All right, so we're doing exactly what we did with particle dynamics where we went from what? We went from kinematics then to kinetics when we looked at particles. And if you remember, when we got to the kinetics, we had three flavors of methods to solve kinetics problems. Remember what they were? Come on, take that. Yeah, yeah. The other two come right from that, so it's not like they're exclusive, but as I think we've seen, they did kind of lay themselves out for different types of problems. Bob just said the work energy method and then impulse momentum. That's even what we did in physics one, so it was kind of a review, but we did a lot more in-depth, especially since we took non-constant acceleration problems. And then we started with rigid body motion, rigid body dynamics. We just finished the kinematics of that. And now we're going to go to the kinetics, just like we did with the particles. We're going to see what it takes to actually get the accelerations and velocities that we had in the rigid body motion. But don't forget that we're also not doing just rotation. We also still have the possibility of exclusively translation or the combination of translation and rotation. So our kinematics involve all of those things. But the kinetics, a little bit more involved, we still will have this equation, but we're now also going to have to do something about the fact that forces can cause things to rotate. When we looked at our particle motion, there was no difference to us between a problem like that. When we looked at particle problems, there was no difference in those two situations. Yet you know that most certainly there is, that we can replace this second possibility with something that looks a little bit more like the first. But the fact that we've displaced this force by some distance, now we have to also put in a moment. Alex, since you jumped over static, you didn't hear the term moment really. We take it as torque and in physics one, so very same thing. But as you remember, these two systems for our need are equivalent systems. Particle motion does not take into account the fact that these first two are even different. So now we do. So we're going to have to come up with something where we also look at some of the moment's business. We'll set that up in a second. And then we are going to have, again, the work energy and the impulse momentum methods that will work for rigid bodies as well. All right, so that's where we're going here in the next couple of days. Well, we only have three weeks left. And one of the days is a test. And I think one of the days is review, just so the test wouldn't be on the last day. Give you kind of a break from the professors doing that. So let's see if we can improve our kinetics so that they reflect the kind of thing we need. All right, first and foremost, whatever the object is, there is some center of mass to it, some center of gravity. If it's a uniformly dense solid and a uniformly thick solid, then that center of mass is also at the area centroid, which is a simple fact we've used several times before. Now we've got this possibility that there are forces or a-force acting. Maybe that's the, well, we'll go ahead and call it the sum of the forces. And then that can cause some kind of acceleration. And I'll put a little G on there to remind us that, well, in particle motion we didn't need that, because that's all that would happen. There'd be some unbalanced force on some mass and it would accelerate. Now there's a little bit more going on as you'll see in a second. So we're going to have this subscript of G. But we know that the forces that are unbalanced will cause that center of gravity to accelerate somewhere. We have to add to it the possibility that there's going to be some kind of rotation or at least some kind of moment due to that force. So we have to take that into account too. So we have, if we sum the moments about G. If you remember, we set this up a little bit ago and that was the time rate of change of the angular momentum. These two equations were actually very similar because this one was time rate of change of the linear momentum. And this one was the time rate of change of the angular momentum. That looked a little bit familiar from a couple of weeks ago, I think. I hope trouble is, I don't know about you, my trouble is that I find the first one quite easy to work with. One, we're just more familiar with. And two, when we have forces on something and cause it to accelerate, it's kind of right there. You can see what it's going to do. You can see what it takes to do something. You look at this equation, I can understand what moments are. I can visualize them. I can't visualize that. That's not something that my mind can work with simply. So we can do a little bit more with that and get this to be somewhat more useful to us. Go something like this. A little bit of it has to do with what we did before. Remember this angular momentum, not the time rate of change of the angular momentum. Just the angular momentum itself was the fact that we were some distance from a reference point, which we can take for now to be this point G, because, I don't know how to erase this, but that was sort of our good reference point with our original situation where we had a force that was not acting through G, and that's the type of thing we're trying to investigate now. And then that was crossed with the linear momentum, that of the center of mass, which we kind of need to pay attention to now because the center of mass may have some velocity that other points on the body do not have, because it may be rotating. It can be doing all kinds of things. If it was just simple translation, every point on the body would have the same velocity, and I wouldn't need this. Now that we've got rigid body motion, we need to pay attention to the fact that the center of mass is going to be going some velocity, and, well, for the time being, God knows what the other points could be doing. So we're going to have to pay attention to them, get ready for them in a little bit. All right, so we have that little bit. That's, I don't know, a little bit more workable than this is, but let's see where we can go with this to make it even more useful to us in a second. If we're talking about multiple parts to the body, we can, or multiple components of some kind, we can sum all this business up over all of those pieces, and that will then represent the whole body, all the body pieces. So we can sum over all these little pieces doing this. Every little piece might have its own velocity. It doesn't seem like that's an easier step for us, but it will be in a little bit, because when we sum up what all the little pieces are doing, of course that's got to be what the whole body is going to do, so we should be okay with it. We're looking at 2D motion, so we can