Maybe Rupert urdoc bought it! One day I turned on SPEEVISION to watch Formula one and uro racing and it had been turned into 23 hour a day NASCAR after Rupert took it over ;( Even worse was the OUTDOOR LIFE network- when it started getting more viewers than Late night talk shows with the Tour de France, and even better downhill World Cup Ski Racing in winter....it suddenly became "vs." with Bull Riding and fist fighting :{ Now to my point - I clicked on this for the picture of a bomber with a radial engine in the nose yet do not see any such thing here - what plane is on the 'click bait shot'?
Oh I see - at the end the pic is the plane with the refueling rig, and not an extra engine, nevermind, and Rupert keep your hands off our cable and we will not hit you with any more pies in the face.
Flying 60 hours over the North Pole in a single engine aircraft in 1937! Talk about having huge balls. If your engine failed that would be a guaranteed death sentence, and a miserable one at that.
fun fact: tu95 can fly so slow, that during peace, intercepting jets can't fly next to it because they will stall so the russians use this feature to annoy nato and waste it's time and fuel
Lovely words from somebody who knows really nothing of the USSR. It SUCKED ASS. I know. I was there. Russian marauding soldiers in the end of the USSR, no food in shops, no clothes in shops, only thing you could buy was alcohol. Go to a supermarket and imagine the empty shelves, for weeks and weeks, no food. Desperation. Constant fear - You never knew who will give You out to the KGB and what KGB had on Your family. Opinion any different then the public government opinion landed You in prison with some serious violence, Your teeth and fingernails pulled out, You finger bones and ribs broken. If You didn't break, they shot You. Propaganda everywhere screaming at You from everywhere: OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! "Gavarit Moskva!" Pretty much anything else then military equipment from the USSR sucked ass. There is a funny part in this video as well - the part where the narrator states: "Russians were assisted by German aeronautics engineers who were hired from Germany at the end of the war". I actually laughed. They were not hired, they were captured and sent to Gulag where they were forced to work for the USSR. Same as the rifle "Kalashnikov". Schmeisser was working under Kalashnikov.
The Polikarpov I-16 was the first fighter plane with a single, low, cantilevered wing and retractable landing gear. They still hold the record for the biggest plane, with greatest lifting capability. The record for altitude and the fastest propeller driven plane in serial production (The Bear).
The Tu-95s in service today are of the Tu-95MS variant, which entered service in the 1980s and can carry the Raduga Kh-55 cruise missile. Although the Tu-95 has been in existence as long as the B-52, the Tu-95s currently operating with the Russian Air Force are 20-25 years older than the B-52Hs (notwithstanding the fact that Rolls-Royce plans to have the B-52H fleet fitted with the BR700 turbofan).
That is definitely not correct the B-52H were built in the early 60’s the current in service Russian Tu-95 are from the late 70’s to early 80’s they are the younger airframes between the two types.
There are a lot of scenes in this version of The Nuclear Bear that are not found in the broadcast version found on UA-cam. Whatever you do, do NOT delete this video. Because this will serve a very big importance for fans of the Wings series.
The Tupolev Tu-4 was the first large Soviet heavy bomber with strategic range, but it was not designed for intercontinental strikes on the US. The Tupolev design bureau developed an intercontinental version of the Tu-4, the Tu-85, which was the Soviet counterpart to the B-36 Peacemaker but did not progress past the prototype stage. The Tu-16 also was not designed for intercontinental missions and it was the only Soviet strategic bomber to be exported to a former European colony in Asia, serving with Indonesia from 1961-1970.
I'm Filipino and we speak American English but me personally i find it hard to speak American English because it is so soft for my tongue whilst the English English is more acceptable it uses spanish R and it is not soft yet it is melodic tone don't know if my grammar aee correct
The original Tu-16 is no longer flying, but the Badger lives on in the form of the Chinese-built Xian H-6. As a matter of fact, one version of the H-6, the H-6K, differs from the baseline H-6 in having a solid nose, Soloviev D-30 turbofans, and larger air intakes.
One thing they didn't mention much is that the TU-95 'Bear' is beyond noisy, they did say that it is loud but that's not really putting it into perspective. So let me say this, the damn thing was so loud that our submarines could hear it so far off it's ridiculous, even while there submerged quite deep. So to say it was noisy and loud is a true understatement.
