Having actual footage showing the inside made this video a 10/10. An extremely interesting aircraft to see.

@Raminagrobisfr

Жыл бұрын

There was also an AWACS version of it, the Tu-126 . Strangely, i dont know whether the tu-126 were refurbished civilian Tu-114 or new airframes, the sources are contradictory on this

@1joshjosh1

Жыл бұрын

Ya, safe to say that kicked ass.

@basbeestKT

Жыл бұрын

@@Raminagrobisfr that is litterally mentioned in this video (that they were there, not the second bit :) )

@jorgegonzalez-larramendi5491

Жыл бұрын

propaganda this is sale to enslaved captured countries and the sovi inteligentsia. i flew a cattle version pls see my open note

@t72shatch7

Жыл бұрын

@@jorgegonzalez-larramendi5491 Lol Okay²

I cannot understand why such a treasure of an aircraft would not be housed in an indoor museum. This was an interesting video for a U.S. aviation enthusiast to see.

@Max_Da_G

Жыл бұрын

A lot of people in Russia are ripping their hairs about this, myself included. The way these aircraft are being utterly ignored by the military in whose "care" they are (the museum belongs to Russian Air Force), one has to bow down to the volunteers spending their own money and time and resources restoring these aircraft. They remanufacture some things on their own dime. Even washing takes days given just how basic the equipment they have is. You'd be shocked how much gunk was washed out of the engine nacelles of Tu-144.

@SithLord2066

Жыл бұрын

@@Max_Da_G Maybe if oil price rises to $200 a barrel then Russia govt will have money to create a proper indoor museum for all these wonderful planes. Russian air force should not be involved, it should be a dedicated civilian organisation that is funded directly by the government. Kind of like the Smithsonian museum in the US.

@h8GW

Жыл бұрын

@Sith Lord Higher oil prices will only make oligarchs richer, with the hope they might feel a bit more generous and throw some pittance to the museums for charity's sake.

@curtisgregory517

Жыл бұрын

Corruption and theft runs in the blood Vains of most Russians and makes them selfish to only think of skimming off profits to buy Mega yachts/trophies etc., they are almost as selfish as DONALD TRUMP. fair elections are the scariest thing in their life.

@dryan8377

Жыл бұрын

I've seen these artifacts of aviation and the military in person in Siberia. They are basically public parks. They park them there then just leave them. It's a different world half way around ya know.

I like these 1950s Soviet planes being absolutely luxurious by today's standards

@williammckinney4090

Жыл бұрын

Presumably this plane was also intended to be chartered for VIP transport. This would be perfect for transporting a General Secretary and his entourage.

@opprometheus

Жыл бұрын

Not only the planes, but the passengers. Todays passenger, especially in the USA, are very uncivil. So much I don't fly anymore.

@rashkavar

Жыл бұрын

Almost like we've forgotten what it means to travel in luxury. Sure first class seating is more plush in modern planes than it is here, but actual fresh cooked food? Sleeper cabins? These are things that would get you laughed at on a plane today.

@silentone6411

Жыл бұрын

@@glitchaudio7993 i often fly business and get cooked meals like salmon and meats etc, also i usually get an full reclining chair so i can sleep , amazing air con and low noise , dont listen to the economy boomers

@dangleeboars9781

Жыл бұрын

the noise would of been awful back then and it would be full of cigarette smoke , but it had some tables and fake leather seats so i guess that more luxurious than modern aircraft right lmao

The Soviet and American Military were waiting for the start of the brightest and shortest war in History ! LOL , once again , a great sense of humor ! Keep up the good work !

@yevgeniymaksimovich8505

7 ай бұрын

Its still not far away! Unfortunately.

I flew on one of these from Samarkhand to Irkutsk in 1970. I remember it being very, very loud with strong vibrations, we sat up front...

@andrewhammel5714

Жыл бұрын

If I had been the head dictator of the USSR I would have ripped out the turboprop engines, and replaced them with modern quiet turbofan turbo jets for all TU114s flying international routes- as soon as possible. Wouldve been better propaganda to the outside world than to have props, the planes on the foreign routes would no longer have needed to have tall landing gear to accomidate their props, and the western passengers would no longer have been tortured with the loud noise. The 114s flying domestic USSR routes could be allowed to retain thier turboprop engines.

@JohnOpie

Жыл бұрын

@@andrewhammel5714 Russians never got modern turbofans down right, jet engines are the Achilles heel of Russian aviation...

@leevilehtovaara2261

Жыл бұрын

@@JohnOpie wasn't solojev D-30 quite good for it's atleast?

@JohnOpie

Жыл бұрын

@@leevilehtovaara2261 Yes! Robust Soviet-era low-bypass turbofan, but specific fuel consumption and maintenance came nowhere near western contemporary engines (RR Spey, P&W JT-8D), which were themselves rapidly improved to be more dependable and powerful with lower maintenance...

@oliviersimonnin6983

Жыл бұрын

As long as it is noisy, it can fly 😋!

