seems to be few people on YouTube, they know when it was conceived by the T-4, since I write such stupid comments.
first, already in the year 64 was built full-size wooden model for aerodynamic testing.
secondly the Tu-144 was developed from the T-4, just got off the ground first. Therefore, once the talk of copies, say, T-4 with Concorde is not with the T-144.
By the way this tail and nose with a variable geometry, first appeared on T-4
@jay55also Please explain. Because this plane is not alike anything. Only TU-144 is clouse. Baut there is a reason. The T-4 and Tu-144 are sisters in a way. Developed one out of the other. :)
@jay55also Самолёт не может быть квадратным. Если у него есть крылья для сверхзвукового полёта - это не есть копия. Это вынужденная форма, а не дизайн автомобиля.
@ranzelrob Yes. Like the Foxbat. Or the Mig 29..or the Mig 15.... Actually, you dont understand anything your commenting on do you? Your just typing uninformed unscholored opinion as fast as the magical ideas hit your synapses
@gwsoldier1 just the outside similar. The AK-47 and the STG44 has totally different firing mechanism, the AK's built up is similar to the M1 Garand (gas-ram), but could be fully automatic, the STG44 is more like the FN FAL, it's gas-surpressed operated. And as well the AK-47 is the most reliable assault rifle ever made, well the STG was... unreliable, hard to produce (compare to AK or AKM) and heavy. But as well it was the first true assault rifle, so it had some children's illness.
@supressorgrid HAHAH they have too much money to spent that's why...they think that they have unlimited amount of money even today...that is why they are fighting multiple wars and have 1000 of bases across the world. Now they are in debt, and their people are hungry and pissed off. The fall of an arrogant empire..
Ah... Russians and their carbon copies... I mean, they're cheaper, and built with less... safety in mind... but they really didn't come up with anything major on their own, did they?
If you're american you should thank you holy trousers that your helicopters were built by a ukrainian emigrant (sikorski) you rockets were built by germans (Braun) and your chemicals were designed by german chemists brought in under operation paperclip and most of the brilliant minds on the Manhattan project were Europeans that fled Nazism....
@52111centrumcz Сикорский, по вашему, "ukrainian emigrant"? А ведь за такие слова он как великорос, сторонник единой России и даже в какой-то момент монархист, вам бы мог и в морду двинуть.
Предшественники ваших "украинцев" (петлюровцы) для него были грязным отребъем, ломанувшимся в смутное время из загаженных галицийских деревень в его родной великорусский город Киев.
Ну и, естественно, эмигрировал он из Питера, где работал и создавал свои знаменитые бомбардировщики.
@IIKiboshII Actually, the Tu-144 IMPROVED upon the Concorde design. It was only because of the crash at the Paris Airshow that the plane never really made it... and that crash was caused by a French plane that was sent up to get close up pictures of the Tu-144. The French plane had a near-collision with the Tu-144, which was already in a precious maneuver. The pilot of the Tu-144 lost control when trying to avoid the collision.
@planeguy141 So that´s why the soviets asked the french for technical assistance in 1978? Because the TU-144 was better. Is was a flawed half finished design at best, pressed into service to fast, with highly insufficient and unreliable engines. During it´s short service lift, the TU-144 suffered two crashes, and there was no French around the second time to blame it on. It also suffered countles technical problems and inflight failures. Some improvement indeed.
@cwjian90 In 1977 they asked Lucas industries for help to redesign the engine management systems., and BAC-Aerospatiales for help with the air intake design. In 1978 they also asked the British for help to solve a host of other problems. The request was denied by the Brits, by the way.
@planeguy141 Are you having a laugh!! Improved on Concorde. Have a look at there in service performance. If you book a flight on aTU-144, you probably wouldn't get there!!!
The ruskies stole the data for concorde from the useless french, and then stiil couldn't build a decent aircraft!!!
I don't get what the points of saying which plane was first? Back then all the similar planes had same engineering solution to the problem. You can't defy laws of physics and make supersonic jet which will look different especially during times when technology was not advanced as today.
@Capt777harris The XB-70 Valkyrie was a much more advanced aircraft than this. I would say more of a response, although they have obviously used ideas from the XB-70 and done the best they could
@Capt777harris T-4 is not "copy of XB-70" in any way. They just share some common ideas, which have, though, very different implementation. Just compare the table characteristics. It's much better way to make conclusions than to blindly believe in the trash you have read in the wall of unknown WC.
The only true statements is that XB-70 is of bit early design.
@perlghost No, it's a copy right down to the intake, the canted cockpit, exhaust and fuselage. The only thing different is that it doesn't use the twin tail configuration.
@Capt777harris In a way... Yes. Also, as it was a prototype, and it did fly, so it did achieved a lot. It was made to fly M3, but the project was canceled in favour of MIG-23. Also ballistic missiles appeared, so it was not needed as a bomber anymore. Another important result of this plane is TU-144 itself! Another thig is; Please put a picture of XB-70 (that project was abandoned also) next to a picture of the T-4. Do you really think that it was a copy? :D This is what i ment when i wrote....
