The Bouran spaceship was so ahead of its time and thus naturally a joint Russian-US team in late 90s, early 2000s had named it as the best way to replace the space shuttle after its decomissionng by the end of the decade (well it was extended this year isn't it?).... so the hangar accident in 2002 came as quite dogdy to say the least (a collapsing roof? hmmm...). Current Russian projects Klipper & PPTS make use of Bouran tech.
... but the Buran was a mature project that produced the finest spaceship ever. Initially Russian engineers wanted a different design but because in the mid-70s the Russian generals insisted to have "the same thing as the Americans were trying to built", they finally chose to... copy the external appearance of the shuttle (funny reason to copy!). However, inside the systems fitted were much much more evolved than the Shuttle - given of course that the programme lasted much longer up to mid-80s.
@notgodsemigod The Space Shuttle was tuned around the presence of astronauts. Bouran was designed since the beginning as an unmanned vessel that could also accomodate cosmonauts (though the cosmonaut module was never installed due to the end of the programme). The vessel was sent once to space and descended down to earth fully automatically - and it did it with a nearly 70km side wind only losng 3m from its designed landing course. Absolutely amasing craft.
@D4RKW3VE It is not everyone. Traditionally it was the British that hated and still hate Russians and of course Americans can't get over the cold war syndrome - afterall US government still considers Russia as its enemy no1 in the world. From there one it is a couple of small countries like Poland or Finland that resent having borders with this giant country but that is all, other Europeans in the center, south and west do not hate Russians, Germans are a bit wary but French are rather friendly.
There are a few examples of Soviet knockoffs of western designs; the C-141/IL-76, the B1/TU-160, the C-5/AN-124 and the most obvious, the space shuttle/Buran. But there are many, many more examples of Soviet designs that exist nowhere in the world. This is one example of something that could only be dreamed up, much less built in the U.S.S.R.
@azimuth361 Industrial espionage was something that ALL were well into. People usually tend to concentrate on outer design resemblances and not on the externally invisible systems inside. Russians in development tended to launch instantly their prototypes and then spending years of testing and fine-tuning them. Americans did the opposite, i.e. first designed in detail and then built quickly and tested. As such, Russians were more prone to be attracted by the option of copying the external design
@notgodsemigod However, Russians would usually proceed to develop radically different systems, very often superior to American or European ones. As such, losing less time to the initial design phase saved them time so they correctly took American designs built them quickly and passed directly to testing. Americans working in the inverse even if they wanted they could not do the same as often since detailed design would require continuous changes to suit the project.
Now, the examples of C-141/IL-76, the , the C-5/AN-124, B1/TU-160 you refer are excellent examples. However it is arguable where external similarities end and system differences start. For it is true that in the 2 best known cases, the Concorde/TU-144 and the Shuttle/Buran, the similaries end in the external appearence. While TU-144 was finally proven to be an ambitious but still early prototype rushed into commisioning phase and as such it had no success (high consumption, too much noise etc.).
@notgodsemigod You make a good point. The external design similarities are because it's easy to get a look at a test plane. It's much harder to get close to one. Looking at the plans and internal designs involves espionage. Even if you can get a hold of the designs, it's not always possible to get a hold of the technology to make internal systems work or even get a complete set of plans to make those systems work together.
@EJ25RUN its an airplne that cant fly, its a boat that hadle a rough sea. its all the things that it is not rather than anything that it is. it is not an airplane.
As i am a pilot, I've taken the training to know the difference between an airplane and a ground effect craft. Before you respond again, go read an aerodynamics book.
@sniper77shot This is NOT a "hovercraft". GEVs are completely different. Hovers nake use of thrust while GEV makes use of trapped air. The idea is a natural one, since all aircraft exhibit ground effect when landing - at GE time, you have to [literally] 'break through' the ground effect in order to land.
@WiseGuy5674 :) It is impressive though. I'm sure you can run it on hydrogen etc. And yes, the Soviets were not well known for eco-friendlyness and they did spend unbelievable amounts of money on defense. I want to see one for civilians.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
as usual for this fucking camaraders, they are doing things in back , but thanks God useless!...imagine they spend a lot of time and money to do this shit good for what??...they can put it in they asses....