I had the pleasure of touring this very aircraft in 1959 when it visited Idlewild Airport in New York...I was 6 years old. When standing under the wing with my Dad, I reached up and turned one of the inboard props. Suddenly this big Russian guard in a bearskin cap ran over yelling Nyet...Nyet! My Dad grabbed me and whisked me away, grinning sheepishly. I had no idea how close I had come to causing an international incident!

@scotty6346

Жыл бұрын

Cool starry bra!

Loved the inside details, wow what a classic way to fly

Not mentioned is that the TU-114 was used on a regularly scheduled transatlantic route to North America into Montreal. When I was a small boy in the 1960s we lived below the flight path for Montreal's Dorval airport. We used to regularly see Aeroflot's big and loud TU-114 coming in for the Moscow-Montreal flight. On special occasions, dad would take my brother and I to the airport where we could stand on the external observation deck (anyone remember those ?) from which we got to see, hear, and smell the planes, including occasionally the TU-114.

@CH-pv2rz

Жыл бұрын

And in the tine it took to fly that route outbound you could have flown it out and back hime again in a Boeing 707

@LarS1963

Жыл бұрын

@@CH-pv2rz Boeing 707 Cruise speed 885 km/h. Tu-114 770 km/h. And the 707 is quite a bit smaller. So try again.

@CaptHollister

Жыл бұрын

@@CH-pv2rz Not really, but do keep playing.

@rocoroco15

Жыл бұрын

I remember the observation deck... what a view and fuel smell! I was an Air Traffic Controller (trained and qualified in Dorval) The TU-114 was quite an impressive flying machine. I witnessed a few Moscow to Montreal flights and remember at times, when the crew alone would take off from Dorval and fly over St-Eustache (now Mirabel) to practice VOR (VHF Omni Range) navigation in preparing for their maiden Montreal to JFK run. I will never forget the sound of those counter rotating props...

@CaptHollister

Жыл бұрын

@@LarS1963 And the 707 has a range of 6000(ish) km to the 114's 8-10,000 km. The distance between Moscow and Montréal is just over 7000km. Guess which one would have had to make a refuelling stop...

I'm so glad some people have the foresight to save the planes from this era. From the mid 70's on, all planes are pretty much flying Greyhounds... but back before then? Style, innovation, a truly great time in aviation advancement...

@nexpro6118

Жыл бұрын

some people keep saying how Russia and even China are building better shit than the US has.....then how and why do Russuan and China shit are worse in, fuel usage, reliability, range? why does China use US LEAP engines on China's own, C919 airline aircrafts? lol. I thought the US stuff wasn't as good as China and Russia stuff(like engines)? lol. I know. using facts and common sense upsets these people, but damn. ha

@lena5613

Жыл бұрын

@@nexpro6118 ‘MURICAN

@mickeymch876

Жыл бұрын

The first commercial jet I was ever on was a DC-9. As soon as I boarded I realized I was in a school bus with wings, the same 2 seats on one side and 3 seats on the other side layout (but not as safe as a school bus). The hour maintenance delay and the lights in the cabin continuing to flicker on and off after the delay didn't help. That DC-9 did not belong in service, it belonged in the scrap yard.

@sabrekai8706

Жыл бұрын

@@mickeymch876 Hey, be nice. I built the tail end of 110 of them in 1979-82, If you'd seen what I saw while working there, you'd never get one again.

@wildanfatihg

Жыл бұрын

@@nexpro6118 People keep forgetting that 50% of CFM is French, including half of the engine design. Also, aircraft manufacturers using engines built in another country is fairly common; look at all the Boeing planes using British made Rolls-Royce engines

Tu-114 and L-1049 Super constellation are two of most beautiful prop driven passenger planes ever built.

@martinhvam1031

Жыл бұрын

Why? Because of the shared nose and forward landing gear? Personally I find that downright ugly, in both aircraft.

@AppersonJackrabbit1915

Жыл бұрын

@@martinhvam1031 Tupolev and Lockheed aircraft share no commonality in components. Are you daft?

@spazmonkey3815

Жыл бұрын

They both had a design flair, that made them attractive.Many times the beauty of art cannot be described in words.

@patrick_test123

Жыл бұрын

@@AppersonJackrabbit1915 Don't you know that russians only steal technology. /s

@thomasjordan5578

Жыл бұрын

I too saw the resemblance. 🙏

As an American that grew up during the Cold War I’m so impressed with the Soviet aviation products!

@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24

Жыл бұрын

Most Soviet era planes from both sides look cool

@Tom-uk2ow

Жыл бұрын

Cold war birds are beautiful..

@stealthfur1375

Жыл бұрын

no kidding. i lost it with the existence of the yakolev 141.

@junocrusader5860

Жыл бұрын

Lol.And your pilot this evening is Borat!

@crawford323

Жыл бұрын

Their ejection seats work.

The interior is absolutely unlike todays standards, where just the amount of seats counts. I like the restaurant part which has a cool art deco look, like a 1930s or1940s ocean liner. The cruising speed wasn't bad either, a modern jet liner cruises maybe 100-150km/h faster as this plane did. Only the noise would have been incredible, I bet you would hear the drone several days after the flight in your head.