simplify that cross product. Those vectors will be mutually exclusive in some part, and we'll take our usual direction as positive, so this can become then the sum of r, m, v, k. Now we'll put it into our 2D only. It's not that it doesn't work in 3D, but things are going to get easier for us if we do this. So now we've got the magnitude and the direction of everything. Oh, skipped a little piece. That's in fact no shock. So we've got this r. Now that v we just had as omega cross r. That's the part we needed. Now we can go to the 2D step. Sorry about that. Now we go to the 2D step. Now we get the sum of r i squared omega. Remember for a rigid body, omega is constant for the entire piece, so that can come out of the summation. So redirect you with the magic arrow of algebraic redirection. And we get omega comes out of the summation. We get all of the rest left over, which is just a characteristic of the object itself. None of the dynamics is now in there. That's just whatever the object, that all has to do with object geometry. In fact, if we wanted to make dm small enough, these mass pieces small enough, this would then become just the integral of r squared dm. Either way, it's the same thing. And either way, I hope that this integral r squared dm or the summation of mr squared for all the pieces looks maybe a little bit familiar. No, not quite. You'll recognize it. It's the mass moment of inertia, which you remember is a purely geometric property. So this whole thing becomes i omega. If you think back to physics one, where we had a rotational analog for every linear component variable we had, we also had a rotational equivalent for mass, and that was the mass moment of inertia. Now, the reason this becomes so very useful to us is all the way back here, because now this time rate of change of the angular momentum, which we've now determined is, we'll have to put a g on this i, because as we know, moment of inertia is different about different axes. We now have that, that's the time rate of change of that vector. Our 2d analysis. Remember the moment of inertia is a characteristic of the solid itself no matter what it's doing. Omega is what it's doing, so i g comes out of the integration. We get d omega dt, which is alpha. And now we have our two equations governing rigid body motion. And I find i g alpha a lot easier to work with than h dot was. I don't know about you. I do. For our two-dimensional problems, oh, I guess I needed the vector sign in here, sorry. For our two-dimensional problems, this is three equations, because the sum of the forces is in x, y, and the sum of the moments is in k, so we have three equations. We can handle problems with three unknowns. Four two-dimensional problems. If we had three-dimensional problems, this would be a full six equations with three dimensions. Don't forget, though, that we also have any kinematic equations we used before. So we can solve problems of greater than three unknowns because we also can pull in, in fact, will pull in the kinematics equations. I don't understand this term here. This f sub i goes to zero, and that's how we go to r. No, as for this, if we're talking about a solid of discrete masses, so there's m1, there's m2, there's r2, there's r1, you know, like a satellite type thing might be, then this equation applies nicely. If we're talking about a continuous solid, then we break it into little elemental pieces. So this is dm, and it's located at some place, r, I don't know, what do I put? dm, and then we have to do that for the entire solid all over the place and for it to be accurate, dm has to go to very, very small pieces so that we do the continuous integral over the entire object. Kinetics equations. So obviously for problems now, that moment of inertia is going to become important. Let me just do a little bit of review for us on that. It's the integral over the entire solid, r squared dm, for a continuous solid rather than for a solid made up of discrete parts. We could even handle, if we need to, the possibility that the density changes with position. So we could do the same integral that way. However, as you can imagine, these integrals exist for regular solids so that we don't need to do the integration. That's not the point of this class. That's in appendix B4 in your book. Way, way at the back, have lots of regular solids, cylinders, hollow cylinders, parallel pipe beds, all kinds of stuff. The usual one, spheres, hollow spheres, conical sections, all kinds of things. And in there are the moment of inertia through the centroid but also through other parts of the object. Remember that moment of inertia through an axis through the center of gravity will be different than the moment of inertia about some other axis parallel to it and separated by a distance d. If you remember, that's the parallel axis theorem. And so if we have the moment of inertia about an axis through the centroid, through the center of mass, we can find the moment of inertia about an axis parallel to that. That's the parallel axis theorem. From this business, we also define then a term may or may not sound familiar. I don't think we used it in Physics I, radius of gyration. Have you heard that term before? Radius of gyration is some distance, we call k, that if all of the mass was collected at that distance in an infinitesimally thin ring but all the mass was there, that would have the same moment of inertia as whatever we're talking about in the problem. And they're related by that equation. There's not any great use to this other than the fact that a lot of times in some of these problems or in other problems in industry, I guess you're more likely to hear the radius of gyration rather than the moment of inertia and it's the moment of inertia that we need for this equation. It's also true that we can get the moment of inertia about another axis and the radius of gyration about another axis but the equation still is the same. So if we have some object and we took all of its mass and collected it at some radius such that those two objects had the exact same moment of inertia, that radius would be the radius of gyration. An abstract concept but one that is of common use in these problems. All right. Obviously, moment of inertia is going to be important in these problems. There are five ways you'll come up with the moment of inertia in a problem. It might just be given in a problem. This is common for more complex solids like satellites and bicycles and other things that we might need to look at. It's just given. It's also possible for you to look it up, checking that appendix D4. If the solid we're using is in that table, just use the moment of inertia from the table. Not often are our problems just simply objects out of the table but it might be composites of objects given in the table. So you can sum up all the moments of inertia