@hotpocketpoison Ok It is just like XB-70. Exept the entire concept, canards, engines, their placement, the wings, the tail, the flight systems, materials used, structure, and all the rest.... :D
@Modellpecs the ONLY difference between the T-4 and the XB-70 is the size of the canards and the fact that the XB-70 has 2 vertical stabilizers. OF CORSE the materials and engines will be different, the fact remains that the T-4 is nearly a carbon copy of the XB-70.
@hotpocketpoison Yeah just like an apple and a stone.... :D Do you hear yourselfe? The 2 vertical stabilisers? Yeah... And a few more engines... etc... Who cares....? :D
@perlghost WHAT are you talking about??? EVERYTHING IS IN COMMON! the variable nose cone, the canard placement, the delta wing body, the placement of the engines, they even serve the same role EVERYTHING IS THE SAME! there may be slight and i mean SLIGHT differences in the shape and size of certain parts but the overall design is nearly identical.
@hotpocketpoison Oh dear... Every bird flyes. Once there was onley one. Than birds started to copy each other... :D Nose? Only Stoka had variable nose. The canard is positioned here because it have to be there. It is aerodynamics... The wing is a simple triangle on xb. The winglets angle can be changed. Stoka did not have this. Also a few more engine and tail on xb... :D The body? Yeah like fire and water.... :D To see this, you don't have to be an engineer...
@Capt777harris "The only real difference is the Valkyrie uses a twin tail configuration" You wrote this. I think it is funny. So if you wanted to make us laugh, than i give your post a "like". But i was not sure, so i ask.
@rampking1 The Tu-160 was designed in the 1950's and was released 1967.Unlike the B-70, the Tu-144 was not cancelled.The T-4 was harnessing the same technology as the B-70,until the Soviets thought it sucked.The Tu-4 is indeed a copy of the B-29.This is because US didnt want to supply the Russians with them.They liked the airplane so they built their own B-29(who could blame them?).But it was never used and Tu-16's replaced them.
@scarface8999 Oh wrong info...Tu-160 was planned at the 1950's and they started research (in conjunction with Tu-144 charger and M-18)...Tu-160 first production was in 1975
The funny thing is the copycat plane is always released like 10-20yrs after the original was in service, as if the outdated hunk of Russian scrap can compete with the new stuff. It's also funny how commy sympathizers say "oh it's because form follows function." In the Russians case, outdated design follows thieving crime.
Why the hell is it that when I watch videos of American military planes, somehow I end up on a video of a random Russian plane, AND ITS A SIMILAR EFFIN DESIGN! Sheesh Are the Russians so inept that they need to copy designs instead of creating them? Seriously it's getting kind of annoying.
@piesior Ha Ha it,s so funny.... O, I forgot you belong to western civilization - that,s why i,m not surprise to your stupid joke... Is that Britain,s soldiers were crying in Iran,s prison?! P.S. Say hello to Berezovskiy...
This plane was 5x times more advanced than that Valkyrie garbage. First fly-by-wire in the World, futuristic materials. No wonder XB-70 was cancelled.
That reminds me of when Reagan cancelled US ASAT program after one "successful" test (USSR succeeded earier ofcourse), only for Clinton to restart the "successful" program in 1997. Why? Because yanks failed dismally, Soviet space tracking saw nothing happening in orbit. So Congress "banned space weaponry cause its baaaaad", hahahahaha!!!
@SovietWarrior The B-70 flew, achieved mach3 (something the T 4 NEVER achieved), crashed and was cancelled long before this piece of soviet crap even took off.
@scoobytopdog /politely/ The crap is in your head, baby. It's pity you hadn't lost that head in the mentioned crash of XB-70, so we didn't need to see as that shit is drifted through the stupid mouth and to the stupid comments.
@scoobytopdog You really thought that you have some "facts" in your comments? Unbelievable. There are only wrong/incorrect/stupid/offensive statements.
(ahbahpuh) - you r the idiot or the provoker. The title this video are incorrect. Tu-144 has made the first flight( 38 min 1968) earlier, than Concorde (FR /UK). or U.S . supersonic Transports Lockheed L2000 and Boeing 2707-300 a fixed delta wing.
And 17 Mar 1996 from Airport Ramenskoe fly TU-144 LL .
24 .October .2003 (113 dead) concord crash just 5km from the village Gusenvil where was been crashed Tu-144 (11 dead)
(ahbahpuh) - you r the idiot or the provoker. The title this video are incorrect. Tu-144 has made the first flight( 38 min 1968) earlier, than Concorde (FR /UK). or U.S . supersonic Transports Lockheed L2000 and Boeing 2707-300 a fixed delta wing.
And 17 Mar 1996 from Airport Ramenskoe fly TU-144 LL .
24 .October .2003 (113 dead) concord crash just 5km from the village Gusenvil where was been crashed Tu-144 (11 dead)
Beautiful footage. This was a very exciting era in aviation. We saw the ultimate evolution of the delta wing in aircraft such as the XB-70, Concorde, Tu-144 and the T-4. Amazing to think they were all designed with sliderules and pure human genius. Nowadays, with the use of computers, designers not only KNOW their aircraft will fly but also many of the fly characteristics before they ever reach mockup.
