Amazing video, and all made with 50`s 60`s technology, a stunning achievment. As usual in those early stages of advanced aviation, USSR was always the first one to get almost anything they wanted in this ultra competitive science. As usual to them in early years of search & development. My respect and hats off to the Kremlin technicians.
I don't care what anyone says. That xylophone version of Aviamarch during the opening credits was pretty ballin'! Would love to find a full recording of that myself.
Despite its many many well known flaws and horrors - it is surely the most beautiful plane to ever take to the skies. Beats Concorde even. Superb. D.A., NYC
alas the tu144 could not maintain supersonic speeds without the old reheat hence the short range. the europeans created fantastic technologies for their concorde, but as history showed we should have been building cheaper aircraft for the masses. for comparison concorde used more fuel taxiing heathrow than an airbus a320 uses to get from heathrow to paris fully laden.
Respect to Mr. Andrei Tupolev. The Tu-144 ultimately didn’t enjoy the success of our stunningly elegant Concorde. However this doesn’t detract from Tupolev’s leadership or competence as an engineer aiming big, while restricted by the difficult system that pervaded all aspects of his era.
tupolev actually protested spending over half of the civil aircraft budget on this plane, wanting it spent on instead on developing existing models. id be interested to know though if any of the tech created for the tu144 passed on into later russian aircraft.
@@leomotshagen5885 the engines and wing designs were integrated in later military aircraft. And sorry about what I said in an earlier comment, it was intended as a joke.
I read a book about the TU144. What remember is that even when it became operational the refrigeration equipment used to keep the cabin cooled had to be massive because of supersonic air friction heating and was so noisy that passengers had to use ear plugs.
True, it couldn't be cooled using fuel as other jet aircraft did (the Concorde WAS cooled using its fuel) because of very poor engineering, it was added as an afterthought.(skin, Windows became extremely hot glowing orangish red without refrigeration, due to friction from partials of air.
I notice this prototype didn't have the canards that later ones did. I wonder what was so bad about its handling that it needed to be retrofitted with them, yet Concorde didn't need them ?
Concorde wings were far better design and generated more lift at slower speeds especially at take off and landing. The canards were designed to help with stability during these situations during flight.
it had so many issues that the chief engineer would sit in for every flight. 7 aircraft made just over 100 flights with 2 crashes. tupolev lobbied to get the aircraft taken out of service.
@@mrrolandlawrence the flight engineer would allways fly in aircraft at the time. It was taken out of service because it was built to prove a point. Not to make money.
I think he was specifically referring to its shape. It wasn't able to cool the skin, the TU had no proper computerized handling or instrumentation because the West would not sell the Soviets technology, the engines were horribly inefficient, fuel was burnt so fast the range was less than 1200 miles. Secret Supersonic is the best book written on the subject, I thinks it's $12 on Amazon
It’s quite simple. The Russians didn’t care if the tu-144 actually functions nicely as a supersonic aircraft, as long as it was the first to fly, it’s limited passenger services proved they didn’t really trust it, the fact you couldn’t speak to each other and passed hand written notes to. To be fair they did get further then the Americans 😁
And to be fair, the American SST was gonna be the size of a freaking Star Destroyer, have a swing-wing and would cruise at Mach 3. An SST? after the A12, SR-71 and XB-70 an SST should have been a freaking layup. Talk about a let down. Oh well, the 747 rendered the SST race a moot point.
@@Great-Documentaries with America they were all in for the SST but they also had the 747 project running along side so couldn’t loose really, I do believe there whole ban the SST against Concorde would have been a bit different if there’s got or the ground to
No, it does not. It looks somewhat similar because it was the most efficient way to design a large supersonic aircraft at the time. It was actually much faster and larger than the Concorde.
Yup, I want to say it's a KrAZ. They were used as tugs in the USSR. I'm surprised no one pointed out the MAZ-541 that shows up during the titles and opening credits a little later.
