go through on a daily basis for the town, which is, yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Andy. Yeah, I'll just be quick because it is getting late. You know, I early on was drew the motion that I presented because I felt that the substitute motion here addressed significant pieces of what my concerns were that I expressed. So that's one thing I wanted to say. The second thing is that I'm actually a little uncomfortable about completing this tonight in part because I noticed one place where the committee charge which is listed as a part of substitute motion one has an inconsistency with what's said earlier in the motion. And if I noticed one just reading through it right now, I worry that it might require given its length and the complexity of the to the charge which is built into the motion and the motion itself to make sure that they really do agree with each other in totality. And the specific one that I'm talking about is the appointing authority is slightly different in the committee charge versus in the motion. The other thing that I just wanted to note is that the whole subject of developing a proposal for repair is a complicated subject. And I think that the maker of the motion and draft of the motion did a good job of trying to recognize the complexity of setting that up. But I don't think that we should minimize for ourselves thinking about it because there are a lot of policy financial legal issues that are involved there. And this is not going to be a simple matter. So those are the things I want to point out. Rachel. I see that Allegra has her hand raised. Would it be permissible to allow Allegra to speak before I speak? It's really a town council discussion at this point. And I hate to do that, but I really feel we need to respect that it's a town council discussion. Okay. So I wanted to address some of the things that have come up first being that there is a lot of concern about the recommendations that were already offered by the CSSJC. I really do feel like that is a distraction here. It's innate that if we are having the CSSJC as part of this process, that the recommendations that they have suggested will be voiced in this process. So there is nothing about this that is negating the recommendations that they have already made. In fact, it's saying we value the recommendations that you have made and we want to include you in this process. And so I want to be very clear about that. I also wanted to address something that Shalini said, which was confusing to me. And she said that we have a DEI director that we've hired to do this work. And I think this DEI director has clearly said that she believes that reconciliation is the way forward. She put that very clearly into her last report. But at the same time, Shalini says that we should hire a consultant to do other work. And to me, that is a contradiction. So I want to point that out very clearly. I do think to Mandy's point, and maybe this was the point of Deb as well, that what are we going to do with this? So yes, we are taking a leap of faith here. We are doing something that is different than what we normally do that requires us to give up control and power. And that puts this into the hands of the people that it belongs to. And when I hear, you know, I just, I heard somebody I can't remember, I'm trying to take notes say we could use them in motion number six. This isn't about using people. This is about their voice being central to these matters and guiding and advising this town counselor council that clearly cannot get it stuff together to move this process forward. So I'm not going to apologize for being a little worked up here, but I am going to say that, you know, we are taking a leap of faith here. And yes, Mandy, it's possible that recommendations will come to the council and they won't all be embraced and we will work through that together. But until we can get together and establish some consensus about what happened and include different perspectives and voices and allow the committees that we have created to guide this process. I truly believe that these other sort of matters that are coming up about an inconsistency. And I think that we should be, okay, so we can change and make sure, Andy, that the charge and the motion both say that the town council is that the, that the council president is the appointing body. I have asked and given Lynn and Athena these motions, if there was an inconsistency, I apologize. So I'm asking us to take a leap of faith and to work through a process together that I truly believe will allow us to go to these deeper, more meaningful discussions that we need to have and that we're circling around again and again. Thanks. Alicia. Thank you. I just wanted to speak to a couple of things. One, because like I heard some comments as to like this, this motion was too specific, but just to bring us back to the reminder that the entire topic of this entire meeting is the July 5th incident. So like that is what we are addressing with this whole meeting. So this should be specific to that incident and like repairing that incident and responding to that incident. So this is why this motion is specific to that. But it's also that because the conversation of this meeting, because this is just a piece of a whole, right? Like this is just one incident in a whole systemic issue. So that's why there are other, so many other pieces that are also relevant to this happening. But this is a specific meeting for a specific thing. Why, which is why I think this motion is extremely relevant. And I think that's why this is a very specific issue. Because a lot of different interests would encompass a lot of different interests in moving towards a resolution to this one specific incident. And then we will also have other work to do in terms of the structural bigger pieces, bigger picture pieces. That is still our responsibility. But I think it's extremely important to realize how critical this one piece of the puzzle is. And I think that's something that we should be aware of. If that is completely being recognized. That like the way, again, I think I heard somebody already say that the way that we address this. We'll, we'll establish precedent, right? Like, what are we going to do next? It will start. Our path forward. Like what we do and how we address this. And so I think it's really important to realize how this one piece. We need to be ready to do better and build something better. Right. Like that is the point.  It's because we want to better. Like everyone wants better. That is the goal here. And to be better, you have to figure out what is wrong and address it and change things. And so like we need that change. And so this is one piece. We need to do a bigger puzzle and all of this is. Like a, these are all learning moments. And another big learning moment. I think this, this should also represent to the town in terms of talking about. Town staff and the DEI director specifically and their ability to be involved in something like this. Again, this is a critical piece to the big puzzle. And something so critical absolutely deserves the attention of the community. And I really appreciate the report, the comprehensive report that she wrote before. And that is great. But there is an ongoing conversation that needs to happen. And if we agree that that needs to happen, then why would the DEI director not be a part of that conversation? Because I think that just helps. Her to build her fabric. Like that strengthens her in her position. Being part of community conversations like this. And that's what we're trying to fix. Like that is how you build a person in their role. And you build their connections in their community and strengthen their ability and their connections. And how successful. They will be in their role. Like those things affect that. And so I think it would be really smart. To figure out how we could make that possible. For the DEI director to be involved. And something so critical as coming to. I think it would be really important to be able to take that path forward from this situation. I think her involvement would be very important. As well as of course the other groups, but just because that specific role was. Something that came of question in this meeting is why I'm talking about it. And then also a learning moment, because when we created the DEI department, I don't know if you all remember when the CSWG came to you all with a bunch of budgets last year. We had a lot of budget. We had a lot of budget. We had a lot of budget for the youth empowerment center. And for the cultural center. And we were told that all of the budgets were way too high. And we were criticized and picked apart. And the DEI director ended up with just the DEI director and just an assistant director. Like we also proposed admin staff. We also proposed for her to have a budget to actually do things. And not just the salary. But we also also, we also recommended those things in the first place. Because this is a lot of work. This is a huge, very important job. And we realized that this. Should not be handled. By one to two people. They should have staff and they should have more money, but they don't.  