of them individually, applying the parallel axis theorem that's necessary. It could also be that you're given the radius gyration instead and then just simply calculate the moment of inertia from that. The fourth possibility and a student favorite integrate it and figure out what it is. Figure it out yourself. That could be though if you add up the moments of inertia of regular solids then you're okay. The fifth possibility, one that sometimes sneaks up on students is that you just simply don't need it in a problem. If you remember back to physics one or even some of the problems we did in this class there were occasionally times when you thought the mass was important and it turned out it wasn't more important than the problem from the equations and that wasn't even necessary. Freefall problems were always that way. Remember the mass didn't apply but if you did freefall problems as a work energy problem the mass is in there and it doesn't cancel out to the end and then you remember all you have freefall problems we didn't need it. Then just a reminder the last little piece for composite bodies. Bodies made up of some of those regular solids that are in that table from method two. You can sum up all of the pieces applying the parallel axis theorem if necessary. All right, sounds like a horrible mess but it's not so we'll do it. Maybe I'll have to mic these for this class. Imagine a 747 looks like that's what they look like right there. Man, that's pretty darned. That's like a photograph. Where's Swing's? They're there. Can't draw them because they're swept back. See, it's got this big landing gear type thing if you remember plus some little nose thing there. That's what they look like. Exactly what they look like. I want to find out the reactions the forces on the wheels. Now as a statics problem not a big deal center of gravity right about there we'll put it let's say that it's 5 meters in front of the back landing gear and 22 meters behind the front landing gear 5 meters off the deck. See, when we get part of a motion none of that matters we didn't care where the forces were we just did what they were so we can figure out then from a statics problem what these reactions are and we'll call them A and B we can do that pretty quick we can do it oh I think we need to give it a mass too we need mega-grams favorite units. So we can figure out very quickly I hope what those reactions were for example we can sum up moments about one of the points one of the forces we pick one of them and we don't have to worry about it Alex we did this in physics one some of these simple type problems 5 meters must equal B times 27 meters is that right just practice quick practice quick warm up because that's just a statics problem just sitting there on the sitting there on the tarmac waiting to taxi out that's not good enough for us that's just a statics problem but I'd like to compare it to what happens to these type of problems during takeoff back that's why they have those multiple wheels there the front you've often seen guys just walk out they lift up the front and move the plane around you've seen that haven't seen them do that you have A and B go ahead and give them to me gee how about a few more figures in there 454 your A was somebody's got it Colin got it that's just a statics problem that's no good to us here because during takeoff now do we all draw on the wings the wings are maybe something like here with the engines below them that generates thrust that is a little bit below the center of gravity by about 2 meters how does that change then the reactions at the wheels that now becomes a statics problem because that's going to generate some moments that weren't there before cause some acceleration of the plane itself that's the point of turning on the engines so now let's figure out what the reactions of the wheels are to the dot notation just because we do have a subscript here if we are doing things in the x direction then we have another layer of subscript which I'm not really fond of so if we use the dot notation we only have the one subscript g forces in the x direction obviously the thrust there's a little bit of rolling friction at the wheels but not much certainly not much compared to the thrust so that's our x direction equation oh by the way we do have the thrust it's 700 kms so we can figure out the acceleration of the center of gravity of the plane itself down the tarmac and that problem is no different than what we would have done in particle motion no different than what we would have done in physics one so we'll take it a step further we still haven't found the reactions all that and then is give us the acceleration so we're going to have to sum the forces in the y direction as well we'll have already done that that's a plus b equals w because there is no acceleration in the y direction sum the moments remember about some point that's convenient it might be convenient to do some other points however don't because the only equation we have so far is the moment summed about g oops I didn't put the g in there we only have an equation for summing the moments about g we're going to see in a minute things change when we sum the moments about other points all right going to sum the moments about g what's the moment of inertia of a fully loaded 747 with respect to an axis through its center of gravity well go down that list of five ways to find it it's not given it's not in that table don't have the radius of gyration probably don't want to integrate it especially since we don't have any other dimensions than just these and we certainly don't have the weight distribution so the possibility is that we don't need it why don't we need it though it's right there plane is taking off still going down the runway well we don't even know if it's takeoff it's just a thrust of 700 km maxing but it is just running down the runway what's alpha it's not rotating it's only translating so we can sum the moments about g and we get essentially the same equation except we have the thrust in here where we didn't have any thrust there so we'll take all the since they all sum to zero counterclockwise thrust I mean moments so that's t times 2 meters a makes a clockwise moment about g b also does a counterclockwise moment about g so we'll add it over here of course that 22 meters b those are the two counterclockwise moments and that must equal sum to zero on this problem clockwise moments which is p we have two equations p plus b equals w and two unknowns static's problem when there wasn't any thrust this equation here the moment equation is a different equation than we had here the statics sum of the moments I didn't know this is a taxing situation so this thrust is very much smaller than takeoff thrust you don't get anything close to what these two are at together a plus b equals w is the