TED NUGENT WAS WAY LOUDER....could hear from 7 miles away.....stage speakers blew up a pigieon.....likes Randy Johnson's pitch....with one power chord from TED in the 70's
well because it's faster than most bomber in those days, plus it was meant to be big and noise, I have heard most the nato's pilot intercept them, have ears drums damaged, they were so fear of the bears , they shit in their pants.
The Ilya Muromets remains pivotal in aviation history as the first ever heavy bomber ever built, and one of a few production aircraft built in Czarist Russia, a monumental technological feat for a country with rudimentary industrial infrastructure at the time of the abdication of Czar Nicholas II.
I would love to have any of these old planes, I would build a house that is sort of like a base to mount the plane on, then I'd convert part of the interior into living space, use the top half of the wings as a deck and use the bottom of the wings for shelter, shade, possibly a car port. Weird dream right?
The only people that actually see Russian air bases or have seen Russian air bases outside of the political party and military end up seeing a small room in the basement of the Lubyanka. That's the last thing they see.
NATO likes to name Russian bombers after large land mammals, animals known for their ability to fly. Also, to my understanding, the bomber gap never existed because the Soviets realized it would be a gigantic waste of money.
Actually, the Tu-95, Tu-16, and M-4 were the only Soviet bombers to be given NATO codenames referred to land mammals. The Tu-22, Tu-98, Tu-22M, and Tu-160 weren't named for land mammals.
I remember this series being in TV in the early 90’s great series. They did make a mistake in saying the the Tu-95 had a fixed forward firing cannon in the nose. It did not they have confused the Tu-16 Badger which did indeed have a 23mm cannon fixed in the nose it was removed on several versions of the Badger but they did have one.
The documentary about the Tu-95 was released in the 1990s. The Tu-95, the only operational turboprop-powered bomber ever built, still serves its country of origin seventy years after its first flight in 1952. The turboprop engine used to power the Tu-95 was based on a wartime German turboprop design, the Junkers Jumo 022, of which engineering documentation was discovered by Soviet military personnel after Nazi Germany's surrender when they entered the Junkers Jumo factory in Magdeburg in June/July 1945 (the Americans briefly occupied the Junkers facilities after entering Dessau and Magdeburg in April 1945, but handed them over to Soviet control two months later as per the agreements reached at the June/July 1945 Potsdam Conference), and the Kuznetsov design bureau developed the Jumo 022 into the TV-022, which in turn spawned the Kuznetsov TV-2, the powerplant for the Tupolev Tu-91 carrier-based attack aircraft.
wow..never knew Russia was such a pioneer in flight, many firsts, many trails blazed by them, records, etc...and many accused Russia of stealing ideas from them? lol
@ 33:00 The Russian 'recruited' German engineers who had worked with Junkers towards the end of the war... that''s one way of putting it! ;-) It's like saying the police 'invite' criminals to take holidays in a multi-room hotels with burglar-proof bars on the windows! ;-)
With respect to captured Junkers engineers who worked at the Kuznetsov Design Bureau (see 33:00), the Bear's turboprop engine was based on captured blueprints for the Junkers Jumo 022 turboprop engine, a wartime German turboprop design. The Jumo 022 design was called TV-2 by the Soviets, and a coupled variant of it was used to power the first Tu-95 prototype. More info about the Jumo 022 can be found at this link: hugojunkers.bplaced.net/junkers-okb-2-jumo-022.html If anyone's familiar with Nazi-era jet combat aircraft projects, the Junkers EF 131 (an advanced version of the Ju 287 forward swept-wing bomber) and EF 132 (backswept wing jet bomber with six Jumo 012 engines buried in the wing roots) were originally designed in Nazi Germany but had their development taken over by the Soviets. Only the EF 131 flew while the EF 132 was cancelled before completion. The EF 126 pulsejet-powered attack aircraft likewise was tested in the USSR after the end of WW2. The EF 131 formed the basis of the EF 140 with two Mikulin turbojets, but the EF 140 did not enter production. The layout of the EF 132 would influence design of the Tu-16 and M-4 bombers.