@korodore Won't argue with you there, Bro! The Vulcan was a beautiful machine. Speaking of Brit planes, let's not forget the Handley-Page-Victor. That thing is bizarre looking and beautiful at the same time. It always reminded me of a huge X-1 with those cockpit window frames and the sleek 50 cal bullet shape.
@TV843 The Victor... oh SNAP YEAH. You win. Those British used to make awesome planes. The Harrier, Lynx and (ok not strictly Brit) Jaguar and Tornado... Concorde... HOTOL..? all works of engineering art. Shame they're so screwed these days, and even then wanting to put cash into Trident rather than some NEEDED military equipment, but I digress :D
@korodore if you want an amazing british jet, look at the English Electric Lightning, a short range, high speed fighter. Look it up in Wiki, you'll have a new pet jet.
@TripleZ89 Amen, Bro... This was when aircraft looked like bullets. They looked fast sitting still. I once heard someone say, with all of the electronic flight control software we have nowadays, you could make a brick fly stable. This is a good thing, but unfortunately it's made for some ugly/uninteresting aircraft. Back when the Sotka/B-70/Tu-144 and such came around, stability depended more on the shape of the aircraft. Thus, we had these long, sleek, gorgeous arrow-like aircraft.
RUSSIANS! YOU ARE IGNORANT FOOLS! AMERICAN EXPERTS WITH 8 CLASS EDUCATION TELL YOU IT IS A COPY AND IT MUST BE A RIGHT BECAUSE THEY LOOK SIMILAR!!!1111oneone1. RUSSIAN HAVE ALSO STOLE WHEELS, BECAUSE THEY ARE ROUND TOO IN RUSSIA! RUSSAINS STOLE EVERYTHING, THEY CAN'T INVENT THEMSELVES!
Looking at this some comparisons with the Vulcan, and particularly the prototypes could be drawn (in that I'm comparing them as supersonic bombers.) To all those commenting on the lack of bomb bays or attachment points, read the description. It was a prototype. A proof of concept. You don't have to arm them out for that, just show that the design flies the way its supposed to...
the US XB-70 was suppose to be the first stealth bomber US wants to test. although its program was scrapped after a disastrous flight test that blew the experimental bomber along with another escort it was meant to be a stealth bomber.
The XB-70 was not close to a stealth bomber. 6 engines + giant rectangular air intakes = giant radar and IR signature. Rather, the XB-70 was supposed to be the first "untouchable" bomber, so that all air defenses would be successfully evaded by flying so high and fast that they couldn't stop it.
@ganarzon . The destruction was due do a chase plane colliding with the XB-70. Its believed the it came to close and was flipped over by air currents from the XB-70. The deployment of ICBM's meant the XB-70 was superfluous and only useful for research into high speed technology. Production was canceled before the crash.Stealth technology was a long way off when the XB-70 program was canceled. The later B-1 was the first large aircraft to deliberately incorporate stealth ideas.
@evilfish456 U R a twatt compairing a passengerplane with a military bomber!look at the underside of this T-4 (or Tu-144) and you'll see there is simply NO PLACE for the bombcompartimentdoors!
I just don't understand why the US and Russia just can't get over their issues. US flew a B2 spy plane over their territory, Russian's stole US nuclear information and eventually sold it to everyone(thanks Russia) but that was years ago, I don't understand why they wouldn't want to work together on more issues than space.
Comment removed
planeguy141 1 month ago
It was the most expensive project in the USSR after the Buran, of course (in the aerospace industry)
greyderH2 2 months ago
seems to be few people on YouTube, they know when it was conceived by the T-4, since I write such stupid comments.
first, already in the year 64 was built full-size wooden model for aerodynamic testing.
secondly the Tu-144 was developed from the T-4, just got off the ground first. Therefore, once the talk of copies, say, T-4 with Concorde is not with the T-144.
By the way this tail and nose with a variable geometry, first appeared on T-4
greyderH2 2 months ago
Just a crap copy of the MIGHTY VALQUERIE...
TheJetbreaker 2 months ago
@ the start looks like a concorde
ComboSlicer 2 months ago
It's amazing how the USSR seem to always have close copies of U.S. military aircraft.
jay55also 3 months ago
@jay55also Please explain. Because this plane is not alike anything. Only TU-144 is clouse. Baut there is a reason. The T-4 and Tu-144 are sisters in a way. Developed one out of the other. :)
Modellpecs 3 months ago
@Modellpecs The Tu-144 was obviously a copy of XB-70 that flew 4 years before the Tu's first flight.