@Hibob, no I wasn't trying to go off on anybody, I just thought we were getting a little bit, WAY, off subject here. I think the Russians/Soviets had to do everything they could to compete with the West as the underdog they were. They could not create real aircraft carriers or much of a surface navy so had to concentrate on aircraft and submarines. The ekranoplans would not have been any more of a target than a destroyer sized ship and moved over 10 times as fast. Was a good Idea.
OK, we (america) did land on the moon, if you don't realize this, that is sad. Second, Harry potter is bullshit stupid, racist, disgusting, and drivel. Third, Creationists are also blind and lost.
So why are people talking about this on the ekranoplan video????
Both nations produced inovative stuff, both used nazi's and worse people than that, stole data from them.
USA just had more money, and approval from the NWO.
@spectre04 You know, you're right. Sorry, I got pissed off at an America basher.
The big akranoplan just unbelievable. As a side note, after Howard Hughes died in the 70's, the US Navy proposed to do a full-up fight test on his Flying Boat (Spruce Goose) to get data on, among other things, very large aircraft traveling in the ground effect environment. Tests didn't happen, though, and it looks like the Soviets were decades ahead in developing these vehicles. Thanks for the post!
Wow, this plane could have been a nightmare for enemy fleets. Fast, could not be seen on radar, with enough antiship missiles, this could have wrought havoc in battleshipp and carrier groups at the time.
Only one KM (Caspian Sea Monster), was made, which eventually sank in a crash. However, they also made another on a smaller scale and a similar design called the Lun, which was in an anti-ship missile role. Another Lun was due to be produced, fitted out as a high-speed medical facility, but funds ran out before it was started. Russia also produced the Orlyonok, a much smaller, 125 ton craft, of which 5 were built.
afaik only one prototype Lun-class jet-powered ground effect vehicle armed with anti-ship missiles was made - that's the one usually referred to by the name "caspian monster"
There were also 5 unarmed propeller-driven A-90 vehicles.
I think these were the only big sized ones produced - afterwards the projects were canceled despite the very promising results they've shown.
Um, you mean like the atomic bomb? Landing on the Moon? The computer you are on? The software that it uses? The internet you are surfin'? and so on, and so on???
The US has always been ahead of Russia. That is why the wall finally went down, as the Soviets could no longer keep even the slightest pace with the West, especially the US.
actually, i must admit i once did believe it was real, but as the time passed, the time in believeing in santa claus, easter bunny and tooth fairy is now long gone...
wow, now i can see the truth. many thanks for shedding light on my foggy mind, much appreciated! and happy hunting, may you catch all them darn hoaxers
is that so? at least i don't have 'I am actually a bit of a freak' as description of myself on my profile, i don't read harry potter, i don't 'investigate montauk monster' (LOL) and i don't spit on atheists. and now put a sock in it sonny
Yes, I wrote I am a freak, as I prefer science text books to most other books. Problem with that?
Next, yes, I think the Harry Potter series was brilliant way to inoculate the up-coming generations against nationalistic, and racist movements.
I investigated the Montauk Monster to show people how to stop making wild speculations. I showed how basic investigation reveals the animal to simply be a dead raccoon, and nothing more. Problem with that?
1. I have researched both sides, and it is rather obvious we landed on the moon
2. If you know history you have to be an idiot not to grasp the meaning to her books.
3. I am trained in anatomy, and I know how to diagnose a species. Reality is reality, despite delusional people such as yourself.
4. My comment on Dawkin's website was an explanation of a creationist dogmatic response about atheists. It was rather obvious if you had read the actually posts involved in the discussion.