I am wondering the "western" press and audience. If we are talking about the Soviet (or Russian) air frame the reaction is - "a copy", or "stolen from the West". Why don't they speak about similar constructions like Boeing 707 and DC-8 or DC-10 and Lockheed 1011? Tu-144 was bigger, heavier and more comfortable for passengers than Concord. The problems of this airliner were avionics and engines. But in both points there were possibilities of improvements but nobody was interested in this airplane. When we are talking about Concord there is the same - there were less interest after 1973. Either British Airways or Air France were interested to use it (even them). Btw. regarding a comfort for passengers of Tu-144 I read a very interesting report of a West-German journalist - he was very pleased to fly from Moscow to Alma-Ata and noted the higher comfort then in Concord
Nobody wanted to have anything to do with Russian political system. By the way, I hear that Concorde is tentatively scheduled for flight in 2019 by some privateers.
Andrew Piatek , not for all things... For example Russian vodka was very popular within US and western Europe. Our ships named "Meteor" were bought by the US )))
+Vladilen Kalatschev That was a big debate between the British and the French whether to spell the name of the plane Concord or Concorde (too French the latter one?) Never mind going friendly with the Soviets. But yes, some people see merits in Zenit camera or Polivoks synthesizer. Russian vodka? How about Louis Roederer inventing Cristal champagne especially for the Tsar of Russia? If the bolsheviks revolution didn't take place, Russian engineers would be well appreciated all over the world. Look at Sikorky, his helicopters are the cream of the crop. Ilyushin, Antonov, and Tupolev would be well known and celebrated, too. But due to Soviet political system, it all crumbled rather badly.
Too bad that A) Russia was totalitarian (still is!) and B) the concord that created Concorde wasn't tripartite. An Anglo-Soviet-French alliance here would have brought the plane into the present day and it would have been more commercially viable and well, still receiving upgrades today despite being noisy at its most efficient speed.
At the same time vast majority of pax complained about excessive cabin noise level. The airframe was extremely poor made, onboard systems were comparably unreliable and most of Tu-144 fleet were grounded constantly. It was a premature design doomed from the beginning.
What follows ARE THE FACTS Clyde, Forgetting the Paris crash and the propaganda excuses, working models of the 144, had a range of 1500 miles, they used Russian made very old technology engines and had 1950's technology in navigation and flight control systems. The remaining models could not be out into scheduled use because of breakdowns. As I stated their were only 55 passenger flights for the entire program, along with mail only flights. Big Problem- if this program was not only for political promotion of the communist system, where would it be flown to? The Concorde was built for two flight routes London to New York, and Paris to New York. As such flights were very expensive but highly desirable. BA in the heyday of the Concorde made 25% of their profits on the Concorde flights. What city pairs would work for the Concordski????. Out of Moscow where can you find people willing to pay 7X to 10X coach fare to take the 144? Remember it can only fly 1500 miles, so you have no hope of crossing the Atlantic. There was no practical use for the poorly designed and unreliable 144.
I would like to see reliable sources of this information with regard to reliability and other technical data (range, engines supposedly 50 - ies and avionics). Because most of this information looks like a personal opinion, which is not true information. Equipment, engines (specially for Tu-144) and avionics were appropriate for the time and era. Many Soviet engines had high consumption, which limited the range, but the consumption itself was not considered a disadvantage for the time. But the Tu-144 flew between Moscow and Almaty, where the distance is more than 1,500 miles, and tickets were actively sold out. There were also disadvantages, but they are not so critical as to call the aircraft poorly designed, it was designed perfectly. Moreover, the aircraft had great opportunities for modernization in order to minimize the disadvantages. Still, the main problems were fuel consumption and maintenance difficulties, but not the overall design. They did not carry out modernization, but decided to develop simpler and more reliable aircraft. And do not believe everything that is written in Wikipedia. To study Soviet aircraft, it is better to read Soviet or Russian books, American-American books, etc.