442hoeky 2 months ago
@442hoeky :D Not even the size is the same.... :D
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@jay55also Самолёт не может быть квадратным. Если у него есть крылья для сверхзвукового полёта - это не есть копия. Это вынужденная форма, а не дизайн автомобиля.
konjinni 3 months ago
@izchicago Uuuuhm... Ukraine was part of the USSR. In fact, it was one of the founding republics.
planeguy141 3 months ago
It looks strikingly similar to the XB-70 Valkyrie.
planeguy141 3 months ago 5
@planeguy141 take XB-70, divide by 2, equals T-4
tht1drnkrussian 1 month ago
That's pretty cool!
libertyphoenix777 3 months ago
b-70 to t-4: "quit biting, nigga!"
bryanttillman 4 months ago
@zzerDrezz I was sarcastic
zzerDrezz 4 months ago
baby conkordski
t1000eg 4 months ago
Comment removed
bjosifovic 4 months ago
Comment removed
bjosifovic 4 months ago
Actually it was never going to be used as a bomber, but as a interceptor fighter aircraft.
actionmantodiworl123 4 months ago
all the russians can do is copy everything the americans put out
ranzelrob 4 months ago
@ranzelrob Yes. Like the Foxbat. Or the Mig 29..or the Mig 15.... Actually, you dont understand anything your commenting on do you? Your just typing uninformed unscholored opinion as fast as the magical ideas hit your synapses
tommiatkins 4 months ago
@ranzelrob LOL! really? or the other way around?
pogpog28 4 months ago
Balalaika v vozduhe!!! :)
digimaks 5 months ago
@jericoparazo
Correction: The ak47 was a total copy of the german stg-44 just so you know it :)
gwsoldier1 6 months ago
@gwsoldier1 just the outside similar. The AK-47 and the STG44 has totally different firing mechanism, the AK's built up is similar to the M1 Garand (gas-ram), but could be fully automatic, the STG44 is more like the FN FAL, it's gas-surpressed operated. And as well the AK-47 is the most reliable assault rifle ever made, well the STG was... unreliable, hard to produce (compare to AK or AKM) and heavy. But as well it was the first true assault rifle, so it had some children's illness.
macee17 6 months ago
@gwsoldier1 the AK-47 was INSPIRED by the STG-44, it was not a copy.
planeguy141 1 month ago
Nasa spent millions developing a pen that would write in space. The Russians sent pencils. You decide who had more sence.
supressorgrid 7 months ago 2
@supressorgrid HAHAH they have too much money to spent that's why...they think that they have unlimited amount of money even today...that is why they are fighting multiple wars and have 1000 of bases across the world. Now they are in debt, and their people are hungry and pissed off. The fall of an arrogant empire..
zero00tolerance 6 months ago
@supressorgrid Your last word should be cents ;}
prjerry7 6 months ago
@supressorgrid - AAOOOGAH! AAOOOGAH!
URBAN LEGEND ALERT! URBAN LEGEND ALERT!
JBofBrisbane 6 months ago
@JBofBrisbane this one happens to be true. Thirty years ago they ran tv ads about it.
supressorgrid 6 months ago
@JBofBrisbane As a matter of fact it was called the Fisher Space pen if I aint mistaken.
supressorgrid 6 months ago
in soviet russia plane fly you!
BigSammy1000 7 months ago
@jericoparazo That's really not much. If it wasn't for the Bolsheviks there would have been much more.
newmanfrigan 7 months ago
Ah... Russians and their carbon copies... I mean, they're cheaper, and built with less... safety in mind... but they really didn't come up with anything major on their own, did they?
IIKiboshII 8 months ago
@IIKiboshII
If you're american you should thank you holy trousers that your helicopters were built by a ukrainian emigrant (sikorski) you rockets were built by germans (Braun) and your chemicals were designed by german chemists brought in under operation paperclip and most of the brilliant minds on the Manhattan project were Europeans that fled Nazism....
52111centrumcz 6 months ago 3
@52111centrumcz Сикорский, по вашему, "ukrainian emigrant"? А ведь за такие слова он как великорос, сторонник единой России и даже в какой-то момент монархист, вам бы мог и в морду двинуть.
Предшественники ваших "украинцев" (петлюровцы) для него были грязным отребъем, ломанувшимся в смутное время из загаженных галицийских деревень в его родной великорусский город Киев.
Ну и, естественно, эмигрировал он из Питера, где работал и создавал свои знаменитые бомбардировщики.
perlghost 4 months ago
@perlghost
nope. CZ
52111centrumcz 4 months ago
@IIKiboshII Actually, the Tu-144 IMPROVED upon the Concorde design. It was only because of the crash at the Paris Airshow that the plane never really made it... and that crash was caused by a French plane that was sent up to get close up pictures of the Tu-144. The French plane had a near-collision with the Tu-144, which was already in a precious maneuver. The pilot of the Tu-144 lost control when trying to avoid the collision.
planeguy141 3 months ago
@planeguy141 So that´s why the soviets asked the french for technical assistance in 1978? Because the TU-144 was better. Is was a flawed half finished design at best, pressed into service to fast, with highly insufficient and unreliable engines. During it´s short service lift, the TU-144 suffered two crashes, and there was no French around the second time to blame it on. It also suffered countles technical problems and inflight failures. Some improvement indeed.
schr75 3 months ago
@schr75 Since when did they ask the French for technical assistance?
cwjian90 2 months ago
@cwjian90 In 1977 they asked Lucas industries for help to redesign the engine management systems., and BAC-Aerospatiales for help with the air intake design. In 1978 they also asked the British for help to solve a host of other problems. The request was denied by the Brits, by the way.
schr75 2 months ago
@planeguy141 Are you having a laugh!! Improved on Concorde. Have a look at there in service performance. If you book a flight on aTU-144, you probably wouldn't get there!!!