Um, I wasn't playing dumb. I never said anything against atheists. You simply misunderstood what the discussion was about. It is an on running joke that atheists are always being told they are bitter and angry all the time, despite whatever behavior they actually show. An atheists could be singing Disney tunes while eating ice cream and the creationist would claim the atheist was bitter and depressed.
unlike in your pathetic life you believe it's the model for all of us to follow, i've got a surprise for you. this is not a place where you can openly insult other people, call them idiots, then claim you don't really remember, and then says it's a running joke.
your behaviour is very questionable, much like your statement: 'I am a lunatic that likes to make weird sounds...' you definitely need a reality adjustment. sooner or later it's gonna hit you so bad you won't know what happened
You said I "spit," on atheists. I asked where I said such? You never found anything to support this comment.
You did, however, talk about a comment I made out of context that was posted on an atheist site in support of that sites fight against creationism. The comment was never criticized by the atheists there. Know why? Because they knew what I was referring to, unlike you.
You stole german scientists to build the bomb. You stole german rocket scientists/data to help your space program. You have Turing (english) to thank for your computer. Tim berners invented the internet, the U.S just created a lot of the network protocols it used (for short sighted purposes).
The U.S. is a social abomination that will destroy itself within a century. The rest of the world can see this, but obviously if you're a propaganda fed dumbass yank you'll find it harder to understand
Not sure what your point is, but Leo Szilard, Enrico Fermi & Albert Einstein all got the hell out of Europe to avoid Axis persecution; Werner VonBraun & friends surrendered to US rather than be captured and enslaved by the Soviets; Alan Turing underwent chemical castration rather than go to British prison just for being gay in the 50's, and Tim Berners chose to teach at MIT rather than stay in England. Does the US have its problems? Absolutely. But we're also a beacon for freedom the world over.
instead of this Russia should focus its effort on carriers and new destroyers. they are much behind in surface ship to US and its alies. submarines should be in mass production to counter the threats of tridents.
*Hums Thunderbirds theme*
MrChristopherCourage 3 months ago
Stephan Hooker?? xD
mariusbalacl 7 months ago
could someone explain to me how these wings are different from hydrofoils?
Which have been around since at least 1906.
Konstiin 11 months ago
The Bouran spaceship was so ahead of its time and thus naturally a joint Russian-US team in late 90s, early 2000s had named it as the best way to replace the space shuttle after its decomissionng by the end of the decade (well it was extended this year isn't it?).... so the hangar accident in 2002 came as quite dogdy to say the least (a collapsing roof? hmmm...). Current Russian projects Klipper & PPTS make use of Bouran tech.
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
... but the Buran was a mature project that produced the finest spaceship ever. Initially Russian engineers wanted a different design but because in the mid-70s the Russian generals insisted to have "the same thing as the Americans were trying to built", they finally chose to... copy the external appearance of the shuttle (funny reason to copy!). However, inside the systems fitted were much much more evolved than the Shuttle - given of course that the programme lasted much longer up to mid-80s.
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
@notgodsemigod The Space Shuttle was tuned around the presence of astronauts. Bouran was designed since the beginning as an unmanned vessel that could also accomodate cosmonauts (though the cosmonaut module was never installed due to the end of the programme). The vessel was sent once to space and descended down to earth fully automatically - and it did it with a nearly 70km side wind only losng 3m from its designed landing course. Absolutely amasing craft.
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
why does everyone hate russia????? :(
D4RKW3VE 1 year ago
@D4RKW3VE It is not everyone. Traditionally it was the British that hated and still hate Russians and of course Americans can't get over the cold war syndrome - afterall US government still considers Russia as its enemy no1 in the world. From there one it is a couple of small countries like Poland or Finland that resent having borders with this giant country but that is all, other Europeans in the center, south and west do not hate Russians, Germans are a bit wary but French are rather friendly.
