The Tu-144: The Soviet Union's Concorde
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 05. 2020
- AKA Concordski. It took everything for me to not just title the video that ;). Second of a two parter on these two commercial super sonic planes!
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
Simon's Other Channels:
TodayIFoundOut: / todayifoundout
TopTenz: / toptenznet
Biographics: / @biographics
Visual Politik: / @visualpolitiken
Highlight History: / @highlighthistory
Geographics: / @geographicstravel
Business Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Future Mega Projects: Simon and all of his CZcams Channels.
What are the others channels of Simon?
@@ismaelalejandro4150 Biographics, Geographics, Top Tenz, Today I Found Out, Business Blaze.... And there's probably more I don't know off the top of my head.
@@jasonleclare2273 megaprojects
@@jasonleclare2273 I'm a dick this is megaprojects see he has that many I'm. Confused
Ismael Alejandro There’s a list in the video description.
You forgot to mention that you can visit both the Tupolev and the Concorde in the Technik-Museum in Sinsheim, Southern Germany. They had to tow the Tupolev there all the way from Russia.
Sinsheim... Been roughly 22 years or so since I've last been there. Certainly was an impressive museum back then.
Fantastic museum
The scene at 6:37 is taken at Sinsheim, with the Concorde on display just behind the TU144 but not shown in this picture. Both planes are accessible. The interior view at 9:04 is from this exhibit.
Why couldn't they just fly the planes there? Oh yeah right never mind
Havnt been there in nearly 14 years.i used to go there all the time,wonder what they have now.I live in Arizona USA now,We have the Air musuem in Tucson and boneyard,very impressive also.
When I was stationed in Berlin in 1971, I worked not too far from the East Berlin airport, Schoenefeld. It was about 1.5 miles away across the Wall. We had an obsolete tower with a steel mesh pad on top that stood about 100' tall on site. We heard about the Russian SST flying into Berlin on the way to the Paris Air Show, so we kept an eye out for it. Lo and behold, it turned up one day, and we got a really good look at it through our binoculars. It was a very pretty plane, even though we never saw it in the air. A very large helicopter, the Homer by NATO reporting name, was there, too. Just a bit of fun from the good old days.
Carl Huffman - Berlin Brigade? My dad was in that unit, I think in 1971. I'll ask him.
@@JohnnyWishbone85 Yes, sir. I was with the ASA Field Station, Co B from 1-1-70 to 3-6-72. I have never gone back to Berlin, since just about everything I was familiar with in my job is now erased. Thanks for asking. Good times.
Cool story, man!
That was great. I love these little personal nuggets. Thanks for sharing.
Next one: AN-225 "Mriya"
How big plane do you need?
YES.
Super duper size.
Da.
Alright. As opposed to the Boeing C-17 Globemaster, or the Lockheed C-5 in the Galaxy version, or the Super Guppy, versus the A300B4-600ST „Beluga“. They all are interesting transport vehicles.
@@the_kombinator or rather "так", it's Ukrainian after all
@@Inchaos42 Absolutna racja, moje zlo ;) We should not adopt the language of our mutual occupier!
Similar to this, the US space shuttle and the Soviet Buran would be an interesting topic!
Yes it would be interesting video, and in that regard the Buran IMHO was better than the shuttle, even though they copied the american and improved on it
Flavio Salatino it’s entirely possible that it was indeed better but it’s also entirely conjecture at this point on if it was or not
Or the Saturn rockets (most notably the Saturn V) vs the Shuttle.
@@aidan11162 lol why? The buran launched
@@aidan11162 Nah it was just better.
Suggestion: American and Soviet spaceshuttles.
Buran is a really interesting vehicle and arguably more capable than the Space Shuttle.
As with everything else, the soviet project is more promising, theoretically better, but ultimately the soviet union doesn't have the money to pay the upkeep costs on it and must give it up.
Definitely second this. First thing I thought of when you asked for suggestions.
Well except for the space shuttle anyway, where even the US forgot to pay the upkeep cost. They could have afforded it of course... but decided to spend a shitload of money elsewise instead.
Yup! My suggestion too. Space shuttle vs. Buran
i can imagine some British guy in his shed laughing thinking "we sent them all the wrong parts"
I can see them saying, they had all the right parts but not necessarily in the correct order
Ha ha ha poetic justice! 😂🤣😅😃😆
You do understand that is propaganda, and you do understand that Soviets were fantastic investors
@@nemanjap8768 i am British.....we are better.
