• Becoming a member is completely free!

    • Join the community and start contributing to a large source of sea angling information.
    • Members who are regular contributors and have posted more than 25 times, will see no adverts.
    • Become an active member and you can enter member exclusive competitions.

    REGISTER FOR FREE HERE

Strange question of physics in casting

Does it matter if you are using monofilament with more stretch.!
The calculation will be different if the line stretches during the launch.
Maybe we should approach NASA for advice..😳😳🤷🏼‍♂️
Or maybe we go fishing, there's a novel idea, with everybody trying to be technical on here at least it means more fish for those who actually are more hands on and use the gear for what it was meant for
 
Am now considering folding space and time travel, my brain hurts😂
 
Tbh I couldn’t care less.
Neither could i, however some ballistics interest me in a practical sense and oft wondered what damage say a seven ounce lead could do to me. Been some gruesome incidents over the years🤷🏽‍♂️
 
Last edited:
It takes all kinds
That’s not aimed at you., or in fact anyone else.. I just don’t have the time or space in my brain to even consider the possibility of launch speed x velocity divided by windspeed multiplied by the mass of the object…divided by line diameter.
Notice nobody has mentioned how hard different people crank their wrists to achieve maximum velocity..🤓
 
That’s not aimed at you., or in fact anyone else.. I just don’t have the time or space in my brain to even consider the possibility of launch speed x velocity divided by windspeed multiplied by the mass of the object…divided by line diameter.
Notice nobody has mentioned how hard different people crank their wrists to achieve maximum velocity..🤓
Might not have mentioned flappy but has not escaped my attention nor the stats it could generate if it became a sport in a competitive sense with targets to aim for🤔😂
 
Wot like archery.?!
Something on those lines but maybe closer to darts as range, yield, and velocity vital not to mention accuracy, would am sure work on tv not unlike strictly cum dancing.🤔 Edit, pretty certain a chronograph could be utilised to measure velocity of various loads.
Apologies angrybear for deviation.😁
 
Last edited:
Might not have mentioned flappy but has not escaped my attention nor the stats it could generate if it became a sport in a competitive sense with targets to aim for🤔😂
If you had ever been on tour with a rugby club you would be well aware that it's been done already! :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 
If you had ever been on tour with a rugby club you would be well aware that it's been done already! :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
Lordy, a Zulu warrior performing a blinding on a consenting young lady. Top, middle, or bottom pocket also scoring points now thats classy 👍😂🍆💦🤪
 
No you can't!
Yes I can, as much as I'm interested in,
with the initial velocity I have the formula to get the energy, which is all I wanted a rough idea of, to compare with my firearms
 
Yes I can, as much as I'm interested in,
with the initial velocity I have the formula to get the energy, which is all I wanted a rough idea of, to compare with my firearms
So how are you going to calculate the velocity then.?
 
Quite bit on subject on casting forum wsf going back to 2014, with various rough calculations made on the matter.
One post suggested/or knew the Danny moeskops did a cast of approx 250m with camera on rod taking 8 secs and
Suggested 140mph max. Worth trawling back if anyone on quest for enlightenment and detail etc, etc.🤷🏽‍♂️
Know a 5 ounce lead at around 40- 50 yards casted by mr average from a century ttr with Sakura nite crystal has a very negative
Effect on a flying herring gull.🙁
 
Last edited:
Yes I can, as much as I'm interested in,
with the initial velocity I have the formula to get the energy, which is all I wanted a rough idea of, to compare with my firearms
As I’ve already said, no you can’t. You won’t get anywhere near as you will be using the wrong data to get anywhere near the correct result, but who am I to stop you wasting your time. If it makes you happy then go for it.
 
I asked Copilot (Microsoft AI) just to get an initial answer (numbers used are probably total nonsense):

To calculate the horizontal distance covered by an object with a surface area of 1 square centimetre, traveling at an initial speed of 100 km/h at a 45-degree angle, we consider both the ideal case (without air resistance) and the realistic case (with air resistance).

Ideal Case (Without Air Resistance)​

In the absence of air resistance, the horizontal distance ( d ) can be calculated using the formula:

d = \frac{v_0^2 \sin(2\theta)}{g}d=gv02sin(2θ)

where:

  • ( v_0 ) is the initial velocity,
  • ( \theta ) is the launch angle,
  • ( g ) is the acceleration due to gravity (approximately ( 9.81 , \text{m/s}^2 )).
For ( v_0 = 100 , \text{km/h} ) (which is approximately ( 27.78 , \text{m/s} )) and ( \theta = 45^\circ ):

d = \frac{(27.78)^2 \sin(90^\circ)}{9.81} \approx 78.65 \, \text{meters}d=9.81(27.78)2sin(90∘)≈78.65meters

Realistic Case (With Air Resistance)​

Considering air resistance, the horizontal distance is slightly reduced due to the drag force acting on the object. Using numerical integration, we find:

  • Horizontal distance without air resistance: 78.65 meters
  • Horizontal distance with air resistance: 77.77 meters
So, the object covers approximately 77.77 meters when air resistance is taken into account.

If you have any further questions or need additional details, feel free to ask!
 
I asked Copilot (Microsoft AI) just to get an initial answer (numbers used are probably total nonsense):

To calculate the horizontal distance covered by an object with a surface area of 1 square centimetre, traveling at an initial speed of 100 km/h at a 45-degree angle, we consider both the ideal case (without air resistance) and the realistic case (with air resistance).

Ideal Case (Without Air Resistance)​

In the absence of air resistance, the horizontal distance ( d ) can be calculated using the formula:

d = \frac{v_0^2 \sin(2\theta)}{g}d=gv02sin(2θ)

where:

  • ( v_0 ) is the initial velocity,
  • ( \theta ) is the launch angle,
  • ( g ) is the acceleration due to gravity (approximately ( 9.81 , \text{m/s}^2 )).
For ( v_0 = 100 , \text{km/h} ) (which is approximately ( 27.78 , \text{m/s} )) and ( \theta = 45^\circ ):

d = \frac{(27.78)^2 \sin(90^\circ)}{9.81} \approx 78.65 \, \text{meters}d=9.81(27.78)2sin(90∘)≈78.65meters

Realistic Case (With Air Resistance)​

Considering air resistance, the horizontal distance is slightly reduced due to the drag force acting on the object. Using numerical integration, we find:

  • Horizontal distance without air resistance: 78.65 meters
  • Horizontal distance with air resistance: 77.77 meters
So, the object covers approximately 77.77 meters when air resistance is taken into account.

If you have any further questions or need additional details, feel free to ask!
All that assumes the Velocity of 100kmh & 45 degrees BUT I DON'T KNOW THE VELOCITY THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT neither does a cast go at anything close to 45 degrees. :eek:
 
As I’ve already said, no you can’t. You won’t get anywhere near as you will be using the wrong data to get anywhere near the correct result, but who am I to stop you wasting your time. If it makes you happy then go for it.
Once I have the initial velocity, fps x fps x wt /450240 = the kinetic energy at launch :geek:
There that's it, the two things I'm after, initial velocity & initial energy.
I don't care about what happens after the lead is launched.

Cwab can you link to that info please? I've been looking on WSF but haven't found that.
 

Support Us

Support from our members means we don't need to plaster advertisements around the website! Keeping it clean and fresh! Maintaining a website such as this takes time and money, and your support helps to keep the lights on, provide new features for the website and, hopefully, make you feel warm and fuzzy!

Thank you for considering to help support our work.
Back
Top