This is how we set it up. So can we figure out how to make it work to the best of our ability? And it's not going to happen. Thank you. Thank you, Alicia. Shalini. I want to speak to the contradiction that was brought up. There is no contradiction about hiring a consultant. Because as Alicia just pointed out, we have a DEI department of just two people. And so hiring a consultant would be this. And secondly, from my understanding and reading and doing research of resident oversight boards, it's a very specialized job. And even though a DEI is competent, she may not have the expertise to do a resident oversight board, which is a very specialized job which special specialized consultants do. So I would highly recommend that we hire that consultant. And regarding the, it's not, I mean, I know that it was mentioned that, you know, what's the need for a motion when the director is already doing that job. I think what we're asking for in that motion is we're signaling that that needs to be a priority. Secondly, what we're signaling is that as a council we want to allocate, we're willing to allocate funds for a consultant if that is what she needs right now. And thirdly, we are also looking at the consultant bringing a fresh set of eyes with respect to the July 5th incident to look at it. And, you know, we already know what the CSJC CSJC is asking us in terms of compensation funds and and so the consultant can look at that information with fresh eyes and provide a perspective that we don't have in the room right now. We've all spoken about this issue from different points of view, and bringing an objective point of view could be helpful from someone who does that work because that can also help us look at what were the causes and conditions that the police do have ended up in that place making those statements, what needs to change in the police processes, you know, what are the procedures that might need change. And we, I mean what we're proposing is a way forward to fix and address the cause and conditions for what happened to look at it systemically, and to address those changes and to give that power to the black woman leader that we have hired in our town. I hope that addresses the contradiction part. I mean, Linda want to raise her hand earlier and put a little note in front of me saying that she can't so I apologize that I missed you Lynn so I'm going to go Lynn then Jennifer and we'll keep going. I can't raise my hand while I have all this. It's okay. The post it method sort of works go ahead. My problem with this proposal is not the issue of whether the people who would be proposed here bring terrific perspective and important perspective. My problem is with bullets to one, I'm sorry, two, three and four, because without a judicatory capabilities. There is no way to establish consensus on the factual record of what transpired, or afterwards. And without that, you can't establish a clear statement of harm, and therefore reward it so I've, I've struggled with this I mean Michelle and I spoke about this. That is my concern about all this that's one of my concerns staffing is a second concern a serious serious concern. The other concern I have is how much of this is also is already embedded in the committees that we have. To what extent are we just confusing the work of those committees by having a fourth committee. And so I have those three concerns and I think I have a couple others but that's all thank you. I actually would like to propose the amended six. If I could, but I don't want to be rude to people. And I don't think you can when there's a motion on the floor. Right. You can have a substitute motion. Oh, you only if she or a simultaneous simultaneous motion. You have a substitute or simultaneous. Consider both at the same time. I mean that would be sort of the substitute motion where the vote is to substitute or not. Then let's finish discussion on this. Thank you. For a second, I thought you said a single ladies motion and I was very confused. Jennifer. Thank you. Thank you. I would see motion one, maybe. We would also pass motion five or six. I would see because I am sensitive to how much work is on staff's plate. That maybe the consultant. You know, it's an ad hoc committee, so it's not a permanent committee that we're adding. I see it as a way to have a working group between the human rights commission representatives, the African heritage reparations assembly, CSS JC and counselors, you know, with the liaison from the police department. Working together on an ad hoc basis. It's not a permanent ongoing committee. And I just personally feel that. I mean, the testimony that was provided in Mr. Stewart's letter has to be a part of. I don't know the consensus or the record of what transpired. I think that's an important part of repair for the youth to have the full picture to acknowledge what happened that, you know, in those early morning hours and for that. I mean, I think that's an important part of the process. I feel that we do have to have some consensus because otherwise. We're. Kind of denying a big part of the reality that they experienced. And so I don't know how we move. Forward with repair and. You know, and we need to have a true sort of. You know, for the record, for the present and for history. We have that now. And I feel that Mr. Again, Stuart's testimony provides an important part piece of the picture and for our community. And certainly for the youth that evening that we owe it to them. To have for the written record for the present and history, you know, the full accounting of what transpired that night. And as I think Alicia said, we can't fix it until we, you know, fully acknowledge what happened. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, thanks. So I haven't had a chance to speak with Michelle about this, but Michelle, I'm sure that you know, I, I appreciate your intention with this. And I see it. And I think that my concerns. That haven't been mentioned or it's late, so maybe they have. Are. Some of this seems to me that because we have, you know, a HRI has ongoing meetings. CSS JC has ongoing meetings. And it seems it wouldn't just work and continue as is. Within the committees. And as it, as it stands now, we have the DI department. There, I guess, splitting time and attending these meetings. And liaison role. So we're doubling down and we have now it seems like we have, we're extending this conversation. So we're basically moving it into another room to do all of this work. And I don't know who said about using people. But it seems that six does the same, but instead of having DEI. As a liaison role that they're more centered at the helm. So they're participating and having room to flex their wings and, you know, show us what they were here for. And I, and I do believe and agree with, you know, I think we need to respect people and their roles, but we have someone who really is already built. And I think that we need to respect that as well. And of course this is a new place and a new environment and things are different, but you know, to, to give people a chance. I don't, I feel that this is putting. Pamela in a position of having training wheels. And I think that we need to also allow her voice to be heard. And I don't think that by, you know, moving, if we move into another room where that the committees here are having double the voice as opposed to we have another, a shared space where there may be DEI, maybe more at the helm, but it still says clearly they're still pulling from and working with and collaboratively with these, and that's it. Thank you. Pat. I'm concerned. That we're losing track of work that's already been done by the community safety working group. And the requests built on that from the community safety and social justice committee. And we're saying, okay, let's now take