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
You're lying to himself or bad you know the story
dimanbaraban 1 year ago
There are a few examples of Soviet knockoffs of western designs; the C-141/IL-76, the B1/TU-160, the C-5/AN-124 and the most obvious, the space shuttle/Buran. But there are many, many more examples of Soviet designs that exist nowhere in the world. This is one example of something that could only be dreamed up, much less built in the U.S.S.R.
azimuth361 1 year ago
@azimuth361 Industrial espionage was something that ALL were well into. People usually tend to concentrate on outer design resemblances and not on the externally invisible systems inside. Russians in development tended to launch instantly their prototypes and then spending years of testing and fine-tuning them. Americans did the opposite, i.e. first designed in detail and then built quickly and tested. As such, Russians were more prone to be attracted by the option of copying the external design
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
@notgodsemigod However, Russians would usually proceed to develop radically different systems, very often superior to American or European ones. As such, losing less time to the initial design phase saved them time so they correctly took American designs built them quickly and passed directly to testing. Americans working in the inverse even if they wanted they could not do the same as often since detailed design would require continuous changes to suit the project.
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
Now, the examples of C-141/IL-76, the , the C-5/AN-124, B1/TU-160 you refer are excellent examples. However it is arguable where external similarities end and system differences start. For it is true that in the 2 best known cases, the Concorde/TU-144 and the Shuttle/Buran, the similaries end in the external appearence. While TU-144 was finally proven to be an ambitious but still early prototype rushed into commisioning phase and as such it had no success (high consumption, too much noise etc.).
notgodsemigod 1 year ago
@notgodsemigod You make a good point. The external design similarities are because it's easy to get a look at a test plane. It's much harder to get close to one. Looking at the plans and internal designs involves espionage. Even if you can get a hold of the designs, it's not always possible to get a hold of the technology to make internal systems work or even get a complete set of plans to make those systems work together.
azimuth361 1 year ago
Bodenefektflugzeug ein geniales patent sehr sparsam und riesig gross.
fischcoco 1 year ago
wtd was his name again?
leviterande 1 year ago
it was copied from 'Thunderbirds'
moogug 1 year ago
Stephane Hooker?
Allexxx96Reloaded 1 year ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
best site to meet single mom and dads naneedj.info
kapilakaliu 1 year ago
in august 1967 an american spy satalight , and they show SKYLAB. typical propaganda. SKYLAB dont you have a google tool bar?
datzfast 1 year ago
i think that airplane just crashed landed
molten09able 1 year ago
an air plane that cant fly, im not impressed. its like a penis that shoots blanks.it looks good and feels good, but never gets you pregnant.
datzfast 1 year ago
@datzfast
Its not an airplane.
EJ25RUN 1 year ago
@EJ25RUN its an airplne that cant fly, its a boat that hadle a rough sea. its all the things that it is not rather than anything that it is. it is not an airplane.
datzfast 1 year ago
@datzfast
As i am a pilot, I've taken the training to know the difference between an airplane and a ground effect craft. Before you respond again, go read an aerodynamics book.
EJ25RUN 1 year ago
@EJ25RUN great i dont need a piolet license to fly it. or any groud effect craft. Now you go read the regulations.
datzfast 1 year ago
Some corporation should step in and pump money into this thing. I am 100% sure there are uses for this baby.
vmorgun 1 year ago
The Soviets did not come up with that, Alexander Gram Bell did look it up.
sniper77shot 1 year ago
@sniper77shot This is NOT a "hovercraft". GEVs are completely different. Hovers nake use of thrust while GEV makes use of trapped air. The idea is a natural one, since all aircraft exhibit ground effect when landing - at GE time, you have to [literally] 'break through' the ground effect in order to land.
measl 1 year ago
RIP HEATH LEDGER
FreeeeS 1 year ago
@FreeeeS hahahahaha
AleksandarKospenda 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hollywood Wealth Vids Forum
WealthVids 1 year ago
Looks like another colossal Russian waste of resources...And they wonder why they went broke.
WiseGuy5674 1 year ago
@WiseGuy5674 :) It is impressive though. I'm sure you can run it on hydrogen etc. And yes, the Soviets were not well known for eco-friendlyness and they did spend unbelievable amounts of money on defense. I want to see one for civilians.
vmorgun 1 year ago
А-90 is "Eaglet", not "Eagle".
