Is the cast itself a transverse wave?

[windknotz88]

I know this might not be a simple yes or no question, but can you guys explain if a standard fly cast can be interpreted as a transverse wave.

[Graeme H]

Others are going to disagree, but I believe it is.

Cheers,
Graeme

[Geenomad]

There was a time when I interpreted a cast as being a wave, then I changed to "like a wave" or "analogous to a wave" and now that I no longer see the loop as the engine of the cast I don't see wave theory as being very helpful in explaining what happens or predicting what will happen in a fly cast - overhead or roll.

FWIW my present understanding is based on straight lines - tension in the fly line and the purity of direction in which it is propelled. That's the more mundane version of my sig line. Grace is what happens when physics marries aesthetics.

Cheers
Mark

[James9118]

To me, to recognise something as a classical wave then it must have certain quantifiable attributes, amongst these are amplitude, wavelength, frequency and speed. If you apply this to an aerial mend then and then ask what could be measured then my answer would be:

Amplitude - Yes
Wavelength - Yes
Frequency - Yes
Speed - Yes

However, if I apply the same thoughts to a typical fly casting loop, then I'd answer as follows:

Amplitude - No
Wavelength - No
Frequency - No
Speed - Yes

Therefore, for me, a casting loop is simply not 'wavey' enough. You essentially have a moving piece of string that you've tethered at one end.

James.

[gordonjudd]

but can you guys explain if a standard fly cast can be interpreted as a transverse wave.

If you think of a wave as being a disturbance propagating in a medium, then I think it could certainly be considered to be a wave.

However it could not be considered to be a classical transverse wave since elements in the line (the medium) are moving in the direction the wave is propagating in addition to the vertical direction that is transverse to the direction the disturbance is propagating.

Although the loop may take on different shapes as propagates I like to think of as "fly wave" much the same as Dr. McMillen used the term "whip wave" for the tear-shaped wave he analyzed in his landmark doctoral paper.

In this note Jefferson used a more general term of "kinetic wave" for the disturbance he looked at as noted below.

This back and forth motion of the experimenter’s arm creates a kinetic wave in the material. This wave propagates through the whip and by the time it reaches the tip of the whip, that tip is moving at supersonic speeds.

So take your pick on what you might want to call it. "Fly wave" works for me.

Gordy

[VGB]

I like ”not wavey enough” and plan to drop it into as many conversations as possible.

[Jonathan]

I like ”not wavey enough” and plan to drop it into as many conversations as possible.

I wish we had a "like" button - I would use it here.

[Graeme H]

I like ”not wavey enough” and plan to drop it into as many conversations as possible.

I like it too. No jargon involved and gets the point across very well.

The reason I think it's a wave is that if I added a length of running line to the front taper and tried to make a cast, the "no" answers in James' response become "yes", so it's just the short length of the medium that prevents it being a wavey enough.

Cheers,
Graeme

[OLDGOLD]

Great terminology James.

However, you have seen me cast and as you know, it is wavy enough.....

Sadly usually in the wrong direction.

[Lasse Karlsson]

The reason I think it's a wave is that if I added a length of running line to the front taper and tried to make a cast, the "no" answers in James' response become "yes", so it's just the short length of the medium that prevents it being a wavey enough.

Cheers,
Graeme

Hi Graeme

I don't see how that would change it? In essence, your statement would be that casting a level line would make the loop a wave? Or am I seeing this from a wrong perspective?

Cheers
Lasse