Does anybody know if a TU95 Bear will be flying in any European airshows any time soon? Would really love to see and hear one just once in my life (without being a target!).
That is because it uses stolen blueprints for the B-52. How do you think almost every 'invention' or "innovation" the Soviets ever devised came to be? Look it up. They steal the plans, then try to buld it, or get ahold of a existing copy somehow and then try to reverse engineer it. The history of this way is replete with examples of these attempts blowing up in their faces because they just didn't know HOW, what to do, or what material something was made of, etc, etc. And to think we saved their asses with lend-lease too. The re-payment was in immediate lock-down of eastern Europe, theft of all they could find and then spend the entire Cold War screaming at us. Same with Red China. Patton had it right: We shoulda armed the Germans and gone after Stalin.
look at the history of the Manhattan Project, how they were able to sway scientists inside it to pass plans and betray the two main powers, US & GB, working on the project. It STARTS there more or less, and goes on right on up to today. They even made their own SPACE SHUTTLE Have a look: io9.gizmodo.com/incredible-soviet-rip-offs-of-western-technologies-973280252
I wasn't saying that they haven't stolen or borrowed things from the west. but in my videos featuring russian stuff ,comments about the russians doing that ridiculously outnumber all other kind of comments! :-( P.S. the russian "buran" space shuttle only LOOKS like the american one,but I guess it had too since these 2 space shuttles were meant to deliver similar sized payloads in orbit, they where just boxes with wings for the re-entry...
"the russian "buran" space shuttle only LOOKS like the american one,but I guess it had too since these 2 space shuttles were meant to deliver similar sized payloads in orbit, they where just boxes with wings for the re-entry..." Yes and the launch system is completely different SS-> SRBS main engines inside the shuttle Buran liquid boosters engines in the central tank makes a better design since the energija can fly without the buran like it did with the polyus payload.
8:36 June 37' flight to Portland, Washington? Uh no, try Oregon. Didn't actually land in Portland either but a few miles across the Columbia river at Pearson Field in Vancouver, Washington. Love catching these errors.
true "The flight was supposed to be from Moscow to the San Francisco area, that’s where the Soviet ambassador was waiting to welcome his troika of heroes. But engine problems and a looming fuel shortage prompted the southbound aviators to reverse course and head back for Portland. When word spread of the change in plans, people started gathering at airports in the region - just in case. When Chkalov saw the crowd waiting for them at Portland’s Swan Island airfield, he was afraid his airplane might get torn into scrap metal by souvenir hunters. So he headed across the Columbia, where the military airfield at Vancouver Barracks figured to have better crowd control."
There's quite a few minor faux pas in this episode. I paused and rewound for a moment at about 12:55 because it said Stalin asked Shvetsov to copy the "Wright Whirlwind engines..." The Whirlwinds were an earlier series of Wright engines, the largest production versions being 9-cylinders making about 450hp. The B-29 used the 18-cylinder R-3350 Duplex Cyclone of 2,200hp each.
Used to be Discovery Wings, then the Military Channel, then I just didn't care. TV is refuse of garbage that historians will be laughing about for many years to come. If you want to watch what you want. Streaming is the way.
Vincent Chen , AHC plays World War 2 in Colour which is an amazing series. Also, they rarely play World at War which is even better, but you should buy it in eBay cheap so you can have all 20 some odd one hour episodes. It's finominal.
It would seem that, given the speed, range and "intelligence" of current self-guided missiles, any platform capable of lifting them to minimum launch altitude is a credible threat. And, given the immense radar cross section of this aircraft, a flight of TU-95's would occupy a great deal of one's targeting resources to the advantage of faster, more stealthy platforms. Add to this the near panic of dealing with multiple threats, with velocities ranging from high subsonic to hypersonic, and it might be a Bear carrying the one with your name on it. In the insanely crowded threat environment anyone would face nowadays, even against a relatively unsophisticated enemy, everything is dangerous. Just ask the crew of HMS Sheffield.
Fun fact: the Law of the Sea is an internationally recognized set of rules regarding territorial waters, rules of engagement, and generally just making sure nations don't bully each-other when it comes to shipping. The United States Navy is by far the most powerful enforcer of the Law of the Sea... (seriously, at this point we could probably take on the rest of the world's navies, including our allies, and still win, despite all the whining about our navy being 'only half as powerful as it used to be') ...and yet the United States is one of the few countries with a navy never to have ratified this Law. Basically, we are outlaws enforcing the law on others while claiming to not be subject to it ourselves...