Nobody cares about your personal opinion please read some facts about this plane before writing such crap. If you call Tu-144 Konkordski - that already means western propaganda has strongly damaged your brain
@@tenton2525 OK, if I accept all your “opinions” why was it pulled out of passenger service after 55 flights? Why did it not fly as long as the Concorde program flew?
Sorry, it was a terrible aircraft. Rushed into service 5-10 years before Soviet science would research the knowledge needed to produce a great supersonic craft , Every completed 144 crashed, they only logged 55 hours of commercial service all together and half the seats had to remain empty, because of its short range, at that, the flights were always late or cancelled due to a mechanical. Those are the facts, you may wish to check out Wikipedia, note the footnotes and read the articles quoted in the piece
+Ranjit Dey Yes, here we have a expert from the Aeronautical School of I Said It, So It's True. He sees no problem with the fact that no real expert on earth agrees with him. Gee Wannabee, why did the Superior TU-144 project lose every production aircraft made in crashes*, but Concorde flew for 20 years and made 25% of Air France or British Aviations profits? Why could the TU only fly 1200 miles before needing to refuel? Why could the TU only fly with all but 50 seats taken out and finally, why wasn't the TU placed in service? *NASA leased one prototype for supersonic tests
You are right I am an expert just like you. Anyway go to the Tupolev website to know little bit more. You see the real problem is this ,in the eyes of western morons anything not made in the west is always shitty. Even aircrafts like SU37 or PAK-FA are declared as a piece of shit by these experts.
@@whoareyou7399 eh nope, the Concorde was way more sophisticated at some point. Ngl its engines were just next level. Light turbojets are way more likely for an SST than heavy overpowered turbofans and the 3080 km range is just ridiculous imo. Anyway, the Soviets had their own critters for civil aviation. While the Western aviation was becoming more and more demanding in terms of ground service, the Soviet one was learning to be more versatile (to adapt to poor conditions+logistical strangenesses) all along the process of its evolution. For example, their fuel efficiency is horrifying even for the 1960's critters, but their versatility remains unmatched.
This is a lie. TU 144 has many significant differences from Concorde. It's bigger, accommodates more passengers (150 vs 124). And, most importantly, *_has other engine layout_*. It means that power fuselage schemes of both aircraft is significantly different, and this is the key element of plane design. Therefore, these are different aircraft with a similar appearance. And, we won't forget, that Tu-144 took off for two months earlier than Concorde.
What a huge waste, 55 commercial flights, 102 mail flights, all totaled for the program. One crash in Paris of the first prototype, another crash later of improved version. No victory for the worker's Paradise over the west.
+Bobby Paluga Indeed! But Russian megalomaniac desire was gratified enough. We should not expect any efficiency and profitability from bureaucratic inertia of the Soviet Union. No wonder the Soviet Union collapsed in spite of its excellent technology and military power.
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
Amazing video, and all made with 50`s 60`s technology, a stunning achievment. As usual in those early stages of advanced aviation, USSR was always the first one to get almost anything they wanted in this ultra competitive science. As usual to them in early years of search & development. My respect and hats off to the Kremlin technicians.
I've seen this for like 5 times in original version...the f*** I am doing. I think I fell in love with this white titanium swan.
I don't care what anyone says. That xylophone version of Aviamarch during the opening credits was pretty ballin'! Would love to find a full recording of that myself.
Despite its many many well known flaws and horrors - it is surely the most beautiful plane to ever take to the skies. Beats Concorde even. Superb. D.A., NYC
Notice the engine noise during take off was heavily dubbed to make it seem more quiet than it actually was 😃
It was dubbed because it was made in 1969 and retrosynching audio was science fiction.
alas the tu144 could not maintain supersonic speeds without the old reheat hence the short range. the europeans created fantastic technologies for their concorde, but as history showed we should have been building cheaper aircraft for the masses. for comparison concorde used more fuel taxiing heathrow than an airbus a320 uses to get from heathrow to paris fully laden.