TBeholder 1 year ago
@GRATZIANI2002 you're right, the best transport Kaspian Sea are jeeps. =)
notalwaysright..com/here-today-gone-to-maui-2
TBeholder 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
as usual for this fucking camaraders, they are doing things in back , but thanks God useless!...imagine they spend a lot of time and money to do this shit good for what??...they can put it in they asses....
GRATZIANI2002 1 year ago
@GRATZIANI2002 to land on Ontario Erie Superior Michigan
FreeeeS 1 year ago
@Hibob, no I wasn't trying to go off on anybody, I just thought we were getting a little bit, WAY, off subject here. I think the Russians/Soviets had to do everything they could to compete with the West as the underdog they were. They could not create real aircraft carriers or much of a surface navy so had to concentrate on aircraft and submarines. The ekranoplans would not have been any more of a target than a destroyer sized ship and moved over 10 times as fast. Was a good Idea.
spectre04 1 year ago
OK, we (america) did land on the moon, if you don't realize this, that is sad. Second, Harry potter is bullshit stupid, racist, disgusting, and drivel. Third, Creationists are also blind and lost.
So why are people talking about this on the ekranoplan video????
Both nations produced inovative stuff, both used nazi's and worse people than that, stole data from them.
USA just had more money, and approval from the NWO.
spectre04 1 year ago
@spectre04 You know, you're right. Sorry, I got pissed off at an America basher.
The big akranoplan just unbelievable. As a side note, after Howard Hughes died in the 70's, the US Navy proposed to do a full-up fight test on his Flying Boat (Spruce Goose) to get data on, among other things, very large aircraft traveling in the ground effect environment. Tests didn't happen, though, and it looks like the Soviets were decades ahead in developing these vehicles. Thanks for the post!
hibob418 1 year ago 2
@hibob418, amazing design. looks like a Monster size Hovercraft for sure.
Wolfen443 1 year ago
one word, beautiful
stivante 2 years ago
Ups!
muitaloca 2 years ago
Damn I love this Magnificent machine!!
380800 2 years ago
Wow, this plane could have been a nightmare for enemy fleets. Fast, could not be seen on radar, with enough antiship missiles, this could have wrought havoc in battleshipp and carrier groups at the time.
Iggy82xl 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this thing was a joke
ericssson 2 years ago
The only joke here, is you.
Vova993 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
heath ledger is dead!!!????
andrewsandersuni 2 years ago
i wonger how many were made? they look very expensive
castoresnegros 2 years ago 2
@castoresnegros
Only one KM (Caspian Sea Monster), was made, which eventually sank in a crash. However, they also made another on a smaller scale and a similar design called the Lun, which was in an anti-ship missile role. Another Lun was due to be produced, fitted out as a high-speed medical facility, but funds ran out before it was started. Russia also produced the Orlyonok, a much smaller, 125 ton craft, of which 5 were built.
TehBluebear 2 years ago
afaik only one prototype Lun-class jet-powered ground effect vehicle armed with anti-ship missiles was made - that's the one usually referred to by the name "caspian monster"
There were also 5 unarmed propeller-driven A-90 vehicles.
I think these were the only big sized ones produced - afterwards the projects were canceled despite the very promising results they've shown.
Suyamu 2 years ago
ekranoplans kick ass
novembergraveyard 2 years ago 3
MGS3 style XD
AlexanderLaurence91 2 years ago
Um, you mean like the atomic bomb? Landing on the Moon? The computer you are on? The software that it uses? The internet you are surfin'? and so on, and so on???
The US has always been ahead of Russia. That is why the wall finally went down, as the Soviets could no longer keep even the slightest pace with the West, especially the US.
Lagomort 2 years ago
'like landing on the moon'... ROFL
Executioner1984 2 years ago 3
I am going to make a wild guess here and say you are one of those wackadoodles that does not believe the moon landing was real?
Lagomort 2 years ago
actually, i must admit i once did believe it was real, but as the time passed, the time in believeing in santa claus, easter bunny and tooth fairy is now long gone...
Executioner1984 2 years ago 2
No, your medication just wore off..