these many months. To do some more work and then we'll give you a report. And you'll have to do it the way we say, or we're going to be, have worked for nothing. We're. There feels like they're unintentionally, I feel like there's some kind of trap embedded in here. A trap for all of us. Not for the council, not for the BIPOC community, but for all of us somehow. I really think that we. I really think that it is for me personally, I really want to know what happens. On July 5th. I would like to talk to some of the youth. I would like to know what happened. I would like to know why the police didn't send children home. With the first parent who was there. I would like to know those things and those things are very important. I'm getting off track. I'm very tired. But I think that somehow or other. We're just shoving this down the road and unintentionally. And we really, I think, looking at motion six. That seems more reasonable. Looking at honest proposal about what parts of the original request by CSS JC. How do we get them done? How do, where do they belong and how do we get them done? And I think, I think we're just setting ourselves up again. Sorry, I'm not clearer than that. I need to interrupt Sean. I've been told we've gone off TV. Amherst media is still. Yeah, they're still here. Amherst media is still on, which means they're still taping. But are they still broadcasting? I can reach out right now. Thank you, Athena. I'm looking for counselors who haven't spoken. Don't think there are any. I think you're right. Are we waiting to see if we're streaming? Have we determined if we're still in there? I mean, we're not, are we required to be on the air to have the meeting? Okay. We, we're going to. I'm sorry. We're still, we're still streaming on YouTube and they're working on reestablishing the channel. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that information. Thank you. Just keep calling on. Sure. So I, my. I'm next and my little screen thing. So I wanted to maybe clarify and I apologize if my word choice is poor. My, my brain isn't firing as fast as it was at the beginning of the evening. And I can't even add to that. I, I don't know. I see a lot of the committee's recommendations on the ones we have already been given. My concern is that if, if we're waiting for recommendations from this committee, you know, are we supposed to act? Are we supposed to move forward with other ones? Or are we, are we waiting until February or whenever the together with the purpose of making with one purpose, one of many purposes being to make recommendations. I don't want to undermine that by starting on other work but I also don't want to delay starting another work that's been that's been recommended to us so that's that's my sticky spot right there. And I believe you are next in my window. Yeah. So first I just want to say that every member of the CSS JC has supported with a lot of strength this motion. So any concerns that I'm dismissing their original, you know, recommendations or haven't accounted for them. Simply, there's a concern there they've all supported this and have spoken that they would like to see this committee move forward. I am asking my fellow counselors with all of the concerns that you might have to keep that at in the forefront of your mind that the public who have come out to speak, and all of the members of the CSS JC unanimously have supported this. So, their recommendations as they've already been submitted will of course be part of our discussions with respect to staffing staffing is going to be a concern, whichever direction we take, whether we ask the town manager to ask his staff to take this on, or whether we ask the staff to collaborate with these committees, we're going to have a staffing issue so we're a concern or a challenge. I'm deeply disappointed in Pat's perception that a recommendation to go through a reconciliation process would be seen as a trap. I'm deeply disappointed with that. I think that there is absolutely no intention to create a trap here. There is a deeply thought out motion and charge. And I will also say that in any reconciliation framework, whether you look at the John Jay School of criminal justice whether you look at any reconciliation method. These are the steps I didn't pull these out of my head. I pulled these out of a framework of nationally and internationally recognized reconciliation models. So, while I understand that some of this may be new to us, and while I understand that consensus may seem like something that's impossible for us to get to consensus is about including and making sure that we've consented that all voices have been heard and represented in the record of what has occurred, we may not agree on the record, and that's not the point of consensus. So, I'm not going to raise my hand again because I'd like to call the question, but I also would never do that and shut down voices. But I would like to very clearly say, Lynn that I would like my motion to be acted upon before it gets some other motion comes through. And I also respect the fact of trying to do simultaneous. I also want to say that I do support the, the creation and the immediate creation of the resident oversight and whatever needs to happen to move that forward. The Chancellor can bring any action forward at any time. So this committee getting put in place to do this work does not stop me from coming to the next meeting and saying that I would like to put a motion forward to freeze the police. I can still do that I can do my own research. I don't have to wait with all due respect for honor to come back and tell me what I need to do. I can figure that out on my own and I can bring that motion forward, and any one of us has the power to do that. Thank you. Since I have my screen down on. I'm just going to ask there's five counselors with their hands up. Is there anything else you feel you need to add before we take this to a vote, Andy. I was going to make a motion procedurally, if we aren't going to get to a vote because it's getting late. And I think we're, we're getting to a point where we've probably lost our effectiveness. So we'll reserve and see if you're, if you're ready for a vote, then I don't need to make another motion. Dorothy wanted to say I support motion number one and I definitely would do not support number six, although because I've read it, some of the language in there is embarrassing because some of the language is that of white fragility which tries to say that there's been suffering on both sides, such words as accusations and innuendo. So I think that kind of disqualifies that motion. So I think we should move forward and not stall any longer. Alicia. I'm sorry just a couple of quick points. The CSS JC was also created in part to provide support to the DEI position. So that's one point. The second is that I support this motion because it allows their voice to be continued and centered in the conversation. I support the town's official community safety and social justice committee. The name speaks for itself. Why would they not be included in the continued conversation. I also think that records are extremely important for history amongst other reasons but more importantly for history and documenting what has happened and what is happening. And that is very important. And also, we have all of these committees with the same central goal of achieving equity and racial justice, and what more important platform would we have for them to be working together. Because we talk about people doing parallel work all of the time why would we not create a space where they could work together these are all already existing members of already existing things that are happening. We're not pulling new people into this work this is giving them an opportunity to work together. This is our best path forward that will bring us the most success and includes everybody's voice. There will be a representative from the PD this community safety and social justice the DEI director, some town counselors like that sounds like a recipe to move forward. Thank you. Kathy. Just a quick comment actually following up on lens and Jennifer's concern about getting the facts. Unless we're giving this ad hoc committee subpoena power to get all the film that we haven't seen yet, or bring in people for death positions. I'm not sure we can do the kind of fact finding and I, I'm not proposing we do that, but I'm just saying that, but you're saying we have part of the story. So that one of my concerns, as