Watercraft.

cg74 · Oct 10, 2013

I was always of the opinion that watercraft is an intrinsic part of our ability to catch fish BUT is it?
Can it be bypassed?

Especially on waters with higher stock densities. Could info logged into a well thought out computer programme, such as; weather patterns, water temps, catches from swims, baits/techniques used etc etc

Would it then be possible for a complete novice (with only the ability to cast and play fish) to turn up on a new water and eclipse the match scene?
Though saying that, the ability to cast can be made easier using currently available technology like Magnetic braking found on multiplier reels.
As for feeding, that'll be done mechanically along the line of a tennis ball machine, the quantity of feed predetermined by the computer programme.

Could this work, what percentage of success would you think could be achieved?

Your thoughts but bear in mind this isn't exclusively a stillwater idea, it could also include rivers like the Wye.

peter crabtree · Oct 10, 2013

Eclipse the match scene no, such a feeding machine would break the rules.
Some fisheries already use these machines to feed their stock and they are quite big and heavy so lugging one down to the wye would be a challenge along with all the other paraphanalia.
Regarding the rest of your ideas only time will tell but it seems unlikely to me....

tinca13 · Oct 10, 2013

God help us all .

this cuckoo would fly the nest

cg74 · Oct 10, 2013

peter crabtree said:
Eclipse the match scene no, such a feeding machine would break the rules.
Some fisheries already use these machines to feed their stock and they are quite big and heavy so lugging one down to the wye would be a challenge along with all the other paraphanalia.
Regarding the rest of your ideas only time will tell but it seems unlikely to me....

Peter, whose rules would be broken using a bait feeding machine?

Regards size/weight obviously it would have to be a lightweight scaled down version.

So you don't see any merit in feeding at regular set intervals even when playing or handling fish?

Keith M · Oct 10, 2013

There is far more to watercraft than you might think; from simple things such as the light levels, water and air temperatures, right through to underwater features such as warm/cool springs interrupting from the bed (and how to detect them) or subtle changes of depth or a change in current speed, or a change of wind direction or wind strength etc. the list is endless.

It's not just knowing what swims on a fishery fish well and what baits to use.

I don't think a computer can handle more than a very rudimentary knowledge of watercraft.

Keith

peter crabtree · Oct 10, 2013

http://www.anglingtrust.net/core/core_picker/download.asp?id=3722
Scroll down to rule 15... Where did I say there was no merit in regular feeding?

cg74 · Oct 10, 2013

Keith M said:
There is far more to watercraft than you might think; from simple things such as the light levels, water and air temperatures, right through to underwater features such as warm/cool springs interrupting from the bed (and how to detect them) or subtle changes of depth or a change in current speed, or a change of wind direction or wind strength etc. the list is endless.

It's not just knowing what swims on a fishery fish well and what baits to use.

I don't think a computer can handle more than a very rudimentary knowledge of watercraft.

Keith

So how do you detect springs coming out of a river or lake bed apart from if you can see boiling on the surface?
Besides if the computer had enough info entered, would it not be plausible that the influence would be detected. I am talking (hypothetically) about busy fisheries, not small rarely fished rivers.

I will say rivers offer a greater level of scenarios, making things more complex.

daji · Oct 10, 2013

i think it would work if there was enough motivation/resources/money invested in this 'automated' angling idea. Unikely to happen though

chub_on_the_block · Oct 10, 2013

A computer model would struggle to do more than suggest the probability of a particular species being in a swim or section of river, or to predict a biomass of fish likely to be present, and it would probably need a lot of information about the watercourse size, flow velocity, habitats present etc etc. As for the size/quality of the fish likely to be present, that would need a sophisticated overlaying program with up to date information concerning resident cormorants, otters and Eastern Europeans. If the software was developed by Dynamite Baits i am sure it would be able to recommend the most effective bait though.

daji · Oct 10, 2013

chub_on_the_block said:
A computer model would struggle to do more than suggest the probability of a particular species being in a swim or section of river, or to predict a biomass of fish likely to be present, and it would probably need a lot of information about the watercourse size, flow velocity, habitats present etc etc. As for the size/quality of the fish likely to be present, that would need a sophisticated overlaying program with up to date information concerning resident cormorants, otters and Eastern Europeans. If the software was developed by Dynamite Baits i am sure it would be able to recommend the most effective bait though.

a sonar type system could be used to identify the fish in the swim by size/shape etc in real time so no predictions needed.

kind of related: Independent Fishing For Anglers With Disabilities : Wheelchair Diffusion

nicepix · Oct 10, 2013

cg74 said:
So how do you detect springs coming out of a river or lake bed apart from if you can see boiling on the surface?

barbelboi · Oct 10, 2013

daji said:
a sonar type system could be used to identify the fish in the swim by size/shape etc in real time so no predictions needed.

kind of related: Independent Fishing For Anglers With Disabilities : Wheelchair Diffusion

What does that prove? You'ld be suprised at the amount of fish in your swim at any given time just ignoring your bait..................

laguna · Oct 10, 2013

Shame my laptop just hung and all my typing (data) was lost, my reply wasn't particularly exhaustive but it illustrates the point I was 'trying' to make namely;

The input data for the computer model would only be as good as the less than perfect human that enters it, and we all know the human error factor is the No.1 cause for malfunction/confusion where computers are concerned dont we?

