Added: 4 years ago
From: marooojaro
Views: 491,953
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (395)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • LOL

  • RIP

  • Comment removed

  • Anti commie? Anti Yankee? West Vs east….East Vs west… Blah Blah Blah….Which is best – Concorde or Tu 144? Ours is!...No its not…Yes it is…No its not…you coped us…no we didn’t….it was you who copped us you commie tosser…no we never you capitalist pig…Concorde was the copy…..bull…Tu 144 was... blah blah blah… Does it bloody matter?? Both are sadly gone now. Someday people will simply learn to admire both these beauties in their own right and quit all political nonsense

  • I love how someone like u can take a short 10sec clip and get 400,000+ views from something you didnt render or create!! WOW

  • A MAD PILOT,THAT RUNNING PASSENGER PLANE LICKS SPORT

  • I was present at this crash... 12 years old. I remember the silence over 100.000 visitors...Authorities decided to continue the show to avoid the traffic to slow the emergency trucks to operate. 29 dead. Never forgot.

  • What broke off of it? Looked like a steep, but controlled approach, and then wham! What separated from the a/c before impact? Some control surface? Wing tip? Anybody know?

  • @jonesy97 One of the wings outer part. :(

  • all of you cannot even comprehend the intelligence put into making something of that scale!

  • Russia is a poor country. When defected pilot Lt. Belenko, flew his Mig 25 Foxbat to Japan, our agents noted that it was made of steel not like our titanium frames. Their electronic systems were vacuum tube based. Ours are solid state microchip based. After the fall of the wall, we are still giving them billions in aid and rebuilding their electrical systems and roads.

  • @leegenix

    Oh, thats why roads in Russia so suck.

  • @leegenix Good point, never knew that about their electronics though. Belenko was a bad-ass for that move, landed on fumes. Yeager took him fishing for years after and became very close. Funny how we feared the foxbat and once we got one it wasnt the big bad wolf. (still an imprssive airplane. Any interceptor that can bust 100, 000 feet is ok in my book)

  • @leegenix Actually thy used titanium also. Basic material was stainless steel. They have also used silver for heat protection. Also that time mig-31 was almost ready. It was able to fire at 4 aircrafts at the same time. It was like mig-25 but was totally rebuilt. Including the electronics. So Americans saw a plane that was obsolete already. Also the remaining mig-25 s wore reconstructed also, because Americans knew the locators frequency etc. The locator was so strong that could not be diturbed.

  • Russian planes were and is pretty good except some failures. Tu-144 was indeed abig failure.

  • @urmo345 If Tu-144 was a failure, than Concord also. I think, in many ways Tu-144 is better than Concord.

  • @Modellpecs It's spelled Concorde.

  • @djbk7456 Fain to me....

  • Another piece of FAILED Russian technology in action!

  • @XXXGhostGrenadeXXX Yeah when I was a child, i have built exactly the same plane! Out of paper! But my mother did not allowed me to play with it. It did not fit in my room.... Was also afraid that the plane would catch fire because of skin friction over M3...

  • oh well, I stand corrected then comrade, but what you perceive is not what I saw with my own two eyes, I will not argue with you.

  • Tu-144 that day was told to shorten it's show,a french fighter was attempting to take pictures of the canard on the plane when it must have caused the pilot to dive to avoid a collision,doing a "bunt",the engines can take the rapid change in airflow causing the engines to stall,pilot dove to keep airspeed up and in doing so overstressed the wings,

    crash.Look up online.

  • @thresher4 All is correct except there was not danger of collision and emergency dive, pilot just did took a risk cause they had orders push plane to off the limits.

  • TU-144 was destroyed during a demonstration due to sabotage.

  • @Biogem369 wrong totally - I saw it for real it was a stressing of the airframe the front airfoil went into the port engine and it exploded - I was only 3km from the town of Gousinville and watched it come down through binoculars..... sorry!

  • @freddielaker2 it happened because of the foreign military fighter jet that clipped tu144. so the west has always been dishonest in relation to Russia.

  • someone should make an add on for firefox that recognizes when a youtube video has a song in it by 009 sound system and blocks it so you don't have to listen to it or mute the video.

  • what is the different of Tu-144 and concord?

  • @wisnu1231

    TU-144 is different, in structure, size, speed, engines, landing gears swept wings, crue, etc.

  • wtf wat went wrong????

    just spontaneous combustion?????