I've said is this focuses on just the incident. I think six is broader, but I'm not even sure what part what version of six we're looking at so I'm prepared to, to vote on the motion. Michelle's motion, and I know how I will. I keep hearing that. You know, we've heard that the CSS JC represents the BIPOC community and as we have already seen and heard that there are other voices there are other people. I want to make, make that clear that when we say the people have the BIPOC people have spoken that, yes, a few people have spoken. But as we have seen just with a few other perspectives that have come in from miss face on miss Dr Patricia Romney with Dr Shirley Whitaker with we've heard from Dr roads in the past and including myself as a BIPOC person. I don't anytime I say something that is a different point of view, I am discounted, I am rebuked, and I do not feel hard. So to say that this committee is has spoken the BIPOC has spoken. I am sorry that no, they have not. And the reason we're not hearing more people. And again, is because people do not want to go through this being, we are public servants. I am willing to take this on, and I'm willing to speak my truth, because I have sworn to be a public servant. I have taken the Bodhisattva Wow, which is to speak on behalf of people who do not speak up and to do justice for all for everyone. You can call me you can be disappointed in me and that is fine. But there are many other people who don't want to do that. And that's why we're not hearing them today. And that is the reason why I will not support the first motion because we have tried. We have tried as a council very hard to work towards working together. It hasn't worked unfortunately I'm not blaming anyone, we are equally as fault perhaps, which is why we need to step out of this and allow a person who we have hired to do this job, which is why I will not be supporting this motion. It sounds as if we're ready to move to a vote. Yes. The motion is on the motion, which was on the screen I'll be glad to put it up again if anybody requests that. Okay, Shawnee Balmille. No. Patty Angeles. No. Anna Devlin got here. Yes. Mandy Joe Hanna key. No. Anika Lokes. No. Michelle Miller. Yes. Dorothy Pam. Yes. Pam Rooney. Yeah. I'm sorry I didn't hear that. Is that a no. Yeah. The answer is yes you're voting in favor yes. Okay, got it. Thank you. Kathy Shane. No. Andy Steinberg. No. Jennifer top. Yes. Alicia Walker. Yes. No. And I would like. People if they're willing to at least look at motion six. I'll put it up. For clarification purposes, can you announce what the vote was? Yes, but it was seven to five, seven to six, seven. I'm sorry. Six in favor. Seven opposed. And I know we're going to have to go back to you. Because I've got to share my screen. All right. Can I just say that I actually would eliminate some things from this list. Or be very clear that they're already in process. And. The first, the first one I would say is already in process is this. But the need may be there to hire a consultant. This came right out of. One of the other motions. This addresses one of the areas that. Among the seven demands actually several of these two. And it involves. Working with drawing on the ongoing. Community safety and social justice and human rights commission and African. HRA. Committee. And challenges people to make. To create greater awareness. This would be a report back to the council within two months. On the progress. And at any point in time, we're going to have to go back to that. And then we're going to have to go back to that. And we're going to have to go back to that. But still bring. Item is forward. So I'm placing the motion on the floor. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Comments or questions. Mandy Joe. It looks like you placed the home. Motion on the floor. And I'm wondering if it would be a friendly amendment to begin. And what would you do if you had a comment. Any requests that the town manager working with the DEI department and eliminate everything before that. I accept that. I suppose I accept that. Yes, you accept that. Yes. Okay. But only because I believe a lot of this has been covered in past resolutions, even if it's not specific to the issue. Right. So I have a question about now it's going to be in the first paragraph where it says the town council request that the town manager working with the department and other stuff. Okay, and drawing upon the ongoing work of the community safety and social justice committee and all the other committees. Does that mean that they won't actually consult them and they will just look at the stuff that they have already done. There's any number of things they could do, including consulting. Let me give you one, what I think is an important example. The HRA has already had very, very important and informed discussions with the town attorney about how to create a fund and the process. And they certainly can share that either in writing or in person with in order to do the process to conduct research into the feasibility of a justice compensation fund. That's just one example of the several people earlier have mentioned the resident oversight board. You know from your work on CSWG and the subsequent conversations on CSSJC that and the fact that Pamela, Dr. Pamela Young has been charged to do this. The question now is whether perhaps it would be helpful to expedite it by bringing in a consultant. Does that answer your question, Alicia? I like it's around answering my question but I guess what I'm really wondering is, or I guess what I'm saying is that I would feel more comfortable with this with this motion. If it required conversation with the other groups, like if there was language around that and not just saying drawing upon the ongoing work, because the ongoing work has been in front of us, and we can see clearly how that doesn't always serve. That again it would be more progressive if it was a joint process in which people could actively participate and not just people are looking at reports and writing. So you would like something like here that says discuss and draw upon. Discuss with and draw. Yeah, because I want them to be actively involved in the discussion as like humans there. That didn't work. I added that that would have to be acceptable to Anna. It is. Okay. And would you mind saying out loud what's changed. I'm sorry. Can you say out loud what has changed. It's difficult to read the screen. It says working with the DEI department and other staff and just and through discussion, I guess, or and discuss with and draw upon the ongoing work so we added the words discuss with and and we changed the word drawing to draw. I have a copy of it on a theme. Pam. Thank you. I think what really bothers me about this is that we just had a very long conversation about staff, staff priorities and and and overwork staff. Motion number one was a conversation with the groups that are formed to do this work. With with assistance and support of town staff. This motion puts this 100% on the burden, the burden on the town staff itself. Oh, and maybe we'll talk with the other committees. This is just not the right. It's not the right priority. We, it feels like this needs more discussion and some of us are not able to bring out our best selves at this time. And I would like to request a journey, but I'm happy to take in the feedback from everyone. Let me call on Michelle and Mandy Joe first Michelle. I just want to support what Pam just said. And I mean, this is this takes staff work to a whole new level. I mean, this is an extraordinary amount of work. And the way that I see this is that this is the option that feels more safe to this council, because it keeps it within the control of the town manager and even the council leadership itself. And doesn't what I was hoping to do in my failed motion was really to turn that power over and to loosen those controls and to give us an opportunity to work with that. I will support this in some shape or fashion because if it's all I got all we got, then something's got to budge here and move forward, unless once again, if we are going to continue this discussion, I'll come back potentially with something at another meeting. So, I would say that if, you know, if, if this, I think to Charlene's point I appreciate very much and I do want to come back to the point of hiring a consultant if needed. I also want to come back to Mandy Joe's point about reviewing I know that the police policies have been thoroughly