The ruskies stole the data for concorde from the useless french, and then stiil couldn't build a decent aircraft!!!
scoobytopdog 2 months ago
I don't get what the points of saying which plane was first? Back then all the similar planes had same engineering solution to the problem. You can't defy laws of physics and make supersonic jet which will look different especially during times when technology was not advanced as today.
ArmAFan 8 months ago
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. ;-)
onlymusicism 9 months ago
it looks as if they duped it from XB-70
maninder1992 10 months ago
no lo conocia,buena filmacion!
miguelito5627 10 months ago
@ShaitanBabai The Valkyrie was an excellent plane. There was absolutely nothing wrong with it.
Capt777harris 11 months ago
As usual, a Russian copy of an American plane.
Capt777harris 11 months ago
@Capt777harris Как обычно что то ляпнул малограмотный америкос
MaksimovLugansk 9 months ago
@MaksimovLugansk Which doesn't negate the fact that it's a copy of the American XB-70 Valkyrie.
Asshole.
Capt777harris 9 months ago
@Capt777harris Но ты не расстраивайся. ))
MaksimovLugansk 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Capt777harris The XB-70 Valkyrie was a much more advanced aircraft than this. I would say more of a response, although they have obviously used ideas from the XB-70 and done the best they could
binaway 8 months ago
@Capt777harris How could it be a copy? It is totally different.....
Modellpecs 6 months ago
@Capt777harris T-4 is not "copy of XB-70" in any way. They just share some common ideas, which have, though, very different implementation. Just compare the table characteristics. It's much better way to make conclusions than to blindly believe in the trash you have read in the wall of unknown WC.
The only true statements is that XB-70 is of bit early design.
perlghost 4 months ago
@perlghost No, it's a copy right down to the intake, the canted cockpit, exhaust and fuselage. The only thing different is that it doesn't use the twin tail configuration.
Capt777harris 4 months ago
@Capt777harris Sure... :D
Modellpecs 4 months ago
@Modellpecs Meaning what? Are you trying to be sarcastic? This piece of shit Russian plane never achieved anything.
Capt777harris 4 months ago
Comment removed
Modellpecs 4 months ago
@Capt777harris In a way... Yes. Also, as it was a prototype, and it did fly, so it did achieved a lot. It was made to fly M3, but the project was canceled in favour of MIG-23. Also ballistic missiles appeared, so it was not needed as a bomber anymore. Another important result of this plane is TU-144 itself! Another thig is; Please put a picture of XB-70 (that project was abandoned also) next to a picture of the T-4. Do you really think that it was a copy? :D This is what i ment when i wrote....
Modellpecs 4 months ago 11
@Modellpecs You're full of shit. Just look at the physical appearance you commie fuck.
Capt777harris 4 months ago
@Capt777harris :D I have fears for you. Be careful pls. Don't eat the bowling ball!!! It is not a melon! :D :D :D
Modellpecs 4 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Capt777harris Calm down nigga.
ViciousCritique 3 months ago
@Modellpecs it's A COPY from the FUTURE with a time machine.... which was also copied
VVUULDTUURRM 3 months ago
@VVUULDTUURRM :D Did not know that.... :D
Modellpecs 3 months ago
@Modellpecs YES! the XB-70 looks virtually identical excluding the design of the wing tips.
hotpocketpoison 2 months ago
@hotpocketpoison Ok It is just like XB-70. Exept the entire concept, canards, engines, their placement, the wings, the tail, the flight systems, materials used, structure, and all the rest.... :D
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@Modellpecs the ONLY difference between the T-4 and the XB-70 is the size of the canards and the fact that the XB-70 has 2 vertical stabilizers. OF CORSE the materials and engines will be different, the fact remains that the T-4 is nearly a carbon copy of the XB-70.
hotpocketpoison 2 months ago
@hotpocketpoison Yeah just like an apple and a stone.... :D Do you hear yourselfe? The 2 vertical stabilisers? Yeah... And a few more engines... etc... Who cares....? :D
Modellpecs 2 months ago
@hotpocketpoison Compare the wings. Compare the nose. If you have eyes, of course.
There is _nothing_ in common except... but you have no need in subtleties, with such simplicity.
perlghost 2 months ago
@perlghost WHAT are you talking about??? EVERYTHING IS IN COMMON! the variable nose cone, the canard placement, the delta wing body, the placement of the engines, they even serve the same role EVERYTHING IS THE SAME! there may be slight and i mean SLIGHT differences in the shape and size of certain parts but the overall design is nearly identical.
hotpocketpoison 2 months ago
@hotpocketpoison Oh dear... Every bird flyes. Once there was onley one. Than birds started to copy each other... :D Nose? Only Stoka had variable nose. The canard is positioned here because it have to be there. It is aerodynamics... The wing is a simple triangle on xb. The winglets angle can be changed. Stoka did not have this. Also a few more engine and tail on xb... :D The body? Yeah like fire and water.... :D To see this, you don't have to be an engineer...
Modellpecs 1 month ago
@Modellpecs Yes I do.