@shadetreemech290

Жыл бұрын

The counter rotating props were mechanical monsters that would have been expensive and heavy. But, yes the noise would have been a real problem.

@dannydaw59

Жыл бұрын

I wonder what it sounded like. I wish the video had a sound bite.

@justforever96

Жыл бұрын

You can do a lot when cost is no object and the state is sponsoring it as a national prestige program. Modern airliners rely on being profitable. 1950s airliners were more luxurious because tickets cost the equivalent of $5,000 each. You can still fly in luxury if you are willing to pay that much.

@erikringdal844

Жыл бұрын

I never saw the plane , but grew up close to Kastrup AirPort . Once in the seventies I heard an incredible screeching noise from ground level there , distance around 6 km, now I know What IT was!

The TU-114 was a magnificent aircraft, truly unique.

@CH-pv2rz

Жыл бұрын

@Stephen Mordey the Tu-114 was slow, didn’t carry enough passengers to be practical and was an overly noisy bucket of bolts…

@stephenmordey6371

Жыл бұрын

@@CH-pv2rz What a silly pointless comment. It was amongst the fastest, highest capacity of the era!?

@dryan8377

Жыл бұрын

@@CH-pv2rz Stop being a dolt in public. Have you ever flown on Soviet era aircraft? Probably not. I'll tell ya what a bucket of bolts is... an SH-2 Kaman, or an SH-3 Sea King. I've flown on both at sea as well as Soviet era aircraft.

@Dave-ty2qp

Жыл бұрын

@@stephenmordey6371 It had elegant lines much like the Lockheed Constalation, but the fit and finish was ugly. Also if given a choice between flying a jet, or recip, the choice was overwhelmingly jet. They were much quieter, and didn't rattle your teeth from vibration. Soviet era aircraft did look great, but comfort was unheard of then.

@stephenmordey6371

Жыл бұрын

@@Dave-ty2qp It was designed to fulfil specific missions for the Soviet State. It was never going to be bought by BEA to fly around Europe. Obviously it was quickly replaced by more efficient jets in this case the IL-62. All four engined turboprop aircraft sold poorly as they all arrived just before the jets. It became a stop gap just like the rest. No doubt it reflected late 1950's technology in all respects. What else would you expect?

I flew on a similar but smaller aircraft to Moscow 19 1983. During the flight I was invited up to the cockpit ( same as the TU-114) and allowed to remain there on landing in Prague for refueling.

@jwenting

Жыл бұрын

probably an Il-18. Those were still in service at the time, though rapidly being replaced with Tu-134s and Il-62s.

@sailaab

Жыл бұрын

Aha😊👌🏽 I am assuming.. you might have been 39 years younger back then. And if young enough to be considered a kid.. might have had this extended access to the cockpit during key phases of the flight.

@mrobocop1666

Жыл бұрын

@@ericscandinavia3220 ...as part of Russia. Ukraine built no single plane after USSR collpase, while Russia started to revive it's air industry

@Rudy_Play

5 ай бұрын

​​@@mrobocop1666Have you heard of the An-158, An-140?

Possibly the "coolest" turboprop ever ! What a sleek design !

Credit where it's due, the engineers who helped adapt the TU-95 Bear into a long range airliner did a good job. To this day, the record holder for the fastest propeller driven airliner ever built :)

@petesheppard1709

Жыл бұрын

And it's still running right alongside the B-52!

@SiVlog1989

Жыл бұрын

@@petesheppard1709 well the TU-95 is, but the 114's weren't so lucky

@petesheppard1709

Жыл бұрын

@@SiVlog1989 Yes, I meant the Tu-95. 🙂

@yourfellowturdwheel1864

Жыл бұрын

the XF-84H is faster

@SiVlog1989

Жыл бұрын

@@yourfellowturdwheel1864 yes, but the TU-114 is an airliner and the XF-84H isn't

Love the TU 114. Looks like a giant grasshopper the way it sits on the tarmac. The 2 other Soviet classics of real interest are the Il62 & TU 154

The TU-95 Bear is my favorite aircraft of all time. Such a long slender and beautiful beast! The sound of the engines and props at start up are unique and amazing. Many years ago I flew in a TU-154 several times across Russia.

I still find the contra-rotating props of this monster so cool. As an aero engineer, I recognize the limitations of the system, but also as an engineer I recognize the coolness of pushing this kind of system to its limits! I also find it interesting how the soviets would adapt bombers to being airliners, whereas in the west, airliners of the modern era have almost nothing in common with a bomber.

@baomao7243

Жыл бұрын

You can see the willingness to continue moving forward w/ coaxial drive technology. I too think it has a certain engineering elegance. (I personally started watching it when i saw it on Soviet attack helicopters. And now i see it on experimental next gen US helicopters. The concept apparently has some … merit even to those most likely to resist the technology due to its roots. 😉)

@marcogentile3392

Жыл бұрын

Contra-rotating propellers make every plane cooler Change my mind

@shawnmiller4781

Жыл бұрын

The last airliner in the US I can think of that was directly derived from a Bomber would be the Boeing 377 Stratoliner.