reviewed. But how I'd like to see action on that immediately in in really focusing on police policies I mean with the Hampshire College incident that just occurred again. The other thing that I wanted to just say that I can't leave this meeting without getting off my chest is Paul said that chief Livingstone was one of the best police chiefs in this state or I'm sorry Paul if I'm not quoting you properly but in some the essence of what you said is that, and while I personally really really like chief Livingstone and find him to be an easygoing and charismatic and caring person. The fact that he has not come forward with an apology, a direct and meaningful apology to this community. To me, I don't understand how the town manager can not acknowledge that and not bring that most basic function of saying I'm sorry forward as something that should be done and done immediately. And I'm not going to make a motion to ask the town manager to ask, you know, Chief Livingstone for an apology but I just want to strongly say that those are contradicting opinions in my mind and and I think that we don't even have that most basic thing so. Yeah. Thanks. Thank you very much for. Yes. Shallow and you made a motion under rules seven point one. For to to adjourn. And I believe that under the rules of our council that that takes precedence over any other action. And it would but it was not seconded. I would ask that does she want to adjourn or would she like to postpone this discussion to a date certain before she adjourns one of the questions I was going to ask with my hand up. I have no idea what that means. What. So, please go ahead and adjourning doesn't deal with the motion on the table for when it gets taken up again. Whereas a motion to postpone that would indicate when it would get talked about again, definitely, you know, if we just adjourn. Okay, okay, I get it. Okay, so I chair move to adjourn postpone this media this discussion to the next council meeting. Can I ask a friendly question. Knowing what the agenda for the next council meeting looks like and it begins at five in the evening and goes through as three different meetings in it. Would you consider November 21st. No. No. Okay, fine. Can I ask a point of order. Next council meeting is technically the 5pm reading session.  Yes, the regular cut. So the motion has been made to defer to postpone this conversation to November 7 at eight o'clock. Is there a second. No, I don't have it. Yeah. Is there any further discussion. Manjo. Alicia. Is it not possible for us to like create another special meeting because I know the next council meeting has a really long agenda but I also agree that the ongoing council meeting is too far away. But can we create another meeting specifically for this. Is that a possibility. I can look at that Alicia, I, I will just tell you that when we pulled to find the November 1 date. We looked at other possible meetings without interfering with other meetings and holidays, and there wasn't a date. And we went all the way out to the 14th of November. Manjo. I would just add you need 48 hours notice so Alicia, if you're trying to get this in before the seventh, the only day that's available that is not a weekend is Friday now that it is one Wednesday morning. So, I mean, I'm more than willing to look for that and and to poll for that. I just want to warn you that I had trouble finding another date besides November 1. Sorry, just to clarify not before the next council meeting before the one after that. Right. Let me, I will try I will poll and look. Okay. Is that I, and I agree that if possible that would be a good idea. Is there any other question and I just want to say before you adjourn, I'm going to take this down. I am asking CSS JC, do you want to still remain in your meeting. We still need to vote on the motion to postpone. Thank you. We're going to vote on the motion to postpone. At this point it's postponing to November 7 at eight o'clock. Okay. And so is there any other question from the council about that and then I'm going to go to the leg road and ask the question. Okay, happy Angeles. No, on Devon got here. No. I'm sorry, I think I'm confused about what we're voting on voting on whether to propose whether to postpone the motion that's on the floor to a date certain and in this case, it is November 7 at eight o'clock. I just said that you would poll though that's where I'm confused with the polling. We, but at least is asked is if I could poll to see if there's another date besides that because the November 7 agenda already is very full. And I agree to that but meantime, we have it on November 7. So if we don't postpone, if we vote no to postpone, then we're going to continue the discussion, even though, but I thought that Shalini, oh, because she said that she wants to postpone and not adjourn. Is that what happened. Okay. Point it's postponed. Okay. Okay. So let me clarify because I want to make sure. Okay. If you vote no to postpone the discussion then we continue discussing. Okay, vote vote yes to postpone, then we postpone to November 7. On November 7, if I was, I haven't been able to find a date between November 7 and November 21st for us to meet as a council to discuss this motion, the motion on the table. Then on November 7, I would make a motion to that other date certain, or move it, if I had to do November 21, but otherwise it will happen on November 7 that eight o'clock during the eight o'clock meeting. And how much time would you give us to, would you give us endless time on November 7 to debate. I have to look at the agenda Michelle I mean it's okay. It's now 1230 at night and nobody's thinking straight. 1232. Okay. I mean, but I just heard four votes that are want to keep going with. Right now I have. Patty Andrews is a no on a devil and God there's no Lynn grease person no man Joe Hannity's no and because of no. So Michelle, I'm a no. Dorothy Pam. Dorothy. I think Dorothy as is now absent. I don't see her Pam Rooney. Kathy Shane. I really don't understand the vote because I can't possibly continue a discussion on this motion now. So then I would say your vote would be yes. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Yes. Jennifer top. Yes. Alicia Walker. No. Shall any bomb in. Yes. So we have one, two, three. Four in favor of postponement. Eight opposed postponement and one absent.  Yeah, I would like to propose a motion. Please go ahead. To postpone this conversation to the next most. The next soonest agreeable date. In consultation with the CSS JC, like I want to be able to pull them as to when. They're available. I don't want to just be like, you need to come to our 8pm meeting. Can we postpone. To a date. The soonest date where the CSS JC members and council members are available to be. Speaking about this together again. I'm going to look at you for this one. To postpone to a date that you would pull for. For which the council and the CSS JC would both be available. So Paul's looking it up right now, but I believe motions to postpone are generally to a date certain, not an unknown date. I think they are. That's where I read the rule. So Alicia, the answer is postponements are to a date certain. So can I just propose it as a motion and not a postponement. Can you propose it on the motion. Yeah, just as a motion. I think that's the other time in agreement with the CSS JC. To continue this conversation. No, because it needs to be postponed first. There's not a way. To get consultation from the CSS JC. As to when they are available at the soonest date for another meeting that isn't at 8pm at our next meeting. Is there anybody that Mandy Joe. Go ahead. I think I know the answer. Did you say you don't have an answer. No, I think I know the way would have been to do what. What was just on the table, which was to postpone it to the, to the meeting on the. Right. Seventh knowing that we weren't going to discuss it that night, but at that meeting we would have found another date. But because that motion failed, we're now continuing the discussion right now. And let's see on the motion on the. Yeah. So we can postpone it to a date certain with their consultation. So that we know that they will be available for that meeting. To avoid the having to schedule it twice just to get a date that works for everyone. Good suggestion. Not really. Unfortunately. Because of Roberts. The way that Robert's rules is written. You have to postpone to a specific date. In the moment. Like we'd have to pick the date right now. Right. So we can't allow