Capt777harris 2 months ago
Comment removed
Jenbwb 1 month ago
@Modellpecs the project was canceled in favour of TU-160 - slower craft, with less altitude and fly range.
Jenbwb 1 month ago
@Jenbwb Th T4 first flew in 1972. TU-160 came almost 10 years later, in 1981. But it only entered service in 1987!
The TU-160 really had a ancestor. It is called TU-144.
Modellpecs 1 week ago 2
Comment removed
199leg 4 months ago
Comment removed
199leg 4 months ago
Comment removed
199leg 4 months ago
@Capt777harris It would be very nice if you at least compared the pictures before making statements.
perlghost 2 months ago
@perlghost I did. The only real difference is the Valkyrie uses a twin tail configuration, another American innovation.
Capt777harris 2 months ago
@Capt777harris Are you kidding?
Modellpecs 1 month ago
@Modellpecs Kidding about what? At least tell me what you're talking about.
Capt777harris 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Capt777harris "The only real difference is the Valkyrie uses a twin tail configuration" You wrote this. I think it is funny. So if you wanted to make us laugh, than i give your post a "like". But i was not sure, so i ask.
Modellpecs 1 month ago
great footage!!!!! which came 1st? XB-70 or T-4?????
migstrike 11 months ago
THE XB-70 was AWESOME! T-4 Clone! Never knew that!
bestinsigns 1 year ago
@bestinsigns
go in school, troll
ReDDDgoII 9 months ago
Looks like XB-70
alongthebluff 1 year ago
@alongthebluff I think it looks far more like concord tbh, the adjustable nose in particular....
migstrike 11 months ago
@migstrike You mean Tu-144. ;)
Modellpecs 9 months ago
Rare and great shot.big fail of soviet aircraft technology.made of titanium,expensive than gold and finally crash and musium!!!
Apache2029 1 year ago
old mig 21 in background what a monster that was...
IDemonHeroI 1 year ago
The funny thing is that, by "heavy", they mean it weighs a lot not that it is a big bomber. Fly like a rock.
BombaBVI 1 year ago
Minimum of 10 years difference time difference between the two aircraft.
Pardon the expression, ;-) ..but the B-70 was "light years ahead" of the T-4 in development era's. Late 1950's for the B-70, late 1960's for the T-4
I find it interesting that the Soviets used the #4 for another copy of an American bomber...the Tupelov Tu-4 copy of the B-29 bomber.
rampking1 1 year ago
@rampking1 The Tu-160 was designed in the 1950's and was released 1967.Unlike the B-70, the Tu-144 was not cancelled.The T-4 was harnessing the same technology as the B-70,until the Soviets thought it sucked.The Tu-4 is indeed a copy of the B-29.This is because US didnt want to supply the Russians with them.They liked the airplane so they built their own B-29(who could blame them?).But it was never used and Tu-16's replaced them.
999cheetos999 1 year ago
@999cheetos999 The TU-160... you mean the TU-95, the TU-160 is a supersonic bomber kinda like the TU-22M and B1B Lancer.
scarface8999 1 year ago
@scarface8999 Oh wrong info...Tu-160 was planned at the 1950's and they started research (in conjunction with Tu-144 charger and M-18)...Tu-160 first production was in 1975
999cheetos999 1 year ago
@999cheetos999 ( en.wikipedia. Tupolev_Tu-160 )
nk12ma 1 year ago
B-70 with Red stars...end of story.
rampking1 1 year ago
@rampking1 or is the B-70 a T-4 with a withe star ???
rudiballaballa 1 year ago
Cool plane, first with fly-by-wire. now its resting in a museum in Moscow.
alexejnemov 1 year ago
The funny thing is the copycat plane is always released like 10-20yrs after the original was in service, as if the outdated hunk of Russian scrap can compete with the new stuff. It's also funny how commy sympathizers say "oh it's because form follows function." In the Russians case, outdated design follows thieving crime.
WillAvenger 1 year ago
Why the hell is it that when I watch videos of American military planes, somehow I end up on a video of a random Russian plane, AND ITS A SIMILAR EFFIN DESIGN! Sheesh Are the Russians so inept that they need to copy designs instead of creating them? Seriously it's getting kind of annoying.
WillAvenger 1 year ago
Т-4 "сотка" --- красавец!!!
Bunker161 1 year ago 28
@Bunker161 Just like Your's Mum.
piesior 1 year ago
@piesior Ha Ha it,s so funny.... O, I forgot you belong to western civilization - that,s why i,m not surprise to your stupid joke... Is that Britain,s soldiers were crying in Iran,s prison?! P.S. Say hello to Berezovskiy...
Bunker161 1 year ago
@Bunker161 I'm in Britain now,but.I'm Polish.You know : Kura nie ptica,polsza nie zagranica.
piesior 1 year ago
eto xuyna
azadliq77 1 year ago
This plane was 5x times more advanced than that Valkyrie garbage. First fly-by-wire in the World, futuristic materials. No wonder XB-70 was cancelled.
That reminds me of when Reagan cancelled US ASAT program after one "successful" test (USSR succeeded earier ofcourse), only for Clinton to restart the "successful" program in 1997. Why? Because yanks failed dismally, Soviet space tracking saw nothing happening in orbit. So Congress "banned space weaponry cause its baaaaad", hahahahaha!!!
