What happens to the parachute immediately after it lands? Is there a retracting device to pull the parachute back in or is it just dragged on the ground during taxiing?
Because of the deltawing design, the centre of rotation (when the plane rotates in pitch) lies far forward. Thus, when the pilot pulls back on the stick to "flare" the landing, the first thing that happens is that the plane "descends". The "descent" is actually the plane reacting to the nose up command from the pilot. Eventually, the plane would have "flared" had it not been so close to the ground. The pilot should have used power to cushion the landing instead. Probably a tricky plane to land
Don't quite understand this video. I thought the TU144 was a 1970's soviet 'concorde' equivelant. Why is it flying years later as a Nasa aircraft? Remember the original crash though.
IBP Aerospace negotiated an agreement with Tupolev and NASA, (also Rockwell and later Boeing). They offered a Tu-144 as a testbed for its High Speed Commercial Research program, intended to design a second-generation supersonic jetliner called the High Speed Civil Transport. In 1995, Tu-144D built in 1981 was taken out of storage and after modification at a total cost of $350 million was designated the Tu-144LL. It made a total of 27 flights in 1996 and 1997.
@Work4What TU144 technologically superiour to CONCORDE. I think crash was not an acident and not faliour, it was crashed becouse in the middle of a cold war America and the west could not aloww Soviets to be superiour in such important point and to make Soviet technology look bad, incenirated crash.
@mikeplay007 don't be silly. Concorde was way more advanced in every single way. The engines on the Concorde could go 50% further mileage than this. It's landing speed was 50% lower. Concorde was lighter and way more advanced. This aircraft needs a parachute to stop while Concorde uses anti lock brakes, and reverse thrust. Fly-by-wire technology/controls. Concordes is still advanced to this day. ur statement has been blown out of the water. O and Concordes much more better looking.
concorde was a success BA actaully used to make a profit operating concorde we will never see supersonic airliners again because the world is run by pen pushing blotter jotting bean counting weeds
I bet if concorde had been built by boeing there would have been hundreads flying today!!
there was a lot of crap talked about concorde like the fact it would make whales go deaf and it would "punch"holes in the ozone layer
Supersonic air travel... Could we achieve that yet again in this age of the retired Concorde? - But instead of jet propulsion, how about immense short bursts of rocket propulsion? Like they do with space satellites in space. Could be feasible... There's no doubt Virgin would get there first. Rockets over jets... Anyone?
Dear sheep, better get propper information before entering the public. Guess why the eastern jet didn´t work. They couldn´t handle the thechnology. I´d be glad to show you the entrance of the public library in your area so You could read the facts yourself. Best regrads
like usely-even sowjets was first with satellite (sputnik 1)= in space..also with a lot of other things su was leader..but anyway.also space shuttle Enegija buran was bedder then space shuttle.ignorant peopel ars st...
Not true Jozch... read up on it before you post ignorant comments again. The Tu-144 was released first and was completely different in terms of mechanics etc... the design was similar yes but everything else that mattered was completely different and could not have been copied.
actually the tu-144 was superior in every way than the concorde, except for range. and it was abandoned oficially because one fell apart in the air(basically). stupid comment btw.
It was never wasted. They gained so much with the research. Thanks to this program they came up with supersonic bombers like the Su T100 (?)and the Tupolev 160 supersonic intercontinental bomber. Face it economist, sound like your just trying to flare ut cant handle the truth about Soviet Technological achievement.
Okay, Im not sure which came first,maybe the TU144 came later but your analogy doesnt make any sense. Of course you cant say that Kirov was base on a fishing boat, what kind of a dumb analogy is that. TU 144 was a very advance jet and its no Cessna so Im not too surprised that TU 144 resources were used for future aircraft. And no, it is not a loss. Soviet gained a lot when it comes to technology form this masterpiece. Face it.
Wrong wrong. Enough with the analogy, it was still a dumb example you used. Second, 16 were built but the same can be said about the Concord. If you agree that the Concord was a waste, then ok we are on par and agree that it came to fruition. But if you disagree about the Concord. Then sorry, I dont talk to bias people. It may have not been a commercially successful aircraft, but they gained alot through military technology. Therefore, no it was not wasted. The plane succeeded technology wise.