them to talk. With us right now. We're asking, but there's, there's only. D is not here. And. No, I'm, I'm here. D is here. I think our committee is still here. It's just. Right. Okay. There is. There is definitely four, five of you here. I think one of your committee members. Not so. Are you available on November 7th at eight o'clock? For what reason? Well, it's actually for the purposes of the council continuing this discussion. Which is one of the reasons why I'm not completely clear. If the council has to continue the discussion. And yet CSSJC isn't. Doesn't vote. If you weren't available. And we wanted to continue the discussion and move on the motion. We could. So, I mean, I think. That. Allegra, please go ahead. I'm just. I'm thinking that we had a discussion. And we've been sitting here listening to you deliberating about the vote. And. Our input seemed to have been. Overlooked. And so if we're not going to be able to vote or have discussion or be a part of, you know, an active part of the discussion, I don't know that it makes sense for us. To be there. Okay. Can I suggest that. One of the people who was on the prevailing side. About the November 7th at eight o'clock. Ask to reconsider that motion. Yep. Mandy Jow, please. Having voted on the prevailing side of no, I move to reconsider the motion to postpone. The discussion on the motion that's on the table. To November 7th. At eight o'clock. At. 8pm. 8 o'clock PM. Okay. Rooney. Is there a second. Second Rooney. Thank you. Now. The process that will take place is we'll see, I will poll to see if there's any other date, but otherwise it will be on November 7th, unless someone else makes a different motion at that time. We should. So if you vote. Yes, we're postponing. No. This is a motion to reconsider and then you would have to vote. We have to pass the motion to reconsider and then we revote the motion to postpone. Thanks. All right. This is. If you vote, yes, you're saying, yes, we can reconsider. If you vote, no, you're saying. No, we're not going to reconsider the vote. And then once we determine that. Then we actually revote if people, enough people vote. Yes. Michelle. Hypothetically, if we vote to postpone to that date and then somebody on the council consults with the CSS JC to determine whether or not they would like to be involved in the next discussion and how we could find a date with them to propose at the next meeting. No. Okay. I did with the finance committee meeting. Okay. Thank you. Mandy Joe, you have your hand up. Okay. So the vote at this point is the vote that allows us to reconsider. It is not the vote. To postpone. I'm going to start with Anna. No. Lynn is a yes. Mandy Joe. Yes. Okay. I did with the finance committee meeting. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Anika. I'm sorry. Could you say, are we voting to adjourn? We're voting as, as to whether you will reconsider. The motion, not whether you agree to the motion, but that you can just, you're willing to let us reconsider it. Yes. Michelle. Yes. Dorothy is absent. Yes. Pam. Yeah. Kathy. Yes. Andy. Yes. Jennifer. Yes. Alicia. Yes. Shalini. Yes. Pat D'Angelo's. Sure. Okay. That passes. With. 11 in favor, one no, and one ups. One absent. Now we're going to go back to the original motion. The original motion is to postpone. This motion. To November 7th at eight o'clock p.m. Now we're voting on postponing. Okay. Mandy. I don't. Lynn is a yes. Andy Joe. No. Anika. Okay. I'm sorry. It's just getting late. So. What are we voting on? Anika. This is the vote to postpone. Yes. Thank you. Michelle. Yes. Dorothy is absent. Pam Rooney. Yeah. Kathy. Yes. Andy Steinberg. Yes. Jennifer. Yes. Alicia Walker. Yes. Shalini Balmille. Yes. Pat D'Angelo's. I. On a Devon got here. No. Seven. Eight. Nine in favor. Three opposed and one absent. Can, can you say who was opposed? Devon. Devon got there and Hanna key. Yes. The opposition, the votes in that, that were not in favor. We're on a Devon got her got here, Mandy, Joe, Hanna key and Pam Rooney. The absent was. Pam Rooney was a yes. Oh, I'm sorry. Then I have. No to me. Thank you. I have my count wrong. It's 10. Yes. Right. Okay. 10. Yes. No. One was absent. Thank you. Okay. If there's no, oh, now I'm going to ask, does the CSS JC want to stay in session? I'd like to make a motion to adjourn. Okay. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Can we take a vote? Let's see. Let's see. Phillip. Hi. Freca. Yes. D. Yes. I don't even, is Deborah still on? No. She's not on. Okay. Ms. Pat. Yes. And I am a yes. Good night. 1243 CSS JC has adjourned. And I am just going to adjourn the council. Thank you. Thank you. Good night.


Hello and welcome to the session. Let's work out the following problem. It says without using trigonometric tables evaluate the following. So let's now move on to the solution. The given expression is cos 58 degrees upon sin 32 degrees plus sin 22 degrees upon cos 68 degrees minus cos 38 degrees into cosecant 52 degrees upon tan 18 degrees into tan 35 degrees into tan 60 degrees into tan 72 degrees into tan 55 degrees. Now we'll see that in this term some of the angles is 90 degrees. So we'll convert either cos 58 into sin 32 or sin 32 into cos 52. So we'll convert cos as sin 32. So cos 58 degrees can be written as cos 90 minus 32 degrees upon sin 32 degrees plus here again we'll convert cos into sin. Sin 22 degrees upon cos 68 degrees can be written as cos 90 minus 22 degrees plus it's minus cos 38 degrees into cosecant 52 degrees can be written as cosecant 90 minus 38 degrees upon tan 18 degrees to tan 35 degrees into tan 60 degrees which is root 3 into tan 72 degrees can be written as tan 90 minus 18 degrees into tan 55 degrees can be written as tan 90 minus 35 degrees. Now cos 90 minus theta is sin theta so this becomes sin 32 degrees upon sin 32 degrees plus sin 22 degrees upon again cos 90 minus theta is sin theta so it becomes sin 22 degrees minus cos 38 degrees into cosecant 90 minus theta is secant theta so it becomes secant 38 degrees upon tan 18 degrees into tan 35 degrees into root 3 into tan 90 minus theta is cot theta so tan 90 minus 18 degrees is cot 18 degrees into tan 90 minus 35 degrees is cot 35 degrees and here you must write the formulae which you have used cos 90 minus theta is equal to sin theta and cosecant 90 minus theta is equal to cos theta is secant theta and tan 90 minus theta is cot theta and it is very important to write all the formulae which you are using now sin 32 degrees gets cancelled with sin 32 degrees sin 22 degrees gets cancelled with sin 22 degrees and here we have 1 plus 1 minus cos 38 degrees into secant 38 degrees can be written as 1 upon cos 38 degrees upon tan 18 degrees into tan 35 degrees into root 3 into cot 18 degrees can be written as 1 upon tan 18 degrees into cot 35 degrees can be written as 1 upon tan 35 degrees right here because cos theta is equal to 1 upon secant theta and cot theta is equal to 1 upon tan theta right now tan 18 degrees gets cancelled with tan 18 degrees tan 35 degrees gets cancelled with tan tan 35 degrees cos 38 degrees cos 38 degrees so we have 1 plus 1 that is 2 minus here in the numerator we have 1 upon 1 into root 3 so this is 2 minus 1 upon root 3 now again 2 minus 1 upon root 3 rationalizing 1 upon root 3 multiplied by root 3 by root 3 that is 1 so we have 2 minus 1 into root 3 is root 3 upon root 3 into root 3 is 3 now taking LCM LCM would be 3 3 into 2 is 6 minus root 3 so the value of the given expression is 6 minus under the root 3 upon 3 so this completes the question and the session why for now take care have a very nice day


When I was a child I dreamt of travelling the world. I was fascinated with meeting new people and exploring different places. I liked to question everything and develop the strong love for storytelling. I was determined to find a career that would allow me to realise my dreams and more. I signed up for an apprenticeship in TV production and now work for the BBC. Being an apprentice can help you realise your dream too. It's a job with training and you'll develop higher level job specific skills. You'll combine the practical experience with working towards a nationally recognised qualification. And while you are working you'll also be earning a wage. If you're interested in an apprenticeship visit careerswales.com and follow the apprenticeship link to register. Or find out more on Facebook or Twitter. The apprenticeship programme is funded by the Welsh Government with support from the European Social Fund.