@justcarcrazy

Жыл бұрын

The West did turn bombers into passenger aircraft after WW2, with loads of surplus bombers suddenly out of a job. Avro Lancastrian, Boeing C108 Flying Fortress, Boeing 307 Stratoliner, etc.

@777jones

Жыл бұрын

Tankers, command, asw planes in the US can be airliners.

Several years ago, a TU-95 bomber, the plane this guy was based on, overfly me at about 700' on a visit to China. It was DEAFENING! I can't imagine using this design as an airliner! (Nose gear reminds of the old Lockheed Constellation's which also got extended to accommodate its huge props!)

@interstellaraviator6437

Жыл бұрын

My friend lives in Northern Denmark and Tu-95 used to fly over there for demonstration purposes before the war (now they afraid I believe) and every time it overflew the area he heard it inside his house and I also heard it when I visited him. I could only imagine how freaking pound was it at 700 feet!!!

@yuxuanhuang3523

Жыл бұрын

That sounds interesting, I wonder when was that? I guess it's flown by Russian Air Force since there is no other place that I know of operating these, even fewer coming to China. Must be a really interesting experience.

@danielocarey9392

28 күн бұрын

One flew over my house once. I heard it first, and knew what it was. The Piaggio rear engine twin turbo (Avante 2) is loud.

@danielocarey9392

27 күн бұрын

I am probably wrong, but the ss speeds of propellor blades should cause terrible drag thereby making the craft inefficient. I know they are loud. I have heard them. But I am not convinced this is because of sonic boom noise. Sonic booms are illegal oven land in non-combat ops in the USA. So might it be that the FAA doesn't think this is boom noise?

Wow, thanks for the fascinating clip. Having flown a couple of times in Ilyushins and Tupolevs myself, never thought the early generation Soviet liners were so luxurious. "The food was prepared in the kitchen downstairs .. " Amazing.

@laurie3546

Жыл бұрын

Where ya from ??

14:19 That food tray elevator is dope, not going to lie. Another good video with excellent footage and imagery. Spacious for its time, even today.

@michaelplunkett8059

Жыл бұрын

Like early 747s with basement galley. Cooked food on china plates with silverware. So lucky were we.

It was gorgeous, like the Constellation. And fast. I’ve always been fascinated by Soviet design. I love this:)

@skeetrix5577

Жыл бұрын

exactly I'm as anti-communist as it comes but I am utterly fascinated by the Soviet Union I was born in 1989 right at the end of the Cold war so I didn't actually live through it personally too long but every day I try to learn something new just so damn interesting

@sethrich2790

Жыл бұрын

@@skeetrix5577 👏🏼🎯

@natquesenberry6368

Жыл бұрын

Truly beautiful!

Its classy and cool at so many levels: the engineering, interior design, size - truely stunning👍

Very classy, beautiful and technological piece of history. Great to have it seen from the inside too!

@danielocarey9392

28 күн бұрын

I know.

404 knots cruising speed is not much off what modern jets are flying today since they have slowed them down so much. 39,000 ft is impressive and the range as well! I also think of the IL-62 as a very Soviet plane, still going today! Thanks!

@marhawkman303

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, the Russian turbo-props didn't suck. sure they were noisy, but they had good fuel efficiency, and speed.

@mycosys

9 ай бұрын

And the CFM RISE engine is moving back to open rotor (propfan) - may have just been 80 years early

What an absolute beauty the TU-114 was! Great video.

@laurie3546

Жыл бұрын

GG

The soundness of the design is demonstrated by the fact that the Tu-95 is still in service, like its US strategic counterpart, the B-52. The safety record of the Tu-114 was remarkable compared with all other Soviet airliners. PS: The tall undercarriage reminds one of the Lockheed Constellation's legs.

@JohnDLeo-rg8tc

8 ай бұрын

or Concords front leg

It’s a shame that an airplane with such an incredible history has to be stored outside. It’s difficult to see that it’s just sitting there (on flat tires!) instead of getting the VIP treatment indoors at a museum or at least just indoors for storage. You know…as big of a pain in the ass as Russia can be, I do wish they could invest more into their aerospace industries. Credit where credit is due - Their aeronautical engineers have always managed to create some amazing airplanes. Obviously with their limited funding, function must come first, and often still suffers due to the culture that survives to this day that essentially says that “good enough” is good enough. Their solutions are often downright brilliant, if not wholly practical. The best part is that with all of the roadblocks they face, Russia makes some of the most visually appealing airplanes ever built, especially their military planes and specifically the Sukhoi design bureau. As always, this video was superb! I am SO happy that I found this channel. For purely informative content with a focus on aviation, this channel is unquestionably in the top 2. PilotPhotog is the other aviation channel that I absolutely love and is how I found your channel (someone made a reference to you in the comments section of one of his videos).

@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665

Жыл бұрын

One positivr point Russia. Aircraft are built to be kept outdoors.. the Bears sit outside in all weathers and temperatures ...and are expected to stand and start from temperatures way below freezing.. Definately a big beast 😎

@IrishCarney

Жыл бұрын

Russia can't invest more. Even without the 2014 and 2022 sanctions it couldn't. It's like if a Mafia took over a country. The corruption is at pervasive levels going all the way to Putin. It's like constant heavy internal bleeding, making the patient weak. Because of massive ubiquitous theft, there's just no money available to enable Russia to live up to its potential in economics, defense, aerospace, engineering, or anything else.