same equation what was your what was the mass the mass was 250 mega grams so its weight was 9.8 what have we got get what you agree or don't agree don't agree with each other if you agree with me you're at path path's had a stellar day that's what you get something wow all kinds of different things common create the tie under one to one so if you agree with somebody that's not an accurate answer bobby what do you have for a no for b 439 all the numbers are right sometimes a transmute table everything looks okay 22 meters w forward what do you have pat for there I got 203,000 do we what do you have for a 2061 2061 Alex Colin 2048 Jake nothing that's a spirit in the plane Colin you were within round off 9.8 that's what I had contributing yet 402 they're mine 600 well look at the problem does it make sense that B would go down and A would go up the thrust is pushing under the center grab the center grab is the point about which it would tend to rotate if it could it can't of course because it's in contact with the pavement so the thrust pushing under the center gravity would try to turn the plane that way which would increase A and decrease B which is what several of us got but not everybody but I increased to exactly this 1800 1800 is less than 2000 well the only place to go wrong is algebra if what 9.1 where did that come from oh I thought you had 2300 well 2061 oh 2061 somebody else had 2300 alright anyway something close to this alright we got to take care of other possibilities though turns out that this moment equation with the moment summed about the center of gravity isn't always the easiest thing to use we have some situations where we might have some some lovely object of some kind with some center of gravity somewhere and a couple forces acting on it maybe there's a force there and a force there and a force there could be that we don't know what all those different little pieces are and the like or we don't know exactly how they act or something but it might be easier for us instead of summing the moments about G three components to that often times we've seen as we have before that there's some other point it might be more efficient or for us to sum the moments about it might be a little easier for us to sum the moments about point P most of our problems will be this oddly complex we know that a lot of the very regular programs or problems point P could be quite easy to find in a lot of type of problems we look at but the some of the moments about point P could indeed cause it to rotate however it'll be a center moment of inertia with respect to that point P itself same type of equation however it's about a different P a different point either equation is perfectly fine always make sure that these subscripts match the trouble is we might not know what IP is the moment of inertia with respect to an axis through P remember these are two dimensional problems so the axis is in the z direction the k direction often what the moment of inertia through the center of gravity is however when we apply the parallel axis theorem knowing that this will these forces will cause some kind of acceleration we can adjust things by using this form of some of the moments equations this just comes from the parallel axis theorem you can derive this in about three seconds using the deal that a equals r alpha actually in this case it'd be d instead of r our book happens to use d where d is the perpendicular distance from the point to the direction of acceleration whatever that might be so is d the same as r yes this is the form you're more familiar with d is what our book happens to use for the parallel axis theorem so we need another bracket there you go gives us an alternative way to sum the moments we have several possibilities now when we're summing the moments depending on what's easiest for a problem first one still applies it's not that it doesn't apply for other problems it just might not be the easiest one to use second one also applies but again may not be the easiest one to use the third one may apply but may not be the easiest one to use use whichever one of them is the easiest problem and see how this applies contemporary problem that applies right up to the very moment of our lives one of you has a little projector clicker you stole from Bobby you got a smart phone that has a projector app on it there we go see it's spring let's do a lawnmower problem alright what? draw up that's a photograph man it's a picture of my lawnmower and my grass let's see some of the details we can see center of gravity is 215 millimeters off the deck there's a wheel base with respect to center of gravity and well we're going to do this problem where it's a self-propelled lawnmower so take p as zero so we want to find that we want to find the forward acceleration for the self-propelled mower rear wheel drive without the operator actually having to do any pushing two little things you'll need that aren't up there let me make sure I got the right one is the coefficient of friction US and UK we want to determine what the acceleration is of course this acceleration is going to be parallel to the ground and forward kinda like the plane this was well the place the acceleration lives is in the x direction equation remember there's a p in the drawing but p is zero for this problem let's see what will be the forward acceleration if the wheels are engaged but the the operators just let go it's a phone ring or something maybe he knows that his daughter was playing out in front of the mower instead of turning off the mower and he ran around to the front together what yeah it's a lot more exciting than that alright are there any forward forces here there must be or there wouldn't be any forward acceleration we're trying to determine what a sub g is or x dot dot g same thing what forward forces are there remembering that p even though it's in the picture is zero well we can't sum the force if we don't have a decent free body diagram so let's finish that then any forces we want to jump in with easy ones so they get the rest of the act in and off good Alex the weight acting at the center of gravity we didn't necessarily care where we acted before other than it was acted down now we have to pay attention to the fact that there's a bunch of different positions in all of these problems and the center of gravity is most clearly one of them specifically listed as such what other forces normal force at each wheel b and c what else we still have no forward force friction as the back wheels tend to turn they produce friction in contact with the ground front wheels will just take to be simple rolling wheels with minimal resistance what else we don't have all the forces no sense doing the problem we're doing the wrong problem I want forces there's a free body diagram I did put the kinematics result of the forces