Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Berkut

  • Rank
    Push the envelope,watch it bend.
  • Birthday 03/20/1991

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Norway, Kristiansand
  • Interests
    Writing down my stupid interests so whole world can see my stupid interests.

Recent Profile Visitors

22,994 profile views
  1. I have not. If they reach out and have specific questions/need help i can help out, but otherwise based upon previous experience i don't plan to do so myself.
  2. I am not sure, but i dont believe they have. They did at some point promise to update/rework MiG-25 (which was a goddamn atrocity) but it never happened. I haven't taken a detailed look at either their Su-35S or Su-34, but overall those seems passable although unremarkable other than the head-scratching decision of offering no "resting position" exhaust nozzles for Su-35S. I very very looking forward to that one, considering i have been waiting for one ever since first T-50 flight. No, first Zvezda kit doesnt count and neither does the HB one. Have been meaning to contact Zvezda to offer help/guidance on the new T-50/Su-57 kit but havent gotten around it.
  3. One can make a very basic 3D model with all the shapes correct. Reworking all those things i mentioned require far more effort than getting it right from the start. And of course i see it is an early 3D model, which is why i didnt comment about the nozzles for example. If anything, the fact that there are already panellines on the model (no matter how simple) shows me they basically moved past the "get the basic shapes right" phase and has started the detail work. So unless they are willing to radically change the CAD - what we see, is what we will get, but with rivets.
  4. Even from little that can be seen from that single CAD - I can't say i am impressed. Wings look off, motor gondolas look off, spine (directly behind cockpit) looks off, stinger looks off, and something (not quite sure what) is off with the nose. Also, considering the panellines on the nose and pitot and the wing tip design the only frames that can be built OOB is T-50-1 and T-50-2. And unless the canopy included is with a frame along the middle, that would leave just T-50-2 OOB. Even if all those mentioned sections will be modular in the kit, as it is now, basically one can only reasonably build "Phase one" frames, ie frames before T-50-6-2. From that one and onward ("Phase 2"), there were significant changes which would be hard to achieve with modularity so basically would need own tooling.
  5. Berkut

    Aviation Art Su-33 1/48

    Thank you for the update Ran, looking forward to the release.👍
  6. Are there any good sites that can ship it internationally? I looked into it a few months back and didnt have much luck finding anything online that would ship it for a decent shipping price. My only bottle which i had for a very long time has gone bad (basically doesnt dry) and i havent found anything locally at all.
  7. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    Today i learned i don't live in a real country. Apparently a country that is about as long as it is from San Diego to Houston is not a real country and must be fake news. And our surface area is almost as large as California, which must make California a fake state. Or us Europeans traveling to European countries never ever happens either. It is almost as if we are a continent with free and open borders or something. Average number of cars in American family is 2. It is entirely possible for an average family to have an EV and an ICE. Besides, just like vast majority of people charge their phones as home, vast majority of EV owners charge their EV's at home. Also, the exact car of this topic, Model 3, recharges at a rate of about 180 miles/300km in 15 min at a V3 Supercharger. I am not sure what you consider to be a long recharge stop, but i don't consider taking a 15 min brake every 300 km or so exactly a massive sacrifice.
  8. Berkut


    Ah interesting, so there is a logic behind it - just for the dark arts of software. 😅
  9. Berkut


    Great stuff. 👍 While you are taking in requests for the site functions Raymond, could the scale drop down list be reworked? It has always been a really strange one for me and there is no clear cut logic to it. I see that it is grouped after 1/[First Number] but there is no chronological order within the groups. For example the first group is 1/100 (small, unusual scale), 1/12 (BIG scale) , 1/144 (tiny scale) , 1/16 (big scale again). Why not 1/12, 1/16, 1/100 and 1/144 order for example? Would also be useful to have checkmarks instead of a single choice on the Category too. For example i might be interested in seeing both the kits and accessories on the same search result.
  10. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    Depends. Some are just "peak shaving" ICE to keep it at optimal efficiency, some are plug in hybrids and are able to drive on electric only.
  11. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    😛 You mean people like people that actually own and use Tesla's (including a friend of mine, and plenty of coworkers, and i live in Norway, generally speaking a cold place) and an owner that already said the loss is around 20%; Mine 25% was based upon data i have seen prior + some extra percentages. With some planning and preheating it should be significantly less than 20%, just like BaconRaygun has said. So indeed, they beg to differ, with you. As to "steep inclines", that is basic physics and those apply to ICE too. Unlike ICE, EV's can recoup a lot of energy on the way down too. Hydrogen cells dont "recharge". The stupid part about hydrogen is that one is converting electrons into hydrogen and to be used as an energy carrier, a bad one at that. Instead of just directly using electrons, afterall they end up driving the same thing, efficient electric motor(s). Battery degradation, atleast with modern cells and design (with aforementioned active heating/cooling system) is minimal. Roughly speaking as a general thumb of rule, about 0,5% per 10000 miles. And degradation is "quick" at the start, and very slow after that; https://steinbuch.wordpress.com/2015/01/24/tesla-model-s-battery-degradation-data/ Otherwise Model 3 battery degradation (or rather, lack of it) is probably even better.
  12. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    Mildly ironic statement. You are seeing "pitfalls" that don't exists (CFL vs incandescent) and long tailpipe because you are (were?) uninformed. There is nothing wrong with being uninformed (i am ignorant about one million things), there is however something wrong making assumptions and statements based upon lack of knowledge however.
  13. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    1; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp#Mercury_content 2; If it bothers you that much (which i highly doubt tbh), just use LED's then.
  14. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    This is the long dead myth of "long tailpipe". If you took an average coal plant and used to charge your EV, it would still be more efficient and cleaner than the vast majority of cars. And the grid, even in US and China, is far cleaner than just pure coal plants. Otherwise; 1; https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/new-data-show-electric-vehicles-continue-to-get-cleaner 2; https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/ev-emissions-tool?_ga=2.47602990.809256624.1553200539-1853582052.1553200539 Now i am expecting "But the batteries man, the batteries! And lithium!" as the next myth/argument.
  15. Berkut

    Tesla, model 3

    It does not. Atleast not EV's with an active warming/cooling system on the battery like Tesla's have. Ie if the battery is preheated before a trip (which can be done automatically and while plugged in based on time) the loses beyond that shouldn't be more than 25% or so. And that kind of loses happen with ICE too obviously. Now, LEAF's and smaller cars that dont have any kind of active warming/cooling system at all is a different story. But trend with newer cars is to have that system, it is extremely important for battery degradation too. Fool cells are terrible terrible idea. They don't make any sense whatsoever. It is perplexing how Toyota continues with their push (although still in an extremely limited fashion) but i understand there are political reasons behind it. Other than that, i will just leave it at that; And those numbers used on the hydrogen side are basically best case. Just the fool cell efficiency is closer to ~40% if one wants to have any sort of decent power output from them, which a car does need. The EV numbers are slightly too low, should be closer to ~92/87/92 or so, atleast with efficiency oriented EV's. + https://electrek.co/2017/10/26/toyota-elon-musk-fuel-cell-hydrogen/