Respect to Mr. Andrei Tupolev. The Tu-144 ultimately didn’t enjoy the success of our stunningly elegant Concorde. However this doesn’t detract from Tupolev’s leadership or competence as an engineer aiming big, while restricted by the difficult system that pervaded all aspects of his era.
tupolev actually protested spending over half of the civil aircraft budget on this plane, wanting it spent on instead on developing existing models. id be interested to know though if any of the tech created for the tu144 passed on into later russian aircraft.
It did.
@@mandarin1257 Any examles? By the way, name-calling has no place here!
@@leomotshagen5885 the engines and wing designs were integrated in later military aircraft. And sorry about what I said in an earlier comment, it was intended as a joke.
I read a book about the TU144. What remember is that even when it became operational the refrigeration equipment used to keep the cabin cooled had to be massive because of supersonic air friction heating and was so noisy that passengers had to use ear plugs.
True, it couldn't be cooled using fuel as other jet aircraft did (the Concorde WAS cooled using its fuel) because of very poor engineering, it was added as an afterthought.(skin, Windows became extremely hot glowing orangish red without refrigeration, due to friction from partials of air.
@@bobbypaluga4346 it was well engineered, but it was only built to prove a point. Not to make money.
Russian promo film in english?
FarrelFZeta they wanted Americans to buy it
They love propoganda
I notice this prototype didn't have the canards that later ones did.
I wonder what was so bad about its handling that it needed to be retrofitted with them, yet Concorde didn't need them ?
Great question!
Concorde wings were far better design and generated more lift at slower speeds especially at take off and landing. The canards were designed to help with stability during these situations during flight.
Shame only a few dozen flights were used and mainly for mail runs...
it had so many issues that the chief engineer would sit in for every flight. 7 aircraft made just over 100 flights with 2 crashes. tupolev lobbied to get the aircraft taken out of service.
@@mrrolandlawrence the flight engineer would allways fly in aircraft at the time. It was taken out of service because it was built to prove a point. Not to make money.
Kelly Johnson in his autobiography commented that the canards were the main problem with this a/c.
I think he was specifically referring to its shape. It wasn't able to cool the skin, the TU had no proper computerized handling or instrumentation because the West would not sell the Soviets technology, the engines were horribly inefficient, fuel was burnt so fast the range was less than 1200 miles. Secret Supersonic is the best book written on the subject, I thinks it's $12 on Amazon
where are the front canard wings?
It’s quite simple. The Russians didn’t care if the tu-144 actually functions nicely as a supersonic aircraft, as long as it was the first to fly, it’s limited passenger services proved they didn’t really trust it, the fact you couldn’t speak to each other and passed hand written notes to.
To be fair they did get further then the Americans 😁
And to be fair, the American SST was gonna be the size of a freaking Star Destroyer, have a swing-wing and would cruise at Mach 3. An SST? after the A12, SR-71 and XB-70 an SST should have been a freaking layup. Talk about a let down. Oh well, the 747 rendered the SST race a moot point.
@@Great-Documentaries with America they were all in for the SST but they also had the 747 project running along side so couldn’t loose really, I do believe there whole ban the SST against Concorde would have been a bit different if there’s got or the ground to
Looks like a 1976 Concorde plane.
Yes but it’s 1969! Soviets were ahead of time
really sorry, it was a great plane, just like the Concorde :(
No it was NOT a great plane. Never went into scheduled service in the USSR. PROBLEMS PROBLEMS.
It was complete garboe from the START!..
Arguably better
@@Great-Documentaries
when you say it was a shit plane
it must have been so ... ho ho ho
@@leomotshagen5885 actually it did, but not this prototype. The first scheduled passenger flight was between Moscow and Alma-Ata in November 1977.
There is something unusual about it... it copies the Concordes plans!
No, it does not. It looks somewhat similar because it was the most efficient way to design a large supersonic aircraft at the time. It was actually much faster and larger than the Concorde.
@@mandarin1257 EXACTLY!
eh, why not?
is the noiser than concorde
The Soviet supersonic shitbox known as the TU144
What makes you believe it's a shitbox?