Lagomort 2 years ago
Comment removed
Executioner1984 2 years ago
Is that the best attempt at, "No sa, YOU!" you could come up with?
Really, moon landing deniers are as simple minded as flat-earth people,,,
Lagomort 2 years ago
Comment removed
Executioner1984 2 years ago
do me a favor, go back and read your harry potter books
Executioner1984 2 years ago
Do you know what Harry Potter was actually about?
Lagomort 2 years ago
dude, it's ok to believe in fantasy. just please do me a favor and don't try to persuade other people to believe in what you believe in, ok?
Executioner1984 2 years ago
You are the one in a fantasy world if you think the moon landing was a hoax.
Harry Potter was an allegory about the events that brought about World War ll. The books are an attempt to make kids more politically savvy.
Lagomort 2 years ago
wow, now i can see the truth. many thanks for shedding light on my foggy mind, much appreciated! and happy hunting, may you catch all them darn hoaxers
Executioner1984 2 years ago
Um, you are the one that is promoting the idea of hoaxers...not I. Yes, it does seem you have a foggy mind..
Lagomort 2 years ago
is that so? at least i don't have 'I am actually a bit of a freak' as description of myself on my profile, i don't read harry potter, i don't 'investigate montauk monster' (LOL) and i don't spit on atheists. and now put a sock in it sonny
Executioner1984 2 years ago
Yes, I wrote I am a freak, as I prefer science text books to most other books. Problem with that?
Next, yes, I think the Harry Potter series was brilliant way to inoculate the up-coming generations against nationalistic, and racist movements.
I investigated the Montauk Monster to show people how to stop making wild speculations. I showed how basic investigation reveals the animal to simply be a dead raccoon, and nothing more. Problem with that?
When did I, "Spit on atheists?"
Lagomort 2 years ago
dude, if you read science books like you claim you do, then you might want to research both sides and not be biased only to one side
secondly, J.K. Rowling never ever mentioned her books 'inoculate up-coming generations' against 'nationalistic rasistic movement'
third, who called up on you to show and teach people what is wrong and what is right?
now to spitting on atheists - i guess it's your comment #59 on richard dawkins website
Executioner1984 2 years ago
1. I have researched both sides, and it is rather obvious we landed on the moon
2. If you know history you have to be an idiot not to grasp the meaning to her books.
3. I am trained in anatomy, and I know how to diagnose a species. Reality is reality, despite delusional people such as yourself.
4. My comment on Dawkin's website was an explanation of a creationist dogmatic response about atheists. It was rather obvious if you had read the actually posts involved in the discussion.
Lagomort 2 years ago
so, you thought if you play dumb nobody will remember that you spit on atheists, right garth?
Executioner1984 2 years ago
Um, I wasn't playing dumb. I never said anything against atheists. You simply misunderstood what the discussion was about. It is an on running joke that atheists are always being told they are bitter and angry all the time, despite whatever behavior they actually show. An atheists could be singing Disney tunes while eating ice cream and the creationist would claim the atheist was bitter and depressed.
Lagomort 2 years ago
unlike in your pathetic life you believe it's the model for all of us to follow, i've got a surprise for you. this is not a place where you can openly insult other people, call them idiots, then claim you don't really remember, and then says it's a running joke.
your behaviour is very questionable, much like your statement: 'I am a lunatic that likes to make weird sounds...' you definitely need a reality adjustment. sooner or later it's gonna hit you so bad you won't know what happened
Executioner1984 2 years ago
Exec...
You said I "spit," on atheists. I asked where I said such? You never found anything to support this comment.
You did, however, talk about a comment I made out of context that was posted on an atheist site in support of that sites fight against creationism. The comment was never criticized by the atheists there. Know why? Because they knew what I was referring to, unlike you.
this video explains the on running joke:
watch?v=NRmibWLEt-U
The lunatic sounds was referring to guitar sounds
Lagomort 2 years ago
dude, you truly are lost. i do feel sorry for you. from now on, whatever you say and reply, it's like shouting into wind, nobody's going to hear you.