That explanation is somewhat deceptive. The reason the United States is not a signatory of UNCLOS is more to do with internal US bureaucratic squabbling, and not a belief it should not be subject to it. Originally territorial waters were set at 3 miles (this issue was a contentious issue within the treaty, some nations wanted it to be 3 miles, some 12 miles, some even further) and while the US initially supported the 3 mile position, in 1988, as more and more countries started abandoning it and just declaring a 12 mile territorial limit themselves anyway regardless of UNCLOS, President Reagan announced the same. However it was the view of the US justice department that this was not his decision to make, determining US territorial waters should be a matter for Congress, and essentially the issue has been stuck in an inter-governmental legal logjam ever since. Although it’s all a bit of a moot point now because the definition of territorial waters has since been moved to 12 miles anyway. However more importantly, even though the US did not sign, it still adheres to the conventions of UNCLOS anyway, while many countries who DID sign it now completely ignore them, some almost mockingly so. Such as China who despite ratifying UNCLOS, then declared it would completely ignore an international arbitration ruling based on UNCLOS that ruled overwhelming against China. With Beijing claiming the court in The Hague had no authority and it’s ruling was “ill-founded” and “naturally null and void anyway”. Since then Beijing has stepped things up even further, despite China being undeniably a continental country, Beijing now audaciously claims it is an ‘archipelagic state’, which is a status conferred by the UN on a small number of nations (hint, China is not one of them) that are made up of large numbers of islands like Indonesia, the Solomon Islands and the Bahamas. This is important because archipelagic states have sovereignty over the small sections of ocean that separate each island as it is viewed as their internal waters just like a river or stream. With this interpretation in hand and it’s scattering of recently built artificial islands, China now views the ENTIRE South China Sea as the ’internal waters’ of it’s ‘archipelago’, which is just crazy! As you correctly point out, apart from the US, there is no other country in the world with a large and strong navy and so without their help these sorts of shenanigans would go completely unchallenged.
Also, I have no idea why you thought America’s position on a UN naval treaty has any relevance to a documentary about the history of bomber aircraft design in the Soviet Union....
This was one of the destinations of the 1937 flight by the Tupolev ANT-25 record-breaking aircraft. Tupolev would later adapt the ANT-25 into a long-range bomber, the ANT-36/DB-1.
Russia a truly innovative aero country.im a big fan of Russian aviation.imagine if Stalin was not around be even more formidable country in those days.
@@zanstuart2809 dude if they did reverse engineering what's bad in it USA reverse engineer do many technologies from Germany in world war 2 even Soviet and Americana were toke captured German scientists to space program and missile program also USA have inspected russian mig31 fighter after pilot defected to japan
Before the Soviets even launched Sputnik it was the Tu-95 that forced the creation of NORAD. After the Tu-95... Oh wait, the Tu-95 still exists, and NORAD still has to exist in large part because of it! Guess how the Russians still think about our B-52 force...
Don't know about the Rolls Royce comparison, as it implies luxury. But the Russians did have a different strategy. Rather many uncomplicated machines then a few high tech ones. The US follows the opposite strategy. Personally I would rather fly an old Soviet plane, then an American of the same age. The same goes for the AK vs M16 choice.
Why did only the USSR forces construct ALL their combat planes, fighters, bombers, cargoplanes, to have big, very rugged undercarriage so ALL can take-off and land from fields of grass!? Whenever WW3 would have broken out in Europe, ALL airbases and runways would of course be main targets on both sides so pilots returning from missions would be forced to land on grass or eject. The west only constructed the VTOL-capable Hawker Siddely Harrier.
The Tu-95 was developed (as sayed) from the B-29 copy the Tu-4. So the basic concept is american. The key for it's longevity are the engines efficiency that can now be compared to a modern Hi bypass turbofan.
I wonder if the propellers on Tu-94 build up any torque at all ? . Its a bit like Kamov's helicopters the propellers/rotor runs in opposite directions . I wonder if that prevent torque ? . That must be an enormous advantage on a strategic bomber .