  • @xInFaMoUsxdope Two theories to this day. One, a French military jet flew too closely to take photos of the TU-144 forcing the plane to make evassive moves it was never designed for causing it to break up mid flight. The other, the TU-144 was trying to imitate the same maneuver the Concorde made minutes earlier. Again, the body of the Soviet plane couldn't take the stress and broke up. This is what I read when it happened.

  • wtf wat went wrong????

  • @ CharlieDoen "Russian now NOT ENOUGH MONEY to continue space programs! PERIOD.."

    It is the US that are phasing out the space shuttle and booking space on the Russian space program!

    The Space shuttles will all be out of duty by the end of 2010, with a replacement not due until 2015. So it seems the USA are the ones who are running out of money, either that or very little planning and foresight has left NASA in a very precarious position, relying on other countries to get people into orbit!

  • @lyle67 You're talking such nonsense! That Americans have the space program's failure, according to this they resort to the Russian. Yes, I agree with you that the U.S. and Russia the last time they started to work together and invest.

  • @KatrinaX17

    Incidentally during World War 2 the Russians used American P-39 Airacobras,B-25 Mitchell bombers and PBY Catalinas,all thanks to the Lend-Lease Act.All of these aircraft held up just fine in the Russian winter climate. The Tupolev TU-4 (NATO code name"Bull") was a reverse engineered Boeing B-29 Superfortress that unfortunately also acquired the B-29's "Achille's heel",problematic engines.

  • American fighter planes won't make it thru Siberian winter storms, just like Hitler's babarossa in ww2 & Napoleon's attack of Russia.

    Regardless how these American planes (or other machines) look like or whatever media wants you to believe, these machinery won't run thru Russian winter because one of the big reason is fuel is turning to ice inside thier pipes.

    Russian machineries are rigid and design to make it thru their winter. Don't believe it? Go ask Hitler or Napoleon. lolz.

  • Gentlemen, capitalists, you envy us in Russian, because this plane proves the superity of sovetskova down over your pseudo-democracy.

  • @Batkad Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!

  • Tu-shit

    Let Russian and all the former communist fly with it...don;t gone with the wind

    See..new accident in Poland: family of President are the victims..

    NO BULL SHIT TU-xxx can sell to rich western world or Asia..

    - and CHINA still a COPY cat...but 2nd place took seat from USSR Russie pussie

  • @CharlieDoan

    The Russian passenger aircrafts statistics are as good as Western ones. Might be even better. The crash you mentioned was human error, not the plane.

    Actually i feal much safer on a TU than an airbus that makes a touchdown, and ven th pilot wants to fly back up tu give it a nother try for safety, gives full throttle, and pulls the elevator, than the planes computer refuses this. insted of pulling, it pushes, than the plane goes straight to the forest.....

  • @Modellpecs Can you provide statistics to prove this? The Concorde flew regular flights for 27 years. The TU-144 was grounded after a mere 55 scheduled flights.

  • @itsmegp46 Concord and 144? That statistic was newer made. I can give you this; Airbus A310 One crash per: 1 067 700 flying hours Tu-134 One crash per: 1 087 600 flying hours Boeing 737 JT8D One crash per: 507 500 flying hours Tu-154 One crash per: 1 041 000 flying hours As you can see it depends on the type.... Makes no sence to argue.... Russian planes deserve more honor than they recive. Expecially because they serve mostly in por contries, in bad conditions.
  • @Modellpecs Provide your source for this "information". Otherwise your post is vaporware. I do know that the Boeing 737 in one form or another has been flying since the mid 1960's. Over 45 years.

  • @itsmegp46

    Just like TU-134....

    But, I do not think, that i can tell you anything, that you accept, or ether makes you belive me, so feel free to look it up yourself. Lots of people are surprised just like you, when they realise, tahat a tradicional aircraft could be much safer than a, as they say "hightec plane" like Airbus A310 is. Normaly everyone thinks that its computer, and modern electronics, makes it safe, but it is false. Actually a lot of plane went down because of this....

  • @Modellpecs That's a good point that I always made, but never had numbers to back it up.

    Even in Russia, these planes encounter more difficult conditions than many other countries simply because of the remote, outdated locations they often land in.

  • @12OclockLow The Aeroflot IL-62 was a thing of beauty to me when I worked at Washington Dulles airport, but they were always in such a horrible state of disrepair - tires with missing tread, dents in the fuselage, things like that. This was in 1990 and 1991, and I suspect poor maintenance was due to poor funding in those final Soviet years. I think the Russian/Soviet aesthetic for passenger aircraft was beautiful. I hope the Russian aviation industry is doing well! Also Sukhoi - the SU-31! WOW!