@@paulleader7000 You are simply Russophobes.
Thinking of these 2 planes, reminded me of the story of the Tortus and the Hare. The Concord was designed and built as a super-fast commercial passenger plane. The TU was designed to beat the concord for speed, and from the sounds of it, thinks like reliability, safety, passenger comfort, etc (everything that made the concord work for its brief life) were left out in order to win the speed race, and it shows.
"Extraordinarily successful failure" What a great way to describe that. Thanks Simon, and everyone who helped produce this. Love your work.
RJ YOYO this reminded me of the known error window meme: “Task failed successfully!”
"Successful Historical Failures"
Thermopylae (Spartans)
Dunkirk (British)
Apollo 13(USA)
The Charge of the Light Brigade (British)
Bunker Hill (USA)
Amelia Earhart (USA)
Spartacus Revolt (Italy)
Jesus of Nazareth (Israel/Palestine)
@@Frank-mm2yp Alamo
US vs Russian cold war tech races are endlessly entertaining
whats really fun is watching all the cheap copies both sides did of eachother (mainly Russians ripping off the US and the Chinese copying the Russians, but it happened all over)
Boy could I fill your ears !! LOLZ
😎
In retrospect,it's almost laughable.
@@arthas640 The funniest being the Chinese copying Russian copies of Western aircraft !!
Sorry, but where exactly did you see the US in all this? The US gave up on their supersonic airliner, and Concorde was a proud piece of European cooperation. Don't forget that while the Cold War was obviously the major geopolitical conflict of the time, and Western Europe was on the same side as the US in that one, there was also an ongoing rivalry between European and US aircraft manufacturers; part of the reason Boeing and Lockheed started developing supersonic airliners at all was because successive US presidents did not want airlines in the US (notably Pan Am) to fly a supersonic airliner that had been made by BAe and Aerospatiale rather than a US manufacturer.
To be more specific, the cabin noise onboard the Tu-144 was quiet enough that you could just about talk to the person sitting right next to you. But it was also loud enough that if you were sat two seats apart, then you'd need to pass letter or use sign language.
Imagine telling your boss, "Yes, I know the program I designed was a huge failure, but you can't deny that it was the most successful failure though."
А вы представьте, что наши жуковци как что нибудь сопрут так сразу хаить начинают.
The Tu144 really is 2 planes. The prototype had so many issues the main production was pretty much a ground up redesign. Also interesting of note that Tupolev actually was against the aircraft as it was sucking up pretty much most of the Soviet aviation funds, funds that were desperately needed elsewhere!
I can only imagine the 1973 Paris Airshow did no favors to alleviate this. Between that and the increasing loss of faith from the top brass, makes me wonder who was the exact person that insisted this seemingly never ending train wreck to keep going.
In Soviet Russia, sound barrier breaks you!
underrated comment of the year
Unless you ar a MiG-25 or MiG-31...
Now to try to find rich people in Russia to fly on it.
@@johnbockelie3899 there are bunch of them
Overrated comment of the year.
In case there wasn't already a 100 people posting this, the Sinsheim technology museum has both of them on adjcacent rooftops. Sadly the TU144 engines are removed, but still it is wonderful to step inside both these planes. The TU-144 had a lot more headroom for the passengers, but the cockpit also shows it's basically 1950's technology.
2:25 - Chapter 1 - Rivalry
3:35 - Chapter 2 - Concordski
5:40 - Chapter 3 - Tire gate
6:30 - Chapter 4 - The 1st supersonic airliner
8:30 - Chapter 5 - Plagued with problems
10:50 - Chapter 6 - Showdown
12:30 - Chapter 7 - Official service
17:05 - Chapter 8 - Afterlife
Simon, maybe you could do a video on the first commercial aircraft to break the sound barrier? It wasn't the Concord or the Tu-144. It was in 1961 when a Douglas DC-8 was pushed to its limits. A man named Magruder took his DC-8 up to 52,000 feet and put it in a dive. At 45,000 feet it broke the sound barrier for some 16 seconds. The plane was escorted by Chuck Yaeger in an F-104.
DC-2, DC-3, DC-8 all god tier for different reasons. Boeing is no longer what it was.
The original prototype Tu-144 had all 4 engines under the plane, while the revised version separated the engines into two bays, similar to the Concordes. U can see the two version and how they look in ur videos. The first version also had the wings that were designed for speed while the second version had the canards in front and the wings had a similar look to the concords. They rushed to get the first version into the air and revised the second.