@FloridaManMatty

Жыл бұрын

@@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665 Absolutely. Their attitude toward FOB is astounding to me, but in all honesty, it probably MUCH more realistic in a combat setting. They have obviously figured out how to make some robust, rugged airplanes. I d’off my hat to those fellows.

@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665

Жыл бұрын

@@FloridaManMatty You should see the insides of Soviet coldwar era Be 12s Amphibians.. I thought a vulcan was a bit of a issue... but if you have to strip and maintain an aircraft on the edge of the Arctic ocean in winter ...you want to be able to get at everything possible from the inside and or as quick as possible. Plus you dont want bits breaking off or freezing up solid.

@elliotoliver8679

Жыл бұрын

Russia is not a pain the ass, the US is a pain in the ass

I would have LOVED to fly in this beast. I used to fly in the early Convair 440, DC 4s and DC-7s as a child.(My dad worked for Delta when it was a GREAT airline) Props were more...primal I guess. Felt more like actual flying. Hope you understand what I mean.

@timmotel5804

Жыл бұрын

I've flown on those prop planes too. My dad was with American Airlines

@JTA1961

Жыл бұрын

You are speaking plane English...

@twistedyogert

Жыл бұрын

Must be the fact that you have to adjust the pitch settings for the propeller blades. Sort of reminds me of a manual transmission, there's a lot more to think about.

@Braun30

Жыл бұрын

A friend of mine flew from Milano in Italy to Havana in Cuba on one of these. Apparently no scurvy on board at arrival.

@myusername3689

Жыл бұрын

Ducted fans and jets definitely give off a more tamed vibe compared to the open spinning props, almost like comparing collared dogs to wolves.

It's honestly crazy to think that the accommodation aboard a decades-old Soviet plane reached levels of luxury that even the A-380 struggles to match today.

@patrickcotter5629

11 ай бұрын

Yes.

The 114 is a beauty of an airliner, its older brother the Bear is a very handsome aircraft as well! Thank you for this outstanding history lesson and documentary!

It looks rather comfortable honestly if we forget about the potential noise. Also I kinda hope the aircraft would get some nice restoration work done to her, the years don't seem to have been so kind to her. I reckon she ideally deserves an indoor hangar too as being decently historically significant.

Wow. A flying cruise ship .. probably a great way to travel aside from the engine noise

In terms of safety, the Tu-114's record compares favorably with the Boeing 377 Stratocruiser; 13 of the 56 Stratocruisers were destroyed in service. However, the Tu-114 was also eight years after the Boeing 377.

@jacksons1010

Жыл бұрын

The problem with the Stratocruiser was unreliable piston engines. The Tu-114 used turboprop engines; that alone makes this an odd comparison. Eight years was a very long time in mid-century aircraft development.

@jaybee9269

Жыл бұрын

I really love the Stratocruiser-beautiful Art Deco aircraft…wait, that’s the 307 Stratoliner! Never mind.

@user-yy1rs3df3q

Жыл бұрын

@@jacksons1010 I think the comparison was based on the both aircraft's bomber origins and similar design processes. But your right, the Tu-114 was light years ahead of the Stratocruiser in every other aspect.

@SMGJohn

Жыл бұрын

Only one Tu-114 had a total hull loss with casualties, Soviet aviation was generally extremely safe compared to western aviation, USSR had very few deadly disasters mostly because Soviet aviation used military planes which were built to an extremely high standards, and their maintenance shared crew that also worked on military variants of the planes. USSR also carried less passengers per plane domestically, instead of building large planes, USSR simply just built more smaller planes, very few Soviet planes actually carried 200+ passengers even if they had the capacity, USSR had a lot of domestic flights too which makes this very interesting, Aeroflot flew the most hours of anyone during the cold war, yet had the fewest incidents. And still Soviet planes receive notorious remarks that they are unreliable or faulty LOL

@jacksons1010

Жыл бұрын

@@SMGJohn Let me guess what's wrong here: you're using Soviet-era statistics. They didn't often report events that might reflect negatively on the state, so whatever data you base this comment on is ...suspect, to say the least. Military aircraft are built to _lesser_ standards than civilian aircraft. A civil airliner experiences thousands of cycles and tens of thousands of flight hours. Military aircraft are used perhaps 1/10th as much.

What an amazing, and unique aircraft! Thanks for the walk-through!

Finaly !!! I can't thank you enough for making one of your sweet videos about what I beleive to be one of the moste exiting and good looking plane ever made. The only one that can compete in awesomeness with the allmighty Constellation.

@lastmanstanding9389

Жыл бұрын

They have several similarities too.

A fascinating aircraft that would not have been produced anywhere else in the world. Must have been interesting to travel on.

Really an amazing aircraft. Too modern and luxury.

Congrats to Tupolev team and Skyships Eng!