  • @Modellpecs

    Correct, the main reason they crash is because of the really sloppy and bad service performed on them by poor local airlines, not by the faults of the aircraft itself. A Tupolev plane in service in a good airline has pretty much a perfect safety record.

  • @Modellpecs The soviets stole the concorde's tech from the Aérospatiale/British Aircraft Corporation...and made this..how cheap of them!....and u say that russian planes deserve honor?!.....

  • @technospear Sure i do! Let me ask you one thing. If they stole, than how come, that they built a totally different plane? Let us say they had Concordes plans. And they built a plane, that is bigger, Has totally different wing design, different engines, different engine placement, different landing gears, different flight and onboard systems, basically everything is different. Why would they do such a thing?

  • @Modellpecs ahem!....it has been proven that the tu-144 is BASED on the blueprints that were missing from the Aérospatiale/British Aircraft Corporation's testing lab...u can say watever u want ...but they still copied it!

  • @technospear Proven? :D What are you talking about!? Bulls shit..... Even if they did seal... They have built the plane on their concept. That is why TU-144 is totally different than Concorde. Just for an example, to make you see the trough; Was Concorde planned to be bigger than Concorde? Don't you see the conflict in the sentence? Don't be blind..... You always have a chance to see clear. But you have to decide, if you want to.... Go after this. Read, read, read. ;)

  • @Modellpecs hahaha...u make me laugh ..search wikipedia for tu-144 and read,read,read :P XP......and u'll see :P

  • @technospear So, facts are nothing? Hmmm.... Think it over.... ;) Let me try once again. How could it be a copy, when it is not alike at all? Like an apple and a plum. Bough are fruits. Bought taste good. Can eat bough. But, totally different.... Same with 144 and Concorde. Bough are beautiful planes, but only their shadow is the same from far away... Everyone can see the difference. If not, than, know nothing about flying.

  • @Modellpecs brrr....u russians never learn do u?....im just wasting my time arguing with clueless people like u......im off ...u can comment all u want....i know im right ..and i dont have 2 prove it 2 anyone....cherio..

  • @technospear Wrong. You have to. You just wrote something, that is against the facts and tons of technical data, flight parameters, etc. So i say again, you have to! At this point, it seams, that you wrote down your feelings, nothing else... If you know that you are right, than you should be able to give me reasons, numbers, facts, etc. That you did not do. You know nothing about TU-144. It is clear to me. That is why you are writing about your feelings and guesses. I wrote facts...

  • @Modellpecs listen dude...iv got no time 2 argue with you.....im a school kid...and iv got no time to hang around youtube .....i hope u undestand that :)

  • @technospear I don't. Than why are you keep writing here? ;) Still no reasoning.... I am sad... :(

  • @Modellpecs ok...heres the deal....u keep ur reason to yourself ....and i'll keep my reason to mine....

  • @technospear You don't have any.....

  • @Modellpecs oh please ...like i said...iv got no time...to be arguing with jobless people like u.....so stop comenting...u russians are really anoying

    :P

  • Comment removed

  • @technospear hmm...another stupid yankee :(( you even can not use YOUR WIKI!!! TU-144 was made before Concord...TU-144 first flight 31 Dec 1968 and its superjet flight already - the beginnig 1969...Concord`s first flight only several months AFTER it(!!!) You know nothing teenager. Do you know that that USSR has another project of such a jet (but from another engineer bureau) even 2 years earlier?

  • @dobrovolets777

    It's "Concorde"... and the overwhelming majority of USAmericans are not "Yankees," despite common and widespread overuse of that word to describe them.

    Perhaps before you lament someone else's obvious ignorance, you should attend to your own. Food for thought.

  • @ImmortalSynn sorry for my english, my russian is perfect! And what I should think when I read the comments of people who even do not want to look through internet sources to repair their illiteration but who always talk "we are the best and you are russian thieves"!? TU-144 was an excellent plane. The reasons (why its flights were stopped) are really unknown...

  • @dobrovolets777 hahaha....i get all my info from my cousin ...he works at Aérospatiale...those russians used their espionage services to steal the blueprint no.75j.....which went missing in the Aérospatiale test lab in 1966....dont make me laugh old man :P

  • @technospear "my cousin said..." - oh! it is REALLY strong source!!! Anyway espionage is the international thing...Doesn`t USA have its own intelligence services (for example)? You do not understand the real thing!!! How can you steal all the technology at all? You may steal all the projects, you may steal or buy even the sample BUT you can not produce the original if you haven`t got every know-how? every stage of production with the beginning from the production of metals and polymers!