Mom went to work at Boeing's wind tunnel at Plant 2 around 1960 as an engineering aid, among other things plotting graph results of the wind tunnel testing on the Dyna Soar and SST projects (she had the neatest fine tip pens!). She took me on a open house kind of event featuring a walk through of the SST full scale mockup. I remember that it looked just like a real plane, that it did not look as narrow as I now know it must have been, but what excited me most was seeing TV screens at each seat!
An American aero engineer got a close-up look at the Concordski. He was impressed by the titanium parts. Except when he took a close look at a titanium screw, which had obviously been hand-made by using a lathe to cut the threads and a hacksaw to cut a slot in the top. Also remarkable we’re the huge titanium forging. Although after reflection, the items were so large they could not be routinely inspected for cracks and impossible to replace even if cracks were ever found. The Soviets had invested huge amounts of money in making the largest titanium presses in the world, but with never a thought about the later consequences of making such huge parts. On the Concorde you could unbolt worn out parts at least.
I would like to see the SR-71 Blackbird.
It has already seen you
brilliant idea sir
What do you think
This is probably the best one on the A12 - SR71 program I have seen
czcams.com/video/-zWAxIeeXqs/video.html
Also find the other ones on that channel with the pilots and navigators.
Russia sent spies to England to get info on Concord . right down to the rubber for its tires.
Saw down in Virginia at the Smithsonian sister museum by Dulles , very humbling aircraft even if a bit dated. Incredibly powerful engine, Mach 5 speeds. They also have the space shuttle discovery. Amazing trip definitely make it a bucket list item.
Well, given that URSS gave us the first satellite, the first living thing in space, the first astronaut (that was a cosmonaut) and the the first space walk, while being a country that was little out of the middle ages at the start of the XX Centuty tells you how hard they did drive themselves
And was almost destroyed by Nazis and payed a big price 20 million lives unlike the US only + 1 decade prior
Yes, but the criticism is "at what cost"?
Laika died a horrible and painful death long before the USSR had perfected TPS, basically launched in a tin can strapped to a Sputnik, while the US returned Ham in a capsule already ready for human flight. Yuri Gagarin had to bail out of his spacecraft, by design, because the vostok capsule hits the ground so hard it crushes on impact. Leonov performed the first spacewalk, but nearly died doing it. His spacesuit inflated so bad he could barely move his joints, and couldn't fit back in the airlock. He had to manually depressurize his spacesuit. And Soyuz 1... Oh boy... Commander Komarov was slated to fly on that mission... The engineers identified over 200 problems with the spacecraft before launch. It was to be launched anyway because the politicians were desparate for a win of some kind. Both he and Yuri Gagarin, his backup crew, knew this was a suicide mission. Yuri offered to take Komarov's place, but Komarov refused. He couldn't stand to see Yuri, his friend, and the hero of the soviet union, be killed.
Soyuz 1 ended in Komarov's death. This, combined with N1's failures, already after the US had beaten the USSR to the moon, as well as Korolev's unfortunate death (his failing health ironically in part due to the brutality from previous soviet governments) spelled the death knell of the soviet space race. They ran out of luck, and the corner cutting finally caught up to them. They took a moritorium on spaceflight for a few years to take a step back, re-evaluate, and go through massive safety reforms.
The Soviet Union's exploits during the space race are impressive, and worthy of praise, and the benefits are still felt even at NASA today believe it or not... But the methodology is questionable, and well worth criticism. If the US space shuttle program's constant cutting of corners in regards to safety to meet deadlines and design goals is worthy of criticism, then so too is much of the USSR's space program (as well as their nuclear program, aviation programs, weapons programs, etc, because they did this stuff everywhere).
@@altergreenhorn lol, sorry man, but the idea germany was ever capable of defeating the soviets is pop history. The germans were never capable of defeating the soviets. Operation Barbarossa was shortsighted, the Germans chronically failed at the operational and logistics level throughout the war... And even if they hadn't, more importantly, the Soviets alone outmassed Germany's forces, let alone British and American forces on the other side of Europe.
Let me put this into perspective for you:
Germany: Something like 20,000 Pz IVs (the closest equivalent to the T-34, though a bit worse), about 6,000 Panthers (a lot of which, incidentally, could be killed by lowly anti tank rifles fired into the tank's side armor), about 1300 Tiger 1s, and about 600 King Tigers. Germany had a wide variety of other tanks as well, but these were the biggest players. TDs also played a big role, but they rarely really exceeded their medium and heavy tank counterparts in numbers.