Wow, for having open doors to the elements it’s surprisingly preserved inside. Part of me wishes I could go back to the 50’s and fly some of these. Must have seemed like the future was coming fast back then.

@laurie3546

Жыл бұрын

Hey 👋

@marhawkman303

Жыл бұрын

I dunno if the doors are ALWAYS open, or if they just posed them open for the camera?

Great to see this beautiful aircraft looked after so well by enthusiasts, a real surprise to see such a luxurious interior for a 50's Soviet aircraft...what a great channel this is.

Thank you very very much for this gem. Its a present for all enthusiasts and especially for 114 fans as I am. Wonderful pictures, rare footage. Even in the internet you can hardly find anything about it. Its a unique plane. Thank you once again.

The navigator's seat! 😍

Soviet era engineers have always impressed me. The machines they were been able to design and manufacture with usually limited resources at their disposal are pretty amazing.

@misterwhipple2870

Жыл бұрын

Since Failure meant the GuLAG for you and your family, yes, their work was outstanding.

@jakekaywell5972

Жыл бұрын

@@misterwhipple2870 The gulag system no longer existed after 1960.

@misterwhipple2870

Жыл бұрын

@@jakekaywell5972 Officially, no. The Cheka has changed its name many times, but some kind of lock-you-in-a-cage, pull-your-fingernails-out and starve-your-slave-ass system continued on (disguised as a mental hospital, perhaps?), and does to this very day.

One of my favorite aircraft, your video is (as usual) of excellent quality. Thanks a lot for these 26 minutes of pure pleasure.

To me the Tu-114 still is one of the most beautiful aircraft ever designed. The only fault was, they didn't work on improvements from the start. If they had started developing improved propellers from day one, they would have had more efficient and less loud propellers available some time in the mid or late 60's, giving the aircraft a much longer service life.

@mycosys

9 ай бұрын

Its such a pity - we are moving back to propfans/open rotors now because theyre just more efficient.

What a beautiful plane! Beautifully appointed and great engineering given the limitations of the era and political climate. Very happy some of these are preserved for posterity. Excellent video!

as an interior designer, I am interest with commercial airliner and business jet interior for a long time.. I am really impressed the interiros of Tu114. its look a bit out of age but in fact looks so comfortable. tupolev engineers definetly made good job about design of partition of the plane. it is realy great..I loved it and I'd like to vist the museum oneday.

@danielocarey9392

28 күн бұрын

Ever meet Harry Millinger, the main designer of the Convair 880 and 990 and Lockheed L-1011 interiors?

@hakan737

28 күн бұрын

@@danielocarey9392 thank you for information.. I made some serch about him but I couldn't find any information. If you have some link, could you send me ? I don't have much information about Convair 880 and 990 but L1011 was really precious plane. Tristar was absolutely in beyond of the aviation and aircraft engineering compare by the others. I always liked L1011 interiors , barco system inflight entertainment and double layer galleys...

Another gem of Skyships channel! Congratulations for this beautiful crafted documentary about this beautiful and embelmatic plane! So many original footage scenes, intercut with present day situation make it one of the most interesting films about Soviet airplanes. For those of us who grew in communist Europe at that times, it s interesting to see that some of the Soviet accievemnnts were real (!), not only propangada and, moreover, there were made with real sacrifices, many painfully working hours (poorly paid, etc) from the part of the working people, whose conscience was above political situation ... I feel you are really proud of this beautiful and emblematic plane (2 trips to US in 1959!!!, one with Nikita Sergeevich 😎 on board!) that you did not use your good, usual, humour on this film. We appreciate this! Hope that many films like this will follow on this channel!

hell yeah , finally you answer my prayers! ! an episode about my favorite airplane the Tupolev TU-114 Rossiya!

What a beautiful airplane ,passiva sky .✈️💗

@SkyshipsEng

Жыл бұрын

Spasibo)

That is a beautiful piece of history. They deserve a big hand in keeping it looking so good on the inside. Great video.

Wooo cheers from The Philippines.

“Yes, two” was a nice touch. Well done. Great aircraft.

@laurie3546

Жыл бұрын

Men

Just cool! Thank you for sharing

@laurie3546

Жыл бұрын

Where ya from?

@hkja99

Жыл бұрын

@@laurie3546 Denmark..

Wow, amazing! I had no idea that an airliner had been created from the famous bomber, and how luxurious!

I've always found the Soviet and Russian aircraft to be impressive, specifically how they kept a very flat and high lower fuselage. The Mig and Su line of aircraft have always been stalwarts of speed and later models are highly maneuverable. Their rocket engines are far more powerful, up to 25% compared to US rocket engines. I have nothing but the highest respect for their engineering and scientific teams.

@mattosullivan9687

Жыл бұрын

I would fly in one I imagine the designers were "Highly Motivated"

Would love to see both leaders' faces if a 747, 787, or 380 showed up when they were saying hello. Trim/decor looks cheap, but overall interior design is amazing. Did not expect such accommodations.

@Max_Da_G

Жыл бұрын

One DOES have to bear in mind the times during which this interior was created.

@owen368

Жыл бұрын

It's much nicer than current cattle truck low cost flying today but I bet some of that interior trim would not pass current saftey standards.

