Aubrey McClendon will not be down for corn flakes.!

[Kyle78]

Why would anybody buy a resort/land, and let it go fallow? None of this makes sense.

What little I know about developers, is that they buy properties that aren't making money because the maintenance of older properties has exceeded the profit or close to it, and have to shut it down or look for investors.

Investors aren't going to invest in something that isn't going to make them money, or their income won't allow investments because of downturns in their businesses that eliminate investment money's.

I suspect that is what happened, but You all could be right. They tore it down to let it set.

Originally they talked the county into forming a TIF district for them. The lodge was never reopened, nor any of the facilities on the south side of the roadway.
They kept the gas station, and golf course open on the north side of the highway. They made public promises to keep the south golf course open, but that didn't happen.
It's gone back to nature, and actually would be a nice wildlife park.

After 8 years, the county dissolved the TIF. No investors have ever come forward. the fishers have plotted out luxury house lots on the edge of the lake, and tried illegally to sell Corps of Engineers property. That's currently being looked at by investigators. The CLO is "suing" for contact failure, but its the exact same people who sold the property to them in the first place. Last fall they came out with some weird agreement with swapping land, and for the state actually buying the fishers MORE land, plus trying to get more Corps property.

Sound Crazy right? It's extremely convoluted, and highly suspect. The entire deal. Jay Paul Gumm was convicted in Mississippi recently, and half of the former employees of the tourism/clo departments now work for the fishers/McClendon. Our local state Reps/Senators received large donates/trips from these people.

A recent article shows that Fisher/McClendon used state tax rebate credits to pay for this whole deal. Which according to the article is illegal..

 

[chuter]

I personally would not attempt suicide in this manner. Modern cars are too safe. I'd be afraid of surviving gravely injured.

High speed at 90 degrees into concrete will *probably* kill you, but I've seen people survive (injured terribly) very severe car wrecks. Too risky.

I thought of this too. They said he wasn't wearing the seatbelt; I wonder if the air bag was disabled.

 

[tRidiot]

I thought of this too. They said he wasn't wearing the seatbelt; I wonder if the air bag was disabled.

I think the odds of surviving a high-speed collision with a wall of that magnitude without a seatbelt at high speed are pretty slim, airbag or no. Even not expecting the engulfing subsequent fire, that would have been an absolutely horrific crash.

 

[CHenry]

The 4 lane was supposed to go from Ardmore to Durant was put on hold due to politics. The locals at that time didn't want a 4 lane highway, and bypass going around madill, and cutting thru some extremely rich peoples ranches. Good example is just north of Kingston were us70 was moved to the east because the ex-governor didn't want it going in front of his ranch.

I worked on it for years so I may know the inside scoop just a little. I did the alignment designs and all estimates.

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

 

[CHenry]

I think the odds of surviving a high-speed collision with a wall of that magnitude without a seatbelt at high speed are pretty slim, airbag or no. Even not expecting the engulfing subsequent fire, that would have been an absolutely horrific crash.

I talked to a fireman buddy who told me his speed was over 100 mph "easily".

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

 

[4play]

I talked to a fireman buddy who told me his speed was over 100 mph "easily".

Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk

100 mph easily? I'm pretty sure the GM trucks are all governed at 98 MPH, not that it makes that much difference. I doubt you would see much difference between 85 and 115 or whatever. I wonder if the crash data can be retrieved with how much the vehicle was damaged and burned. Also wasn't the first 911 call of a guy about a 1/4 mile behind the wreck, seems if he was going real fast, then he probably had to be passing slower traffic or at least this guy.

 

[swoklagunner]

I think it's tragic that someone as successful as McClendon felt this was the only way out of this mess. A very extreme and permanent solution that left many people beyond his family grieving. He must have really struggled with that decision, his press release was very pointed that he was innocent and had planned to fight the charges. Sad all around.

 

[tRidiot]

100 mph easily? I'm pretty sure the GM trucks are all governed at 98 MPH,

Mine's not.

not that it makes that much difference. I doubt you would see much difference between 85 and 115 or whatever.

Actually, the difference is quite significant. The kinetic energy imparted in a crash is only linearly dependent on the mass of an object, but is equally dependent on the square of the velocity of said object. So going faster makes a much bigger impact on the kinetic energy.

Thus, extrapolating from his 5500 pound 2013 Tahoe (if I remember right) at various speeds, we get these values (in newton-meters, or joules):

50 mph - 623,205J (459,652 ft-lb)
85 mph - 1,801,063J (1,328,396 ft-lb)
100 mph - 2,492,821J (1,838,610 ft-lb)
115 mph - 3,296,756J (2,431,562 ft-lb)


As a comparison, your standard 230-grain .45 ACP round fired from a government model 1911 has just under 477J of energy, or almost 325 ft-lb.

 

[chuter]

Mine's not.



Actually, the difference is quite significant. The kinetic energy imparted in a crash is only linearly dependent on the mass of an object, but is equally dependent on the square of the velocity of said object. So going faster makes a much bigger impact on the kinetic energy.

Thus, extrapolating from his 5500 pound 2013 Tahoe (if I remember right) at various speeds, we get these values (in newton-meters, or joules):

50 mph - 623,205J (459,652 ft-lb)
85 mph - 1,801,063J (1,328,396 ft-lb)
100 mph - 2,492,821J (1,838,610 ft-lb)
115 mph - 3,296,756J (2,431,562 ft-lb)


As a comparison, your standard 230-grain .45 ACP round fired from a government model 1911 has just under 477J of energy, or almost 325 ft-lb.

Damn doc, you got some physics-fu goin' on there. Cool.

 

[RidgeHunter]

I think the odds of surviving a high-speed collision with a wall of that magnitude without a seatbelt at high speed are pretty slim, airbag or no. Even not expecting the engulfing subsequent fire, that would have been an absolutely horrific crash.

Yeah I get that. I'd still be afraid of fawking up the impact though. Not centering it or getting the angle wrong, hesitating, etc.