  • @dobrovolets777 ahem!...he's a part of the design team...so he knows alot :P .....and USA doesnt need to steal from other countries because they know that their tech is the best....the only thing that they do is spy........what im saying is....the t-114 is not a direct copy of the Concorde ...but its based on the blueprints that when missing

  • @technospear :) "part of the design team"? and he really said this shit? the only resume that I can do - he is NOT professional or he NEVER deal with ANY engineer systems! How HE CAN KNOW that russians stole the blueprints? "USA doesn`t need to steal"-really?so why did they steal the RSZO "Smerch" all the projects?:) but even having its they couldnot even do a copy such a system! You and your cousin haven`t ever thought WHAT it means to construct jet of such level! play the toys better,kid.

  • @dobrovolets777 yes he is a part of the design team...but he started in 1989..so maybe he doesnt know much...not professional huh?! lol....he works as the 2nd lead designer in the avionics tean :P....anyways enough about my cousin...and the chinese are the guys who stole or copied the BM-30 Smerch! not aamerica......those russians took the blueprint no.75j...and made the tu-144 which was BASED on the blueprints....i dont care what u say..... :P

  • @technospear you just bother me by your illiteration...How can he know about the jet of another country that this was stolen if he did not work in Tupolev bureau??? And yes, he is NOT professional if he talks such a shit! Or he didn`t told this and you simply lied to me, little boy. As for "Smerch" - NO, that were americans who tried to repeat it but failed. Chinese tried to copy another system which cals "Uragan" but failed too!

    cont+++

  • @technospear the info for you, my little boy - to construct even the same jet of such level any stolen blueprints will be not enough...you will need ALL the technology from the beginnig to the end, from the producing every detail and material to the tests of electronics, for example...you even does not really understand what you are talking about!

  • @dobrovolets777 u dumb nut!......they stole the blueprints to get an idea of what they should create....anyway...its still called stealing!

  • @technospear ahaha! do you understand yourself, my little crazy schoolboy? "they stole the blueprints to understand WHAT they should create"!!! Ok, boy, let`s try to speak - why do you think they could not create this idea by themthelves? for you not to write absolutely shit as before I give one help - these people already built on that moment not one but much more superjet BOMBERS! last their project on that time was Tu-22...do you think they were absolutely stupids like you are?

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @Modellpecs dont be fooled by my age ;).......ok..u say that russians are not copycats right?....so how can u explain the buran orbiter looking EXACTLY the same as the space shuttle? :P

  • @technospear Simply. But Buran and shuttle is not comparable also. Going to the space like this was Russian idea. Way before the moon landing... Also if they copy than how come that it can bring up 4 times more weight than space shuttle? And able to land with 10 ton more? Its heat protection can take more heat than space shuttle? Fully automatic? Also Its engines can be stopped anytime? Wonder if Chalanger had this... Buran also equiped with ejection system. But it has nothing to do with TU-144

  • @Modellpecs who cares..about weight,heat protection and stuff?!...it was a big balloony failure..only 3 hours in space.....all that tech was a wastage!......hahaha...space shuttle over 30 years!.....i know it has nothing to do with the tu-144 and the concorde...i just gave an example.......oh,....and what destroyed it?!...cheap hanger maintenance!

  • @technospear Ehh... You know nothing.... talk about TU-144 pls. Done with you...

  • @Modellpecs ya right ;)...k i also had enough with this fight...nobodys proving anything...u cant convince me ...i cant convince u...this sucks....have a nice day ;)

  • @technospear I think, i did.

  • @Modellpecs nop u didnt...and never can :P

  • @technospear I did, but you closed your eyes.... Read back.

  • @Modellpecs nop u still havent.... u r just wasting my time dude.....im off.....and i still say russians are thieves and copycats! :P

  • @technospear Ignoring the facts, is not very claver but it is ok. I was telling to myself, if i give you more, than you might understand it. But post like this.... Hmmmm... To say anything, like you just did. Is not simply stupid, but also labeling yourself. From now on, It is pointless to argue with a child like you. So it was my last reply to your comments. I do hope, while you grow, you are not only getting taller, but smarter. I think i wait for that. A few years might be.... ;)

  • @Modellpecs hahahaha...anything u say ...OLD MAN XD ...i'll be seeing u when im older and when yo dead!.....have a nice day :D

  • Comment removed

  • OH...whore dare to seat in Russian air plane to travel?? Make survey to be fair

    - 90% that no body want or dare to sit in USSR shit to travel and spend their money to enjoy a trip

    - Other company witb bon voyage..but not Russie Pussie...kkkkk Those people in here try to hugh russian 's balls too much!