The only reason why Concorde and The TU144 failed to be on the market is because US failed to come up with a similar jet from the 6 engine bomber design (XB70?) anyway, US policy restricted the flight of supersonic jet over public which was BS. If US created it first, it would have been legal
Not really, since when did the official care about sonic boom and so on. Believe me, it was a way to protect US defense company like Boeing by outlawing the usage of supersonic over city. This prevented orders from EU aircraft companies. Yes it only carries 100 people but it is still a potential market.
Yes it is protectionism.If Us is so concern about the environment, then why do SUV still get tax breaks? Protect GM and Ford. And why at one point the US was going to reconsider sonic flight when Boeing was designing a new supersonic cargo plane? Its the fact, its protectionism.
It's still protectionism. Like I say, the FAA or whatever you call it once wanted to change their mind when Boeing was developing a supersonic plane. Its not like jets sound are not annoying anyway. If theres big money involves, they would approve it.
What happens to the parachute immediately after it lands? Is there a retracting device to pull the parachute back in or is it just dragged on the ground during taxiing?
thibaulthalpern 2 years ago
Because of the deltawing design, the centre of rotation (when the plane rotates in pitch) lies far forward. Thus, when the pilot pulls back on the stick to "flare" the landing, the first thing that happens is that the plane "descends". The "descent" is actually the plane reacting to the nose up command from the pilot. Eventually, the plane would have "flared" had it not been so close to the ground. The pilot should have used power to cushion the landing instead. Probably a tricky plane to land
dolby338 3 years ago
@dolby338 Yes. The combination of poor visibility and very stiff pitch controls contribute to a difficult landing profile.
beeroosterm 1 year ago
It looks like it was deliberately landed that way. The gear only seems to very lightly touch down the first time. Anyone speak to that?
mikoyan25 4 years ago
this is one hard to fly plane
thunderdragon14 4 years ago 2
Don't quite understand this video. I thought the TU144 was a 1970's soviet 'concorde' equivelant. Why is it flying years later as a Nasa aircraft? Remember the original crash though.
Work4What 4 years ago
You are right, I don't think this video is from the late 90s, but rather from the late 70s. Can anybody confirm?
Anyways, from what I gather, it was an extremely touchy airplane to land, and this landing seems right in the norms.
etiennedauphin 4 years ago
IBP Aerospace negotiated an agreement with Tupolev and NASA, (also Rockwell and later Boeing). They offered a Tu-144 as a testbed for its High Speed Commercial Research program, intended to design a second-generation supersonic jetliner called the High Speed Civil Transport. In 1995, Tu-144D built in 1981 was taken out of storage and after modification at a total cost of $350 million was designated the Tu-144LL. It made a total of 27 flights in 1996 and 1997.
hostroute 3 years ago 2
@Work4What TU144 technologically superiour to CONCORDE. I think crash was not an acident and not faliour, it was crashed becouse in the middle of a cold war America and the west could not aloww Soviets to be superiour in such important point and to make Soviet technology look bad, incenirated crash.
mikeplay007 1 year ago
@mikeplay007 don't be silly. Concorde was way more advanced in every single way. The engines on the Concorde could go 50% further mileage than this. It's landing speed was 50% lower. Concorde was lighter and way more advanced. This aircraft needs a parachute to stop while Concorde uses anti lock brakes, and reverse thrust. Fly-by-wire technology/controls. Concordes is still advanced to this day. ur statement has been blown out of the water. O and Concordes much more better looking.
teemas10 1 year ago
concorde was a success BA actaully used to make a profit operating concorde we will never see supersonic airliners again because the world is run by pen pushing blotter jotting bean counting weeds
I bet if concorde had been built by boeing there would have been hundreads flying today!!
there was a lot of crap talked about concorde like the fact it would make whales go deaf and it would "punch"holes in the ozone layer
lordofbore 4 years ago 3
Supersonic air travel... Could we achieve that yet again in this age of the retired Concorde? - But instead of jet propulsion, how about immense short bursts of rocket propulsion? Like they do with space satellites in space. Could be feasible... There's no doubt Virgin would get there first. Rockets over jets... Anyone?