This is compared to: 200,000 T-34s of various types produced throughout the war.... No, I am not even going to touch other tank types like SU tank destroyers, KV-1s, KV-2s, etc, because why bother... 200,000 T-34s is, all by itself, a retarded number of vehicles, backed up by a retarded number of men, a retarded amount of gasoline and oil, etc, again, before even getting to the US and British involvement... Germany... Did not... Have... The resources... PERIOD. They were never going to win that war, even if the USSR were somehow their only opponent.
To paint this picture very vividly, one of my favorite WW2 stories comes from Geog Gaertner, the last German POW in the United States. To paraphrase, he knew that Germany had lost the war as early as 1943, when he was captured in North Africa... When he was escorted through the US camp, he noticed something... All the allied tanks were just sitting around engines idling. Initially he thought they must be prepping to head out on some attack... But no... They were just sitting there... engines whirring away all day long, while the crews chill out in the camp.... He knew then Germany had lost the war... THIS was what they were up against, an enemy so rich in resources, they could just leave their tank engines idle all damned day and not even notice, while Germany was so strapped for gas, every drop counted and german tank crews had to take great pains not to waste ANY of their fuel reserves.
Whoever told you Germany nearly beat the Russians is a joke. Russia had an entire continent left to retreat down and burn what they leave behind total war style while they get their act together, and figure out how to quit letting the Germans get the better of them through attrition. Capturing Moscow would've been a victory in name only for the germans, it didn't hold much value militarily.
Alot of their early success was due to copying German tech. The Russians managed to seize a ton of German tech after WW2 and they had alot of spies in Western countries when the allies retook the territories, and the spies were integrated into those allied regions, so they were able to get alot of German and allied tech in the 40s, 50s, and part way into the 60s. The Russians were infamous in their treatment of POWs so most scientists fled west to the Allies, especially the US which is why the US got so many Nazi scientists, bu they didnt necessarily get the research papers and tech that was pulled back towards the capital as the war dragged on. That meant the US had more long term boosts to technology (in addition to democracies and capitalism being more beneficial to research than communism and autocracies) while the Soviets only had a short term boost. The US also gave a ton of technology to Russia as part of lend lease and sent them alot of material, especially more difficult to manufacture things like early computers and radios. Thats why you see Russia take off like, well, a rocket in the 50s and 60s before lagging behind the West and stalling in the 70s and finally being pretty backwards by the 80s.
@@arthas640 You mismatched US (operation paperclip) and the Soviets its happen particularly to an average msm eater
To bad this Tupolev had so many problems. Personally, I would have loved to see these supersonic giants flying together.
The next best Option you have is visiting the Technikmuseum Sinsheim there is a Concorde and a Tupelov in starting Position behind each other it is an impressive sight and you can Look in both of the planes Interiour.
Tu 144 was modified and altered. The latest versions of the aircraft were very good. Tupolev also worked on the Tu 244 project, based on the experience gained on the Tu 144. The problem was in the economy. In the west, the Concorde could be hauled up like an elite plane for a select few rich people and kept. In the USSR, this was impossible, because it did not fit into the political, economic model of the state. And he was abandoned. Well, the collapse of the USSR closed the Tu 244 project. But not everything is so sad. Tu144 technologies are alive and well implemented in Tu 160 bomber.
I'll tell ya, I've seen the Concorde taxiing away from its BA gate with the afterburners kicking on and off and also seen it take off while switching buses at Heathrow.
That jet is louder than a F-4 phantom flying right over your head at near supersonic speed!!!
I'm priviledged to have been scared to death by both!
Loud does not apply in either case.... when the dirt and rocks start dancing on their own and you can only smell JP-4, you've been there!
P.S. I've often wondered why it wasn't towed out to the end of it's runway to save on all the fuel it burns while taxiing.
When it takes off, it sounds exactly like a fighter and when you're not expecting it, it really catches yo off guard and you want to hit the deck!
The man The Myth the legend Simon Whistler
New channel every week
New channel every week and insane subscriber numbers
:) :)
@12:25 . I love how when the _"Official Service"_ segment begins the intro music sounds like: *"Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumbd dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb."* Very fitting indeed.
