First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

On 8 Mar 2006 17:05:57 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:jevt02d2gihh8ac0296943tq2o3fo6toos@
4ax.com:

IMO, large-arbor reels acquired with the large arbor being the primary
characteristic sought are for those who know exactly why they _want_
them. There's nothing wrong with getting a reel that one likes that
happens to be a large-arbor, but that doesn't mean that one can "defend"
having it from a practical standpoint on the basis of it being a
large-arbor reel. For most FFers, and a great deal of FFing, the arbor
size is simply not material.

TC,
R

Actually, I've always thought of large arbor reels as a means of getting
people who already have perfectly functionable reels to buy more reels in a
saturated market.

This feeling was reinforced when I started seeing mid arbor reels.

For those who know why they want a particular arbor size and want a
balance of backing capacity and retrieval speed, assuming equal overall
size as compared to "large-" and "small-" arbored reels, they could make
sense. But otherwise, you pretty well mirror my remark reels
designed to sell.

As for most anglers and quarry, the arbor size really isn't material, be
it large, small, or "mid." Heck, for many, they could do away with the
backing all together, at least from a "line used" standpoint. How many
have (regularly, even occasionally) been into the backing on average
trout, bass, panfish, and other freshwater quarry?

And on small waters and quarry, one could do away with the reel,
whatever size the arbor. How many use the reel in fighting and/or
landing (small) quarry?

TC,
R

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
k.net...

Scott Seidman wrote:

Rats. Distributivity gets me again!

There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the earth
without increasing its length at all. Just move it approximately 308
miles toward either pole.


Assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than the
equator this is impossible.

That was part of the problem description: "You have a rope pulled snugly
around the earth at the equator."

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.


You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the equator (diameter =
7,926 miles +/-). How much length would you need to add to the rope to
raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?

So what's the correct answer?
I'm still sticking with 1"
.960" exact.
-tom

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
k.net...

Scott Seidman wrote:

Rats. Distributivity gets me again!

There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the earth
without increasing its length at all. Just move it approximately 308
miles toward either pole.


Assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than the
equator this is impossible.

That was part of the problem description: "You have a rope pulled snugly
around the earth at the equator."

Hm......

Fascinating.

However, assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than
the equator, this is impossible.

On the other hand, you CAN push a rope.

Wolfgang
well, i can, anyway.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in
:


"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
k.net...

Scott Seidman wrote:

Rats. Distributivity gets me again!

There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the
earth without increasing its length at all. Just move it
approximately 308 miles toward either pole.


Assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than
the equator this is impossible.

That was part of the problem description: "You have a rope pulled
snugly around the earth at the equator."

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.


You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the equator
(diameter = 7,926 miles +/-). How much length would you need to add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?

So what's the correct answer?
I'm still sticking with 1"
.960" exact.
-tom





In inches, it would be 12*pi
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

Wolfgang wrote:

"rw" wrote in message
link.net...


Scott Seidman wrote:


Rats. Distributivity gets me again!

There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the earth
without increasing its length at all. Just move it approximately 308
miles toward either pole.


Assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than the
equator this is impossible.

That was part of the problem description: "You have a rope pulled snugly
around the earth at the equator."


Hm......

Fascinating.

However, assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than
the equator, this is impossible.

Assume away. I was following the problem description.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
k.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

Wolfgang wrote:

"rw" wrote in message
hlink.net...


Scott Seidman wrote:


Rats. Distributivity gets me again!

There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the earth
without increasing its length at all. Just move it approximately 308
miles toward either pole.


Assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other than the
equator this is impossible.

That was part of the problem description: "You have a rope pulled snugly
around the earth at the equator."


Hm......

Fascinating.

However, assuming your rope initially follows any circumference other
than the equator, this is impossible.

Assume away. I was following the problem description.

And only missed by 307.13 miles......roughly. Not bad. :)

Wolfgang
who, it must be admitted, has absolutely no recollection of raising a rope a
foot above the earth without increasing its length being part of the
original problem description.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:

Wolfgang
who, it must be admitted, has absolutely no recollection of raising a rope a
foot above the earth without increasing its length being part of the
original problem description.