Welloiledcog 4 years ago 2
what an amazing plane....
Stormrider444 4 years ago
looks like the condorde! what a coincidence!!! still it's russian i woulddn't enter this plane for sure
tom123ek 4 years ago
Tu-144? like Tupolev-144?? So this was a Russian plane. Looks jes like the old T-4 the Soviets built.
HerrHIVEMIND 4 years ago
Extremly Bumpy landing!!!
jonzie12 4 years ago 2
OUCH!!!
Tanhauser01 5 years ago 2
Is it landing on an aircraft carrier???
superbertie 5 years ago
Dear sheep, better get propper information before entering the public. Guess why the eastern jet didn´t work. They couldn´t handle the thechnology. I´d be glad to show you the entrance of the public library in your area so You could read the facts yourself. Best regrads
Jozch 5 years ago
like usely-even sowjets was first with satellite (sputnik 1)= in space..also with a lot of other things su was leader..but anyway.also space shuttle Enegija buran was bedder then space shuttle.ignorant peopel ars st...
eristderbeste 5 years ago
dude whats with the unusual canards
banstaman 5 years ago
actually, the first flight of the tu 144 was a year before the concord...
RADAMES1983 5 years ago
Not true Jozch... read up on it before you post ignorant comments again. The Tu-144 was released first and was completely different in terms of mechanics etc... the design was similar yes but everything else that mattered was completely different and could not have been copied.
OriginalAtomicSheep 5 years ago
actually sovjet secret service stole information on concorde project and simply copied the plane.
Jozch 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
actually the tu-144 was superior in every way than the concorde, except for range. and it was abandoned oficially because one fell apart in the air(basically). stupid comment btw.
99draiwil 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
It was never wasted. They gained so much with the research. Thanks to this program they came up with supersonic bombers like the Su T100 (?)and the Tupolev 160 supersonic intercontinental bomber. Face it economist, sound like your just trying to flare ut cant handle the truth about Soviet Technological achievement.
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
Okay, Im not sure which came first,maybe the TU144 came later but your analogy doesnt make any sense. Of course you cant say that Kirov was base on a fishing boat, what kind of a dumb analogy is that. TU 144 was a very advance jet and its no Cessna so Im not too surprised that TU 144 resources were used for future aircraft. And no, it is not a loss. Soviet gained a lot when it comes to technology form this masterpiece. Face it.
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
Wrong wrong. Enough with the analogy, it was still a dumb example you used. Second, 16 were built but the same can be said about the Concord. If you agree that the Concord was a waste, then ok we are on par and agree that it came to fruition. But if you disagree about the Concord. Then sorry, I dont talk to bias people. It may have not been a commercially successful aircraft, but they gained alot through military technology. Therefore, no it was not wasted. The plane succeeded technology wise.
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
The only reason why Concorde and The TU144 failed to be on the market is because US failed to come up with a similar jet from the 6 engine bomber design (XB70?) anyway, US policy restricted the flight of supersonic jet over public which was BS. If US created it first, it would have been legal
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
Not really, since when did the official care about sonic boom and so on. Believe me, it was a way to protect US defense company like Boeing by outlawing the usage of supersonic over city. This prevented orders from EU aircraft companies. Yes it only carries 100 people but it is still a potential market.
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
Yes it is protectionism.If Us is so concern about the environment, then why do SUV still get tax breaks? Protect GM and Ford. And why at one point the US was going to reconsider sonic flight when Boeing was designing a new supersonic cargo plane? Its the fact, its protectionism.
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
It's still protectionism. Like I say, the FAA or whatever you call it once wanted to change their mind when Boeing was developing a supersonic plane. Its not like jets sound are not annoying anyway. If theres big money involves, they would approve it.
fredgt28 5 years ago
Comment removed
economistBR 5 years ago
mayby the pilot had to much vodka:)
torchman7 5 years ago