Thank you for an interesting video about an aircraft I've only seen in video in bomber form. The passenger version is a remarkable achievement. Interesting interior design and the overall concept was a beautiful piece of work considering it's origin. A unique reliable workhorse albeit a loud one. Truly worthy of a place in the history of aviation. Nothing else was like it. The interior film made the video. It was fascinating to see the fuselage interior that just went on and on and on.

definately the most exotic airliner ever built!

@danielocarey9392

28 күн бұрын

Maybe so. But the Convair 990 was exotic.

The first detailed Video of the interior from this aircraft

The Navigator definitely had the best seat on board with that view.

Jetspeeds in a Turboprop. Very loud, unique sounding counter-rotating props due to the tips exceeding the speed of sound. Overall an incredible aircraft for its time.

Like the Tu-114, in a related context, the An-2 is another notable example of a so-called 'outdated' design (biplane), being brought into service to address a specific requirement in Soviet aviation. BRAVO ZULU, excellent vid!

@marhawkman303

Жыл бұрын

yea, saw one amusing thing long ago about a fighter designer who considered using a biplane as a way to shorten the wings on a carrier launched jet

Amazing to see the stock footage of the aircraft interior compared to how it was preserved today! Excellent video!

What a magnificent aircraft - a unique concept and the interior layout shows just what can be done by thinking 'outside the box'. This would've have been a real experience to fly in, certianly in the configuration shown in the video, albeit a very noisy one! Great video - very informative!

Wow, that front landing gear is just insanely tall!

@michaelmartinez1345

Жыл бұрын

@daapz , Yes, that nose gear is really long!!! It gave the plane a favorable AOA on take-off's and landings, along with providing prop clearance... The plexiglass nose dome for the navigator really helped the flight crew, as the navigator view windows and extra eyes for ground handling were put there.... Great idea !!! The Tall nose gear reminds the classic aircraft enthusiasts of planes like the Lockheed Constellations....

@PadraigTomas

Жыл бұрын

The thought of how to run an evacuation of this aircraft is a bit of a puzzle.

@AtheistOrphan

Жыл бұрын

@@PadraigTomas - The only aircraft where you have to use parachutes when it’s on the ground!

@marhawkman303

Жыл бұрын

@@AtheistOrphan the inflatable slide system some of the modern planes use woud still work, just make the slides a different size and shape

@AtheistOrphan

Жыл бұрын

@@marhawkman303 - WHOOSH! (And over his head the joke goes).

What a beautiful plane. It has a similar and beautiful style as the Lockheed C-121 Super Constellation, B757 and amenities/features only found now a days in the A380. A testimony to Russian aviation and innovation.

Thanks for the amazing walk through. It's nice to finally see what the inside of this early airline looked like.

I can appreciate this. Definitely a different path from the "Pack 'Em All in" design philosophy that most airliners have followed since.

This is definitely a contender for my favourite airliner of all time

What a masterpiece. Still faster and has more range than most of todays propellers.

A very unique design. No doubt a flight aboard one of these was an experience, completely different than the jumbo-jet cattle car perspective these days.

These planes are elegant. As a boy I flew in a DC-8 from LA to Miami. Air Travel was a Joy! Now it's like a bus ride...

This channel just keeps getting better

Hi Sky, Amazing youtube channel, been here since past 5 years, Love from India

Absolutely fascinating. I am glad they saved the plane and kept it in that condition.

The engines are monumental the whole aircraft range is something to be proud of .A plane of great design , I would feel safe aboard.

I've seen a 747's nose gear accidentally released at LAX. It's a good thing that the 747 is relatively close to the ground, and the airframe is more robust, because that airplane was repaired and went back into service.

An excellent insight into a truly unique gem of Russian aviation 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Absolutely gorgeous. Lovely aircraft. Wish I had seen one and flown in one.

not easy to find Tu-114 details, and here's you with this super-walk-through. Thank you for this! amazing to see 'THE Tu-114' that appears in all those old 64 year old movie reels - remarkable its in such original condition.

Thanks a lot for this great video about this big and beautiful bird. Greetings from Belgium.

Excellent video, very interesting!

Truly a magnificent plane. So happy it has been saved.

Это один из самых высоких и потрясающих самолётов у человечества. На его базе летают ту 95 до сих пор!

the tu 114 is an awesome looking aircraft

@laurie3546

Жыл бұрын

Bill

Great review, the shots inside prove how amazing it was. The Tu-114 and the Concorde, of course, are the best of this civilian type of aircraft in my opinion.