Assuming too, that all the many possible input/output variations were correctly interpreted and understood?

Computers are generally very good at churning out data so long as the data is good and sound. Data loss is the caveat, a level of redundancy would also be required... lots of time spent inputting data (instead of fishing) only to have to reboot

mg:

daji · Oct 10, 2013

barbelboi said:
What does that prove? You'ld be suprised at the amount of fish in your swim at any given time just ignoring your bait..................

chub_on_the_block said:
A computer model would struggle to do more than suggest the probability of a particular species being in a swim or section of river, or to predict a biomass of fish likely to be present,

i was just responding to this when talking sonar/fish finding ^^

ignoring my bait? how F%&*ing rude of them

Small Perch must be the least 'ignorant' of all fish

itsfishingnotcatching · Oct 10, 2013

barbelboi said:
You'ld be suprised at the amount of fish in your swim at any given time just ignoring your bait..................

Oh no I wouldn't

mg::wh

no-one in particular · Oct 11, 2013

I have put weather , temps, wind, pressure etc into a computer program for years now and it works very well for most species. It does not replace basic water craft though. It helps if you can read the water for certain species. Getting to know a water is more important maybe than actual water craft. As to a feeding machine, I don't see why not, but I cannot see it has much more advantage than feeding by hand.

cg74 · Oct 11, 2013

peter crabtree said:
http://www.anglingtrust.net/core/core_picker/download.asp?id=3722
Scroll down to rule 15... Where did I say there was no merit in regular feeding?

Like most rules there is a grey area; an area that can exploited if desired.

An elasticated throwing stick can be used, clamped to a seatbox and with simple physics it'd be possible to feed one handed when playing fish etc
And this is a major difference between the good and average.
Not automated but moving that way.

Which will give a novice extra valuable time.

---------- Post added at 17:32 ---------- Previous post was at 17:13 ----------

markg said:
I have put weather , temps, wind, pressure etc into a computer program for years now and it works very well for most species. It does not replace basic water craft though. It helps if you can read the water for certain species. Getting to know a water is more important maybe than actual water craft. As to a feeding machine, I don't see why not, but I cannot see it has much more advantage than feeding by hand.

As suggested by Laguna; accurate data is a must and the more data entered, the more of a guide should come.
Knowing the water is negated by the fact that on many busier waters they've been effectively mapped out. Added to that I would enter all match results.

peter crabtree · Oct 11, 2013

cg74 said:
Like most rules there is a grey area; an area that can exploited if desired.

An elasticated throwing stick can be used, clamped to a seatbox and with simple physics it'd be possible to feed one handed when playing fish etc
And this is a major difference between the good and average.
Not automated but moving that way.

Which will give a novice extra valuable time.

I bow to your matchfishing experience mate.. Simple physics is of course on every participants mind when the whistle goes at the all in?

What a load of old b***ock$

bennygesserit · Oct 11, 2013

I played with artificial intelligence programs in the eighties , today they are incredibly sophisticated they will even operating.in call centres soon, still they are dwarfed by the divine processing power of God's creation.

To test this bounce a rubber ball against a wall and catch it , keep doing this and start whistling a happy tune now , while carrying on , think about a favourite day at the beach.

All the computers in the world couldn't do that amazingly complex thing , let alone read the suggestion on a forum and act on it.

But even more than this , the other reason it could never happen , that some robot from the future could not be programmed to brcome the ultimate fisherman , angler plus if you will, is that none of us , or even two of us , can actually agree on the best way to fish anyway.

To program a thing you need to know what to put in

nicepix · Oct 11, 2013

bennygesserit said:
I played with artificial intelligence programs in the eighties , today they are incredibly sophisticated they will even operating.in call centres soon, still they are dwarfed by the divine processing power of God's creation.

To test this bounce a rubber ball against a wall and catch it , keep doing this and start whistling a happy tune now , while carrying on , think about a favourite day at the beach.

All the computers in the world couldn't do that amazingly complex thing , let alone read the suggestion on a forum and act on it.

But even more than this , the other reason it could never happen , that some robot from the future could not be programmed to brcome the ultimate fisherman , angler plus if you will, is that none of us , or even two of us , can actually agree on the best way to fish anyway.

To program a thing you need to know what to put in

And there is the random element. Get a swim fishing well and a pike (or seal or a canoe

mg: ) moves in and kills it. Who can legislate for that?

Watercraft.

Well-known member

AKA Simon, 1953 - 2022 (RIP)

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

AKA Simon, 1953 - 2022 (RIP)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

AKA Simon, 1953 - 2022 (RIP)

Well-known member

Well-known member