in a different color what are the forces that's it that's all there are so we know that the friction times the normal force well, times that normal force b is going to cause it to accelerate we're looking for that acceleration oh, 50 kilograms by the way it doesn't matter if the friction is going quite in the wrong way it looks like it's going to speed speed it up it is we turn on the gas the wheels start to turn and it accelerates forward so the friction has got to be forward remember oh, okay the wheels are pushing back on the grass the wheels so that's our x-direction equation which coefficient of friction for greatest acceleration well, the greater this is the greater that's going to be so the static friction as you should know anyway you'll get better acceleration if the wheels aren't slipping you want them to remain in contact so the maximum acceleration will come at the maximum friction well, we don't know b the only way to find that is with the sum of the moments in the y-direction of course we don't want to accelerate now, remember in these type of vehicle type problems there's always the possibility maybe desirers of a wheelie in that case the center of gravity would have a y-direction acceleration even though the object was still in contact with the ground those are things we never had to consider before so d plus c equals w so we're a little bit stuck in that we don't have we've got two equations three unknowns so we still got to keep going sum the moments about what point do it about g if we knew the moment of inertia about g well, we wouldn't need the moment of inertia about g would we because there's no angular acceleration however that will load this equation with all of these three unknowns and things are still algebraically complicated if we sum the moments about say b two of the forces drop out of the problem but we will have this piece to it of that business that comes from the parallel axis so notice that the sum of the moments about g might be zero but not about b however this is pretty easy stuff in that it's all directly part of the problem the counterclockwise direction to be the positive direction that fits with our x and the y so let's see the c times the wheel base this is between b and c is a positive moment what's the wheel base for millimeters you agree that's a positive moment summing the moments about b which eliminates two of the forces from the problem so that's a negative we know what the mass is so we don't consider the weight an unknown its moment arm is 200 millimeters is that it for the forces now here's one place we do have to be very careful this acceleration is in a clockwise direction with respect to b so we have to put it in as a negative sign that is a tricky part about using this method 50 kilograms x double dot we're looking for what is d d is the minimum distance between b the point of summing the moments and the acceleration vector acceleration vector is a minimum distance of the 215 so watch out for that minus sign that's an easy one to easy one to skip alright so we've got all the pieces then it's a little bit easier probably have a debate whether that's easier but it's a pretty easy demonstration out there let's see what it's doing because I don't see your homework in here I guess I'm going to have to take a clear note of that you know when you get out of 747 because we have to have a race between the two that'd be kind of exciting equation there's only millimeters but they cancel because there's millimeters in every term so it doesn't matter what the units are in this term in this equation as long as they're all the same units because millimeters appears in every equation these ones didn't appear that doesn't in w but now that they've canceled out of the other terms it doesn't matter if you put in w that would just give you the units there so if you use meters per second squared here you get meters per second squared there 11.03 meters per second squared for 18 no I got it you may have to find x double dot you may have to find a and b sorry b and c on the way and then notice if p did exist that force exerted by the user all of this changes the acceleration no acceleration lottery colon you're just cruising here today you'll get out of mowing along I have 4.14 meters per second squared check those g here's 9.8 yeah I used 9.81 so that might be that b is 414 and c I got was 70 sessions


Youth apprenticeship is an excellent pathway to careers, to quality work, to post-secondary education, and that it should be regarded as something to integrate into learning experiences. We want to put in place youth apprenticeships that lead to high-demand, high-skill careers for students. We're not looking to create youth apprenticeships for obtaining the entry level. We want students to start at the entry level and grow. If I were to look back on my communication skills, responsiveness, time management, last year to when I first started to now, completely different of how efficient I am. The youth apprenticeship program provided students like me with an opportunity to grow out of my conference zone and achieve goals that no one else in their family has achieved so far. One of the people I came in contact with during the youth apprenticeship program was actually the person that set me up with the job. With the youth apprenticeship program, I would get paid to work. I wouldn't have to worry about any student loans. And it was the best of both worlds for me that I ended up liking what I'm doing here. We are able to bring a big tent, knitting in the social support sources that young people have access to and making sure we're able to leverage some of those dollars for them to stay on path and on course towards their ultimate career. Look at apprenticeships is one of the ways that we can build a more inclusive and diverse pipeline. It's not always about the degree that you have, this concept of potential over pedigree. The youth apprenticeship increases the numbers of potential workers. So we need to find a new source of human beings and younger people are part of that new source. As a company, asking ourselves a question all up and down the chain of, you know, from hiring to promoting to, frankly, forming teams the question we're asking is, are we doing this in such a way that everyone has a shot? A lot of what our design is all about is creating these hubs and these connecting people to take the load off industry who has this need, knows what they need. Everything is an opportunity for further development of new programs. You have to have a strong intermediary who can keep all those disparate pieces working together in that collaborative space. As we expand the diversity pool of the people we're working with to build these systems out everybody's input is just really key and important if we want to move to the next level with our programs. Now our partnership looks much more like, hey, these are our shared values. These are our shared goals. How do we get there together? That's a transition that I think is going to be really valuable and positions our work to create the sort of outcomes that we want to see as a community.