It was better than Concord, so shut up, Soviet hater
0:11 driving a plane: Russian style
Guys it’s a truck
Yup, I want to say it's a KrAZ. They were used as tugs in the USSR. I'm surprised no one pointed out the MAZ-541 that shows up during the titles and opening credits a little later.
Hatte sich ja fix erledigt ganz im Gegensatz zur Concorde! So ein Pech aber auch.
Thats what you get for copying your friends homework
I am wondering the "western" press and audience. If we are talking about the Soviet (or Russian) air frame the reaction is - "a copy", or "stolen from the West". Why don't they speak about similar constructions like Boeing 707 and DC-8 or DC-10 and Lockheed 1011? Tu-144 was bigger, heavier and more comfortable for passengers than Concord. The problems of this airliner were avionics and engines. But in both points there were possibilities of improvements but nobody was interested in this airplane. When we are talking about Concord there is the same - there were less interest after 1973. Either British Airways or Air France were interested to use it (even them). Btw. regarding a comfort for passengers of Tu-144 I read a very interesting report of a West-German journalist - he was very pleased to fly from Moscow to Alma-Ata and noted the higher comfort then in Concord
Nobody wanted to have anything to do with Russian political system. By the way, I hear that Concorde is tentatively scheduled for flight in 2019 by some privateers.
Andrew Piatek , not for all things... For example Russian vodka was very popular within US and western Europe. Our ships named "Meteor" were bought by the US )))
+Vladilen Kalatschev That was a big debate between the British and the French whether to spell the name of the plane Concord or Concorde (too French the latter one?) Never mind going friendly with the Soviets. But yes, some people see merits in Zenit camera or Polivoks synthesizer. Russian vodka? How about Louis Roederer inventing Cristal champagne especially for the Tsar of Russia? If the bolsheviks revolution didn't take place, Russian engineers would be well appreciated all over the world. Look at Sikorky, his helicopters are the cream of the crop. Ilyushin, Antonov, and Tupolev would be well known and celebrated, too. But due to Soviet political system, it all crumbled rather badly.
Too bad that A) Russia was totalitarian (still is!) and B) the concord that created Concorde wasn't tripartite. An Anglo-Soviet-French alliance here would have brought the plane into the present day and it would have been more commercially viable and well, still receiving upgrades today despite being noisy at its most efficient speed.
At the same time vast majority of pax complained about excessive cabin noise level. The airframe was extremely poor made, onboard systems were comparably unreliable and most of Tu-144 fleet were grounded constantly. It was a premature design doomed from the beginning.
Sorry that this is decades out of date.
I see konkord solution,2prototip TU144,made before KONKORD
What follows ARE THE FACTS Clyde,
Forgetting the Paris crash and the propaganda excuses, working models of the 144, had a range of 1500 miles, they used Russian made very old technology engines and had 1950's technology in navigation and flight control systems. The remaining models could not be out into scheduled use because of breakdowns. As I stated their were only 55 passenger flights for the entire program, along with mail only flights. Big Problem- if this program was not only for political promotion of the communist system, where would it be flown to? The Concorde was built for two flight routes London to New York, and Paris to New York. As such flights were very expensive but highly desirable. BA in the heyday of the Concorde made 25% of their profits on the Concorde flights. What city pairs would work for the Concordski????. Out of Moscow where can you find people willing to pay 7X to 10X coach fare to take the 144? Remember it can only fly 1500 miles, so you have no hope of crossing the Atlantic. There was no practical use for the poorly designed and unreliable 144.
