The Tu-144 was a great achievement for the USSR but it was still inferior to the Concorde and according to the very engineers that were in charge of the program, the USSR was 15 years behind on the technology needed to make the plane a success. That's what your country gets for being commie assholes and shutting itself off from Europe and the USA after we saved your asses in WWII.
What are you talking about here? I have an opinion that geography lessons at school, they study the globe the United States. They are the square roots are calculated with difficulty (if at all know what that is). I'm not talking about everyone, but those out there Most of. A propaganda of the so-called brain do they have to bear. One channel Discovery which is worth.You looked at them news.The announcers do such nonsense are not themselves aware of it.
A single, just one, kolesov turbine from the USSR was more efficient, powerful, and stable than any whitney, lockheed associated, or turbo-union turbine system (2 +, compared to just one russian turbine!).
Being built in the time it was, it would just be a hair slower than an F-22 raptor with afterburners... Just unreal and at an echelon like no other.
@tr4nscend The Kolesov was a highly inefficient engine, with massive fuel consumption, which had to use the afterburner to maintain supersonic speeds. The TU had a shorter range than Concorde, was uglier, noiser and less efficient. In the end, the Tupolev was a failure, whereas Concorde gave decades of service, and is world-famous. Everyone has heard of Concorde... only aircraft enthusiasts will have heard of the tu-144.
@2491cc Nt at all. Actually 144 was using different type of engines. They fixed all the problems. Like only the prototype was not able to cruse supersonic without afterburner. And the last one in the 90s TU-14LL was useing TU-160s engines!
With respect Sir I am not naive but completely capable of drawing conclusions from the facts. Your argument lacks credibility as it bases greatness on that which was unachieved. I suggest you keep the discussion to the real facts. Concorde performed reliably in service & exceeded design specification. I am sure that if the Tu-144 had done the same the Russian government would have kept it in service - but this we'll never know. Judge products on what they did, not their design intent.
@xlmp96 Facts: CCCP was not a wealthy place. As it was possible to keep a SST in the air in England or France, in CCCP it was not. Socialist economy is totally different. Prices kept artificially low. like a ticket to a TU-144 was 68 rubel. To a normal passenger craft it was something like 40. up to the destination. America also stopped their SST program on economic reasons, combined with the "sonic boom". problem. For France and England Concorde was not a simple plane. It was propaganda.
@Modellpecs Facts: First TU-144 was without wing stabilizer since they didn't know that they will need them, only later research found that wing design wasn't good and needed improvements in low speed flight so they made those wings. Also Concorde can cruise at Mach 2.0 without afterburners, afterburners are only used as acceleration boost. At Mach 2.0 speed, it had the most efficient jet engine in the world, even now it's still state of the art.
@Triglavus Where did you read this? Not true. The canards of Tu-144 was the most advanced of its time. The reason the prototype did no have them is, the fact that it was not developed yet. Tu-144 can cruise without afterburner even faster than Concorde. True that the prototype was rushed to air, but tell me witch prototype not.... The later types became totally different. Like the original beetle and the new one. I think you don't know much about TU-144... Your post is more like a feeling...
@Modellpecs Ok I can now see where you got those informations. Wikipedia isn't the best source of this kind of informations. Canards may be most advanced at its time, but Concord didn't need one. It was using fly-by-wire which is technology that was far superior than entire technology that TU used. If you haven't seen the "crashed" paris air show video, you should check it. It is clear that Concorde even without canards, had much superior maneuverability.
@Triglavus I don't think so. I saw the video. There is a rumor that TU-144 went down because it tried to avoid collision with a mirage, that was taking pictures of the canards. But why are you doing this? I mean you don't know this plane, you just read something, that could be even false. Than the next moment you refer to it. Yes wikipedia is..... We write wikipedia.... Read a bit more, than come back. You might be able to come up with something interesting. This is not. We are over this...
@Modellpecs I was not talking about the Mirage fighter accident when it went down. I was talking about the show itself. Concorde went first and did couple of turns very fast and very smooth. Then went TU and tried to do the same, but it wasn't that smooth, they went off course. I know TU, I know Concorde. Another false argument is that TU can cruise at 2.3 mach without afterburners. In fact without afterburners it got same performance as Concrode, around mach 2.
@Modellpecs Another thing is, I don't understand why are you bashing on greatest piece of engineering that human beings made? TU was great, but the fact is that Concorde was better. I like TU as well as I like Concorde but you can't ignore fact that Concorde operated 27 years without major problems like TU did. 2000 accident was just too many factors combined together and chances of that happening were almost none.
@Triglavus 2000? :D What do you mean? actually one 144 went down. Eve if it was pilot error, you can't blame the aircraft. There was also a crash landing. But! You say 144 had many problems. True. Just like all other planes. Just like Concorde. Like lower and upper rudder controll surface separation, hidraulic failures, landing gear problems, the same thing that made Concorde go down happened many times, but the plane was lucky. Once there was a hole big like a head! Concorde was not better.
@Modellpecs The biggest problem of TU was that they rushed it into air and wanted to be first. Same goes with first commercial use. Concorde had much more testing time than TU and that is what resulted into superb safety of Concorde. Only reason why NASA chosen TU as testing plane is that BA and AF had Concorde in service when NASA launched program and even now, out of service, BA and FA refuse even to sell planes.
The Russian build many amazing things consider how little resource and funding they have.. and for that I respect and love their technology. For example the Ak-47 a legend of all today guns. the Mig-29 - The Spunik - The EKRANOPLAN - The T34 - Mi 24 - Mi-6 etc etc there are still a lot more that i cant think of right now, but from these achievement one could see that the Russian scientists and engineers are very clever and brilliant in their work.
@MrSovjetunion hahaha... the Tu-144 was a piece of shit. It never made money and cost the USSR billions while you suckers were standing in bread lines. The Concorde made more money than the TU-144 and it still didn't do that great financially, but it had 100s more flights. The USA could have built an SST but the planes are just not economical and they can't even go Supersonic over the continental USA anyway. When Russia builds a plane to go up against the SR-71 you can brag. Until then just STFU
@telemetry9 What space shuttle? The Buran only had ONE flight, while the US space shuttle had 30 years of service and 135 flights from our shuttle program.
@mattmatt115 you comment makes me laugh. China invented gun powder and the missile and it was Nazi Germany that invented the flying wing. USA only went supersonic after conning secrets from Britain's research program and only managed to get into space with the help of Nazi scientist Wernher von Braun. If you are going to make comments, at least go to the bother of doing some research first.
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Aaaaaa a copy of Concord! :D Just kiding.... :D I did not know that. My point of interest was TU-144. That I read about a lot! :) But now, just started to focus my attention on the American efforts on building SST. Specially because of their new plans. Boing have used TU-144 for tests in the 90s-s and as I know they still planning to build a brand new SST! Can't wait to see!
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Hey! It seams that L2000 has nothing to do with Concord...? At least I was not able to find any information on that. As the video says "form follows function".... :)
Hey, a Russian bullet will kill you just as dead as an American bullet. But it doesn't really matter who copied who, all that seems relevant is that ALL have the capacity to kill and destroy one another, instead of cooperating and growing. It's no wonder we haven't ventured out into the stars yet, let alone set foot on mars or returned to the moon. Pretty sad... I think modern technology has made us turn inwards rather than look out at the universe where we belong.