Yeah USA you're welcome here are the plans on how to make a stealth airplane and the titanium to build your Mach 3.3+ planes. "stealth aircraft first became possible when Denys Overholser, a mathematician working for Lockheed Aircraft during the 1970s, adopted a mathematical model developed by Petr Ufimtsev, a Soviet scientist" "Titanium was in short supply in the United States, so the Skunk Works team was forced to look elsewhere for the metal. Much of the needed material came from the Soviet Union"
vaso opel you’re welcome Thanks to your government, President Trump has provided your country with plans on how to build hypersonic nuclear tipped cruise missiles.
WATCH...BOMBERS OF THE COLD WAR WINGS OF RUSSIA.... to complete this doc. set if you want to see all about the TU 95. The Russian are still flying in Syria today....it's a cool set up with the counter rotating props....we also tried this with the F-84 turbo prop version but it did not really work without counter rotating props....actual speed estimates of this are questionable....see the Wiki article for both...
That's right. Tupolev built a prototype heavy bomber larger than the TB-3, as the ANT-16/TB-4, but that design didn't enter production. Tupolev proposed a gigantic heavy bomber much larger size than the TB-3 and TB-4, the ANT-26/TB-6, which had 12 Mikulin M-34 piston engines (8 tractor engines on leading edge of wing, four engines in two pusher/puller nacelles above the wings) and whose wings spanned 311 feet, but the TB-6 remained a paper project only.
They just made him look younger. He wasn't that bad looking in 1936. But the awesome weight and responsibility of having to wear those collossal eyebrows all his life is what really aged him.
the Hero of (Socialist) Labor medal. РСФСР=Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic. Пролетарии всех стран, соединяйтесь=Workers of all countries, unite. ГероЮ труда=hero of labor. the page shown just before the medal is too blurry and I can't see which was the recipient... but the dates suggest it was in 1927 ;-)
@@robertjackson9050 one question... do you know that your comment is "invisible" on YT??, only I...the owner of the channel can see it, do you know why? did YT send you any notification about that? it is strange...
TU-95 with its contrarotating turboprop engines designed by engineers "recruited from Germany", with an airframe strongly resembling the American B-29s copied during WWII. Soviet system sure did produce some world-class engineers, didn't it?
american copy of V-1: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic-Ford_JB-2 american missle made by the team that made the V-2: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGM-11_Redstone german engineer helping americans making swept wing airplanes: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Busemann so according to your logic the "american" system sure did produce some world-class engineers, didn't it? :-) anyway, what I'm trying to say is that copying somone else's technology doesn't mean that your country doesn't have good engineers.
@@vasopel The JB-2 was created by reverse-engineering captured or crashed V-1s, and the pulsejet used to power those V-1s was reverse-engineered by the Ford Company and used to power not just the JB-2 but also the Northrop JB-10 flying wing cruise missile. The turboprop engine that powered the Tu-95 was based on wartime Junkers documentation for the Jumo 022 turboprop engine that was analyzed by Soviet engineers after WW2, the Junkers factory in Dessau having been handed over to Soviet control in the summer 1945 after the Americans captured the plant near the end of WW2. Captured V-2s formed the basis for not just the Redstone missile (people may feel tempted to thank Wernher von Braun for giving the Americans the tips for building the Saturn V rocket to take men to the moon) but also the R-1 ballistic missile.
@@vahe2391 yes I agree ;-) but the OG comment is correct about the engines of the tu 95,they were designed and completed by german engineers,after they completed their work they were permitted to leave the soviet union.
I have a great respect for the Russian people. They are quite clever and industrious. However, the fact that the best they could do to counter the B52 was the TU-95 exemplifies (industriousness aside), how their technology has lagged behind the west ... and still does.
hello Robert. I don't think they made the Tu-95 to "counter" the B52 or tried to make it as good, they just wanted to make a strategic bomber. most people agree that the Tu-95 is more cost-effective, can operate in harsher conditions, is more reliable and maintenance-friendly than the B52, but of course the B52 is better in ALL other aspects. I am not trying to defend the russian (soviet) technology but it's is wrong to say that they "lagged behind the west", the truth is that the russians were better in some things and the USA in others. also is wrong to say "and still does" how do you know? it will be decades before we now for sure what military technology russia has today (in 2018). P.S. interesting bonus fact: the Tu-95 engines were designed by german (and austrian) engineers and scientists, prisoners from WWII that were promised to be released when they finished it, the engine was first tested successfully in 1953 and the head of the team Ferdinand Brandnerhe was released from the USSR in the same year.