Sam here with late sports cards. We're ripping 10 box Tuesdays 10 box immaculate football mixer number 148 random team style Here's a look again at your random results as always you can find these on the website under the results tab as well as the link That's in chat. Good luck here everybody. Whoops That's for me 22 Don Russ hobby first Doing well looking crazy. How are you? Yeah, pull some pull some good cards today for sure Definitely pull some good cards today. Let's name play Alvin Kamara for the Saints Shelling hurts red press proof For the Eagles the rookies Alec Pierce and the Kobe Dean and DeForest Buckner red Christian Harris I'm alright smack. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing to worry about. All good, man Trail Bernard for the bills to a hundred. There's an Isaiah Spiller rated rookie auto I hope I hope we see a Lamar deal done soon, man. Nice one there for the Chargers small Adams Malik Willis rookie Tom Brady Kway Walker and Barry Sanders Kind of Walker elite series Oh, no back. I'm Jake Matthews red Christian Watson Red Thurman Thomas Sam Howell leather Kings for the commanders nice one there 17 out of 49. Haha. I appreciate that looking crazy Yeah, I think Stefan Gilmour's I think that's a really good pick up for the for the Cowboys Think have him or shot white have him on the opposite side of Chavon digs It's gonna be saw. It's gonna be a good secondary now. They mean Pierce and Drake London Five of a hundred. That's Jersey numbered five of a hundred nice one there for the Falcons Congrats Atlanta, Boston Knox Trey McBride Roger Stalba Steph Curry fans of the game. Can you pick it red press proof nice? Yeah, I know what you mean Pearson Romeo Dobbs learn for that Rogers to the Jets tomorrow We'll see man Who knows who knows? Sean Gary red color. I was your rookie Joey Bosa. It's very damaged. We'll send an empty box and rapper to 75 Jameson Williams for the Lions the rookies Desmond Ritter and Charles Haley All right, let's do 22 Phoenix now 22 Phoenix hobby red sake one to 150 or 250 silver Aaron Rodgers There's John Dotton hot routes to 50 by our nice Isaiah Spiller to 50 Traylon Berks lava Chris Olava to 175 Jamar Chase Sauce gardener to 299 rookie Jersey auto for the Jets David Montgomery Tyler Algier pink to 199 Romeo Dobbs to 149 bless you on the jumbo Jersey Terry McLaurin color burst green Najee Harris to 25 So I'm there for the Steelers. That is two of 25 Dalton Schultz Purple Andrew Booth, Jr. To 125 Derek Carr on the silver It's Khalil Shakira orange to 99 silver Malik Willis Erica Zucano That is rookie auto for the Dolphins nice one there Miami Silver Romeo Dobbs are miles Garrett to to 150 Brock Lesnar on the consorts All right guys, we're on to 22 no huddle. Yeah, I will be tomorrow night Andrew Fred Taylor to 20 for the Jets It'll be a fun time then So we got a gold coming up here. Can you pick it rookie debut a gold Robert Woods Bobby trees Three of ten going to the Titans now a Texan silver Harold Landry Disco Hassan Haskins rookie for the Titans Petrie Tyrion Davis price to variation and Tony Gonzalez There's Wes Welker no huddle auto for the Patriots nice one there Mosaic Dallas Goddard the needle chat Johnson mosaic There's blue chips Sam Howell Russell Wilson sauce garden Drake London, there's a Kevin Byard silver and Tom Brady on the disco Young sauce gardener purple 21 to 50 nice one there for the Jets. There's a blue Taysum Hill to 75 Silver Carson strong Joe name it awesome Echler disco 22 mosaic hobby 22 mosaic hobby. Yeah, Drake Drake London color versus solid Shaquille It's a nice card It's a really nice card James Cook Red Aaron Rodgers very Sanders met a mastery rock party mosaic nice one there Silver Trayvon Walker met a mastery Josh Allen silver Aaron Rodgers Now, I think they're they're pretty good with the cap right now. I think blue Marquez Valdez scantling to 99 silver Joey Bosa Straight fire Patrick Mahomes. There's AJ Dylan mosaic red Joe Thomas and Blue center stage Jim Kelly seven of 99. There's Hassan Haskins Mosaic rookie auto for the Titans Congrats Tennessee Nice one there Zach Wilson red Derek Henry Sam Howe, Najee Harris There's Ricky Williams going to the Dolphins run Ricky run, baby. Nice one there Sam Darnold Silver Devonte Wyatt Garrett Wilson and Justin Jefferson John Mechie. There's a Barry Sanders Silver Brandon I Disco or not disco mosaic Trayvon Walker Darnold got darnold with the Niners. It's kind of wild It's gonna be weird seeing him in a Niners jersey Mitch Drabisky. There's a tessellation Chase Young for the commanders 10 of 15. Nice one there Washington tessellation Silver center stage Jim Kelly James Connor Silver Joe Burrow and straight fire Matt Stafford Jima George Pickens Jalen Naylor Red Breeze Hall Blue chips Traylon Burks and center stage Eli Manning. All right, 21 mosaic choice 21 mosaic choice We got a peacock Levi and Wuzerica and Ian Book to 80 for the Saints on the rookie Got Kareem Hunt Silver Jalen Reagan John Taylor is going to be your auto. That's pretty cool. Going to the Niners. Congrats San Fran John Taylor Luke Keekley to 80 Nice one here is going to be a Tom Brady to 80 Rated to 80 36 of 80 And then we've also got a Jason Whitton man of the year going to the Cowboys, right? Yep Dallas Cowboys on the peacock. Very cool. Congrats Dallas 21 mosaic hobby Jamar Chase debut Silver Jalen Darden Aaron Rodgers Silver Montage Aaron Don LT Jamar Chase debut rookie Jalen Hertz Gabrielle Cox racing McMath White Jake Funk rookie for the Rams. That's 24 of 25 Nice one there Silver Tom Brady DK Metcalf Silver in it to win it James Harrison Laez Campbell in the Holmes Justin Fields debut Jalen Phillips Jalen waddle rookie kid reporter Tom Brady Super Bowl MVPs Vaughn Miller Red Super Bowl MVPs Tom Brady in it to win it mosaic Yeah, very good Brady roll there for sure. There's a mosaic, uh, Lydanean Tomlinson Silver Steve Largent Blue Chips Trey Lance, uh, Meta Mastery is Dan Marina Patrick Sartan debut Kenneth Gainwell, Dazz Newsom John Elway man of the year Red Davis Mills There's CD Lam Swagger that was a rookie Davis Mills Diggs Morrig, Cornell Powell Waddle Greg Newsom 10 of 10 on the gold. Nice one there for the Browns. Congrats on that Nice gold Cadarius Tony debut Silver Fletcher Cox UTN, Najee Harris debut Najee Bass rookie, Anais Sewell Travis Kelsey Racy McMath John Randall. There's a Jamar Chase introductions mosaic Micah Parsons' debut Yeah, for sure Shaquilla, congrats Bass Aaron Jones, Red Fred Belitnikov Aaron Jones, Silver Devonta Smith introductions