@mattmatt114 you are a fucking idiot the russians spied on the development of the concorde and figured it was a good idea and got in a rush to produce the tu144 before the concorde entered service. The russians STOLE THE IDEA FROM AMERICA AND BRITAIN. get over it you must be one of ZEM damned russians.
@beastinRUSSOMANNO False. Actually France and Britain wanted to know more about TU-144. Specially the "ears" of the TU-144. :) It was the most advanced of its time. Just as other systems also. One thing is sure. Bough side wanted to know what the other is doing. Also America! And they did. But it does not means much.... It is normal, even today! If you decide to build a car you need wheels. An engine, steering wheel, sears, etc... If you want a sport car like TU-144 you nead the wing design, etc
@Modellpecs see now i am actually talking yo someone reasonable. true france and britain wanted to know about the ears of the tu144 but the concorde was in testing when they were researching on the tu144s ears. and about america the point i am trying to get through is that america was the first one who thought of super sonic travel not the russians like most people are saying
@beastinRUSSOMANNO That could be true. I don't know much about americas projects and plans. Onley that: Too bad they did not finish their planes. My favourite was Lockheed L-2000! beautiful! :)
@Modellpecs the lockheed L2000 (concorde) was finished and was retired in 2003 after one hit debris on the runway and exploded in mid air. and EVERYBODY IT SAYS IN THE VIDEO THAT THE CONCORDE CAME FIRST AT 0:17
@Tigadee00 if the russians copied that means they are too damn lazy to do it them self they have to copy someont to produce a plane what a bunch of dougche bags
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Copying is also the fastest, cheapest and easiest and in those ways, the smartest way to attain equality, especially if you can get away with it. How many movies and songs have you downloaded? Or converted to MP3 or AVI? Whether we like it or not, at least the Russians had balls for doing it and getting away with it. Do you think British Aerospace sued them? Doubt it.... Russkies probably just sad, "Vat? Me vorry?"
@JhonnnyTapia As far as I know there was a Russian plane called Moskalev SAM 7 and it was built in 1936! But you are talking about flying wing jets, and you are saying that America made the first. False. Also... Germans made the first flying wing jet. It is called the Gotha go. Me-163 was also a flying wing. You must be a typical American.... They think that America have invented the world.... It is true that America have bombed the world, but that leads to nowhere.. Might be to terrorism....
@JhonnnyTapia First of all Nether Gotha go or ME-163 are bombers. But Ar E.555 was planned to. (I do not know MFS3.) B-70 and expecially SR71 have nothing to do with TU-144. Also SR-71 is not the fastest plane... What superiority are you talking about? America have used German plans and technology in the begining of the jet age. Also German scientists. American aviators also admit that Russian fighters manoeuvreibility like SU-37 is better than any american... Please get back to TU-144.
@JhonnnyTapia Nothing..... :D It is quite clear to me that you are kind of "religious" on this. I say white, u say black.... Leads nowhere. If it makes you feel good to believe, than i wold not destroy this.... ;) Also, it is not important in a TU-144 topic that SU-37 or SU-33 etc. is far more manoeuvrable than that Dinosaur you mentioned... ;) :D
@JhonnnyTapia No. I do not. :) Aldough I did fly small airplanes but that is totally different... In this situation a demonstration video is just enough. (SU-33 is not a prototype, but fain than SU-27... ;) ) Also Military pilots are saying this. Even Americans that I have met. But please Let us get back to TU-144...
@NeverTrustMedia T4 was a bit later. Roughly 4 years. But! T4 uses the same wing design as Tu-144. T-4 is usually told to be a "copy" of the beautiful Valkyrie, but that is not true also. For the same reason; T-4 is much more like Tu-144. So it was their own design. Tu-160 was also designed following the path of Tu-144. So we could say Tu-144 was a pioneer, developing military bombers. This is the point I came to. Could be that Tu-144 was originaly a military aircraft. (This is just a concept.)
its always an amusement to read the comments on youtube where people are just throwing words back and forth and getting pissed, discussing things they (usually) know noting about! of course some of these guys really know their stuff. :D
Having stolen & copied Concorde they succeeded in producing one of the most unreliable aircraft the world has ever seen, that only ever flew 55 scheduled passenger services !
@nealsym49 What your saying is nonsence. If it is a copy, than why is not alike at all? Please answer this. Not even the size of it is the same. Tu-144 is bigger than Concord.... Never right down something that you are not sure of. One thing is true. it did around 50 scheduled passenger flight. But! Non of them went down! Not even one passenger was injured or hurt! So if you are looking at this fact, than it was the safest SST ever. ;) :D Of course this is a bit .misleading. Just like yours.. ;)
@nealsym49 And as Concords fuselage width is 2,87m, Tu-144s is 3,5m. It allows it to have a extra line of seats, it means 150 passengers on board, compared to 108. I think it is not that small difference by itself.
When I was a kid vack into USSR I remember seeing these birts in Domodedovo Airport, they serve regular root from Moscow to Almaata(currently Kazakhstan)
@Modellpecs Obviously you do not know very much about the three competing supersonic transport programs that was going on during this time. The Soviets engaged in a great deal of espionage stolen from the Concorde program which if they had not stolen a considerable amount of information would not have been able to produce the Tu-144. Despite this the Tu-144 had a number of serious problems being it was rushed into service. The Concorde was much better and Boeing's SST had it been (continued)
@MrBEB123 Your reasons are more like concepts than facts. 144 was bigger faster, had more advanced aerodinamics, and it was the first. Thies are facts. Also had better engine placement. Like if Concord had the same engine layout, than it could have landed. (This is also a concept like yours, but built on facts.) Please tell me, what did they steal, and than why did they built a totally different aircraft? If you know airplanes only a bit, than you have noticed this for sure. If you haven't....
@Modellpecs The Tu-144 was bigger and faster but that's it. Aerodinamically the Concorde was superior, especially concerning the wing design. That's why the Tu-144 had those canards in order to compensate for the highly inefficent wing design that it had compared to the Concorde. Not to mention the fact that the Tu-144 was notoriously unreliable which resulted in it being grounded quite frequently. Retirement after 3 years service are signs of a very unwanted aircraft
@aspiringdrummer17 Tu-144 had the most advanced canards of its time. I think you have heard the story that a Mirages mission was to take in flight pictures about it. The fact that Concorde did not have this does not means that it did not need it. Like if it had such a system, might be never crash. Also the wing design was so good that thy used it on other planes also. 144 landing speed was slightly faster, but... So what? Like some Airbuses and Boings, etc... Different landing speeds there too.
@Modellpecs These are all 'top trump' facts that don't mean anything unless the product can do what it was designed to do. Concorde had a sucessful service career that in the latter years with BA turned it into profit. The Tu-144 was not a successful product in transporting people at SST speeds, nor did not show sustained, in-service reliability. It can be the fastest, first, most powerful, largest capacity plane in the world but if it doesn't translate into a working product whats the point?