SovietWarrior 1 year ago
@SovietWarrior The B-70 flew, achieved mach3 (something the T 4 NEVER achieved), crashed and was cancelled long before this piece of soviet crap even took off.
scoobytopdog 1 year ago 5
@scoobytopdog /politely/ The crap is in your head, baby. It's pity you hadn't lost that head in the mentioned crash of XB-70, so we didn't need to see as that shit is drifted through the stupid mouth and to the stupid comments.
perlghost 4 months ago
@perlghost Okay SHITHEAD. What part of my comment are you disputing? What facts stated are incorrect?
Please let use all know so we can all have a fucking good laugh at you.
scoobytopdog 4 months ago
@scoobytopdog You really thought that you have some "facts" in your comments? Unbelievable. There are only wrong/incorrect/stupid/offensive statements.
perlghost 2 months ago
Comment removed
scoobytopdog 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@perlghost B70 max speed attained - Mach 3.08 FACT
T4 alleged max speed attained Mach 1.32
XB70 62-0207 crashed 8 June 1966. FACT.
XB70 last test flight 17 December 1968 FACT
T4 first fight alleged 22 August 1972
scoobytopdog 2 months ago
@scoobytopdog Yeah, leave it to the Ruskies to know jack shit about original R&D.
Capt777harris 4 months ago
Soviet Leadership decided to equip FA and PVO with the MiG-23...it was too expensive to produce both mig-23 and T-4...
andreanfibi90 1 year ago
Valkyrie Xb 71? Is that it?
alanlenon 1 year ago
'
ohh nooo,,,
why ussr russia is always copy steal from america super plane,,,
that is why ussr russia is a BIG cheat evil empire country
bestamerica 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(ahbahpuh) - you r the idiot or the provoker. The title this video are incorrect. Tu-144 has made the first flight( 38 min 1968) earlier, than Concorde (FR /UK). or U.S . supersonic Transports Lockheed L2000 and Boeing 2707-300 a fixed delta wing.
And 17 Mar 1996 from Airport Ramenskoe fly TU-144 LL .
24 .October .2003 (113 dead) concord crash just 5km from the village Gusenvil where was been crashed Tu-144 (11 dead)
1ramus1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
(ahbahpuh) - you r the idiot or the provoker. The title this video are incorrect. Tu-144 has made the first flight( 38 min 1968) earlier, than Concorde (FR /UK). or U.S . supersonic Transports Lockheed L2000 and Boeing 2707-300 a fixed delta wing.
And 17 Mar 1996 from Airport Ramenskoe fly TU-144 LL .
24 .October .2003 (113 dead) concord crash just 5km from the village Gusenvil where was been crashed Tu-144 (11 dead)
1ramus1 1 year ago
Русское ЧУДО!! Скорость 3200 км/ч! Хрен какой истрибитель догонит!
neonella 1 year ago 2
Cool, 'the Red B-70'!
kuluku 2 years ago
Россия является ставка Te
Xbartek575 2 years ago
Beautiful footage. This was a very exciting era in aviation. We saw the ultimate evolution of the delta wing in aircraft such as the XB-70, Concorde, Tu-144 and the T-4. Amazing to think they were all designed with sliderules and pure human genius. Nowadays, with the use of computers, designers not only KNOW their aircraft will fly but also many of the fly characteristics before they ever reach mockup.
TV843 2 years ago 61
@TV843 Naaaah VULCAN :D
korodore 1 year ago
@korodore Won't argue with you there, Bro! The Vulcan was a beautiful machine. Speaking of Brit planes, let's not forget the Handley-Page-Victor. That thing is bizarre looking and beautiful at the same time. It always reminded me of a huge X-1 with those cockpit window frames and the sleek 50 cal bullet shape.
TV843 1 year ago
@TV843 The Victor... oh SNAP YEAH. You win. Those British used to make awesome planes. The Harrier, Lynx and (ok not strictly Brit) Jaguar and Tornado... Concorde... HOTOL..? all works of engineering art. Shame they're so screwed these days, and even then wanting to put cash into Trident rather than some NEEDED military equipment, but I digress :D
korodore 1 year ago
@korodore if you want an amazing british jet, look at the English Electric Lightning, a short range, high speed fighter. Look it up in Wiki, you'll have a new pet jet.
decimated550 1 year ago
@TV843
Yeah these aircraft I THINK were the absolute pinnacle of badassness. What do we have of this magnitude of badassness now?
*Badassness= Huge and fast as hell, and badass looking
TripleZ89 1 year ago
@TripleZ89 Amen, Bro... This was when aircraft looked like bullets. They looked fast sitting still. I once heard someone say, with all of the electronic flight control software we have nowadays, you could make a brick fly stable. This is a good thing, but unfortunately it's made for some ugly/uninteresting aircraft. Back when the Sotka/B-70/Tu-144 and such came around, stability depended more on the shape of the aircraft. Thus, we had these long, sleek, gorgeous arrow-like aircraft.