Just as you didn't recall that the rope being stretched around the
equator was part of the original problem description.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...
Wolfgang wrote:

Wolfgang
who, it must be admitted, has absolutely no recollection of raising a
rope a foot above the earth without increasing its length being part of
the original problem description.

Just as you didn't recall that the rope being stretched around the equator
was part of the original problem description.

Actually, I did. You, on the other hand, evidently didn't recall that the
problem you stated was not the original one and that therefore there was no
reason for anyone to assume that the original restriction applied.

In short, you made the same mistake you always do. And, yes, I'll be
delighted to go into detail......if you insist. :)

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...

Wolfgang wrote:

Wolfgang
who, it must be admitted, has absolutely no recollection of raising a
rope a foot above the earth without increasing its length being part of
the original problem description.

Just as you didn't recall that the rope being stretched around the equator
was part of the original problem description.


Actually, I did. You, on the other hand, evidently didn't recall that the
problem you stated was not the original one and that therefore there was no
reason for anyone to assume that the original restriction applied.

In short, you made the same mistake you always do. And, yes, I'll be
delighted to go into detail......if you insist. :)

OK, here's the problem as Joe stated it:

"You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the EQUATOR [emphasis
mine] (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). How much length would you need to add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"

The obvious answer, and the one that I'm sure Joe expected, and which I
was the first to post, is pi feet.

There's another, less obvious answer: You don't have to add any length.
Just move the rope approximately .87 miles toward either pole.

Try it. See if it works. After all, you claim to be able to push a rope.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Hello,

Thanks to everyone for your advice. I bought a Okuma Sierra reel last
night for $34 which seemed to be a pretty good deal.

The rod I purchased is a Quarrow Big Horn- I've never heard of the
brand and couldn't find much info on them but it seems like a good deal
for $45 including travel case. does anyone have any experience with
this brand of rod?

Now, I have to wait until payday to get line,leader,tippet,flies, etc.
Then I call in sick and go fishing for a few days.

From what I've heard It looks like I'll go with DT line.

Now I'm looking at getting equipped for steelhead, but I think I'll
build my rod eventually, and continue using good old spinning/bait
casting until then. I teach at an outdoor education center and for a
class project we had a custom rod builder come in for 2 hours a day for
a week and 15 kids got to build their own 5ft spinning rods. A great
experience for the kids and me.
You guys have been very helpful-very interesting following the
thread-I'm going to try and stump some of my m-athlete friends w/ the
rope around the earth question.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
ink.net...

Wolfgang wrote:

Wolfgang
who, it must be admitted, has absolutely no recollection of raising a
rope a foot above the earth without increasing its length being part of
the original problem description.

Just as you didn't recall that the rope being stretched around the
equator was part of the original problem description.


Actually, I did. You, on the other hand, evidently didn't recall that
the problem you stated was not the original one and that therefore there
was no reason for anyone to assume that the original restriction applied.

In short, you made the same mistake you always do. And, yes, I'll be
delighted to go into detail......if you insist. :)

OK, here's the problem as Joe stated it:

"You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the EQUATOR [emphasis
mine] (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). How much length would you need to add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"

Yep, that looks like it.

The obvious answer, and the one that I'm sure Joe expected, and which I
was the first to post, is pi feet.

Thus providing a very strong hint at the same mistake you always make.

There's another, less obvious answer: You don't have to add any length.
Just move the rope approximately .87 miles toward either pole.

Nope, the problem as stated specifically concerned the additional length
needed to raise the rope. Any answer that fails to correctly state by how
much the rope needs to be lengthened is not merely less obvious, it is also
just plain flat wrong.

Try it. See if it works.

I'll try it......if you'll pay for the rope. You'll still be wrong, but
it'll be fun.

After all, you claim to be able to push a rope.

I'd be happy to demonstrate. Hell, I'll even use the same rope. Ship it to
any place in southeastern Wisconsin......I don't think I'll have much
trouble finding it. :)

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

OK, here's the problem as Joe stated it:

"You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the EQUATOR [emphasis
mine] (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). How much length would you need to add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"


Yep, that looks like it.