@xlmp96 Well you will never know. Because it was not used as wildly as Concorde. They did not use it because of economic reasons. (Like Concorde later) The planes quality have nothing to do with this. And also, because it was not used wildly, you will newer know if it was reliable or not. Comparing to other Tupoljev passenger aircrafts, it was for sure. (Sure this is a concept. but is a well built.) I think you should forget the western propaganda, an begin to see clear.
@Modellpecs Well I dont know a lot about planes. You wanted to know what they stole ? Try this "Sergei Pavlov, was arrested with multiple accusing documents in his possession". The Delta wing wasnt a concept used by soviets. Heres details stating soviets stole entire blue prints w w w bbc co uk/dna/h2g2/A2818640 . Its alleged French fed false info. Would explain why Konkordski crashed so often ( 5 versions it took for them to get it right ). The engines were inferior hence 2 heavy for wings.
@Dookiedolf It could be that they stoled the "blueprints". That time everyone was spying the other. Don't be surprised, America, England, and France also! But here comes the important part: They did not use it. Just wanted to know what the others are doing. The best proof of this is Tu-144 itself. It is a totally different plane. Different in size, structure, wing design, engines, engine layout, landing gears, nose, canards, flight systems, etc, etc, etc.
@Dookiedolf Yes the French made blueprints of a flawed wing design that to thier surprise were virtually identical the wing design of the Tu-144 as they found out at the Paris Air Show. These blueprints were of course stolen and everyone suspected it to be the Russians. I suppose that confirmed their suspicions. Not to mention it was retired after just 3 years in service due to it being notoriously unreliable. Spent most of its time on the ground
@aspiringdrummer17 How do you know? It is just a could war propaganda. I am sure that there was soviet spys in france. It is also possible that they did steal the blueprints. (Some say all, some say the wingdesign, some say wild things like french knew this and gave faulty plans. What did they think? Are soviet engineers kids?" :D..) But the fact is that TU-144 had its own wing design. They even modified a Mig-21 to test it. Also another plane used almost the same wing design. It was the Stoka.
@Modellpecs It just seems funny to me (and rather convenient) that the wing design of the Tu-144 was virtually idenctical to the stolen blueprints. I'm not saying that the Soviet/Russian designers are incapable of thinking for themselves because some of my favourite aircraft, both military and civilian, are Russian and I think that in some areas, Russian aviation pushes the boundaries more so than anyone else.
@aspiringdrummer17 Did you see the blueprints? :) Why is it suspicious? Because there are people, who does not know much about airplanes. Only thing they see that "it has wings, 4 engines, 3 point landing gears like the other, so it is the same".... Than came the idea; Hmmmm... Is it a copy? Of course not! But the thing is, that they are exceed in number... Also there was a strong propaganda on bough side, so what would a regular people that did not look after think? That he heared the most...
@MultiMinigun Also think that 144 was better in a way. Not all parameters, but if you look at all parameters, together, and also the possibilities it had, than i think it had a great potential, more than Concorde ever had. ;)
@aeroplaceNET Well, spying was present on bough sides. True. But i think bough sides had their own paths. What made them do the similar designs is the could war. Oh the other side have this. Let's make something that is better... ;) Is it? Unreliable? The trough is that we will newer know the trough.... It should have accomplished much more passenger flights. But one thing is a fact. It never crashed with passengers on board.
@Modellpecs im afraid you are wrong and probably russian. im an aeronautical engineer and I can tell you that concorde could pull and withdtand much tighter turns; one of the tu-144 fell to pieces because a tight turn ripped apart the weak airframe. the tu-144 has canards because it was unstable in take off and landing and the wings by them selves failed to generate sufficient lift and control. the tu-144 uses a chute to slow it down whereas concorde doesnt due to more advanced brakes and tires.
@MrWoodoop the tu-144 has thick wings with a big lift area. like all russian aircraft (3+ gen) are bulit with about 10 to 25% ti, 1 to 10% iron and the rest AL new aircraft are incorperadeted with conposisit matrieal mostly carbon fiber like the su-35bm and t-50.
there wheel brakes are strong. like the su-33,27 and mig-29 ect... can hold there ground with full afterburner say that this birds brakes are weak is moot. chute are used becouse they can and so they can get off runway fast
@Starr8492DS concorde had a landing distance of 2200 metres and the tu-144 was 2750 metres. they fitted chutes so it could land airports. the canards were fitted because it took too long to take off and was going entirely too fact on approach.
@MrWoodoop If you really are, than you should know. Actually it was not a turn. It was a dive straight down. than the pilot pulled much more g that any passenger plane could take. Its canards was them most advanced of its time. Which type are you talking about? It is important. Also the landing gear is way better on the 144. At least it would newer make the plane go down... Also it was planned to fit thrust reversers but development was stopped. Instable? Not at all. I am not russian.
@Modellpecs Shut up, you ignorant fool. You and your acolytes know nothing of the facts and do nothing but spew propaganda your government feeds you. Join the 21st century and do one hour's worth of research on this piece of shit. Discover what it really was - and why the remaining -144's rot in parking lots. They were poorly designed, poorly built aircraft that were in constant danger of falling from the sky.
@beeroosterm :D While i was reasoning, yo wrote bad words. I give you facts, you wrote about your feelings. I always try to be neutral. But it makes me a bit angry when people don't know what they are talking about, especially in a situation like this. 144 deserves much more. Just like TU-154 etc... like 154 was one of the safest planes on the planet, it is still safer than some Boings, and almost everyone think that it was a coffin because of western propaganda.
@Modellpecs Your "reasoning" and "facts" were anything but. The -144 was not a dismal failure and a death trap due to "Western propaganda" - it failed miserably on its own - to the point that even Russian propagandists could not make it function as a propaganda machine. It was there for all to see - it was not merely a concept to deny. It was a coffin for several people and it was a miracle that it wasn't for many, many more before the government shut the program down
@beeroosterm That is your opinion. I say, it was the same for Concorde. Concorde had just as many problems. Concorde was also a failure in the same way. The difference between them is that 144 was meant to serve in the CCCP. If you have lived, in a socialist country, you would clearly see the point. The prices are kept artificially low. The ticket price was a fraction of the price of foreign. Etc etc. In this conditions, you could not keep a SST in service. Not only 144, but Concorde also!
@Modellpecs Of course it's "my opinion", you twerp! Would you like me to give you someone else's? What a fatuous remark. My opinion is based on facts - not wishful thinking. And your "logic" about ticket pricing has nothing to do with the quality of the aircraft. Have another vodka, comrade...
@beeroosterm Tell me that fact. pls. I already know your feelings. ;) Prices have nothing to do with the aircraft? Are you kidding? (Sorry. You are a kid...) If there is like half of the $ you need to maintain the plane? What than? Try to think pls...
@Modellpecs made would have been far and away better than the Concorde. The Tu-144 was not only not the best it was the worst even with stolen technology which the Soviets have done more than a few times including atomic weapons, the B-29, the 727 and numerous other stolen data and technology from western countries. Also the Tu-144 was not in service very long because besides having problems such as vibration it was also a commercial failure. Better luck on your next opinion.