@@vasopel Come to think of it I agree with your observations! There is no denying the TU-95 is an efficient and effective platform, particularly in maritime patrol and reconnoissance ... even today. And ... it is a beauty.
thank you very much :D I don't know how I haven't recognized it before... maybe because I heard only some silent version so I couldn't catch the rhythm. Thanks :)
Thank you very much for helping us to figure this out. I have spent the last 12 or so years trying to figure this out. As far as I can tell it is "Hyme to the Red October". I am still trying to figure out what the Discovery Channel used for the opening theme? I am now wondering what the melody that ends at 1:43 and starts at the beginning of the show is? Thank you in advance for helping me to figure this out.
what happened to the discovery Channel. this series was brilliant, now it's fake hotrod shows and dumb fishing and gold mining stuff.
Same with the history channel, military channel, you name it. TV has been replaced with you tube.
Panzer Faust----UA-cam is getting better all the time.
cartmanrlsusall AMEN ITS ALL Alaka this and Alaska that..and hot rod bull shit...nothing really that I consider a "Discovery"
Maybe Rupert urdoc bought it! One day I turned on SPEEVISION to watch Formula one and uro racing and it had been turned into 23 hour a day NASCAR after Rupert took it over ;(
Even worse was the OUTDOOR LIFE network- when it started getting more viewers than Late night talk shows with the Tour de France, and even better downhill World Cup Ski Racing in winter....it suddenly became "vs." with Bull Riding and fist fighting :{
Now to my point - I clicked on this for the picture of a bomber with a radial engine in the nose yet do not see any such thing here - what plane is on the 'click bait shot'?
Oh I see - at the end the pic is the plane with the refueling rig, and not an extra engine, nevermind, and Rupert keep your hands off our cable and we will not hit you with any more pies in the face.
Flying 60 hours over the North Pole in a single engine aircraft in 1937! Talk about having huge balls. If your engine failed that would be a guaranteed death sentence, and a miserable one at that.
fun fact: tu95 can fly so slow, that during peace, intercepting jets can't fly next to it because they will stall so the russians use this feature to annoy nato and waste it's time and fuel
tell me its true!
true
trust me u got a bit good humor.
NATO identifier: Troll
huehuehue makes sense isn't this one of the fastest prop planes
Any true fan of aircraft holds this plane in highest regards.
It is shocking and surprising how so much Soviet (Russian) aeronautical accomplishments were ignored or downplayed. They still are to some degree.
pretty mutch everything made in russia still today people are so ignorant....
Lovely words from somebody who knows really nothing of the USSR.
It SUCKED ASS. I know. I was there.
Russian marauding soldiers in the end of the USSR, no food in shops, no clothes in shops, only thing you could buy was alcohol. Go to a supermarket and imagine the empty shelves, for weeks and weeks, no food.
Desperation. Constant fear - You never knew who will give You out to the KGB and what KGB had on Your family. Opinion any different then the public government opinion landed You in prison with some serious violence, Your teeth and fingernails pulled out, You finger bones and ribs broken. If You didn't break, they shot You.
Propaganda everywhere screaming at You from everywhere: OBEY! OBEY! OBEY! "Gavarit Moskva!"
Pretty much anything else then military equipment from the USSR sucked ass.
There is a funny part in this video as well - the part where the narrator states: "Russians were assisted by German aeronautics engineers who were hired from Germany at the end of the war". I actually laughed.
They were not hired, they were captured and sent to Gulag where they were forced to work for the USSR. Same as the rifle "Kalashnikov". Schmeisser was working under Kalashnikov.
Any proof of this statement?
The Polikarpov I-16 was the first fighter plane with a single, low, cantilevered wing and retractable landing gear. They still hold the record for the biggest plane, with greatest lifting capability. The record for altitude and the fastest propeller driven plane in serial production (The Bear).