Fascinating! If you look carefully, you will note that the galley area involves a small step up. This is to allow the wing spars to pass through the fuselage, a bad design feature that they needed to incorporate nonetheless. Modern Western designs always have a wing box such that the fuselage sits entirely on top of the wing spars. You can really see this on the 757, which was an evolution of the 727. This step up is a trip hazard. The primary reason this was built as a turboprop was due to fuel efficiency. The Soviets had plenty of turbojet engines with the necessary power, but they weren't efficient at all and would have resulted in great range penalties. The reason for this inefficiency was that they did not have the advanced metallurgy that Western jet engines incorporated. Western engines could have very high ITT [interstage turbine temperatures] and small, efficient burner cans due to this better metal, both of which greatly decrease fuel use for the same power. To make up for this Soviet engineers instead used propellers, which are naturally more efficient than turbojets or turbofans. Back in the 1980's and '90's, Pratt & Whitney experimented with "unducted fans" for this reason. Now, as this plane proves with it's 475 knot max cruise speed, you can make a propeller driven airliner fast. Modern airliners usually flight plan for 480 knots, or about .80 mach. The difference is that to get to that speed with a turboprop, those propellers need to rotate fast, and this resulted in blade tip speeds at or beyond the speed of sound. This situation of course results in TREMENDOUS noise in the cabin, so that is why they kept it down around 400 knots. Even at those speeds I bet it was difficult to talk in that cabin without shouting. That cockpit door is interesting; The hermetic seal? I suppose that's a good thing in case of fires, but what comes to mind is security. If there was something going on with a passenger in the cabin, they were NOT getting through that thing! Great video!

@Max_Da_G

Жыл бұрын

I wouldn't call it a bad design feature. I'd call it a technical necessity. Also may I ask why you are comparing a literally rush-job raid-the-parts-bin airplane designed in 50s to a far more modern airliner designed specifically with passenger carrying in mind? Later model Soviet and Russian aircraft clearly didn't have that problem for the same reason: they were made with passengers in mind. At the time of the design, Russians had to fly to USA without landing anywhere. Existing jet engines that Soviets had would have had its air liners reaching US shores no problem if the basing was somewhere around France or Britain. But that was not really possible for Soviet military aircraft. US had the luxury of being able to land in Europe, refuel, fly to USSR and then straight back to USA in one go. USSR had to fly to USA all the way from own territory and back the same way. So Soviet jets were of similar-ish efficiency. At the time US jets weren't amazingly efficient either: B-52 in its initial models, just like Soviet Myasishev M4/3M, didn't reach the range required by technical request of SAC. It took a few iterations of engines to get jet powered bombers to reach the needed flight range. So what Soviets ended up with 2 intercontinental bombers: Tu-95 and M4/3M. The latter, just like B-52, eventually reached the needed flight range, but Soviets started the program of Tu-95 specifically because they knew the jet engines would take time to mature, and hence went with two parallel bombers. Soviets never really had the habit of letting just anyone poke their heads into the pilots cabin. It was almost always locked. Russians are a strange lot, and signs such as "do not enter" don't really bother them: they do what they feel like.

@Flies2FLL

Жыл бұрын

@@Max_Da_G I don't agree with most of what you are saying. Russian metallurgy at the time was little more than what they recovered from Nazi Germany and all they did was copy the designs. American jet engines were WAY more efficient as a result of the advanced metallurgy, look it up. It is never a good design feature to have a hump in the floor; The British Jetstream 32 turboprop had this and airlines were sued when people tripped. The later J41 had the fuselage raised to remove this problem. Later Soviet airliners were built with engines that copied American and British designs right down the metallurgy, and then they had the range to reach the US. But they still didn't have the technology that we had even in the late 1970's. The Lockheed L1011 design never really made any money for this company, and the Soviets expressed interest in buying the design and tooling and building it in Russia. This would have gone forward but Jimmy Carter stopped it at the last minute because they didn't want the Soviets to get ahold of the "advanced" technology this aircraft had. To this day they still haven't produced an airliner that could successfully achieve large scale sales on its own merits. Really, that backwards country cannot produce a decent clock-radio, much less something as complex as an airliner.

It looks far more comfortable and luxurious than todays airplanes.

@danielocarey9392

28 күн бұрын

It was loud inside. And it vibrated a lot.

That was pretty interesting, didn't know much about this aircraft! Looks amazing for a 50's aircraft.

That's an impressive interior!

Always enjoy these videos. Now with historic footage of Soviet programs and life of the times. That’s almost nostalgic and I’m not even Russian

Amazing airplane! 18:50 - The extension of the Pan-Am stairs to reach the rear door is nutty! I don't know if I could have gotten past the noise of it! Those contra-rotating props are loud as hell!!!

I like how the narrator incorporates opinions with the facts.

What a cool plane! One negative thing is the sound though... I don't know how it was for the passengers, but I've been in a C-130 Hercules while in the military, and I distinctly remember being being at an airshow where some plane with counter-rotating turboprop engines were present (but I might just be misremembering from a video :-P Nevertheless, those things are LOUD!

I have subscribed to and enjoyed your channel for a couple of years now. This video was EXCELLENT! A super job. Thank you.

Top of my bucket list… as a passenger on the TU-114 with throttles open wide.

Aeroflot and JAL had a joint service between Moscow and Tokyo in the late 1960’s using this aircraft which had Aeroflot livery with the red JAL logo in the lower part of the fuselage. I remember flying on this plane as a kid in 1969. Aeroflot eventually switched to the 4-jet Ilyushin 62 on this route and JAL started their own service to Europe via Moscow, which shaved considerable flying time compared to the Polar route via Anchorage.