Forums36
Topics40,902
Posts557,126
Members18,452
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
17 members (rjackson, esshup, jpsdad, Boondoggle, jbird5986, Sunil, Rick O, Angler8689, anthropic, Justin W, Bing, bstone261, DenaTroyer, Theo Gallus, Shorthose, Freg, Fishingadventure),
889
guests, and
207
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,421 Likes: 794
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Lunker
|
OP
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Lunker
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 28,421 Likes: 794 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14
Ambassador Lunker
|
Ambassador Lunker
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,979 Likes: 14 |
I could do that. Of course if the pond banks are steep and the water depth substantial, not sure I would want that big chunk of ballast strapped to my back if I slipped!
I'll bet it takes forever to do all those trees by hand, if there's just one machine.
"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"
If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1) And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1) Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT? PB answer: It depends.
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|