Reprezentacija- takmicenje
- Začetnik teme maric
- Datum pokretanja
Milanče je napisao(la):Ma ja razmišljam samo o stručnim metodama mučenja - prvo teorijski deo: Rešavanje višestrukih i krivolinijskih integrala (neophodnih za računanje ERN broja kod štapova kao i razlike u swing weight-u kod dvodelnih i četvorodelnih štapova iste klase)
Zatim praksa: Recimo vezivanje Klinkhamera na 32-ojci, dabiranje split-thread tehnikom koristeći 17/0 UNI Trico Thread,...
Sve do casting dela obreda: Static Roll Cast dužine 22metra (naravno koristeći #000 Sage TXL-F).
Završni deo je jednostavan: Na Splavištu uhvatiti debelog konja (45+) koji jede preko u Bosni ispred stene... Naravno isključivo kada ima malo uzvodnog vetra (konj naravno jede isključivo kada duva uzvodni vetar). Dozvoljeno koristiti sve osim čamca
P.S. Nije lako ući u zvanično najbolji Mušičarski klub OSR "SMUĐ" Požaerevac (pogledati zvanične tabele na SSRS sajtu).
maric je napisao(la):Profo kad smo se dotakli teme oko ERN oznake reci mi nesto posto vidim da poznajes problematiku:''Ako stap ima ERN 5.5 da li to znaci da mora da koristi strunu klase #5 ili ne ??''
Odgovoriću ti na engleskom, jbg dugo sam bio u USA pa se odvikoh od srpskog
No. However, It does mean that if you were to use a “5 wt.” line on that rod, you would find that the line loaded the rod sufficiently to allow the average angler to easily and pleasantly cast the rod with 30 feet of that line extended past the rod tip, or to put another way, with 30 feet of that line aerialized. The ERN (In conjunction with the WL) is a tool for relating rod strength or stiffness to the weight of the line and/or the length of the line being cast.
On the other hand, one must remember that the term “5 wt.” rod is used to designate the line which that rod’s designer has subjectively recommended the angler use. That number tells nothing about the intrinsic power, strength, or stiffness of that rod. Consequently, a “5 wt.” rod might very well bear the marking ERN=6 or even 7. The two numbers (ERN and Wt.) describe different things about that rod and do not conflict with each other.
In my very first article, before the CCS was fully explained and in order to give the readers a conceptual feeling for the CCS, the material was presented with the “assumption” that ERN values and “rod weight” values would be the same if the rods were “correctly rated.” With the development of CCS data, that this was not so became clearly evident, and the utility of the ERN and AA values became obvious. From that point on, the CCS has essentially ignored “rod weight” as a useful indication of a rod’s intrinsic properties.