The obvious answer, and the one that I'm sure Joe expected, and which I
was the first to post, is pi feet.


Thus providing a very strong hint at the same mistake you always make.


There's another, less obvious answer: You don't have to add any length.
Just move the rope approximately .87 miles toward either pole.


Nope, the problem as stated specifically concerned the additional length
needed to raise the rope. Any answer that fails to correctly state by how
much the rope needs to be lengthened is not merely less obvious, it is also
just plain flat wrong.

Nope. You're recklessly "assuming" again. The problem statement doesn't
state that the rope has to stay positioned over the equator -- only that
it has to be "raised." There's an implicit assumption, which I think is
fair, that the rope has to remain in a circular configuration.

There are actually an infinite number of answers that solve the problem
as stated. The problem is what mathematicians call "ill posed."

On the other hand, if you take "need to add" as implying that you want
to MINIMIZE the amount of extra rope, and that you aren't allowed to
REMOVE rope, the unique answer (zero) is the second solution.

If Joe's problem statement were to be unambiguous, with a unique answer,
it should be, "You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the
equator (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). What is the MAXIMUM length you can
add to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"

Assuming a circular rope, of course.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

rw wrote in news:kYEPf.2910$Bj7.240
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

rw wrote:
Scott Seidman wrote:


Rats. Distributivity gets me again!


There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the earth
without increasing its length at all. Just move it approximately 308
miles toward either pole.

Oops. I made a small arithmetic error. It should be approximately .87
miles. :-)


Assuming Earth to be a perfect sphere, of course.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Scott Seidman wrote:
rw wrote in news:kYEPf.2910$Bj7.240
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:


rw wrote:

Scott Seidman wrote:


Rats. Distributivity gets me again!


There's a way to raise the rope one foot above the surface of the earth
without increasing its length at all. Just move it approximately 308
miles toward either pole.

Oops. I made a small arithmetic error. It should be approximately .87
miles. :-)



Assuming Earth to be a perfect sphere, of course.


Indeed.

Also assuming a zero-diameter rope. :-)

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

Nope. You're recklessly "assuming" again.

We'll see. :)

The problem statement doesn't state that the rope has to stay positioned
over the equator

Nor does it include the option of any movement other than verticle. So?

-- only that it has to be "raised."

Nope, not ONLY that it has to be raised. If it "has to" be raised in order
to satisfy a condition in the original statement, then it "has to" be
lengthened by the same logic.

There's an implicit assumption, which I think is fair, that the rope has
to remain in a circular configuration.

There's a boatload of implicit assumptions. That's a big part of what makes
the problem interesting. What is MOST interesting, on the face of it, you
missed entirely despite the fact that Joe stated it explicitly. What is NOT
particularly interesting is the correct answer to the problem which is,
after all, simply a number of feet, centimeters, or whatever other unit of
measure one wishes to use, and not an especially interesting number at that,
and which is arrived at by a very simple bit of arithmetic. Also
intrinsically interesting is the fact that many people fail to correctly
identify the means to solve the problem and/or get the wrong answer. The
smokescreen was interesting too. But, most interesting of all......well,
you already given us some hints about that......and then missed the
hints.....which is what really makes it interesting.

There are actually an infinite number of answers that solve the problem as
stated. The problem is what mathematicians call "ill posed."

No, there is exactly one correct answer. The problem was very well posed.
Your failure to understand it doesn't negate that.

On the other hand, if you take "need to add" as implying that you want to
MINIMIZE the amount of extra rope, and that you aren't allowed to REMOVE
rope, the unique answer (zero) is the second solution.

Well, I certainly won't argue against the proposition that it's unique.
:)

If Joe's problem statement were to be unambiguous, with a unique answer,
it should be, "You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the
equator (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). What is the MAXIMUM length you can add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"

Well, you evidently thought it was unambiguous enough to be "the first to
post" the "obvious answer" and the one that you're "sure Joe expected". I
mean, how much more unambiguous can something be?

Assuming a circular rope, of course.

No need to assume any such thing. A flat sennit would work just as well.

Wolfgang
who has done a bit of fancy line work in his day.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

rb608 wrote:
wrote in message

Assuming competent, rational reel design rather than reels "designed to
sell," it's not only typical, but mathematically highly probable.