Hey everybody, it's Brett the Ford Guy and today I'm going to show you how to find your driver's side door code entry for your 2007, 2008, and 2009 Lincoln MKZ, and you're not going to have to pay a dime to find it. Also this might be good for your 2007 to 2009 Ford Fusion vehicles. If it is and you find it on your Ford Fusion, let me know in the comments below. And as always, if you find this video helpful, give me a like, subscribe, and share on the YouTube channel. And if it really saved you some time and money, consider the super thanks button. Really helps me out a lot personally. Let's find this door code and get you yours. So it's really easy to get your door code entry on these 2007 to 2009 Lincoln MKZs. And I'm talking about the door code to get into there to use that pad. This is a 2009 demonstrator Lincoln MKZ. This one has exactly 200,000 miles on it, actually is still in pretty nice shape for 200,000 miles. All you're going to need for this door code find is a flashlight. You're going to go under the dash on the driver's side. You can see the steering wheel shaft there. There's going to be a black box. And then there's another black box. There's a gray electrical hookup on the right there. You're just going to want to get up above that. You can see there's a number printed on the right hand part of the sticker is 46244. Is the factory door code entry for this car that will always be with this car. And you can use that code to program your own entry. And thanks for checking out the video. Remember to give me a like, subscribe, and share on the YouTube channel. And if you really saved you some time and money, consider a super thanks button. In fact, in a second, you'll see a link to subscribe to my YouTube channel in the upper left. A link to more demonstration videos like this one in the upper right. A link to how to program your own door code entry in the lower left. And a link to one of our latest YouTube videos in the lower right. Click those check us out. Thanks for checking out the video. Have a great day. And enjoy having your own brand new door code entry on your Lincoln MKZ.


Hi everyone, Joe for JaspysCaseBreaks.com. Happy Tuesday coming at you with our final 2020 fantasy sports basketball break to unlock opulence. So at the end of the break, we're gonna do the break itself first. And at the end of the break, we'll re-randomize your names, give away the final nine opulence spots, and that'll be in a separate video if you're looking for that. All right. Good luck to these folks here. Thank you very much for getting in. There's all the teams right there. Let's roll it, let's randomize it. One and a four, five times for names and teams. One, two, three, and five. After five, we've got Josh down to Sean. One and a four, five times for the teams. One, two, three, four, and fifth and final time. After five, we've got the Wizards down to the Miami Heat. All right, there's the first half of the list right here. And I don't know what could pop in these boxes, so let's find out. And there's the next half of the list right there. Good luck. So most of you remember Fancy Sports, when we do those hobby breaks of Fancy Sports, in those large square boxes, which has the graded card or an encased hit and then the two packs around there. This is their sort of retail pack edition of that. Just open this like the Hulk. Now, hard to, slow play this little bit. Let's open up the bag first. Slide that back there. Let's pop this open. All right, so there's the final printout right there, which will re-randomize in just a sec. Let's just do this really quick. Antoine Jamison to 10. Demari Carroll, John Sallie. John Sallie, Tom Tolbert, Stephen Adams, Pink Hyper. Then Antoine Jamison, Wizards Antoine Jamison. Yeah, 10, going to Josh Proust. All right, let's see what the relic is here. It's just a relic only. It's, oh, that's not bad. Vested Veterans Jersey, Ben Simmons. 21 out of 25, Sixers, Adam Cupperman. Remember, Ben Simmons, his autographs are exclusive to Upper Dick. So consequently, well, this is his non-Rookie year, but consequently, his other stuff gets a little bit of boost because of that, especially his rookie years. All right, let's switch back here. All right, thanks everyone. Louie down to Josh, everybody in between. Let's roll it, let's randomize that. Six times three into three. It's gonna be top nine after six. Good luck, hard six. One, two, three, four, five and six. And final time, all right, from 10 on down. Sorry, Adam, sorry everybody, this sad times for you here. But very happy times with the top nine, congrats. Robert, Louie, Josh, Jake, Louie, Daniel, Louie, Danny, and all over Soria, there you go. You are in opulence, which is gonna be a separate video right after this. Good luck, we'll see you for that one, bye-bye.


So we will also start with approach number 1 that is we estimate first to weight ratio from the specified constraints and then we get the wing loading as a back calculation. Now estimation of T by W, T by W is an indication of how much thrust the engines are producing as a ratio of how much is the aircraft weight and this parameter which is normally considered non-dimensional it directly affects the aircraft performance. Higher thrust to weight ratio means you will have a higher cruising speed, you will have a high acceleration, you will be able to climb faster and you will be able to turn much faster and maintain that turn. However you are going to have higher fuel consumption and in general it will lead to a heavier aircraft because engines which have a high thrust to weight ratio also are generally heavier. The second point to be kept in mind is that the thrust to weight ratio is not constant both the numerator that is the thrust and the denominator that is the weight they keep changing during the mission. So throughout the mission and we are looking at a transport aircraft we are assuming that the only loss of weight is because of fuel consumption throughout the mission the aircraft weight is reducing and during the mission even the thrust is not remaining constant. So because of the changes in the altitude, changes in the forward velocity and in the case of a pressure prop aircraft changes in the efficiency eta p because of changes in these parameters and density you know the value of t or p will be changing. So therefore it is important for us to consider one norm and that norm is called as the design thrust to weight ratio. So in the design thrust to weight ratio we assume that the atmosphere is international standard atmosphere, we assume that the thrust is at the sea level static condition, we assume that W is W gross and we assume that we are looking at a maximum throttle setting. So what you do is the thrust to weight ratio required for individual mission segments it has to be adjusted to the design thrust to weight ratio. In other words you may get the value of required thrust to weight ratio for let us say the cruise condition. So in cruise the thrust to weight ratio should be let us say 0.2 but that is not the design thrust to weight ratio because the weight of the aircraft in cruise is not seen as weight of the aircraft before takeoff or the gross weight. Similarly the thrust produced by the engines is not the same as the thrust at the sea level static condition with full throttle. So this is something that has to be done every time you calculate the thrust to weight ratio required in a particular mission segment. You have to say the thrust to weight ratio at the design value should be such that when the aircraft comes to that particular mission the thrust to weight ratio is what is needed to meet this requirement. And I want to highlight that this is the most common error that many students make when they do concerned analysis. They calculate thrust to weight ratio required from various performance requirements or various mission segments but they forget to convert it to the design thrust to weight ratio value. This point we will highlight further when we do some numerical exercises. From historical data we have got typical values of thrust to weight ratio for turbo jet and turbo fan powered aircraft and the power to weight ratio for the piston prop and turbo prop aircraft. If you have a jet engine aircraft then it is dimensionless and it is easy to remember 2 engines 0.23 engines 0.34 engines 0.4 these are typical values. The values could be more than this if there are certain requirements which are little bit critical. For a military aircraft also one can look at the values and notice that for an air superiority aircraft the thrust to weight ratio normally that you see is more than one. In other words the total thrust produced by the aircraft could be even more than the aircraft weight and hence the aircraft should be able to actually go vertically upwards if needed. For a propeller driven aircraft we have a power to weight ratio and this is normally expressed in terms of watts per gram and there are certain values which have been suggested to be taken as the baseline or the starting value depending on the typical aircraft type. For a military aircraft powered with turbo prop or piston prop aircraft you have the values given as 0.35 and 0.4 for bomber and carbure respectively because normally you use the turbo prop engine aircraft or a piston prop engine aircraft only for these 2 