I legit want this sound as a ringtone
@@Souflay1 very easy to do. You're only a few clicks away.
My dad worked for a joint Canadian/American Engineering Company that had a contract in Almaty during the 1970's. He took a ride both ways on the TU 144. It was a rough flight and it was clear that the design needed big-time modification and upgrades His ears were ringing for a week afterwards because it was so loud in the passenger compartment. The plane would literally rattle, upon take off. This was because certain materials were used that were loose at take off but would expand when they were exposed to the high heat associated with traveling for hours at a sustained speed near mach 2. This is similar to certain materials on the SR 71 Blackbird. It was pretty clear to my dad and his colleagues that, the Soviets were way behind the west when it came to aeronautical materials (2 decades at the least). He still really enjoyed the both flights though and was sad when he heard the Soviets had grounded the entire fleet.
I did have a suggestion for a two-part piece, regarding the SS Normandie and RMS Queen Mary, and their roles in the pivotal period of Transatlantic Liner from 1928-1938. It is, in my opinion, one of the most significant eras of ocean travel, seeing Germany, Italy, France, and the U.K. in a mad dash to outdo one another, and so shortly before the start of World War 2.
What do you mean by "SS" Normandie?
pat olt SS means Steamship. It was a massive ocean liner, so in its anglicized form, it receives the prefixed SS.
I'd love to see one for the US space shuttle program vs USSR Buran! Great vid as always
I don't want to spam the comments so this is the last time I'm posting this lol I think an awesome topic would be the rescue of the 33 miners in Chile. It was a major undertaking with an unheard of time crunch. As always keep up the good work!
Really enjoying this new channel/format. The laid-back business-blaze is where I go for some levity and this is just a great addition to my queue for the weekend of learning and information download (along with the rest of Simon's channels)
3:29 Streamlined, aggressive, concentrated and dedicated appearance.
Since we're on the subject of Cold War aircraft, a comparison between the B1 Lancer and the Soviet Blackjack would be amazing!
Galactus33 - Apart from looking similar there is no comparison, the TU-160 is a much larger, heavier aircraft, with a significantly bigger payload and greater range.
@@AtheistOrphan Indeed, well I can settle for 2 videos.
Had always heard of this as 'Concordski'
Andy Arnott - It’s NATO codename is ‘Charger’.
Da Comrade!!!
Fanny Fflapz that’s interesting why does it have a NATO reporting name if it’s a civilian aircraft?
Made in Kazakhstan! Is Nice!
Yes that was the common name for it.
Would be cool to see a video on the building of the Large Hadron Collider on this channel !
I have listened to dozens of subjects across several of your channels and you just don’t screw up! Very impressive, young man!
Simon: "... which I've got a video about that I'll link to below."
Narrator voice: "He won't."
Simon missed the point that the Soviets in the end asked Lucas Electric, aka "the Prince of Darkness", to help with their plane. Now, that is desperation in a nutshell. "Lucas... precisely crafted at the bottom of a Welsh coal mine, carefully packed in brine for shipment", as my uncle used to say.
Didn't Lucas Industries patent the short circuit ?
Lucas Aerospace in Birmingham, Acocks Green also made the Fuel System for the RR RB211...22, 524, and the 535. Powering the Lockheed Tristar, Boeing 747 200 and the Boeing 757 and B767.
Great video and very interesting. To support your point about industrial espionage . My father was an executive with British Aerospace and knew a number of engineers who worked on Concord. Several told him that the TU144 wing design was identical to an early mock-up which was being tested in the wind tunnel in the early 60's when a delegation of Soviet diplomats were shown around the BAC facilities. This design was not pursued when the better wing shape that Concord was launched with which creates slow moving air eddies over the inboard section of the wings at slow speeds to allow better handling at low speeds and lower (still circa 160 mph!!) landing speed. Thank you for another great presentation.
Excellent presentation, well paced and well supported by real footage that isn't repeated. Well done!
Perfect timing i just finished the concorde one
greaseman01 - Concorde.
You may have already been swamped with requests for this, but I haven’t seen any; would love to see you do a Megaprojects video for the SR-71 Blackbird. Connecting it to your U-2 video and the supersonic chapter of Concorde and the TU-144. It’s such a fascinating plane and never surpassed in so many areas.
I think the comparison videos are marvelous! Keep it up Simon, great work!!