For whatever reason, this reminded me of a mathematical problem whose answer
is mathematically correct, but (to me anyway) seemed counterintuitive at
first. Here ya go:

You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the equator (diameter =
7,926 miles +/-). How much length would you need to add to the rope to
raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?

I didn't find this problem counterintuitive, although it's a little
tricky. The essential relationship is that circumference is proportional
to diameter, and the constant of proportionality is pi.

The only reason it might be counterintuitive is that the problem
statement includes a large number (7926 miles), which is irrelevant -- a
red herring. That's a tipoff in a mathematic puzzle. It doesn't matter
(to the problem) what the diameter of the earth is.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
rw wrote:
"You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the EQUATOR [emphasis
mine] (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). How much length would you need to add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"

The problem statement doesn't state that the rope has to stay positioned
over the equator

Nor does it include the option of any movement other than verticle. So?

Good god, would you please learn how to read! The question was
ambiguous in that respect. It doesn't state that you can or can not
move the rope away from the equator. Correct answers range from
-7926miles*pi to +1ft*pi.

I like to argue with RW as much as the next guy, but his answer of 0
was pretty nice.
- Ken

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
rb608 wrote:
wrote in message

Assuming competent, rational reel design rather than reels "designed to
sell," it's not only typical, but mathematically highly probable.


For whatever reason, this reminded me of a mathematical problem whose
answer is mathematically correct, but (to me anyway) seemed
counterintuitive at first. Here ya go:

You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the equator (diameter =
7,926 miles +/-). How much length would you need to add to the rope to
raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?

I didn't find this problem counterintuitive,

Presumably because you have no idea of what the word means.

although it's a little tricky.

Tricky? Good lord. There is nothing the least bit tricky about it. It's a
simple problem in arithmetic. Even you (whose skills are such that you can
pose a similar problem.....and then provide an answer that's off by more
than three orders of magnitude) got it right.

The essential relationship is that circumference is proportional to
diameter, and the constant of proportionality is pi.

No kidding? Is that the tricky part?

The only reason it might be counterintuitive is that the problem statement
includes a large number (7926 miles), which is irrelevant -- a red
herring.

Not a red herring. It's a fact (or a close enough approximation, anyway)
and it is ESSENTIAL to what makes the answer IN FACT counterintuitive.

That's a tipoff in a mathematic puzzle.

We'll try to keep that in mind should we encounter a mathematical puzzle.
Meanwhile, it might (it probably won't......but it might) interest you to
know thats it's also a tipoff to what makes the answer to this little
arithmetical exercise COUNTERINTUITIVE!

It doesn't matter (to the problem) what the diameter of the earth is.

Well, lookee here......the thread is not yet a day old and you've already
found a clue! What a lucky boy you are! :)

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:
rw wrote:
"You have a rope pulled snugly around the earth at the EQUATOR [emphasis
mine] (diameter = 7,926 miles ±). How much length would you need to add
to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the earth at all points?"

The problem statement doesn't state that the rope has to stay positioned
over the equator

Nor does it include the option of any movement other than verticle. So?

Good god, would you please learn how to read!

Hee, hee, hee.

The question was
ambiguous in that respect. It doesn't state that you can or can not
move the rope away from the equator.

There was nothing at all ambiguous about it. The problem as stated said
nothing at all about movement other than vertical. It DID ask by how much
the rope would need to be LENGTHENED to RAISE it 6 inches. If you are still
having trouble with what it means to raise something, try to think of what
happens to you relative to the position of your seat (or to your blood
pressure, for that matter) every time I do this to you. That should help.
:)

Correct answers range from -7926miles*pi to +1ft*pi.

Nope. Only one right answer

I like to argue with RW as much as the next guy,

Everybody should have a hobby he can hope to master someday.

but his answer of 0 was pretty nice.

No, it was just stupid.

Wolfgang
who assumes he is not the only one to notice that slow learners tend to come
out to play in groups. :)

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

wrote in message
...


janikk wrote:
Wolfgang wrote:

It doesn't state that you can or can not move the rope away from
the equator.