Actually it was bigger faster, had more advanced aerodynamics, and very important, it was the first. ;) But as they found with Concord also, that it is not economical, they retired it. That was also the reason why Americans stopped the development. France and England had lots of effort to keep Concord artificially in service, but finally gave it up also. The reason why soviets give it up so soon was that the different between the countryes. In Soviet union noone could afford to travel with...
the concord hit the design table long before russia stole the designs and made this high tech garbage can that was rushed through the build stage just to fly before the west who was in no race to get into the air. the only original invention russia ever had was inter family rape, thats why there is very little DNA in the russian gene pool!
The first Tu-144 prototype was completely different from the later production version that most people see.
The engine nacelles were moved, the landing gear was relocated from the wings to the nacelles, the wing design was altered to a dual delta and small horzontal stabilizers were added to the front. It essentially was a brand new plane.
@rickcain2320 And yet it was still a POS. And those "horizontal stabilizers" were canards; they vibrated terribly and were added to slightly lower the landing speed. Junk.
@mrjkt123 Was not a copy. It is a totally different plane.
Modellpecs 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a pretty good plane considering it was built by commie retards.. it was actually a fail piece of shit.
coldfarted 2 months ago
Comment removed
coldfarted 2 months ago
The Tu-144 was a great achievement for the USSR but it was still inferior to the Concorde and according to the very engineers that were in charge of the program, the USSR was 15 years behind on the technology needed to make the plane a success. That's what your country gets for being commie assholes and shutting itself off from Europe and the USA after we saved your asses in WWII.
coldfarted 2 months ago
@coldfarted And they stole this tech fromt he concorde
ddioppp 2 months ago
NATO designations seem to be named by people who appreciate the aircraft, because they're so cool sounding.
seans63lemansSD 3 months ago
Its just a elegant flying ladie.
SuperCookiemonser 3 months ago
i hate russia copying peole and how many times did the west get stud up because usa did it all the time
USAmilitarypower 3 months ago
@USAmilitarypower Idiot, the TU-144 was BEFORE the concorde
spanish111japan 3 months ago
@spanish111japan HMM did i say it wasn't and pleas watch the first 20 seconds and listen to what it says!
USAmilitarypower 3 months ago
@USAmilitarypower American excuses
spanish111japan 3 months ago
gay USA is the best
laetrille 4 months ago
The canards weren't used on the first flight? Or were they added later?
TheBerkeleyGang 4 months ago
@TheBerkeleyGang The prototype did not have canards. It was a totally different plane. ;)
Modellpecs 4 months ago
What are you talking about here? I have an opinion that geography lessons at school, they study the globe the United States. They are the square roots are calculated with difficulty (if at all know what that is). I'm not talking about everyone, but those out there Most of. A propaganda of the so-called brain do they have to bear. One channel Discovery which is worth.You looked at them news.The announcers do such nonsense are not themselves aware of it.
omskpravo55 4 months ago
hahaha look its concords ugly brother
ragasdapper 4 months ago
santa I want this plane.. for real
TheRommelv 4 months ago
What is the jet flying backround when Tu is landing?
HerraOhjaaja 5 months ago
@HerraOhjaaja MiG-21
dukisu 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The aerodynamics were not better. Concorde didn't need those mini wings.
AndrewMcCheyne 5 months ago
The aerodynamics were not better. Concorde didn't need those mini wings.
AndrewMcCheyne 5 months ago
Concorde Copy?To put it simple is it like if you copy you buddy test and finish first with better grade...
TakumiFujiwara80 5 months ago
A single, just one, kolesov turbine from the USSR was more efficient, powerful, and stable than any whitney, lockheed associated, or turbo-union turbine system (2 +, compared to just one russian turbine!).
Being built in the time it was, it would just be a hair slower than an F-22 raptor with afterburners... Just unreal and at an echelon like no other.
1968.. .versus 2005.
tr4nscend 6 months ago
@tr4nscend The Kolesov was a highly inefficient engine, with massive fuel consumption, which had to use the afterburner to maintain supersonic speeds. The TU had a shorter range than Concorde, was uglier, noiser and less efficient. In the end, the Tupolev was a failure, whereas Concorde gave decades of service, and is world-famous. Everyone has heard of Concorde... only aircraft enthusiasts will have heard of the tu-144.
2491cc 5 months ago
@2491cc Nt at all. Actually 144 was using different type of engines. They fixed all the problems. Like only the prototype was not able to cruse supersonic without afterburner. And the last one in the 90s TU-14LL was useing TU-160s engines!
Modellpecs 5 months ago
yeah! except the tu-144 was an epic fail of an SST! sorry guys..
xDaNiEldrummerx 6 months ago
@xDaNiEldrummerx Don't say sorry. It is your opinion. You are free to be blind. ;)
Modellpecs 6 months ago
With respect Sir I am not naive but completely capable of drawing conclusions from the facts. Your argument lacks credibility as it bases greatness on that which was unachieved. I suggest you keep the discussion to the real facts. Concorde performed reliably in service & exceeded design specification. I am sure that if the Tu-144 had done the same the Russian government would have kept it in service - but this we'll never know. Judge products on what they did, not their design intent.
xlmp96 7 months ago
@xlmp96 Facts: CCCP was not a wealthy place. As it was possible to keep a SST in the air in England or France, in CCCP it was not. Socialist economy is totally different. Prices kept artificially low. like a ticket to a TU-144 was 68 rubel. To a normal passenger craft it was something like 40. up to the destination. America also stopped their SST program on economic reasons, combined with the "sonic boom". problem. For France and England Concorde was not a simple plane. It was propaganda.
Modellpecs 7 months ago
@Modellpecs Facts: First TU-144 was without wing stabilizer since they didn't know that they will need them, only later research found that wing design wasn't good and needed improvements in low speed flight so they made those wings. Also Concorde can cruise at Mach 2.0 without afterburners, afterburners are only used as acceleration boost. At Mach 2.0 speed, it had the most efficient jet engine in the world, even now it's still state of the art.
Triglavus 6 months ago
@Triglavus Where did you read this? Not true. The canards of Tu-144 was the most advanced of its time. The reason the prototype did no have them is, the fact that it was not developed yet. Tu-144 can cruise without afterburner even faster than Concorde. True that the prototype was rushed to air, but tell me witch prototype not.... The later types became totally different. Like the original beetle and the new one. I think you don't know much about TU-144... Your post is more like a feeling...
Modellpecs 6 months ago
@Modellpecs Ok I can now see where you got those informations. Wikipedia isn't the best source of this kind of informations. Canards may be most advanced at its time, but Concord didn't need one. It was using fly-by-wire which is technology that was far superior than entire technology that TU used. If you haven't seen the "crashed" paris air show video, you should check it. It is clear that Concorde even without canards, had much superior maneuverability.
Triglavus 6 months ago
@Triglavus I don't think so. I saw the video. There is a rumor that TU-144 went down because it tried to avoid collision with a mirage, that was taking pictures of the canards. But why are you doing this? I mean you don't know this plane, you just read something, that could be even false. Than the next moment you refer to it. Yes wikipedia is..... We write wikipedia.... Read a bit more, than come back. You might be able to come up with something interesting. This is not. We are over this...