Executioner1984 2 years ago
To paraphrase your response in gun fighting lingo:
Click! Click! Click!! ..Oh, crap!
Lagomort 2 years ago
really, is that so? why don't you share your 'wisdom' with the people here?
Executioner1984 2 years ago 2
You stole german scientists to build the bomb. You stole german rocket scientists/data to help your space program. You have Turing (english) to thank for your computer. Tim berners invented the internet, the U.S just created a lot of the network protocols it used (for short sighted purposes).
The U.S. is a social abomination that will destroy itself within a century. The rest of the world can see this, but obviously if you're a propaganda fed dumbass yank you'll find it harder to understand
howboutpete 2 years ago
Not sure what your point is, but Leo Szilard, Enrico Fermi & Albert Einstein all got the hell out of Europe to avoid Axis persecution; Werner VonBraun & friends surrendered to US rather than be captured and enslaved by the Soviets; Alan Turing underwent chemical castration rather than go to British prison just for being gay in the 50's, and Tim Berners chose to teach at MIT rather than stay in England. Does the US have its problems? Absolutely. But we're also a beacon for freedom the world over.
hibob418 2 years ago
@hibob418 Yeah like a lighthouse beacon, avoid these shores if it's freedom ye be after yaarr.
howboutpete 1 year ago
Looks like Metal Gear.
naduto 2 years ago
This is one cool piece of engineering! Wow!
barbarossa1234 3 years ago 32
why ussr russia use a benz germany car in ussr land
bestamerica 3 years ago
Because they were clever, someone had to milk advantaged countries though
MightyJustas 3 years ago
i swear.. i cannot believe u asked that question..
ok so what are u going to say to bentleys rolls royces and maybachs?
Lukoilovich 3 years ago
Simply amazing! Rusians have always been very good in engineering physics and math.
methaphaze 3 years ago 37
USSR had, no Russia
paralelnyi 2 years ago
@methaphaze i suck at all of those things..
warpedapple 7 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Kako je lako ovo govno obalit hahahahhaahahahah ,nista cisto smece !
CetinjaninSwe 3 years ago
Amazing video excellent monster to see who made it Russians very good job done.
NUSRPKINA 3 years ago 2
Iv've spotted this plane in the new trailer "first wave" for the strategy game soviet Assault :D. Didn't recognize it at first.
jpbalkenende 3 years ago 2
very impressive..hope this will be resurrected
54spiritedwill54 3 years ago 4
Resurrected? Russia never
stopped to use them.
They've kept perfecting them over
the years.
There is new version
to come out soon.
TeslaGenius 3 years ago 3
why don't we build all of our ships here in USA with underwater wings?
bio2020 4 years ago
... Why would you want underwater wings? Or do you mean stabilizers? It's costly so not always economical.
jpbalkenende 3 years ago
Wait I see what you mean. But again those wings are only practical for fast ships.
jpbalkenende 3 years ago
maybe but a sub can not support a whole fleet.
finchiestiffler79 4 years ago
I'm damn proud of my country.
sikkwitit42 4 years ago 4
yeahh amazing la ingenieria rusa siempre me ha sorprendido =o
togegonz 4 years ago
Havent seen this film in a while; thanks for posting it comrade! I understand some similar projects are currently underway.
markbradleyf1 4 years ago
mines, my freind, subs cna be taken out by sub hunter planes, and mines.
12valvepower 4 years ago
instead of this Russia should focus its effort on carriers and new destroyers. they are much behind in surface ship to US and its alies. submarines should be in mass production to counter the threats of tridents.
finchiestiffler79 4 years ago
Hope this will be resurrected, i think Russia severely underrates this plane for now
ComradeLynx 4 years ago 3
yes, its a good thing this ekranoplan.
RussianRuffRyder84 4 years ago
Yeah, it is Ekranoplan! For a while i cant remember its name!
GerojSlav 4 years ago 3
very impressive, to bad project got canned
Globox822 4 years ago 3