On August 21, 1961, a Douglas DC-8 broke the sound barrier at Mach 1.012 (660 mph/1,062 km/h) while in a controlled dive through 41,000 feet (12,497 m) and maintained that speed for 16 seconds. The flight was to collect data on a new leading-edge design for the wing, and while doing so, the DC-8 became the first civilian jet - and the first jet airliner - to make a supersonic flight.[7] The aircraft was DC-8-43 registered CF-CPG later delivered to Canadian Pacific Air Lines. The aircraft, crewed by Captain William Magruder, First Officer Paul Patten, Flight Engineer Joseph Tomich and Flight Test Engineer Richard Edwards, took off from Edwards Air Force Base in California, and was accompanied to altitude by an F-104 Starfighter supersonic chase aircraft flown by Chuck Yeager.[8]
The speed of sound is 1234 km/h
@@namanverma1282 Speed of sound is a function of the medium and temperature. Simply speed of sound decreases with altitude.
i'd love to see one on the russian N1 and their space shuttle. top quality content as always boss.
The Concorde was a graceful swan. The Charger was a goose.
I don't think so
Dang, exactly...
Just that aggressive and bizarre
Everyone who worked on the Tu-144 was a genius. Including Tupolev himself. There are logs that show that he was the one who came to the delta wing design. Another thing: it was designed to land and take off on unprepared runways, including grass ones. That's why it had canards and "overbuilt" landing gear. Also, many passengers have stated that the flight was actually quite pleasant. The main reason for stopping flights was the operating cost.
what about the cabin noise?
@@robertoricardoruben that is hard to get info on. Most western newspapers state that yes, the noise was unbearable. But many individual reports suggest it was louder than in other planes, but acceptable. The note-passing was most likely an exaggeration. There were also technical issues, but many were again an exaggeration. The only "critical" incident was when a fire started, forcing the plane to (very successfully and gracefully) land in a field.
@@mandarin1257 yet the Yegoryevsk accident was caused by doubtful quality RD-36-51 engines that were unable to cope with APU. Concordski is extremely underrated imo.
This is one of the best youtube channels i ever seen, and i'm here since the beginning.
Thanks for this Simon, you are really a TEACHER.
Waiting for the SR-71 vid
U should look up the 'Peninsula Seniors' channel. Some great talks on there by Blackbird crews! (And loads of others)
Yes just a long as the A12 (cooler aircraft im my opinion....single seater, run by the CIA) has equal coverage.
Not even the fastet plane.
A shorter Variant (AN 12 or so) could go a bit faster
You should do an episode on the Boeing 2707. You've done episodes on the Concorde and the Tu-144. Might as well talk about the American supersonic airliner that, unfortunately, never flew.
Compared to the TU-144, the Boeing 2707 was actually a very unique design and tried to put a small horizontal tail on the craft, unlike Concorde. Plus, it was MUCH larger, goal was to carry 300 passengers. Ultimately, the astronomical costs did the project in. It was a beautiful aircraft, but just WAY too ambitious for the time. Interesting fact: Lockheed Martin has publicly said they're trying to build a modern supersonic airliner with a design that will fix the sonic boom problem. If they're successful, SSTs may come back!
@@thunderbird1921 And hopefully they are eco-friendly this time. Biofuels/electric power/hydrogen power...several different methods of powering them. But they each have their own engineering challenges, as do most things.
@@thunderbird1921 The 2707 was probably the most ambitious passenger plane ever designed
Love all your content!!! Keep up the good work. I’d suggest episodes on the F-22, the Boeing 747, the Airbus A380, the New York subway system, Taipei 101, the American Interstate highway system, the Japanese I-400 submarine, the battleship Yamato, and the Basílica de la Sagrada Família in Barcelona.
Simon, one great megaproject was the Itaipu Dam, here in Brazil/Paraguay frontier. I love ALL your channels. Thank you for the awesome videos.
An idea for a future Megaprojects two-parter: The Millau Viaduct in France and the Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge in Japan - two incredible suspension bridges.
Vladimir says :
"The TU-144 had an average passenger load of 378 souls.
Carried a support crew of 22.
This airframe flew at Mach 7.3 in an operational radius exceeding 19k nautical miles without refueling."
As an electrical engineer I am really enjoying this new channel and of course with Mr Simon and his team, makes this a sure fire winner. Thank You!
I wish good health and all the best to you and yours!
Very interesting, thank you. Really enjoy your work.
Part 3: The Boeing 2707 supersonic transport system mock-up...