St. Taylor, Jalen Waddle debut Ian Book, Quiddipay Christian Barmore, Rookie Otto Christian Barmore, Rookie Otto, nice one there for the Patriots Yeah, we didn't catch the side-by-side thing unfortunately. Burrow, second year mosaic, Redwalter Peyton Jones, Brady Oway, Cadarius Tony Blue Michael Pittman, Jr. to 99 Silver Damarina Silver Swagger, Calvin Ridley Kyle Trask and Pete Burner All right guys, that'll do it for mosaic. Ha, be more on to Zenith I believe, one second really quick. That is 22 Zenith first off the line TJ Watt, Z-stars Jamison Williams, Rookie Wave and Jalen Warren, Rookie Travis Etn Nice one here going to the Patriots, Bailey Zappie That is 33 out of 50, four-colored RPI First off the line exclusive, congrats New England Harrison Smith 93 out of 100 for the Vikings 22 Spectra Hobby There's Travis Etn, Jr. Two of three Or no, two of eight Kade York Rookie Silver Got Maurice Jones, Drew, Max Impact, Jersey to 99 And Harry Carson, that is For the Giants, nice one there, you might microfiber in this We'll microfiber that one for you Giants, sorry Trevor Penning, 32 of 60 Michael Carter 39 of 99 is TJ Watt On the high voltage jersey for the Steelers Nice one here is going to be 13 of 25, Eli Manning On the retrospect, going to the Giants Giants back-to-back autos there Congrats New York C Higgins, Hyper to 75 Got Rookie Spectris 57 of 99 is Aidan Hutchinson for the Lions Three of 15, Jomar Chase, Sunday Spectacle I believe this will be a random Yeah, so this will be a random right here This is going to be one of 10 Soss Gardner and Kyle Hamilton Shaquilla B owns the Ravens And Brandon L owns the Jets So that will be random to those teams at the end Spectra Pack, ooh That is three of 10, Wes Welker We've got the case hit Solar Eclipse, Kenny Pickett Nice one there That's awesome Congrats on that Steelers Going to Alvin S Picking up a case hit, congrats buddy We'll get that magged for you Got 92 of 99, Barry Sanders Eight of 10, Brian Robinson, Jr Two cards numbered to 10, very nice Congrats on that, Commanders Alright, Impeccable 22 Impeccable Drew Smith-Schuster To 75 for the Chiefs Zach Wilson to 50 for the Jets And Aaron Jones to 75 for the Packers DeMarvin Leal, that is 22 of 49 Let's go into the Steelers on the rookie order That's AJ Brown, 7 of 15 Nice one there for the Eagles Congrats, Philly Kenneth Walker, 64 of 99 Two-color Patch Auto for the Seahawks Got a Jerome Betis, 3 of 25 for the Steelers On the Master Strokes Really cool one here, you can mag this one We've got Chris Olave, 1 of 5 On the Ball Helmets RPA Going to the Saints Nice one there, congrats New Orleans And we're going into iMac now 22 iMac CD-Lam, 48 of 99 for the Cowboys Got for the Raiders, 38 of 49 Derek Carr and Devontae Adams Tay and Carr Carr now at St Clearly Immaculates is going to be Trevor Lawrence, 95 of 99 Is 32 of 49, Paul Krause For the Vikings, cool one there Nice one here going to the Lions That is 48 of 99 Aiden Hutchinson, rookie iBlack RPA Can mag this and the next one And the last card, True RPA, 71 of 99 Trayvon Walker, two-colored RPA Full Seag on the Trayvon Walker Going to the Jags Nice one there, there's a little bit of damage On that Patch Window I don't know if that's, no it doesn't look like a hair It looks like some scuffing We'll send an empty box and wrap her with the Jags We'll get that mag for you as well I gotta run this random really quick And we'll do a quick recap Is the rookie logo on the Trayvon off? A little bit Oh yeah it is a little bit It is a little bit off Yeah well like I said We'll send an empty box and wrap her there Again guys we've got the sauce and the Hamilton All right guys doing a random for the Sauce Gardener and Kyle Hamilton Dual rookie patch auto to 10 Going to roll the dice Whatever team's on top after five times We'll get the card One, two, three, four, and five Going to the Jets Jets getting the Trayvon Walker Or the, not Trayvon Walker The dual All right let's do a quick recap here everybody Dylan's still magging a couple of things So we'll get it here Jason Witton That is Trevor Lawrence DeMonte Adams there at car Barry Sanders Chamar Chase TJ Watt Marish Jones Drew Romeo Dobbs Sam Howe Harry Carson Harrison Smith Christian Barman Greg Newsome to 10 John Taylor Son Haskins Ricky Williams Wes Welker Isaiah Spiller Erica Zucconma Sauce Gardener Marvin Leal Paul Krause Kenneth Walker Jerome Bettis Brian Robinson Jr There's an Eli Manning AJ Brown Mags Cards We had a Bailey Zappie first off the line exclusive We had Aiden Hutchinson 299 Eye Black Rookie Patch Auto Trayvon Walker 71 of 99 Kenny Pickett On the Solar Eclipse And a Crystal Lave One of five For the Saints That'll do it for the break guys Thanks again for the fill Next up we've got Persona Rose


Hey there friends, thanks for checking in. Think about it Thursday. What have I been thinking about? For some odd reason, I have been thinking about Sky Handguns and how they hit the market and filled the void with budget priced handguns. They came out in 2003, 2005 was the first release of the CPX-1 and back then there weren't many budget handguns, high point was the main one. 100 bucks, sometimes less, for a big bulky handgun with low capacity. And then there was Taurus that many people viewed as unsafe and unreliable with horrible customer service. Yes, they were a bunch of price, but people said it's not worth it. There were some problems with discharges that should not have happened and people shied away from it. But when Sky came out, there just wasn't a big market. There was a big market, but there were not a lot of offerings in budget handguns. So they came out with a polymer frame, 10 round capacity, nine millimeter handgun subcompact. And people seem to gravitate toward that because they were right around 200 bucks. And their timing was great. Then eventually they came out with a bunch of different colors and they offered great customer service. They actually agreed to replace a handgun that was either lost or stolen at a specific time. They had since ended that program because there were some issues with criminals taking advantage of that, at least so I'm told. I have to believe that's true. But they were originally called Sky SCYY then the vodka company said, hey, we've got a trademark with that then they moved it to SCCY. Sky hits that budget price, but isn't really a great handgun. It works okay. The problem I have, and this is a CPX3 and 380 is with the magazines. They ship with a couple of magazines. They are one size fits all, but they don't necessarily operate the same way. I have found in the CPX3 that some of the magazines I have work great others do not. When I did a reliability test on this, every issue I had was a magazine related issue. I think if Sky would work with a company like Metgar to make mags, they would have much better success even