Nah...I saw the removed content before it was removed...the poster was saying who dun it....no real facts about who actually did it are public yet, all word of mouth stuff so best they remove it.
Really kind of sad...everyone is in total agreement that we do not have sufficient power to supply Bahamar running at full tilt...they say that they are going to hold off on any expansion until the deal is struck with the BEC partner...you would think this would have some sense of urgency to it, as power plants don't just pop up functional overnight. But no...here we are, Bahamar is set to open and the government STILL has not done the deal with the partner and are no further ahead with beefing up the needed infrastructure to support Bahamar.
Why does it always come back to having to review the previous governments actions as if to try to justify your current wrong doing? Not just the PLP,, FNM have, and I am sure will do it as well if re-elected...you get caught in a scandal, and because you are not willing to deal with it properly...well...let's just go back through the previous governments contracts as well and prove that they did it as well...as if that gives them some sort solace that continuing to do it was OK or acceptable.
My only feelings go out to the children and the harm that BOTH parents have caused them, mentally and physically. No one knows for certain what caused the fight...definitely should not have been physical while the car was in motion...should not have been physical at all, but it also goes back to all this foolishness unfolding in front of the kids. My wife and I have disagreements, it never comes to anything physical, and sure as heck is never played out in the presence of the children. If that is the mentality of the parents, they should not be parents at all, just perpetuates this growing trend of violence.
Not all planes are the same...also depends on how the plane is loaded...if it's heavy, you don't stand a chance...also, slightly different circumstances...the situation you describe, the pilot had the benefit of both engines to get himself situated precisely how he wanted to handle the situation, and had time to plan and execute his plan. It obviously worked out according to his plan. Here is the catch though, in this most recent situation the pilot flew past the tower at low altitude to have them check the gear, as he was trying to climb back up to altitude one of his engines failed...NOW...that is a VERY different situation. When your gear is down and you lose an engine you have to make choices and make them fast, most if not all piston twins will not maintain altitude with an engine out and gear down. You may be able to control the plane, but you are going down. When the Captain started to make his turn in the traffic pattern, that turn pointed him out to sea, which is when the engine failed...at the altitude he was at when the engine failed, he could not make that turn back to the runway and likely would have ended up in the pine trees or marshes surrounding the airport, either way, it's a split second decision. Let's assume he was probably anywhere from 200 feet-500 feet and starting his circle maneuver to get back to the airport, gear is down, engine fails, immediately the plane is likely losing 200+ feet per minute (and that's being optimistic), he's got 1 maybe 2 minutes of airtime left before he impacts the ground whether he likes it or not. You put that plane into a tight turn to try to get back to the airport and that rate of descent increases dramatically. If he had both engines operational and was able to get back up to altitude and set himself up nicely, lined up on the runway with altitude to spare, he may have gone for that on airport landing. Another aspect is landing speeds, the Navajo/Chieftain line land a LOT faster than an Aztec which puts a totally different dynamic on things when that wing drops and causes the spin. Hope this helps.
B_I_D___ says...
Nah...I saw the removed content before it was removed...the poster was saying who dun it....no real facts about who actually did it are public yet, all word of mouth stuff so best they remove it.
On Phillip Vasyli stabbed to death at Old Fort Bay
Posted 24 March 2015, 5:47 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
3 years on now, you guys with all the answers should be making a dent in the problem...a decline...not an upsurgence!!
On Bell: Gang culture to blame for crime
Posted 24 March 2015, 3:22 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
I'd much rather the company be honest and proactive about it then try to not claim any responsibility. Checked my cupboard, we are all good.
On Macaroni and cheese recall issued by Kraft
Posted 24 March 2015, 8:31 a.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
Now...how much of the remaining balance is foreign owned homes or developed land? Willing to bet it's another healthy chunk!
On Foreigners owe $156.6m in unpaid property tax
Posted 23 March 2015, 2:59 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
Really kind of sad...everyone is in total agreement that we do not have sufficient power to supply Bahamar running at full tilt...they say that they are going to hold off on any expansion until the deal is struck with the BEC partner...you would think this would have some sense of urgency to it, as power plants don't just pop up functional overnight. But no...here we are, Bahamar is set to open and the government STILL has not done the deal with the partner and are no further ahead with beefing up the needed infrastructure to support Bahamar.
On ‘A lot of work’ to stop BEC grid collapsing
Posted 19 March 2015, 1:57 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
Why does it always come back to having to review the previous governments actions as if to try to justify your current wrong doing? Not just the PLP,, FNM have, and I am sure will do it as well if re-elected...you get caught in a scandal, and because you are not willing to deal with it properly...well...let's just go back through the previous governments contracts as well and prove that they did it as well...as if that gives them some sort solace that continuing to do it was OK or acceptable.
On PM: All BAMSI contracts insured
Posted 19 March 2015, 1:52 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
You mean they have to go find a real job and not some government handout?
On BTC now deciding on staff to receive severance
Posted 18 March 2015, 3:58 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
She mussy get knocked up...J/K...well...maybe not...
On Culmer resigns as Miss Bahamas Universe
Posted 18 March 2015, 1:59 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
My only feelings go out to the children and the harm that BOTH parents have caused them, mentally and physically. No one knows for certain what caused the fight...definitely should not have been physical while the car was in motion...should not have been physical at all, but it also goes back to all this foolishness unfolding in front of the kids. My wife and I have disagreements, it never comes to anything physical, and sure as heck is never played out in the presence of the children. If that is the mentality of the parents, they should not be parents at all, just perpetuates this growing trend of violence.
On Man dies after he crashes car ‘during fight with wife’
Posted 18 March 2015, 1:22 p.m. Suggest removal
B_I_D___ says...
Not all planes are the same...also depends on how the plane is loaded...if it's heavy, you don't stand a chance...also, slightly different circumstances...the situation you describe, the pilot had the benefit of both engines to get himself situated precisely how he wanted to handle the situation, and had time to plan and execute his plan. It obviously worked out according to his plan. Here is the catch though, in this most recent situation the pilot flew past the tower at low altitude to have them check the gear, as he was trying to climb back up to altitude one of his engines failed...NOW...that is a VERY different situation. When your gear is down and you lose an engine you have to make choices and make them fast, most if not all piston twins will not maintain altitude with an engine out and gear down. You may be able to control the plane, but you are going down. When the Captain started to make his turn in the traffic pattern, that turn pointed him out to sea, which is when the engine failed...at the altitude he was at when the engine failed, he could not make that turn back to the runway and likely would have ended up in the pine trees or marshes surrounding the airport, either way, it's a split second decision. Let's assume he was probably anywhere from 200 feet-500 feet and starting his circle maneuver to get back to the airport, gear is down, engine fails, immediately the plane is likely losing 200+ feet per minute (and that's being optimistic), he's got 1 maybe 2 minutes of airtime left before he impacts the ground whether he likes it or not. You put that plane into a tight turn to try to get back to the airport and that rate of descent increases dramatically. If he had both engines operational and was able to get back up to altitude and set himself up nicely, lined up on the runway with altitude to spare, he may have gone for that on airport landing. Another aspect is landing speeds, the Navajo/Chieftain line land a LOT faster than an Aztec which puts a totally different dynamic on things when that wing drops and causes the spin. Hope this helps.
On Plane crash questions
Posted 17 March 2015, 4:29 p.m. Suggest removal