...Hell, why not? The mock-up cost almost as much as the real thing.
Suggestion for a video: the CERN LHC or ITER fusion reactor projects would both be very interesting!
LHC is upgrading every few years and ITER has still to be completed.
I subscribe to all your channels Simon, listen to the videos in the background while I work. Love all the work by you and your teams!!!
Loving this channel! Business Blaze is my favorite of all your channels, but Mega Projects is a close second!! Simon, you are awesome 😎
Yay, I loved the first one! The Cold War is fascinating, and I've generally loved Simon's coverage of it.
@Юрий Тойкичев
Interesting.
You'll happily accept that people can live in "ignorance, talking in ordinary nonsense," "stunned by propaganda," taken in by "ridiculous propaganda cliches," but you never once stopped to take the time to wonder whether it might you *_you_* that was "stunned by propaganda" in the first place?
What makes you so certain that it's the host of the video that was fooled, and not you?
If people can be tricked so easily, how can you be so sure that you _weren't?_
You're thirty years too late Comrade.
@Юрий Тойкичев
"By the way, there were practically no lies in the Soviet propaganda . . . "
You're not serious?
Dude, you really need to stop letting your prejudices and your assumptions do your thinking _for_ you. That kind of thinking is _never_ helpful.
@Юрий Тойкичев
Words, words, words.
Empty, meaningless and worthless.
See how easy this is?
"*_YOU_* are a fool, dazzled by propaganda. The reality is that the Soviets did nothing _but_ lie, the Soviets tried and failed to things kept quiet.
The internal delirium was related entirely to the corruption, incompetence and inherent dishonesty, but this was not the fault of propaganda, but of the failed government . . . etc."
Bluster all you want.
You're as transparent as vodka.
when you say all the different speeds (mph, kmp etc...) i dont supposes you could put text on the screen, its weird but i get lost track easly.
I propose that all speeds be expressed in furlongs per fortnight thus maximizing confusion for everyone.
Wait. Too many numbers. What did he just say?
@@Snipergoat1 Furlongs per fortnight? I dunno, how many times can you watch Terminator 2 and Detroit Rock City in 2 weeks?
@@Snipergoat1 Great now my brain hurts! Use to kph. I know 100 mph is 160 kph then lost from there!!
That weird feeling you get when you're on your 5th straight Simon Whistler video and realize you're now on a channel you never even heard of. Great video and definitely subbed! Looking forward to whatever you put out!
I was barely a teenager, and remember hearing few highlights about the Concorde. After this video, I am a bit wiser about the story of its place in history.
do a mega project on the Caspian sea monster, The Ekranoplan
Just googled that, holy crap that thing is cool. Second the motion for a video on this.
Would you be interested in any ancient megaprojects? Maybe, the aqueducts of Rome?
Chase He usually does ancient structures on Geographics instead of here.
Professionally done. Love the background.
Your passion for explaining is super fantastic 👍👍
Tupelov Engineer: "We're going to need 12 rear tires per plane."
Soviet State Accountant: "Let me call the Gulag...."
Sounds like the life of any Engineer that ever worked for a large company.
When concorde was supersonic without the afterburners on, it was in supercruise.
I've been on a Russian Concorde, I'm not surprised they got it built ahead of the competition, I'm convinced they used the seats from a Citroen 2CV and the instruments were salvaged from old Soviet tanks. The only leather on board that craft, was the necks of the crew.
Top stuff Simon...thanks so much.
"It did not make financial success" - Sums up the entire Soviet Union
Can't handle a pandemic, sums up capitalism.
@@cosmicwakes6443 xd
Concorde was a financial failure as well. The world is just not ready for supersonic expensive travel yet.
@@cosmicwakes6443 In capitalism sometimes there are bread lines. In socialism sometimes there's bread. Questions?
@@Corristo89 That's deep bro, so you like a philosophizer man?
16:12 that amazing pilot just sweating 7.62
Love this more human approach. You're not just relaying facts to viewers but having fun doing it. Or you've gone mad from lockdown, but it's still a better watch for us. So whatever it is keep it up!
Really interesting video, I was looking forward to this and was not disappointed.
How bad did things have to be that the Soviet asked Lucas "The Prince of Darkness" of all people for help.
Tupolev: How much money do you want to waste on this?
Politburo: Yes.
Tupolev.
@@Pikrodafni Thank you. Now corrected.
