one moment please

Moderators: William Anderson, letumgo

User avatar
Hans Weilenmann
Posts: 2109
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:45 pm
Location: Amstelveen, The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: one moment please

Post by Hans Weilenmann » Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:23 am

Bob,

All that was more than clear. It is the following line which stumped me:

"The illusion, here, is it looks as if the hackle was wrapped through the thorax, when it actually was not. Wrapping through the thorax came later from Hidy."

Cheers,
Hans W
User avatar
Stendalen
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 8:24 am
Contact:

Re: one moment please

Post by Stendalen » Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:48 am

redietz wrote:
Stendalen wrote: Now, I have to admit...we are all friends here...that I do not understand the procedure described by Mark. Help. Please :o
If it's the pin in the table part that's confusing, it really has nothing specifically to do with this technique -- bobbins holders weren't in use yet, and the common way to maintain tension on the thread was to use a thumbtack in the edge of the table to hold it taut. Ignoring that this is sequence Mark's describing:

1) The hackle is tied in first thing, hanging out over the eye. (Leisenring suggested tying in by stem because he believed you got the stronger part of the quill that way.)
2) The thread is taken to bend, tail tied in, ribbing and body tied in and wrapped forward.
3) The thread stopped at the end of the body -- it doesn't advance to in front of the hackle.
4) The hackle is wound back, and tied off.
5) The thread is wound forward through the hackle (without letting go of the hackle).
6) The hackle stem is cut. (The original text says that a knife does a "neater job" that a scissors because there's less danger of cutting the hackle.)
7) A whip finish is applied to the head.
Thanks Bob!
M
"...because it enriches my soul..."
https://www.facebook.com/stendalenflyfish/
User avatar
gingerdun
Posts: 1660
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 10:00 pm
Location: Merrimac, Massachusetts

Re: one moment please

Post by gingerdun » Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:54 am

Hans Weilenmann wrote:Bob,

All that was more than clear. It is the following line which stumped me:

"The illusion, here, is it looks as if the hackle was wrapped through the thorax, when it actually was not. Wrapping through the thorax came later from Hidy."

Cheers,
Hans W
I am not aware that my father ever claimed to have originated the thorax flymph (or any other tying technique for that matter). He did show Dave Hughes how he tied it, and then Dave published Pete's method in Wet Flies. But I have always assumed that it was an ancient technique just being kept alive by the likes of Pete and Dave. Be interesting to know the origins of the thorax flymph.

Lance
Post Reply