  • TU-??

    Tell Kim Junk Ill fly on it, I will bet with all of you MY LIFE that He dare not to sit on that air plane !! KKK and not gonna sit on any military airplane that made in Russian...kkk

  • concorde was genius....pure and simply

    interesting history the tu had though, red wikipedia :-)

  • concorde was genius....pure and simply

    PS tu 144s are owned by US and used for weather and recon

  • Tu-xx Russian piece of shit!

  • @CharlieDoan I just hate the way "Westerners" always try to discredit every Russian achievement. On any passenger aircraft other than Concorde a burst tyre would not rupture a fuel tank. They solved this problem afterwards by installing Kevlar linings in the fuel ranks. If there was no design flaw they would not have had to install these linings,so the Concorde wasnt perfect either.The Tu-144 wasnt a piece of shit.

  • @Lvieru96 Being that the Concorde was mostly of British design, of course it too was a POS.

  • @Lvieru96 No matter what Russian made fancy shit to serve for HUMAN are SHIT!

    They only made good Katyusha missles, 130mm Cannon are all things to DESTROY the world are very excellent!

    - Just ask the world to see How many deluxe cars of Russian TODAY can compete with Japanese, German...or even with Young industry South Korea ex: Huynday, Kia....

    - Russian's shit can not have a sit in anythings to serve people in the peace time !! Poor Russian

  • @CharlieDoan

    You are another troll who has no argument to come up against the fact that TU-144 is shit.Are you still in the 60's? You have nothing better to do?

    Just because you are western,doesent mean you have to discredit every russian achievement.

    Russia have the most reliable space vehicles today,so that is an achievement.Why are you talking about deluxe cars?Did you know Concorde wasnt safe too? That it has,structure,heating,wing,and radiation issues that the Tu-144 didnt have?

  • Fucking air plane breaking by itself Tu-144! This kind of model killed alot of their pilots and people! Fucking buy Boeing OK..Russian only good for fighting jet (maybe) but to serve the people are S U C K E D! for sure! nobody buy TU - bullshit

    - Only poor countries like Vietnam,Cuba, North Korea, Cambodia,Laos...former communist still using them (got no choice, got not enough dollars to buy Boeing!) - Poor communist brothers, Fuck Russian!

  • Comment removed

  • An ugly plane, not stable at low speeds, short range, every single flight had breakages, pilots had to wear oxygen masks, a landing parachute, two crashes in 70's with 7 dead pilots and so on - a nightmare aircraft. A pity Concorde's rival.

  • @Vad533

    It was actually longer than the concorde.

  • The engineers of the Concorde knew there was a design flaw in the plane from a previous incident. The skin around the fuel tanks was very-thin to keep weight down. In the previous incident a blown tire ruptured the skin and the tank, causing fuel to leak. The real cause of the crash - cheap engineering to keep the weight down, faulty cheaply made fuel valve which is the real cause of the crash.

    Bottom line, no new fighter planes or bombers were designed by Limeys or Froggies after 1975

  • @copilot7777 Who designed the Space Shuttle? Idiot.

    The Russians stole the concord design and the US stole jet and rocket technology from Europe.

    Read a history book thick head, and don't believe everything you see that comes out of Hollywood!

    Yes, Concord had some design flaws, as do many other aircraft, but it was ahead of it's time and a huge success.

    How many Boeings have crashed due to design flaws?

  • @freefallnut ...kkk Russian now NOT ENOUGH MONEY to continue space programs! PERIOD..

    NOT NEED TO SAY NO MORE!

    Chinese are taking 2nd place of super power of the world...Poor Russie pussie

  • @freefallnut Yes! it's true! but the Americans did not expect that the Soviet Union so quickly able to copy and improve the aircraft and make it much luchshe.Ya he watched a documentary film about this aircraft.

  • clearly, he did not choose well....

  • The Tu-144 actually had enough seating for the plane to be economically viable. The Concord only had one or two routes that were profitable for British Airways or Air France.

  • @blindandwatching - yeah, but in Soviet Russia, who had enough money or permission to travel to actually go anywhere in one of these?

  • Sad end of a bautiful jet. I like both, the Concorde and the TU 144.

