Is this really needed?

[John Moore II]

Adrian-I'm not irrigation man, far from it. But, given the proper design, and assuming we don't care about what the condition of the rough is, could a single row irrigation system not provide the right amount of water to have good fairway turf? Like I said, lets assume it doesn't matter if the rough is scruffy or whatever, just the fairway. Can a single row be designed in such a way as to provide great playing conditions on a 30-35 yard wide fairway? That was what I was trying to say. Of course, with double or triple row systems you can have 150 yard wide playing corridors and get water half-way into the trees if you want, but whats the point?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian-I'm not irrigation man, far from it. But, given the proper design, and assuming we don't care about what the condition of the rough is, could a single row irrigation system not provide the right amount of water to have good fairway turf? Like I said, lets assume it doesn't matter if the rough is scruffy or whatever, just the fairway. Can a single row be designed in such a way as to provide great playing conditions on a 30-35 yard wide fairway? That was what I was trying to say. Of course, with double or triple row systems you can have 150 yard wide playing corridors and get water half-way into the trees if you want, but whats the point?

I think it depends on just what quality you want, the main point to remember is that a sprinker that throws 105 feet in a 360 wont deliver the same amount of water to points 105 feet as it would say 70 feet away, if you then think of another sprinker spaced centrally at 105 feet from the other so it throws head to head, if you now think of that sprinker throwing the same (and you think of other sprinklers centrally spaced on that fairway) and if you then consider the amounts of water that are delivered to the areas you have some recieving not so much and some receiving too much. The better system is a squared head to head, double, triple or quad rowed, with independent head control the superintendent is able to understand the water requirements of more individual areas are up or down the timings of his sprinkler so he can control his water applications so he does not overwater. But in a budget situation, your single row scenario its better than nothing. In the UK you would get away with, but you probably would'nt catering for Southern turfgrass situations.

[Jeff_Brauer]

John,

Short version, no at least not in most climates. Irrigation designers pay special attention to watering the roughs on the cart path side, because that turf just dies without water and with traffic.

[Ian Larson]

Thats not a sprinkler at all and is actually very well constructed and placed. Again its the super not doing his job for not coming back and lowering that pipe. It has a locator wire in it and can be lowered and grown over by grass.

From the pictures shown I dont see a single thing that shows bad construction, especially anything that calls for a lawsuit. If these pics are the worst you could find to examplify your point, Wadsworth will win this lawsuit if it goes that far. In the meantime Id tell the super to get off his ass and lower his valve caps.

First, I didn"t say it was Wadsworth.

Second, I just find it hard to believe its "very well constructed and placed".  I've never seen anything like this before?

This is just examples of really poor work on the irrigation.  Here is another example of how most of the course looks.  You have brown spots followed by spots that have standing water. 

Well, I see a brown spot. Which could very well just be a hydrophobic area. It could also be a situation where there is very shallow soil over rock. The pattern of the brown spot is not indicating anything irrigation related. Irrigation system issues create ring like patterns around sprinkler heads due to low pressure operation, worn out nozzles or poor spacing in relation to pressure and nozzling.

As I said, I see some brown spots. So what? Can you show us a picture of standing water because I dont see any in your pic. If there was standing water it could very well be because the super had his guys hand watering these isolated brown spots to green them up a bit, turning on a sprinkler is not going to fix what I see in this picture. Again, Im not seeing anything that is showing any case for filing a lawsuit.

Its appearant you dont know much about construction techniques or golf course equipment such as a sprinkler head. You provided a picture of a valve cover on a bunker face to show poor construction and design with an irrigation system. It was flushout for the bunker with a valve box lid. It is located exactly where it should be located. On the side of the bunker, outside the lip. Its only an extension of the mainline that is in the bunker, then capped. You doing a flyby, obviously was to call it a sprinkler, and taking a picture does not make you credible in saying its poor construction or irrigation design. Please get your facts straight before throwing someone under the bus on a public forum. It not only makes you look bad but it can cause problems for others who dont deserve them.

The examples you've shown in pictures are the responsibility of the super and his staff to lower and hide these caps. You cant hide a sprinkler, and that sprinkler configuration is probably the best possible design given the shape of the green, the operating pressure of the system and efficient head spacing.

....and I highly doubt those brown spots are dead, cause theyre not.