I would like to see reliable sources of this information with regard to reliability and other technical data (range, engines supposedly 50 - ies and avionics). Because most of this information looks like a personal opinion, which is not true information. Equipment, engines (specially for Tu-144) and avionics were appropriate for the time and era. Many Soviet engines had high consumption, which limited the range, but the consumption itself was not considered a disadvantage for the time. But the Tu-144 flew between Moscow and Almaty, where the distance is more than 1,500 miles, and tickets were actively sold out. There were also disadvantages, but they are not so critical as to call the aircraft poorly designed, it was designed perfectly. Moreover, the aircraft had great opportunities for modernization in order to minimize the disadvantages. Still, the main problems were fuel consumption and maintenance difficulties, but not the overall design. They did not carry out modernization, but decided to develop simpler and more reliable aircraft. And do not believe everything that is written in Wikipedia. To study Soviet aircraft, it is better to read Soviet or Russian books, American-American books, etc.
Nobody cares about your personal opinion please read some facts about this plane before writing such crap. If you call Tu-144 Konkordski - that already means western propaganda has strongly damaged your brain
@@tenton2525 OK, if I accept all your “opinions” why was it pulled out of passenger service after 55 flights? Why did it not fly as long as the Concorde program flew?
CCCP \o/
URSS \o/
This was a great documentary about this airplane, Tupolev 144 is one of the best airplanes created by Russians
Sorry, it was a terrible aircraft. Rushed into service 5-10 years before Soviet science would research the knowledge needed to produce a great supersonic craft , Every completed 144 crashed, they only logged 55 hours of commercial service all together and half the seats had to remain empty, because of its short range, at that, the flights were always late or cancelled due to a mechanical. Those are the facts, you may wish to check out Wikipedia, note the footnotes and read the articles quoted in the piece
+Bobby Paluga sorry tu144 was a better aircraft than concord ,The real reason it failed was economy.
+Ranjit Dey Yes, here we have a expert from the Aeronautical School of I Said It, So It's True. He sees no problem with the fact that no real expert on earth agrees with him. Gee Wannabee, why did the Superior TU-144 project lose every production aircraft made in crashes*, but Concorde flew for 20 years and made 25% of Air France or British Aviations profits? Why could the TU only fly 1200 miles before needing to refuel? Why could the TU only fly with all but 50 seats taken out and finally, why wasn't the TU placed in service?
*NASA leased one prototype for supersonic tests
You are right I am an expert just like you. Anyway go to the Tupolev website to know little bit more. You see the real problem is this ,in the eyes of western morons anything not made in the west is always shitty. Even aircrafts like SU37 or PAK-FA are declared as a piece of shit by these experts.
Ranjit Dey r
The Concorde was better
No it wasn’t. This was faster and bigger
@@whoareyou7399 eh nope, the Concorde was way more sophisticated at some point. Ngl its engines were just next level. Light turbojets are way more likely for an SST than heavy overpowered turbofans and the 3080 km range is just ridiculous imo. Anyway, the Soviets had their own critters for civil aviation. While the Western aviation was becoming more and more demanding in terms of ground service, the Soviet one was learning to be more versatile (to adapt to poor conditions+logistical strangenesses) all along the process of its evolution. For example, their fuel efficiency is horrifying even for the 1960's critters, but their versatility remains unmatched.
viva CCCP !!!
All proudly stolen from the British and French but then still failed because they rushed it.
"CONCORDSKI"
Grow up.
This is a lie.
TU 144 has many significant differences from Concorde.
It's bigger, accommodates more passengers (150 vs 124).
And, most importantly, *_has other engine layout_*. It means that
power fuselage schemes of both aircraft is significantly different, and this is the key element of plane design.
Therefore, these are different aircraft with a similar appearance.
And, we won't forget, that Tu-144 took off for two months earlier than Concorde.
Umm, it was earlier than Concord
What a huge waste, 55 commercial flights, 102 mail flights, all totaled for the program. One crash in Paris of the first prototype, another crash later of improved version. No victory for the worker's Paradise over the west.
+Bobby Paluga Indeed! But Russian megalomaniac desire was gratified enough. We should not expect any efficiency and profitability from bureaucratic inertia of the Soviet Union. No wonder the Soviet Union collapsed in spite of its excellent technology and military power.
it was not a first prototype which crashed in Paris, it was the first production modification. So it was a completely reworked air frame.
the Konkordski
Grow up.