The problem as stated said nothing at all about movement other than
vertical.

Very good, you've been practicing. Now if you could only get to the
point where you can tell that you said exactly what I said.

You said that you're a dumbass?

It DID ask by how much the rope would need to be LENGTHENED to RAISE
it 6 inches.

Oooooh, doing good so far.

Even assuming that your mind is too limited to comprehend negative
numbers, RW's answer of 0 is still correct.

Nope. Wrong. Just plain wrong.

If you are still having trouble with what it means to raise something,
try to think of what happens to you relative to the position of your
seat (or to your blood pressure, for that matter) every time I do this
to you.

Dumb and conceited are two traits that don't mix well. I'd suggest you
pick just one to excel at. Dumb would seem the natural one to pick, but
feel free to challenge yourself.

Well, actually, I was going to pick clever......but you seem to have a lock
on that. Can you give me some time to think about it?

There's infinite answers, but apparently finite number of people smart
enough to understand them. ;-)

O.k., so, it is your position that Joe didn't write: "You have a rope pulled
snugly around the earth at the equator (diameter = 7,926 miles +/-). How
much length would you need to add to the rope to raise it 6 inches off the
earth at all points?" Very well, I'm perfectly willing to concede the
possibility. However, this naturally (I think) raises the question of what
he actually DID write. Since we don't have any clues other than the text
that appeared in the message that someone claiming to be Joe posted, I think
all we can do is guess. I'll go first......and then, if you have another
idea (or something that resembles one, anyway) you can offer it. O.k.?

Maybe he actually wrote: "That brown **** oozing out of kennie's and
stevie's ears MAY be milk chocolate......but NOBODY here is big enough to
make ME test it".

Whattya think? :)

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
O.k., so, it is your position that Joe didn't write:

Oh and you were doing so good. I've never met anyone so
proud of his inability to read....

.....I guess when you have limited sklls, you have to be
proud of whatever you can. Have fun demonstrating
your ignorance.

Over and out,
- Ken

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

wrote in message
...

Wolfgang wrote:
O.k., so, it is your position that Joe didn't write:

Oh and you were doing so good. I've never met anyone so
proud of his inability to read....

....I guess when you have limited sklls, you have to be
proud of whatever you can. Have fun demonstrating
your ignorance.

Over and out,

Ah! Sweet surrender! :)

Wolfgang
well, was there ever any doubt?

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...


Nope. You're recklessly "assuming" again.


We'll see. :)


The problem statement doesn't state that the rope has to stay positioned
over the equator


Nor does it include the option of any movement other than verticle. So?

Evidently, your German heritage compels you to believe that anything not
expressly permitted is forbidden.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
wrote:
Wolfgang wrote:
O.k., so, it is your position that Joe didn't write:


Oh and you were doing so good. I've never met anyone so proud of his
inability to read....

....I guess when you have limited sklls, you have to be
proud of whatever you can. Have fun demonstrating
your ignorance.

Over and out,
- Ken

One great thing about Wolfgang -- more than likely the only good thing --
is that if you want an enemy, he's a good one to have. :-)

If you wanted an enemy, I could teach even you what BAD means. :)

Anyway, kennie seems to have smoked his remaining synapse. Maybe you can
tell me what Joe wrote.

Good luck.

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
k.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...


Nope. You're recklessly "assuming" again.


We'll see. :)


The problem statement doesn't state that the rope has to stay positioned
over the equator


Nor does it include the option of any movement other than verticle. So?

Evidently, your German heritage compels you to believe that anything not
expressly permitted is forbidden.

Ah! The Germans are behind this! Well, I might have guessed it.

Anyway, you were going to tell me what Joe wrote?

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
k.net...

Wolfgang wrote:

"rw" wrote in message
hlink.net...



Nope. You're recklessly "assuming" again.


We'll see. :)



The problem statement doesn't state that the rope has to stay positioned
over the equator


Nor does it include the option of any movement other than verticle. So?

Evidently, your German heritage compels you to believe that anything not
expressly permitted is forbidden.


Ah! The Germans are behind this! Well, I might have guessed it.

Anyway, you were going to tell me what Joe wrote?