Modellpecs 6 months ago
@Modellpecs I was not talking about the Mirage fighter accident when it went down. I was talking about the show itself. Concorde went first and did couple of turns very fast and very smooth. Then went TU and tried to do the same, but it wasn't that smooth, they went off course. I know TU, I know Concorde. Another false argument is that TU can cruise at 2.3 mach without afterburners. In fact without afterburners it got same performance as Concrode, around mach 2.
Triglavus 6 months ago
@Modellpecs Another thing is, I don't understand why are you bashing on greatest piece of engineering that human beings made? TU was great, but the fact is that Concorde was better. I like TU as well as I like Concorde but you can't ignore fact that Concorde operated 27 years without major problems like TU did. 2000 accident was just too many factors combined together and chances of that happening were almost none.
Triglavus 6 months ago
@Triglavus 2000? :D What do you mean? actually one 144 went down. Eve if it was pilot error, you can't blame the aircraft. There was also a crash landing. But! You say 144 had many problems. True. Just like all other planes. Just like Concorde. Like lower and upper rudder controll surface separation, hidraulic failures, landing gear problems, the same thing that made Concorde go down happened many times, but the plane was lucky. Once there was a hole big like a head! Concorde was not better.
Modellpecs 6 months ago
@Modellpecs The biggest problem of TU was that they rushed it into air and wanted to be first. Same goes with first commercial use. Concorde had much more testing time than TU and that is what resulted into superb safety of Concorde. Only reason why NASA chosen TU as testing plane is that BA and AF had Concorde in service when NASA launched program and even now, out of service, BA and FA refuse even to sell planes.
Triglavus 6 months ago
"120 Aircraft bearing his initials" Imagine that as a legacy.
Orangebike666 7 months ago
es lebe die udssr
ollenhauer1 7 months ago
The Russian build many amazing things consider how little resource and funding they have.. and for that I respect and love their technology. For example the Ak-47 a legend of all today guns. the Mig-29 - The Spunik - The EKRANOPLAN - The T34 - Mi 24 - Mi-6 etc etc there are still a lot more that i cant think of right now, but from these achievement one could see that the Russian scientists and engineers are very clever and brilliant in their work.
zero00tolerance 7 months ago
udssr have make,stalin ,cruschow
ollenhauer1 7 months ago
I love Russian technology. Superior rocket motors that are now used by Nasa and a far better space shuttle.
Just a couple of examples. Russia is a great country with great people. They deserve peace and happiness.
telemetry9 7 months ago 6
@telemetry9
Russian technology is the best ever !
MrSovjetunion 7 months ago 18
@MrSovjetunion that why they are always behind!!!
USAmilitarypower 3 months ago
@MrSovjetunion hahaha... the Tu-144 was a piece of shit. It never made money and cost the USSR billions while you suckers were standing in bread lines. The Concorde made more money than the TU-144 and it still didn't do that great financially, but it had 100s more flights. The USA could have built an SST but the planes are just not economical and they can't even go Supersonic over the continental USA anyway. When Russia builds a plane to go up against the SR-71 you can brag. Until then just STFU
coldfarted 2 months ago
@telemetry9 What space shuttle? The Buran only had ONE flight, while the US space shuttle had 30 years of service and 135 flights from our shuttle program.
coldfarted 2 months ago
@telemetry9 the russian space shuttle was a fail. you are a stupid nationalistic piece of shit
ddioppp 2 months ago
@telemetry9 all Russia is good for is the Ukrainian whores
coldfarted 2 months ago
This is secret russian space-shuttle :) .. Plane of new generation
crocolea 8 months ago
no true supersonic cruise with the tu144 - only basic afterburners to reach mach and sustain supersonic flight.
concorde used ramps to provide thrust - 67% of which was without fuel burn. A very different method to the tu144.
The two aircraft are very different and concorde was far superior in every way. The front avions of the tu144 are the only improvement over concorde.
telemetry9 8 months ago
@telemetry9 I think you don't know much about Tu-144. It could cruise supersonic without afterburner. It is true that they are different.
Modellpecs 8 months ago
@telemetry9 Besides, a passenger aircraft with friggin afterburners is awesome.
shinra18 7 months ago
lol....that's true.
telemetry9 7 months ago
I like more the design of the tupolev which is more sharp, impressive and agressive, the concorde looked more friendly. ^^
TerminatorFRA 8 months ago
@modellpecs when i say that the l2000 is the concorde i mean it is nearly the same thing
beastinRUSSOMANNO 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mattmatt115 you comment makes me laugh. China invented gun powder and the missile and it was Nazi Germany that invented the flying wing. USA only went supersonic after conning secrets from Britain's research program and only managed to get into space with the help of Nazi scientist Wernher von Braun. If you are going to make comments, at least go to the bother of doing some research first.
allyp73 9 months ago
Comment removed
allyp73 9 months ago
@Modellpecs the L2000I was an upgraded version of the concorde which was canceled the normal L2000 is known as the concorde
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Aaaaaa a copy of Concord! :D Just kiding.... :D I did not know that. My point of interest was TU-144. That I read about a lot! :) But now, just started to focus my attention on the American efforts on building SST. Specially because of their new plans. Boing have used TU-144 for tests in the 90s-s and as I know they still planning to build a brand new SST! Can't wait to see!
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Hey! It seams that L2000 has nothing to do with Concord...? At least I was not able to find any information on that. As the video says "form follows function".... :)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs look up eat da poo poo youll laugh your ass off
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@Modellpecs ithe L2000 is also known as the concorde it flew until 2003
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@Modellpecs the concorde's(L2000) last flight is also known as the AIR FRANCE FLIGHT 4590
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@Modellpecs I like talking to you because you are actually reasonable unlike the other bastards where you can't talk any sense into them
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Well, lots of the posts are more like feelings than facts, or reasoning. ;)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
Hey, a Russian bullet will kill you just as dead as an American bullet. But it doesn't really matter who copied who, all that seems relevant is that ALL have the capacity to kill and destroy one another, instead of cooperating and growing. It's no wonder we haven't ventured out into the stars yet, let alone set foot on mars or returned to the moon. Pretty sad... I think modern technology has made us turn inwards rather than look out at the universe where we belong.
Tigadee00 9 months ago
@mike31 jmb I completely agree but the USA and the UK started super sonic travel first with the concorde and the russians copied
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
the russians deserve to die
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@mattmatt115 again. there is also a reason why the tu 144 is called the concordski THEY COPIED THE CONCORDE
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@mattmatt114 you are a fucking idiot the russians spied on the development of the concorde and figured it was a good idea and got in a rush to produce the tu144 before the concorde entered service. The russians STOLE THE IDEA FROM AMERICA AND BRITAIN. get over it you must be one of ZEM damned russians.