*Да
This channel is absolutely awesome. Great host with great content! 👍🏻
Always fascinated by this machine since playing Top Trumps Planes as a kid. We couldn't get our heads around a Soviet Concorde that beat everything on paper, but had no impact in the real world. Turns out it's still happening with Space X and Tesla.
Wait, they went to Lucas for help? Lucas? Like the company that made the sketchy electronics for various British car companies?
...and motorbikes . Yeah , that Lucas . They must have been desperate .
And FORDs here in the U.S. !!
I would like more Soviet era spacecraft, I'm really interested in the MIR space station
i always found it amazing how the Russians managed to get a satellite in space in 57, man in space in 61, and a space station in 71 yet China, a country many times the size of Russia, only got a man in space in 2003.
This played a big part in the ISS. Not having all those very high skilled space engineers out of a job after the USSR collapsed. An international space program where they would have a job and pay in a project where the west had a part in. So not having those unemployed space engineers going to China to develop ICBM's
Thank you Simon. This was the first of your many informative and entertaining shows that had me crack into a huge belly laugh! When the word "CONCORDSKI" flashed across the screen. I am still chuckling as I right this. Whoops! There goes another belly laugh. I have to go before I hurt myself.
Great video! Very interesting. I agree with the previous comment on the space shuttle or even the Saturn V rocket and the Soviet counterpart.
Drinking game: take a shot each time he says TU-144.
Future mega projects suggestion: The Great Wall of China would be pretty interesting.
Love the channel!!! Good video
I would really love to see a video about SR-71 Blackbird. And thank you very much for the video, it was very informative for me.
Have a great day everyone.
you too!
I remember having this in my top trumps collection, it wasn't a winner
Statistically, it was ahead in many ways... On paper.
Great video as always - I like the A-10 vs Su-25
Bumper sticker "I survived the Tupolev Tu-144"
USSR: Hey, can I copy your homework?
UK/France: No.
USSR: Ok, I’ll copy it anyway but change it a bit so it’s not too obvious
This story is so convoluted, there is simply no way the Russians would have learned about a NATO development and then beat them to deploying it. The espionage went the other way, TU-144 began development in 1955 it was slow to develop and didn't have the sort of electronics that made Concorde far more stable.. history is written by the victor, look at long it took us to admit Tonkin Gulf.. We stole the Concorde from the Russians and made it better and then accused them of stealing from us.. it's all mired in propaganda
USA: No the B29 is ours
USSR made the TU4
France/"UK" yes look at the mockup
USSR: Thank you Tu144
😂😂😂
@Joel Schembri
And yet one TU 144 still fly but concorde doesnt in ironic way one TU 144 is used by nasa for tests
TU 144 had only one mistake they rused it in to the production by soviet politics and this was a main mistake
@Joel Schembri You can see now to this day how much emotional investment people put into nationalism to even suggest that the infallible NATO would steal something from their enemies and might (gasp) learn something from a foreigner
Lockheed A-12 „Oxcart“ and its succrssor SR-71 „Blackbird“ would be interesting
It would probably draw Elon Musk and Grimes to subscribe to Simon
I'd love it if you added a Part 3 on the US supersonic airliner project. Being a bit cheeky, Part 3 won't be able to offer any in-flight footage...
TU-114 (1957) the world's largest turboprop passenger plane, the fastest, the world's only passenger plane with a swept wing, the most comfortable (several sleeping compartments, dressing rooms, spacious toilets with makeage tables, restaurant
, the most spacious cockpit for pilots
very cool
I have a suggestion: I find it confusing when you always say both metric and imperial units right after each other, I feel it would be easier to follow if you only said one and then maybe put the other on-screen. Love the vids!
I just posted the same suggestion.
Was literally thinking about commenting this on the last video too lol
I feel the opposite, as I usually listen to these without watching them.
Valerie Rodger
I find that the vid works as a radio/podcast. And citing both systems of units is redundant, clouds the point being made, and time consuming.
We have to move on. In my work as a land surveyor, I routinely point to the USC&GS, and their reports originating in mid 19th century, entirely metric with no redundant imperial units. That’s well over 150 yrs of pure metric academic reporting in the US by the US.
Henry Fleischer
Do you feel the need for both? Do you have a preference if only one unit system was recited?
Great video. Always well presented. I believe that a video on the Canadian Avro Arrow would make a fantastic story and suit the style of your videos.
Except everyone lies about that project.
Thank you for covering an iconic yet forgotten bit of aviation history.