I already have, word for word.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Over and out,
- Ken

One great thing about Wolfgang -- more than likely the only good thing
-- is that if you want an enemy, he's a good one to have. :-)

I don't think he warrants the "enemy" label. It's more like
trying to argue with a 2 year old. :-)

And here you are.

Anyway, here's a sobering thought. Did you know that they let engineers
play an instrumental role in designing and building things? Even
potentially dangerous things......like guns, airplanes, forks, shoes,
mittens.......... :(

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rb608" wrote in message
How much length would you need to add to the rope to raise it 6 inches off
the earth at all points?

The corrct answer is: The hotel has $25, the bellhop has $2, and each guest
has $1 for a total of $30. There is no missing dollar.

Joe F.


p.s. What I always loved about math (and yes, I'm a geek), is that nobody
needs to tell you if your answer is the right answer. When you understand
it, you already *know* if you have the right answer. But for the record,
the correct answer to the question I thought I posed is Pi (3.1415...) feet.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rb608" wrote in message
news:9tKPf.13381$eP4.11080@trnddc05...
"rb608" wrote in message
How much length would you need to add to the rope to raise it 6 inches off
the earth at all points?

The corrct answer is: The hotel has $25, the bellhop has $2, and each
guest has $1 for a total of $30. There is no missing dollar.

Joe F.


p.s. What I always loved about math (and yes, I'm a geek), is that nobody
needs to tell you if your answer is the right answer. When you understand
it, you already *know* if you have the right answer. But for the record,
the correct answer to the question I thought I posed is Pi (3.1415...)
feet.

I like the answer.....well, both of them, actually. :)

The trouble is that the question is wrong. You never wrote that. Trust
me.......I have it from unimpeachable sources.

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

One great thing about Wolfgang -- more than likely the only good thing --
is that if you want an enemy, he's a good one to have. :-)


If you wanted an enemy, I could teach even you what BAD means.

Ooooo! I'm really, really scared. Are you planning to send some of your
killing-crazy Coast Guard buddies to look me up? Disguised as Postal
Service employees, perhaps? Now THAT would be scary.

I guess life will never be the same for me. I'll be continually looking
over my back. Oh well. I'm manage to cope, somehow.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

A pflueger medalist 1495 is a good all around reel that will always be
cheap, has an adjustable drag, reversible crank, cheap spools and lots
of them around second hand. Only trouble is you can buy them new for
about the used price for the older ones.

If you are a new fly caster a double taper line will let you roll cast
and feel the line on your back cast. The dealers want to sell you
several weight forward lines which will not roll cast or spey cast like
a double taper. they think you need a line for every spe cies of fish.
If you pay attention to learning the principles of casting you can do
about everything you want to do fishing with a double taper line and
have more fun with it. You can cast just about as far with a double
taper and have a much better feeling cast. The double taper loads your
rod so it feels good and you want to cast it. The Pfleuger is the first
large arbor reel. You don't need the large arbor reels they are selling
now because you want a reel and a couple of spare spools One with a
sink tip and another with a full sink line. The large arbor reels are
too bulky and their spare spools are too bulky for your fly vest.

A cheap double taper line from a big box store - 15.00 or so at K Mart
-will do you just fine until you are more familiar with the craft. Then
you can spring for a stiff floating line which will be easier to handle
in a boat or standing up than a weight forward. It will also cast
farther because it doesn't tangle up much and goes through the guides
better. The high end lines cost more than the reel. Don't be afraid to
clean and dress your floating line. It will pick up easier and go
through the guides faster and farther.

Good Luck
Bill

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 00:16:05 GMT, "rb608"
wrote:

"rb608" wrote in message
How much length would you need to add to the rope to raise it 6 inches off
the earth at all points?

The corrct answer is: The hotel has $25, the bellhop has $2, and each guest
has $1 for a total of $30. There is no missing dollar.

Joe F.


p.s. What I always loved about math (and yes, I'm a geek), is that nobody
needs to tell you if your answer is the right answer. When you understand
it, you already *know* if you have the right answer. But for the record,
the correct answer to the question I thought I posed is Pi (3.1415...) feet.