applications in a military aircraft. So these are numbers to be used only for verification purposes and to get an idea they are not to be taken as sacrosanct and to be used blindly. Ramer has given another table in which he has related the thrust to weight ratio with maximum Mach number for turbo jet turbofan engine aircraft and the maximum speed for the piston prop and turbo prop aircraft. So this is like bringing in little bit more accurate information related to the maximum Mach number rather than having only one number for an aircraft type we have inclusion of the maximum Mach number or the maximum speed respectively which is the parameter that actually affects the thrust to weight ratio. So let us understand how we can calculate thrust to weight ratio from the climb gradient consideration. So before that we need to really understand what is meant by climb gradient. Climb gradient is basically excess thrust divided by weight or you can also call it as a specific excess thrust or SET. So if the desired climb gradient is specified by any requirement maybe regulatory bodies or by the performance requirement then thrust to weight ratio in the climb can be or the required thrust to weight ratio in climb would be equal to 1 upon L by D in climb plus the V vertical by the forward speed V. Now two major climb gradient considerations have to be included based on the regulatory bodies. One is the missed approach gradient and second is the second stage climb gradient. Let us have a look at the climb gradient because this is not something very easily available therefore it is important for us to understand what they are. This graph has come courtesy from Jet Airways and it shows the typical climb procedure or sequence that is followed. So from the break release when the aircraft starts moving on the ground you reach a speed called V rotation at which you start rotating the aircraft soon after that you reach a speed called as V lift off at which the aircraft can now be lifted up and then you start climbing so you reach this height of 35 feet the obstacle height. So the distance from the ground where you start to the place where you clear the obstacle height that can be called as the all engine operating takeoff distance. After that there are some segments which have to be followed as we will see in more detail as we go ahead. So the first segment is the segment where you clear the obstacle height and keep on continuing in your path till you so at the end of the takeoff when you have cleared the obstacle height you start retracting the landing gear and it takes some time so that is the first segment and then you have the second segment. In the second segment the landing gear is retracted but the flaps are still in the deployed condition so you start slowly retracting the flaps that takes time and that is the second segment and this segment is the one which becomes an important regulatory requirement so we are going to look at the climb gradient in this particular segment. In this segment the aircraft configuration as follows the flaps are the landing gear is retracted and the flaps are still being retracted. So let us see this information in little bit more detail okay. So this is the first segment which starts from the obstacle height achievement till this particular point. So till here the landing gear is down so when the second segment starts the landing gear is up and now you are climbing with the flaps in the climbing configuration till you reach a height of approximately a minimum value of 400 feet but this number varies from airline to airline for example we saw that get airways follows is 800 feet as the altitude. During this particular segment the second stage climb segment certain gradient has to be maintained as per the requirements. So this particular slide explains this whole thing in more detail and we describe all the segments. So for us the important point is that there are requirements specified for the second segment which have to be met on to the so the conditions are as follows. In the second segment I mean one engine in operative I mean that is the requirement. So when you calculate the required gradient the climb gradient you have to assume that one engine is not working out of many engines the thrust is in takeoff condition landing gear is up flaps are in takeoff condition and during that condition when the weight is equal to takeoff weight you have to calculate the gradient. So the requirement is that in the event of an engine failure the gradient must be sustained so flaps are in the takeoff position and landing gear is retracted. So what are the requirements if you have 4 engines it is 3 percent if you have 3 engines it is 2.7 percent and if you have 2 engines which is there in most cases it is 2.4 percent. So this 2.4 percent for a twin engine aircraft is normally the one that is specified as the critical one of course if you have more engines you have to have a higher value of the gradient. Let us also look at the missed approach gradient. Now what is meant by missed approach the missed approach is that situation in which you are clear to land you are in the final approach but when you come into land because of many reasons you are now asked to abort your landing instead you apply power and you climb and the aim of this is either to just go up to a circle and come back and land or maybe if you are told that the conditions are not going to be favorable or safe you are asked to divert to some other airport. So the regulation says that you must have sufficient value of thrust in the engine so that with one engine inoperative and maximum landing weight you should have the following gradient. You should have you know you should have the value as 2.7 for 4 engine, 2.4 for 3 engine and 2.1 for 2 engine aircraft. So the constraint on the missed approach gradient can be expressed very simply as number of engines upon one engine less 1 upon L by D and gamma missed approach this is the specification this is specified and in the missed approach remember the flap are in the approach configuration and the landing gear is down. This particular constraint is going to put a lower limit on T by W. T by W cannot be cannot be less than the specified cannot be less than a given value so that the specified requirement is met. On the second stage climb gradient the same formula except now we have to keep in mind that the numerical value of this particular second stage climb gradient is different but flaps are in takeoff configuration and the landing gear is up and the requirement says that you should be able to have thrust to weight ratio sufficient to meet the specified requirement of gamma SSCG and again this constraint puts a lower limit on T by W. Let us have a look at whether since both these gradients are going to put a lower limit which one of them is going to be more important. So this is the general formula for the missed approach as well as the second stage climb gradient the numerical value as I told you differs. Now this expression is the same for both the aircraft the value of gamma is different but the L by D of the aircraft also is not the same during missed approach and the second stage climb gradient. So let us do a comparison very quickly between the gamma missed approach and the gamma SSCG. During missed approach the aircraft is lighter because this condition occurs when you are coming into land the second stage climb gradient occurs when the aircraft is just after takeoff so it is heavy and the flap deflection during landing is larger the flaps are deflected to nearly 30 to 60 degrees during landing whereas in the case of climb after takeoff the flaps are deflected to between 15 to 20 degrees. So the takeoff flap deflection is lower the landing gear is down when you come into approach but the landing gear is up in fact the second segment starts when landing gear is up okay and the flaps are in the takeoff configuration. So therefore the value of drag acting on the aircraft is going to be larger because flaps are larger in deflection landing gear is down drag will be smaller because flap deflection is lesser and landing gear is up. So the aircraft is going to have a higher value of L by D when it is in the climb consideration and the L by D will be lower. However you have to keep in mind that the aircraft the required value of gamma missed approach is lesser. It was for example it was 2.1 percent for a twin engine aircraft compared to the required value for gamma SSG which was 2.4 percent okay. So the L by D in missed approach is lower so L by D is less but the value of gamma also is less the L by D will be larger we are not very sure because see the value of L is going to be more compared to the value of L here the value of L will be the takeoff weight the value of L here will be the landing weight and the landing weight is approximately 85 percent of takeoff weight. So you cannot tell in advance which of these two requirements are going to be driving you have to calculate the value and then decide. So not known which one will impose higher constraint therefore every time we do concern analysis we have to calculate the T by W required because of gamma missed approach and T by W required because of gamma SSG and then take the higher of these two as the lower limit. Thanks for your attention we will now move to the next section.