  • yep it was a ledgend but i went on the concorde once ... anyways the concorde was a ledgend too

  • Can somebody tell me what happend in this video?! Sry, but i only see the Tu 144 is going down...

  • @beeroosterm You are right. I am British, English to be more specific. I also read the Wiki entry after you and watched the show down between the Mustang. I think the overwhelming conclusion was that the BMW was the better engineered car in terms of handling, steering, feel and speed and that the Mustang was great value for money, more fun and in my opinion prettier. I think its fair to say the the driver was a little biased towards the American car and why not, he's patriotic. but better???

  • @tom101177 top gear?

  • @Cathaydude well yes lol amongst other sources as well as having driven an M3, but its just a fact. i'm neither german nor a BMW driver and if it was my money I'd probably go for the Mustang because, shit! who doesn't want a Mustang! My favourite car is an old 60s Dodge Charger. Doesn't make it better engineered than say a Gullwing.

  • @tom101177 u like american cars just like hamster. (richard hammond)

  • "Tupolev" is not fortunate name for planes

  • The reason why they stop concorde was because the tickets was too expensive, and concorde was a very dangerous plane, who was supposed to land on certain runways

  • @HopeRanchFBS omfg what stupid people have youtube... read more for concorde and than commend for that..

  • One of the few times that the American Government made the right decision concerning a boondoggle was to cancel support for a supersonic transport for civilian use.

  • chuja widać

  • Este infortunado accidente aeronáutico ocurrió el domingo 3 de junio de 1973 en el marco del 30° Salón Internacional de Paris - aeropuerto de Le Bourget. Se cumplían 100 años del nacimiento del aviador Santos Dumont.

    El Concorde quien le precedió, despego a las 15:10' y el TUPOLEV 144 despego a las 15:21'.

    Dentro de las causa del accidente se manejan dos hipótesis: una cámara filmadora de la televisora TF1 y una modificación de los ingenieros en el sistema de estabilización automático.

  • although the concord lived longer but the Tu-144 is a legend

  • @marooojaro Yes - it's a legendary piece of shit!

  • @marooojaro A legend only in your own mind. The -144 was junk.

  • @marooojaro Concorde was built over a long period of time, and the Russian SST project was "rushed" to beat the Concorde to be the first commercial plane. Also, the Russian project when made didn't have tests for stress, fires or anything to see if it was even flight-worthy. It just flew. Concorde went through safety assessments, time and research which is how it got to the real only Commercial SST. No effort was made to make the TU-144 safe. The video shows it breaking up after too much stress.

  • @marooojaro According to whom?

  • @marooojaro both are.

  • my country is better 

  • Why don't you guys leave the planes out of the "my country's better" penis sizing.. All of you..

  • @texNoz yes, stuck that piece of shit TU-144 in Lenin's ass would you! former productions of USSR, former fucking communist to poor my country : VIETNAM!

    - FUCK RUSSIAN

  • @texNoz Yeah... especially this plane. LOL!

  • I think, everything, Russia has the most perfect aviation and space technologies. It is the fact. By the way, Tu-144 has made the first flight earlier, than Concorde. And these two planes absolutely different technically. Stupid trolls are rather amusing

  • @Mad69sur both aircraft were feets of enginering, its just a shame that jue to cost or watever, wer stuck with the fat american jumbo.........

  • @jema2009 ¿De que vas?

  • Тушку делали в спешке чтобы доказать что мы и в этом круче всех. А Конкорд делали чтобы возить жирных буржуев в Нью Йорк и обратно и не дай бог не уронить. Поэтому тушка получилась с тормозными парашутами, меньшей дальностью и кучей глюков а Конкорд оказался вполне жизнеспособным транспортом. Амеры в это время строили большую экономичную дозвуковую джумбу и не мудрили. Возить пасажиров на сверхзвуке это все равно что мотоцикл-такси.

  • ""Tu-144 can transport more passengers..""

    I thought Concord was bigger

  • @miamad

    you pathetic

  • @miamad Concorde, or should we name it "McTupolev" or "O'Tupolev" since it was made after Tu-144, have killed far more passengers.

  • @miamad пошёл ты на хуй, буржуйский пидор.Встретил бы-уебал бы тебя, суку.Членососина ебучая.

  • @miamad retard

  • @OhMaiLanta

    Don't be a dickhead. I hate these russian stereotypes. These people created the first commercial supersonic plane, and you are saying the pilots crashed it because the got drunk "of vodka". At least say it right douchebag.