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO False. Actually France and Britain wanted to know more about TU-144. Specially the "ears" of the TU-144. :) It was the most advanced of its time. Just as other systems also. One thing is sure. Bough side wanted to know what the other is doing. Also America! And they did. But it does not means much.... It is normal, even today! If you decide to build a car you need wheels. An engine, steering wheel, sears, etc... If you want a sport car like TU-144 you nead the wing design, etc
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs see now i am actually talking yo someone reasonable. true france and britain wanted to know about the ears of the tu144 but the concorde was in testing when they were researching on the tu144s ears. and about america the point i am trying to get through is that america was the first one who thought of super sonic travel not the russians like most people are saying
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO That could be true. I don't know much about americas projects and plans. Onley that: Too bad they did not finish their planes. My favourite was Lockheed L-2000! beautiful! :)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs the lockheed L2000 (concorde) was finished and was retired in 2003 after one hit debris on the runway and exploded in mid air. and EVERYBODY IT SAYS IN THE VIDEO THAT THE CONCORDE CAME FIRST AT 0:17
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Is there a video about lockheed L2000 flying? I think it was never finished.
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs it was finished look up the air france concorde explosion that was its final flight
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO STOLE THE IDEA FROM FRANCE AND BRITAIN*
baptiste98 8 months ago
@baptiste98 I tought that the birds had the idea to fly first.... :)
Might be I'am wrong... there was that prehistoric "megadododron" or something...
Ok... Birds are cheaters. They stole the idea! ;)
Modellpecs 8 months ago 3
Typical western propaganda, this plane flew first it's not a copy.
bombarderoazul 9 months ago
Awesome airplane!
kuluku 9 months ago
I want to ride on it!
OperationAnime262 9 months ago
Whether the Russians copied is irrelevant. What's important is that they managed to do it and in some or most cases, made them work successfully.
Tigadee00 9 months ago
@Tigadee00 And also important; They did it first! ;) A bit later, Tu-144 was also the first airliner that passed M2! ;)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Tigadee00 if the russians copied that means they are too damn lazy to do it them self they have to copy someont to produce a plane what a bunch of dougche bags
beastinRUSSOMANNO 9 months ago
@beastinRUSSOMANNO Copying is also the fastest, cheapest and easiest and in those ways, the smartest way to attain equality, especially if you can get away with it. How many movies and songs have you downloaded? Or converted to MP3 or AVI? Whether we like it or not, at least the Russians had balls for doing it and getting away with it. Do you think British Aerospace sued them? Doubt it.... Russkies probably just sad, "Vat? Me vorry?"
Tigadee00 9 months ago
SR-71s passenger capabilities are a bit worst than TU-144s are. So I think TU-144 have won the airliner competition... ;) :D
Modellpecs 9 months ago
com/watch?v=X1hm5GWcU4k&feature=related
Faraz70 9 months ago
@Faraz70
teach me how to use your post :)
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
All the space advance of western world is the copy of USSR
rejishkulangara1 9 months ago
Americans always win ...........search for B-70 bomber.
The B-70 project clousure means the inutility of supersonic bombers.
Infact an anti-air missile can reach 5 - 6 Km per second.
The future are the stealth bombers B-1 and B-2.....something that russians weren't be able to stole.
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia the B-2 is a flying wing... who first had the concept for the flying wing?
gibbo1112 9 months ago
@gibbo1112
MEIN FUHRER HITLER, with the ghota bomber, or better, that was a prototype of fighter bomber.
In the '50s americans built the first flying wing bomber, with 4 or 6 engines propeller, but was too much instable.
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia that was the first militarised flying wing, i said who first had the concept?
gibbo1112 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gibbo1112
don't know, and doesn't matter.
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia As far as I know there was a Russian plane called Moskalev SAM 7 and it was built in 1936! But you are talking about flying wing jets, and you are saying that America made the first. False. Also... Germans made the first flying wing jet. It is called the Gotha go. Me-163 was also a flying wing. You must be a typical American.... They think that America have invented the world.... It is true that America have bombed the world, but that leads to nowhere.. Might be to terrorism....
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
i know perfectly the gotha fighter bomber, that plane is even in the microsoft fight simulator 3..... :)
Second thing, americans invented the fastest bomber in the world, B-70, and the fastest plane in the world..SR-71.
That's enough to claim the american superiority. hehehe
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia SR 71 isnt the fastest plane the x-15 smartypants...
gibbo1112 9 months ago
@gibbo1112
i was talking about military planes that use conventionals fuels.
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia rocket fuel is conventional...ish
gibbo1112 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia and also, if it was the gotha bomber (it wasnt) then the germans are top dogs...
gibbo1112 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia First of all Nether Gotha go or ME-163 are bombers. But Ar E.555 was planned to. (I do not know MFS3.) B-70 and expecially SR71 have nothing to do with TU-144. Also SR-71 is not the fastest plane... What superiority are you talking about? America have used German plans and technology in the begining of the jet age. Also German scientists. American aviators also admit that Russian fighters manoeuvreibility like SU-37 is better than any american... Please get back to TU-144.
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
the F22 is the most manoeuvrable fighter.
American F22 pilots are trained with fake air-fight against F16, F15 and F18.
I heard that only one F22 can easily defeat five F15 (or F18) simultaneously. And this is true.
So, what do you want to say about this?
Second thing, in the iran-iraq war F14 showed their superiority agains the soviet crap, and F14 is shit in comparison to the F22.
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia Nothing..... :D It is quite clear to me that you are kind of "religious" on this. I say white, u say black.... Leads nowhere. If it makes you feel good to believe, than i wold not destroy this.... ;) Also, it is not important in a TU-144 topic that SU-37 or SU-33 etc. is far more manoeuvrable than that Dinosaur you mentioned... ;) :D
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
First...you cant compare a prototype with a mass produced plane like F22,
and for second if you aren't a pilot you cant make these conclusions so easily, don't you think?
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia No. I do not. :) Aldough I did fly small airplanes but that is totally different... In this situation a demonstration video is just enough. (SU-33 is not a prototype, but fain than SU-27... ;) ) Also Military pilots are saying this. Even Americans that I have met. But please Let us get back to TU-144...
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
last digression on F22 :)
have the pilots you've met flown on either F22 and SU 33 (or 27)?
And then have those pilots said " F22 is worst than SU...."?
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia You do it! do not care... ;) So TU-144?
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
now i know you...hehehehe ;)
about TU-144.......shitty bomber, concorde copy.
TU-144 has no future, it is too slow to run away from anti-air missiles, like the B-70....1,5 times faster.
If you can't fly faster than a missile you must be invisible.
The future is stealth bombers, something that only U.S. and A. can built ;)
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@JhonnnyTapia U forgot to mention that SR-71 is better. ;)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
for sure :D
JhonnnyTapia 9 months ago
@NeverTrustMedia T4 was a bit later. Roughly 4 years. But! T4 uses the same wing design as Tu-144. T-4 is usually told to be a "copy" of the beautiful Valkyrie, but that is not true also. For the same reason; T-4 is much more like Tu-144. So it was their own design. Tu-160 was also designed following the path of Tu-144. So we could say Tu-144 was a pioneer, developing military bombers. This is the point I came to. Could be that Tu-144 was originaly a military aircraft. (This is just a concept.)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
its always an amusement to read the comments on youtube where people are just throwing words back and forth and getting pissed, discussing things they (usually) know noting about! of course some of these guys really know their stuff. :D
ozeeo 9 months ago
@NeverTrustMedia
You stick to your version, I'll stick to the facts !
nealsym49 9 months ago
@nealsym49 Please tell us abut those facts.