if they raised the price a little bit. The long double action trigger pull is really heavy. Hard to stay on target. Now, when Sky came out with the CPX1, they eventually came out with the CPX2 without the thumb safety, CPX3, and then the DVG1. They made them optic ready by choice. And the price went up a little bit, but they still remain under $300. And people have the idea that you can get everything you want from a P365 or a Hellcat at half the price. And I just don't think that is the case. That long double action trigger pull can get hard to stay on target. And the function with the magazines is an issue with me. If I had to say the ranking of Sky on a scale of one to 10, all things considered, I'd give it probably a five, maybe less because of the issues I mentioned. It's an okay handgun. You know, people like all the colors they offer. People like the price. People like some of the options, but it just doesn't hit me as a premier handgun. Was it built to be a premier handgun? No, probably not. This is for somebody that wants a gun buried in the truck. Somebody who wants it in a tackle box. Somebody who wants it in a spare bedroom, hidden away because it's cheap. But when I trust my life with a Sky handgun, I honestly would not. I've had some issues with the Skies, the magazines, that has a little funky take down. That's fine. I can live with that. But I don't think it's a premier handgun. Does it fit a niche of people out there who are looking for budget handguns? Yes, and for that sake, I am happy. I'm sure Sky is much like High Point that they brought a bunch of people in to shooting and self-defense and awareness without costing a lot of money. And that's certainly a good thing. But for those who have a few extra bucks, it's my opinion that you could do better. And if you look at Taurus, they've put out some great handguns right around the same price here. Maybe a little more, but they're actually offering more as well as the reputation has improved over the years. A lot of people have come around to Taurus. Has a lot of people, have a lot of people come around to Sky? I don't know. And that's why I'm making this video on Think About It Thursday, because are you a fan of Sky handguns? Do you think they are awesome? Do you think they are extremely reliable? Or do you think they're a piece of junk? I don't think they're great, but I don't think they're horrible either. I'm happy that they have budget priced handguns. But accuracy can be challenging. The magazines can be challenging. And good customer service is always a nice touch. But in my case, I just don't shoot them that great. But I'm wondering what you think. Are you a fan of Sky? Do you think they make a great handgun for a good price? Or have you moved away from them and gotten into something a little bit more expensive, but you shoot it better and you're happier with it? If you like videos like this, please subscribe. And share. I always appreciate thumbs up button. Thanks for watching and you guys be safe.


How do you get somebody interested in something so unknown? We're sitting on a mountain top about 12,000 feet on a property I purchased in 1982, and where I've been living ever since. Geographers do a lot of different things. What pulls us together as a discipline is this curiosity of the distribution of phenomena in space. Why am I sitting in grass here instead of in a forest? Pretty simple, simple-minded question, but a really wonderful, complex explanation. I've been teaching at UVM between 2010 and 2012, and when I came back to Ecuador, I thought, wouldn't it be nice to maintain the relationship with the geography department? Well, let's do something that is novel for students, but also a passion of my own. What would tie us together was this question of part of our origins. I signed up for this course because I thought that it would be really cool to actually go and experience what students are teaching us about outdoors and actually be learning through the environment. Is it simply the climate? Is it the rigors of climate? Or is there something else going on that we haven't really taken into adequate consideration?  Now, if you find charcoal in soil or sediments, deep sediments that represent a point 15,000 years ago or 10,000 years ago, your question has to be what was burning and who burned it? If we include fire and specifically anthropic fire in our calculation of grass partimo, wow, it means that in fact fire is necessary to the conservation and health of the partimo grasslands. The strange fact is Ecuador law, Ecuadorian law, as is true in the other Andean countries, prohibits the burning of grass partimo. So what we need to do is not only understand the science of grass partimo, the history and the science of grass partimo, but convince the society of what we've learned. You need to burn partimo in order for these seeds to get to the ground in Germany. If I just imagine a partimo that hasn't been burned in 15 or 20 years, the seed falls on it and none of the seeds actually even reach the ground. The idea of going to these three national parks is to see the whole range of expressions of grass partimo and partimo in general between the forest line where it starts and the snow line where it ends at higher elevation. We are on Chimborazo. We just hiked up here. We're now at 5100 meters and there's not a lot of oxygen. It's really a special privilege to go someplace on the earth that is so extreme that flowering plants can no longer exist. You could go to Antarctica to see the same thing in terms of latitude, but here we're seeing it in terms of altitude. If I were to ask what would be my favorite part of giving this course, I would have to say it is seeing students out of their element in essence defeating all of their personal demons about being outside their elements. What is Stu teaching us? Patience, adaptability, and also all about this paramount landscape we found ourselves in. Look at that. That's reason enough to come for me. So there's a lot of new things that sort of knock you off your spot and I love, within limits of course, but I love that students are knocked off their spot and that they deal with it and they come out at the end of the course transformed and much more confident in themselves, but expectant that whatever is new and stretches them in some way is attractive and not to be avoided. It exposes you to a ton of different stuff you never really knew you were interested until you did it. For example, taking this course has made me realize I want environmental sciences to be my double major and I think I never would have decided that unless I had come up here and hung out with Stu and learned all about it. As I hope, it has transformed lives. I think students have been affected deeply in their own personal ways by this experience of just a week over spring break.