Видео

Great Choice!! Remember to share your experience in the comments

Hi. Great question. Panasonic does shaves the smoothest. If You close the door in the bathroom- You will not wake up your family

Hi. Thanks for the reply!! Unfortunately, I can’t say the same good words about my pair of such boots. The WALKABOUT winter boots- are NOT good either- watch my review on those

@@shinobi3337 Hi. Thanks for the review. I would honestly say that hoodies are functional, the are as warm as any other hop from same thickness fleece , durability is ok , no wear after 1 year of use. They are for sure overpriced,……. So , for much less money they would have been a good choice

Hi, Great question!! Thanks. So ….. among cheaper ones - so far I tried only 5000 series from Philips - it is a good razor , but not as good. You need to check my comparison video in the same playlist. Also -- I tried even cheaper AA battery powered travel shaver from Philips- it does shave ok, but can’t compare it even to 5000 series Phillips. This 2 head travel AA battery powered shaver - is also in my review- the one with Henson shaving razor blades- You will find in my shaving related playlists

Watch this video from 11:00 minutes ruclips.net/video/qJNZgTcj3Wg/видео.htmlsi=RKRm4JFitwACxtRb

And this comparison ruclips.net/video/gar6zT7u7xY/видео.htmlsi=hi7xEjXy6dgppj_a

Hi. That is truly amazing cake. Get yourself ready for Christmas

Hey!!! Great that You loved it !!! Thank You very much for such a lovely feedback. Subscribe and check my other videos/ playlists. My latest video- is a Cooking Master class on how to make baklava- very detailed video

Thanks !!

Hi! Thank You very much, my friend!! Enjoy !

Привет. Спасибо. Бери рецепт на вооружение

Hi!! I like unexpected things!! I think at this point in time - RUclips has to adjust algorithms and promote creators/ channels with various content within a single channel. If You, for example, line the way I present information and explain certain skills- why would You need to bother yourself and watch me on 3 different channels- just check my playlists - those are sorted out

Thank for the commenting !! Cooking indoors with safety shoes on - my feet will cook to in such case.

Thanks. That was mainly my idea - to really let people learn how to make it

Спасибо

Thanks !! Appreciate your feedback!!

Fantastic master class!! Very good and informative!

Yeah!!!! Cool !! It was surreal!! But it was 100 % true and epic !!

Yeah, You are right!! Progress should not be stand still…..

Привет. Да, свет классный

You are absolutely right!!

Thanks !!

The one on video - combo. Spot + wide Tomorrow I will upload additional video with this ligh bar while driving

Hi. I contacted them - answer was - bring shoes to repair shop - we will cover repair cost ))))

@ashotgaziyan8876 thanks for the info, at least they made it right with you 👍

I would rather prefer having quality boots from the beginning)))

Oh, man. You better start believing in great people. It is 100% true.

@@ashotgaziyan8876 logically it is impossible

@KpTheFth but practically- Elon and SpaceX did it

@@ashotgaziyan8876 where is the proof?

Look what xAI say about this The Starship Heavy Booster, also known as the Super Heavy, does not have landing legs because it is designed for a different operational strategy compared to earlier SpaceX boosters like the Falcon 9: 1. **Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly (RUD) During Testing**: Initially, the focus might be on the structural integrity and performance testing, where the booster is not expected to survive or land intact after its mission. 2. **Catch Mechanism**: There's speculation and discussion around SpaceX's plans for future missions where the Super Heavy might not land on legs but could be caught by the launch tower's "chopsticks" (mechanical arms). This method would allow for a quicker turnaround and potentially reduce the mass of the booster by eliminating the need for legs. 3. **Reusability in Other Ways**: Instead of landing, the booster might be designed to be reused through different methods like being refurbished after a controlled splashdown in the ocean, although this approach would likely involve significant recovery and refurbishment efforts. 4. **Design Philosophy**: Elon Musk and SpaceX have often prioritized simplicity and efficiency. The addition of legs adds complexity, weight, and cost. If another method like catching or splashdown can achieve the goal of reusability, legs might be deemed unnecessary. 5. **Development Strategy**: SpaceX's development strategy often involves testing to failure. If the initial designs do not include legs, it's because the current phase of testing might not require them. Future iterations might include them or another landing method based on test results and operational needs. The absence of landing legs on the Starship Heavy Booster thus reflects SpaceX's ongoing experimentation with new recovery methods, aiming for higher efficiency and possibly lower costs in the long term. However, the exact reasons can also involve strategic decisions on how SpaceX plans to manage reusability in the context of their broader goals for space travel and Mars colonization.

@@ashotgaziyan8876 I wasn't talking about the heavy booster.

Here is what GROK says During the test flights where Starship (the spacecraft, not the Super Heavy booster) performed splashdowns in water, there are several reasons why landing legs might not be deployed: 1. **Focus on Vehicle Integrity**: In these early test flights, the primary goal was often to test the overall structural integrity of the Starship during reentry and landing. The deployment of legs might not be necessary if the test's success criteria focus on surviving reentry, managing heat shield performance, or testing the engines for landing without needing the legs. 2. **Avoiding Damage**: Water landings can be harsh, with the potential for high impact forces. Keeping the legs folded reduces the risk of damage to the legs themselves or other parts of the vehicle upon hitting the water, especially if the landing is not perfectly vertical or if the speed is too high. 3. **Design Testing**: Early tests might focus solely on the dynamics of the spacecraft itself without the added complexity of leg deployment mechanisms, which adds another layer of variables to test and manage. 4. **Operational Strategy**: For splashdown tests, SpaceX might choose to recover Starship by stabilizing it in the water without the legs deployed, similar to how the Super Heavy might be envisioned to be recovered via splashdown. This could be to test water impact forces on the vehicle's body or to practice recovery procedures without relying on the legs. 5. **Future Recovery Method**: There's speculation about future recovery methods where legs might not even be used for landing. For instance, if Starship were to land on a pad or be caught by the launch tower's arms (like envisioned for Super Heavy), the legs might become unnecessary for splashdown recoveries. 6. **Mass and Complexity Considerations**: If the test flight's objectives do not require proving the leg deployment mechanism, keeping them stowed simplifies the test scenario, reduces potential points of failure, and could save on mass if the legs are designed to be jettisoned post-splashdown (though this isn't confirmed as a strategy). For these reasons, during some test flights, especially those ending in splashdowns, Starship might not deploy its landing legs, focusing instead on other critical aspects of its design and operation. However, in operational scenarios where Starship is intended to land on solid ground, the legs would be crucial and deployed appropriately.

@@ashotgaziyan8876 Great reply, thank you!

@miketobin2324 sure !! Thank You for engaging in comments

It was Biden who just allowed long range missiles to be used on Russian targets

It really is!

Oh, thank You so much for the feedback!!

@@clintbeastwood8240 subscribe)) I have more videos about shoes, boots and workwear

Thanks!