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@NeverTrustMedia
What are you smoking ?? The Su 100 t4 was a North American XB-70 Valkyrie rip off !
The Soviet later admitted stealing Concorde plans !
nealsym49 9 months ago
Having stolen & copied Concorde they succeeded in producing one of the most unreliable aircraft the world has ever seen, that only ever flew 55 scheduled passenger services !
nealsym49 9 months ago
@nealsym49 What your saying is nonsence. If it is a copy, than why is not alike at all? Please answer this. Not even the size of it is the same. Tu-144 is bigger than Concord.... Never right down something that you are not sure of. One thing is true. it did around 50 scheduled passenger flight. But! Non of them went down! Not even one passenger was injured or hurt! So if you are looking at this fact, than it was the safest SST ever. ;) :D Of course this is a bit .misleading. Just like yours.. ;)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
@Modellpecs
Tu144 215 ft , Concorde 202 ft, yep the Tu is massive by comparison !!
nealsym49 9 months ago
@nealsym49 And as Concords fuselage width is 2,87m, Tu-144s is 3,5m. It allows it to have a extra line of seats, it means 150 passengers on board, compared to 108. I think it is not that small difference by itself.
Modellpecs 9 months ago
When I was a kid vack into USSR I remember seeing these birts in Domodedovo Airport, they serve regular root from Moscow to Almaata(currently Kazakhstan)
blackruazan 9 months ago
None of them are copy...
Tu-144 was the first. And my opinion is that it was the best also. ;)
Modellpecs 9 months ago 29
@Modellpecs Unfortunately your opinion is wrong, but it's a pretty cool aircraft regardless.
N330AA 8 months ago
@N330AA Yours wrong. Forgot to reason. ;)
Modellpecs 8 months ago
@Modellpecs Obviously you do not know very much about the three competing supersonic transport programs that was going on during this time. The Soviets engaged in a great deal of espionage stolen from the Concorde program which if they had not stolen a considerable amount of information would not have been able to produce the Tu-144. Despite this the Tu-144 had a number of serious problems being it was rushed into service. The Concorde was much better and Boeing's SST had it been (continued)
MrBEB123 8 months ago
@MrBEB123 Your reasons are more like concepts than facts. 144 was bigger faster, had more advanced aerodinamics, and it was the first. Thies are facts. Also had better engine placement. Like if Concord had the same engine layout, than it could have landed. (This is also a concept like yours, but built on facts.) Please tell me, what did they steal, and than why did they built a totally different aircraft? If you know airplanes only a bit, than you have noticed this for sure. If you haven't....
Modellpecs 8 months ago 51
@Modellpecs It's spelled Concorde.
djbk7456 8 months ago
@djbk7456 Whatever....
Modellpecs 8 months ago
@Modellpecs The Tu-144 was bigger and faster but that's it. Aerodinamically the Concorde was superior, especially concerning the wing design. That's why the Tu-144 had those canards in order to compensate for the highly inefficent wing design that it had compared to the Concorde. Not to mention the fact that the Tu-144 was notoriously unreliable which resulted in it being grounded quite frequently. Retirement after 3 years service are signs of a very unwanted aircraft
aspiringdrummer17 7 months ago
@aspiringdrummer17 Tu-144 had the most advanced canards of its time. I think you have heard the story that a Mirages mission was to take in flight pictures about it. The fact that Concorde did not have this does not means that it did not need it. Like if it had such a system, might be never crash. Also the wing design was so good that thy used it on other planes also. 144 landing speed was slightly faster, but... So what? Like some Airbuses and Boings, etc... Different landing speeds there too.
Modellpecs 7 months ago
@Modellpecs These are all 'top trump' facts that don't mean anything unless the product can do what it was designed to do. Concorde had a sucessful service career that in the latter years with BA turned it into profit. The Tu-144 was not a successful product in transporting people at SST speeds, nor did not show sustained, in-service reliability. It can be the fastest, first, most powerful, largest capacity plane in the world but if it doesn't translate into a working product whats the point?
xlmp96 7 months ago
@xlmp96 Well you will never know. Because it was not used as wildly as Concorde. They did not use it because of economic reasons. (Like Concorde later) The planes quality have nothing to do with this. And also, because it was not used wildly, you will newer know if it was reliable or not. Comparing to other Tupoljev passenger aircrafts, it was for sure. (Sure this is a concept. but is a well built.) I think you should forget the western propaganda, an begin to see clear.
Modellpecs 7 months ago
@Modellpecs The TU-144 had highly inefficient engines, and only had a range of 1600 miles.
2491cc 5 months ago
Comment removed
2491cc 5 months ago
@Modellpecs Well I dont know a lot about planes. You wanted to know what they stole ? Try this "Sergei Pavlov, was arrested with multiple accusing documents in his possession". The Delta wing wasnt a concept used by soviets. Heres details stating soviets stole entire blue prints w w w bbc co uk/dna/h2g2/A2818640 . Its alleged French fed false info. Would explain why Konkordski crashed so often ( 5 versions it took for them to get it right ). The engines were inferior hence 2 heavy for wings.
Dookiedolf 5 months ago
@Dookiedolf It could be that they stoled the "blueprints". That time everyone was spying the other. Don't be surprised, America, England, and France also! But here comes the important part: They did not use it. Just wanted to know what the others are doing. The best proof of this is Tu-144 itself. It is a totally different plane. Different in size, structure, wing design, engines, engine layout, landing gears, nose, canards, flight systems, etc, etc, etc.
Modellpecs 5 months ago 2
Comment removed
Modellpecs 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Dookiedolf Crashed too often? I only know of one. Like Concorde. Also a crash landing. Nothing else. Concorde had just as many problems.
Modellpecs 5 months ago
@Dookiedolf Yes the French made blueprints of a flawed wing design that to thier surprise were virtually identical the wing design of the Tu-144 as they found out at the Paris Air Show. These blueprints were of course stolen and everyone suspected it to be the Russians. I suppose that confirmed their suspicions. Not to mention it was retired after just 3 years in service due to it being notoriously unreliable. Spent most of its time on the ground
aspiringdrummer17 4 months ago
@aspiringdrummer17 How do you know? It is just a could war propaganda. I am sure that there was soviet spys in france. It is also possible that they did steal the blueprints. (Some say all, some say the wingdesign, some say wild things like french knew this and gave faulty plans. What did they think? Are soviet engineers kids?" :D..) But the fact is that TU-144 had its own wing design. They even modified a Mig-21 to test it. Also another plane used almost the same wing design. It was the Stoka.
