Just wondering why we tie (traditionally) the wings on mayflies upright instead of on an angle backwards more like the real thing? Balance on the water maybe??
Printable View
Just wondering why we tie (traditionally) the wings on mayflies upright instead of on an angle backwards more like the real thing? Balance on the water maybe??
For flies like an Adams (Variant)
http://i1302.photobucket.com/albums/...ps410c083e.jpg
for me, it's easier to have the wing upright between the wraps of hackle; setting them at an angle would be a bit more difficult.
For flies like a Hairwing dun
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j1...n/IMG_8784.jpg
it's a lot easier to set the wings at a slant. Just my 1/50th of a dollar. Unknown if the fish care or not
Regards,
Scott
Tig,
There are quite a lot of "delta wing" patterns around.
I think Gary Borger's "yarn wing dun" pattern may well be the most imitative of the natural. There is, however, a large school of thought that since the tips of the wings are the first things a trout sees in its "window of vision" as the fly floats towards it, the upright wings provide this representation better. We have to remember that the trout do not see insects or flies as we do.....from some 3-4 feet above the water!
My, not the greatest, example of Borger's pattern:
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/...ps4ac596f0.jpg
If the angle were critical, Vincent Marinaro- a detail-oriented fisher if there ever was one- would have designed his original thorax dun with sloped wings. But he didn't. Using a slant box (correct my terminology if I'm mistaken) to test what a trout might see as a bug entered its cone of vision. The upright wing matched the mayfly's wing at that important point.
Chuck
To be honest, I've caught too many fish on wingless Catskill style patterns to be convinced they even matter at all, let alone the angle. Except when the wing is in the film such as with an emerger, or as with a downwing pattern (EHC) where the wing directly floats the fly.