TV843 1 year ago
@TV843 but they still manage to produce crap...
canals22 6 months ago
The best bomber for its time.
Project was closed to allow Tupolev Bureau make it's own project.
Unfortunately...
Anti4True3VostokUkr 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
RUSSIANS! YOU ARE IGNORANT FOOLS! AMERICAN EXPERTS WITH 8 CLASS EDUCATION TELL YOU IT IS A COPY AND IT MUST BE A RIGHT BECAUSE THEY LOOK SIMILAR!!!1111oneone1. RUSSIAN HAVE ALSO STOLE WHEELS, BECAUSE THEY ARE ROUND TOO IN RUSSIA! RUSSAINS STOLE EVERYTHING, THEY CAN'T INVENT THEMSELVES!
ahbahpuh 2 years ago 3
at least when russia steals, they make it look good, tell that to china when they copy cars from europe/america!
alexander1485 2 years ago 2
fool
yachttaboo 2 years ago
Comment removed
vovanpop 2 years ago
@vovanpop ебанулся что ли?
ahbahpuh 2 years ago
Не понял я твоего анлгийского юмора сходу :-)
vovanpop 2 years ago
@ahbahpuh
михмад жжот
st4tor 1 year ago 2
@st4tor хехе :D
ahbahpuh 1 year ago
@ahbahpuh and this play was copied from?
SovietBear91 1 year ago
@SovietBear91 it was coped from some holywood movie, it's obvious!
ahbahpuh 1 year ago
Ciekawe kto od kogo "zmałpował" rosjanie
od amerykanów czy odwrotnie!
Agrmons 2 years ago
boris reporting!
nikpogi 2 years ago
rofl
Turkeysitar 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Smaller imitation of XB-70 Valkyrie.
zvast 2 years ago
wow so rare footage amazing 5/5!
BulgarianInCanada 2 years ago 4
Looking at this some comparisons with the Vulcan, and particularly the prototypes could be drawn (in that I'm comparing them as supersonic bombers.) To all those commenting on the lack of bomb bays or attachment points, read the description. It was a prototype. A proof of concept. You don't have to arm them out for that, just show that the design flies the way its supposed to...
Tethran 2 years ago
valkyrie is a german name
s650bandit 2 years ago
the US XB-70 was suppose to be the first stealth bomber US wants to test. although its program was scrapped after a disastrous flight test that blew the experimental bomber along with another escort it was meant to be a stealth bomber.
ganarzon 2 years ago
The XB-70 was not close to a stealth bomber. 6 engines + giant rectangular air intakes = giant radar and IR signature. Rather, the XB-70 was supposed to be the first "untouchable" bomber, so that all air defenses would be successfully evaded by flying so high and fast that they couldn't stop it.
f38stingray 2 years ago 4
@ganarzon . The destruction was due do a chase plane colliding with the XB-70. Its believed the it came to close and was flipped over by air currents from the XB-70. The deployment of ICBM's meant the XB-70 was superfluous and only useful for research into high speed technology. Production was canceled before the crash.Stealth technology was a long way off when the XB-70 program was canceled. The later B-1 was the first large aircraft to deliberately incorporate stealth ideas.
binaway 1 year ago
@evilfish456 U R a twatt compairing a passengerplane with a military bomber!look at the underside of this T-4 (or Tu-144) and you'll see there is simply NO PLACE for the bombcompartimentdoors!
BOYCOT4YT 2 years ago
heavy bomber ?! tell me where would you attach/place the bombs/rocket racks on this kinda
"let's call it NOT the Tupolev 144 Concordski".
this aircraft is just a propaganda machine but obsolete from the start of the military project.
BOYCOT4YT 2 years ago
Money spent for this machine ,it is possible to buy Belgium.
as43 2 years ago
Same place where the us B2 bomber has the bombs, idiot.
evilfish456 2 years ago
this jet was the try to test new technologies just the same as xb70 but its history was not so disatrous
Farkas013 2 years ago 2
that's a XB-70 valkyrie!
stuvucsiz 2 years ago
bottom line... both countries are in absolute Financial Ruin... but the 2 morons are still bragging about technology... hahahahaha... nice trophy
andrew3245 2 years ago 3
Must have been USSR's answer to the US's Valkyrie. Looks about the same.
sirh0213 2 years ago 4
they had the quickest post service in the world ...
duxberry1958 2 years ago
I just don't understand why the US and Russia just can't get over their issues. US flew a B2 spy plane over their territory, Russian's stole US nuclear information and eventually sold it to everyone(thanks Russia) but that was years ago, I don't understand why they wouldn't want to work together on more issues than space.
TequilaKG 2 years ago 4
the list is endless...
duxberry1958 2 years ago
only minus 2 ...
duxberry1958 2 years ago
o dear it seams we have forgotten own history .you must of heard of the industry revolution which started in GREAT BRITIAN ...
duxberry1958 2 years ago
everything
duxberry1958 2 years ago
russia invented this plane before the americans or anyone else could draw up some plans
leinaduanatab 2 years ago
um sir the XB-70 was invented before the T-4. The T-4 was the response to the XB-70 like the MiG-25 Foxbat
rotorypowered74 2 years ago 4