I'm still lost in visions of a rope fitting snugly around the earth. I
try seeing the supporting structure needed to keep the rope from
dipping into the oceans it must cross and my mind keeps coming up with
the highway to Hawaii or the Bridge to Nowhere.

It's as bad for me as the one about the conveyor belt with an airplane
on it and the belt increasing speed as the plane does, so it,
supposedly, can't take off. I kept imagining the belt going all
kablooey and me standing there with one of my favorite quotes: It
blowed up real good, dinnit it? (from someone named Ernest in some
movie I never saw.). The parts flying though the air, the plane being
whipped into the stratosphere by the flexing belt. Ah, things of
beauty.

Sorry, guys, back to your math.
--

r.bc: vixen
Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher, etc..
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.
Really.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...
Wolfgang wrote:
"rw" wrote in message
nk.net...

One great thing about Wolfgang -- more than likely the only good thing --
is that if you want an enemy, he's a good one to have. :-)


If you wanted an enemy, I could teach even you what BAD means.

Ooooo! I'm really, really scared. Are you planning to send some of your
killing-crazy Coast Guard buddies to look me up? Disguised as Postal
Service employees, perhaps? Now THAT would be scary.

The Coast Guard? You mean the United States Coast Guard? I don't know
anybody in the United States Coast Guard. Where DO you get these stupid
ideas?

I guess life will never be the same for me.

That which is to be wished for.....if the evidence presented here is to be
given any credence, eh?

I'll be continually looking over my back.

Not as difficult a trick as a competent reader might think.....for one
blessed with sufficient flexibility to stick his head up his ass.

Oh well. I'm manage to cope, somehow.

I've heard that being first with the right answer is a marvelous bulwark to
delusions of adequacy.

Good luck.

Wolfgang

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

"Cyli" wrote in message
I'm still lost in visions of a rope fitting snugly around the earth. I
try seeing the supporting structure needed to keep the rope from
dipping into the oceans it must cross

See, everybody has a little bit of "engineer" in them. :-)

It's as bad for me as the one about the conveyor belt with an airplane
on it and the belt increasing speed as the plane does, so it,
supposedly, can't take off.

Hey, wait a minute; that only works if the plane achieves its takeoff
velocity through traction on the belt. (The pilots here will no doubt
correct me if I'm wrong, but) ground speed has nothing to do with takeoff.

Hopelessly analytical,
Joe F.

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 11:41:46 GMT, "rb608" wrote:

Hey, wait a minute; that only works if the plane achieves its takeoff
velocity through traction on the belt. (The pilots here will no doubt
correct me if I'm wrong, but) ground speed has nothing to do with takeoff.

I'm not a pilot, but I do know a few. I always thought takeoff speed was a
function of ground speed and wind velocity/direction, and of course weight. How
is it ground speed has nothing to do with takeoff?
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

Charlie Choc wrote:
On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 11:41:46 GMT, "rb608" wrote:

Hey, wait a minute; that only works if the plane achieves its takeoff
velocity through traction on the belt. (The pilots here will no doubt
correct me if I'm wrong, but) ground speed has nothing to do with takeoff.

I'm not a pilot, but I do know a few. I always thought takeoff speed was a
function of ground speed and wind velocity/direction, and of course weight. How
is it ground speed has nothing to do with takeoff?

I'm not a pilot, but I crashed a hang glider one time. ;-)

What matters is the wind speed seen by the leading edge
of the wing. A plane could become airborne while completely
at rest, relative to the ground, so long as the leading edge
of the wing saw enough wind speed. Think wind tunnel.

--
Ken Fortenberry

First Fly Rod, Reel and line Questions??
 

On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 12:39:02 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

What matters is the wind speed seen by the leading edge
of the wing. A plane could become airborne while completely
at rest, relative to the ground, so long as the leading edge
of the wing saw enough wind speed. Think wind tunnel.

That's obvious, that's why I said "takeoff speed was a function of ground speed
and wind velocity/direction" - which will determine the wind speed over the
wing. Taking off with the wind behind you will need more ground speed, and thus
runway, than if the wind is from the front. To say "ground speed has nothing to
do with takeoff" doesn't account for this.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com