Jump to content


  • 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

24,716 profile views
  1. LOL, nice admission to being wrong after being so adamant and arrogant about it... Oh well. And yeah, even if they did get it wrong that would tots make the kit unbuildable.πŸ™„
  2. Excellent and clean build Benner, but not too clean. πŸ‘
  3. A product quality is directly proportional to the effort that those that develop it put in it. And Kitty Hawk is not known to be putting effort in their kits.
  4. It is a well known fact that 100% of those that get any vaccine die. It is also a fact that 100% of those that ingest dihydrogen monoxide die, sometimes a painful death. Ban dihydrogen monoxide NOW! http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html
  5. dude, you are literally proving my point; Re-read what i wrote about that number (and one reply was specifically to you!!!), slowly this time. My God.
  6. IRST is moved as you have noted, there is a refuel probe, the triangle RWR's on the intakes are removed and different instrument panel. Probably a few antennas here and there too. Moving IRST would be the hardest, but probably doable in theory. The other things should be pretty easy. Maybe GWH will do a SM version, that could cover that demo bird, Russian SM and SM3's and the Indonesian SKM's. But that is a question to Haneto and GWH.
  7. Again though, the important take away here is that the vaccines were given to old and very frail people and that regardless of a vaccine 400 of them die in those short term nursing homes, per week. One could probably give an injection of water and the results would be about the same. There is no indications whatsoever the current vaccines are worrisome for those that aren't extremely frail. And if one is - i would argue getting the virus is far more dangerous.
  8. Serious honest question. Considering your health issues aren't you far more worried about getting a novel virus which is known to kill those with especially weak health at an average rate of 2% (much much higher for those with bad health) vs getting a vaccine which kills at a rate... checks notes, basically non existing? Considering the balance of risk one of these options seems much better than the other one. One has to be careful with wording and statements on this because this kind of data is very very easy to take out of context. And if this thread is anything to go b
  9. How about driving in the wrong direction or driving while being on the phone? Does that only hurt one person? Or millions of other examples one could think of. No, you seem to be missing that wast majority of time we all are willing to have certain "individual freedoms" removed or be paused because that is how a society works. You do it as well, all the time, because most people are not psychopaths. Does World War 1 sound deadly to you? Or World War 2? Or Vietnam War? Because USA is now approaching the number of COVID deaths equal to all of those three combined in terms of American
  10. I am just gonna quote this because it is so so amazing it needs to be protected at all costs. Facebook and Parler are dangerous drugs kids. The last sentence literally made me laugh out loud, love it.
  11. I have not. And none of those are; a - Happening right now with over 100 million cases in little over a year or so. b - Anywhere as contagious as COVID-19. c - Has 2%+ fatality rate. (H1N1 has lower fatality rate, SARS is "older" version of COVID and MERS is very low frequency and Antrax is bacteria) d - And if a/b/c was true, and there was a vaccine available i would take it ASAP ZULU ANULULU because it isn't about me but those that could die from it if i gave it to them. Yet, if the points a/b/c were true for any of your irrelevant examples (as they are
  12. You are a good man.πŸ‘ I won't be getting vaccine in a while, fairly young and no pre-existing conditions or anything. Just hope i get it before summer and EU agrees on some kind of vaccine passport.
  13. This is such an alpha and manly take that simply by reading this i grew my beard additional 20 cm. It actually is, it is literally a matter of public safety, google herd immunity. Taking the vaccine might not even be for you but for others. That is the whole point. Your decision doesnt affect only you. The only way to kill off covid so that it isnt here for ever is to vaccinate. But i suppose thanks for letting all of us know where you stand on this.
  14. And that kind of driving is certainly not usual most people, especially not every day. And when it happens, i assume you had some break at that point during which one can realistically charge. But i obviously agree - the end game for EV's is to completely and utterly replace ICE vehicles and have enough range and price to do so. Having a short range EV and long range ICE is inefficient, one car should cover both cases. I would argue that for 99,9999% of the population the range part is solved, realistically 300+ miles/500 km is enough paired with fast charging. And technically if there is an e
  15. Takes about 15 min to add 170miles/270km. About 30min from 0 to 80% (adding about 280 miles of range). Optimally for a "speed run" and using V3 chargers only one would charge about 20min at a time and charging ~220 miles of range and then drive for another 200 miles etc. That would bring down the total charging time to around 2,5 hours compared to the 4,5hours in that 1500 miles example. For Mach-E specifically the story will be completely different. (IE much much worse) Excellent question.πŸ˜‰ Tesla doesnt spend any money on any commercials or marketing whatsoever. And i am
  • Create New...