Modellpecs 4 months ago
@Modellpecs It just seems funny to me (and rather convenient) that the wing design of the Tu-144 was virtually idenctical to the stolen blueprints. I'm not saying that the Soviet/Russian designers are incapable of thinking for themselves because some of my favourite aircraft, both military and civilian, are Russian and I think that in some areas, Russian aviation pushes the boundaries more so than anyone else.
aspiringdrummer17 4 months ago
@aspiringdrummer17 Did you see the blueprints? :) Why is it suspicious? Because there are people, who does not know much about airplanes. Only thing they see that "it has wings, 4 engines, 3 point landing gears like the other, so it is the same".... Than came the idea; Hmmmm... Is it a copy? Of course not! But the thing is, that they are exceed in number... Also there was a strong propaganda on bough side, so what would a regular people that did not look after think? That he heared the most...
Modellpecs 4 months ago
@Modellpecs I just find the whole Tu-144 vs Concorde thing a little suspicious and I don't really know why :P
aspiringdrummer17 4 months ago
@Modellpecs add the fact that the Tu-144 culd perfectly operate in the wildest of Siberia, it just beats the shit out of the concorde
MultiMinigun 3 months ago
@MultiMinigun Also think that 144 was better in a way. Not all parameters, but if you look at all parameters, together, and also the possibilities it had, than i think it had a great potential, more than Concorde ever had. ;)
Modellpecs 3 months ago
@Modellpecs I guess this aircraft is the result of industrial spying on both sites. But it is unbelievable.
aeroplaceNET 2 months ago
@aeroplaceNET Well, spying was present on bough sides. True. But i think bough sides had their own paths. What made them do the similar designs is the could war. Oh the other side have this. Let's make something that is better... ;) Is it? Unreliable? The trough is that we will newer know the trough.... It should have accomplished much more passenger flights. But one thing is a fact. It never crashed with passengers on board.
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@Modellpecs im afraid you are wrong and probably russian. im an aeronautical engineer and I can tell you that concorde could pull and withdtand much tighter turns; one of the tu-144 fell to pieces because a tight turn ripped apart the weak airframe. the tu-144 has canards because it was unstable in take off and landing and the wings by them selves failed to generate sufficient lift and control. the tu-144 uses a chute to slow it down whereas concorde doesnt due to more advanced brakes and tires.
MrWoodoop 2 months ago
@MrWoodoop the tu-144 has thick wings with a big lift area. like all russian aircraft (3+ gen) are bulit with about 10 to 25% ti, 1 to 10% iron and the rest AL new aircraft are incorperadeted with conposisit matrieal mostly carbon fiber like the su-35bm and t-50.
there wheel brakes are strong. like the su-33,27 and mig-29 ect... can hold there ground with full afterburner say that this birds brakes are weak is moot. chute are used becouse they can and so they can get off runway fast
Starr8492DS 2 months ago
@Starr8492DS concorde had a landing distance of 2200 metres and the tu-144 was 2750 metres. they fitted chutes so it could land airports. the canards were fitted because it took too long to take off and was going entirely too fact on approach.
MrWoodoop 2 months ago
@MrWoodoop Don't forget, that it was bigger also.
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@MrWoodoop If you really are, than you should know. Actually it was not a turn. It was a dive straight down. than the pilot pulled much more g that any passenger plane could take. Its canards was them most advanced of its time. Which type are you talking about? It is important. Also the landing gear is way better on the 144. At least it would newer make the plane go down... Also it was planned to fit thrust reversers but development was stopped. Instable? Not at all. I am not russian.
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@Modellpecs Shut up, you ignorant fool. You and your acolytes know nothing of the facts and do nothing but spew propaganda your government feeds you. Join the 21st century and do one hour's worth of research on this piece of shit. Discover what it really was - and why the remaining -144's rot in parking lots. They were poorly designed, poorly built aircraft that were in constant danger of falling from the sky.
beeroosterm 2 months ago
@beeroosterm :D While i was reasoning, yo wrote bad words. I give you facts, you wrote about your feelings. I always try to be neutral. But it makes me a bit angry when people don't know what they are talking about, especially in a situation like this. 144 deserves much more. Just like TU-154 etc... like 154 was one of the safest planes on the planet, it is still safer than some Boings, and almost everyone think that it was a coffin because of western propaganda.
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@Modellpecs Your "reasoning" and "facts" were anything but. The -144 was not a dismal failure and a death trap due to "Western propaganda" - it failed miserably on its own - to the point that even Russian propagandists could not make it function as a propaganda machine. It was there for all to see - it was not merely a concept to deny. It was a coffin for several people and it was a miracle that it wasn't for many, many more before the government shut the program down
beeroosterm 2 months ago
@beeroosterm That is your opinion. I say, it was the same for Concorde. Concorde had just as many problems. Concorde was also a failure in the same way. The difference between them is that 144 was meant to serve in the CCCP. If you have lived, in a socialist country, you would clearly see the point. The prices are kept artificially low. The ticket price was a fraction of the price of foreign. Etc etc. In this conditions, you could not keep a SST in service. Not only 144, but Concorde also!
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@Modellpecs Of course it's "my opinion", you twerp! Would you like me to give you someone else's? What a fatuous remark. My opinion is based on facts - not wishful thinking. And your "logic" about ticket pricing has nothing to do with the quality of the aircraft. Have another vodka, comrade...
beeroosterm 2 months ago
@beeroosterm Tell me that fact. pls. I already know your feelings. ;) Prices have nothing to do with the aircraft? Are you kidding? (Sorry. You are a kid...) If there is like half of the $ you need to maintain the plane? What than? Try to think pls...
Modellpecs 1 month ago
@Modellpecs made would have been far and away better than the Concorde. The Tu-144 was not only not the best it was the worst even with stolen technology which the Soviets have done more than a few times including atomic weapons, the B-29, the 727 and numerous other stolen data and technology from western countries. Also the Tu-144 was not in service very long because besides having problems such as vibration it was also a commercial failure. Better luck on your next opinion.
MrBEB123 8 months ago
@Modellpecs T 144 was faster too
911Investigate911 8 months ago
Damn, those were real men!
deimos2k6 10 months ago
thumbs up is you agree with this
god i wish i was there i love concorde i hope it flys later on in the years
imgoodwithsilage 10 months ago
Actually it was bigger faster, had more advanced aerodynamics, and very important, it was the first. ;) But as they found with Concord also, that it is not economical, they retired it. That was also the reason why Americans stopped the development. France and England had lots of effort to keep Concord artificially in service, but finally gave it up also. The reason why soviets give it up so soon was that the different between the countryes. In Soviet union noone could afford to travel with...
Modellpecs 10 months ago
i case the computers fail, this is russia it should be when the computers fail
FLABEX224 10 months ago
the concord hit the design table long before russia stole the designs and made this high tech garbage can that was rushed through the build stage just to fly before the west who was in no race to get into the air. the only original invention russia ever had was inter family rape, thats why there is very little DNA in the russian gene pool!
OTULP62 10 months ago
The first Tu-144 prototype was completely different from the later production version that most people see.
The engine nacelles were moved, the landing gear was relocated from the wings to the nacelles, the wing design was altered to a dual delta and small horzontal stabilizers were added to the front. It essentially was a brand new plane.
rickcain2320 10 months ago
@rickcain2320 And yet it was still a POS. And those "horizontal stabilizers" were canards; they vibrated terribly and were added to slightly lower the landing speed. Junk.
beeroosterm 10 months ago