Ullo-Ragnar Telliskivi the bear like the b52 is still flying that alone says it was a good design
Amazing how after 60 years of service, the Bear didn't have its combat debut until 2015.
The Tu-95s in service today are of the Tu-95MS variant, which entered service in the 1980s and can carry the Raduga Kh-55 cruise missile. Although the Tu-95 has been in existence as long as the B-52, the Tu-95s currently operating with the Russian Air Force are 20-25 years older than the B-52Hs (notwithstanding the fact that Rolls-Royce plans to have the B-52H fleet fitted with the BR700 turbofan).
That is definitely not correct the B-52H were built in the early 60’s the current in service Russian Tu-95 are from the late 70’s to early 80’s they are the younger airframes between the two types.
I think i hear a TU-95 flying. No i was wrong that's just my neighbor mowing the grass.
Who remembers when the discovery channel didn't suck
There are a lot of scenes in this version of The Nuclear Bear that are not found in the broadcast version found on UA-cam. Whatever you do, do NOT delete this video. Because this will serve a very big importance for fans of the Wings series.
Christopher Manson agreed
49 Minute video about the TU-95, only starts looking at the Bear 32 minutes in....(lots of stuff about other Soviet Bombers though...)
The Tupolev Tu-4 was the first large Soviet heavy bomber with strategic range, but it was not designed for intercontinental strikes on the US. The Tupolev design bureau developed an intercontinental version of the Tu-4, the Tu-85, which was the Soviet counterpart to the B-36 Peacemaker but did not progress past the prototype stage. The Tu-16 also was not designed for intercontinental missions and it was the only Soviet strategic bomber to be exported to a former European colony in Asia, serving with Indonesia from 1961-1970.
Peter Ustinov= how English should be spoken.
Annoyingly?
why is he saying missil then ?
I'm Filipino and we speak American English but me personally i find it hard to speak American English because it is so soft for my tongue whilst the English English is more acceptable it uses spanish R and it is not soft yet it is melodic tone don't know if my grammar aee correct
Well certainly English English is much more classy than American English. Sir Ustinov's accent sounds somehow very aristocratic.
Yeah, no.
Keeping NATO pilots in a job since 1952.
The Bear and Badger are like the B52..still flying. Amazing for military aircraft.
Yeah but in fairness the B52 is just vastly superior. Vastly.
The original Tu-16 is no longer flying, but the Badger lives on in the form of the Chinese-built Xian H-6. As a matter of fact, one version of the H-6, the H-6K, differs from the baseline H-6 in having a solid nose, Soloviev D-30 turbofans, and larger air intakes.
@@joelhammer3538 but also much more expensive
big bad bear still rules today
The narrator is Peter Ustinov.
SIR Peter Ustinov!
One thing they didn't mention much is that the TU-95 'Bear' is beyond noisy, they did say that it is loud but that's not really putting it into perspective. So let me say this, the damn thing was so loud that our submarines could hear it so far off it's ridiculous, even while there submerged quite deep. So to say it was noisy and loud is a true understatement.
It depends on one's perspective. ACDC is loud to some, noisy to others and perfect to many.
TED NUGENT WAS WAY LOUDER....could hear from 7 miles away.....stage speakers blew up a pigieon.....likes Randy Johnson's pitch....with one power chord from TED in the 70's
Actually it was not the submarines but SOSUS, and it was mostly refering to Tu-142 rather than Tu-95, as Tu-95s tend to fly on alot higher altitudes.
Thats because the tips of its propeller blades actually go supersonic. A truly amazing machine.
But yes, the noise is insane.
well because it's faster than most bomber in those days, plus it was meant to be big and noise, I have heard most the nato's pilot intercept them, have ears drums damaged, they were so fear of the bears , they shit in their pants.
Love these programs thank you for sharing.
An amazing plane. Thank you for sharing.
;-)
Perfect documentary, from the Ilya Muromets to the Tupolev Tu 95 Bear
The Ilya Muromets remains pivotal in aviation history as the first ever heavy bomber ever built, and one of a few production aircraft built in Czarist Russia, a monumental technological feat for a country with rudimentary industrial infrastructure at the time of the abdication of Czar Nicholas II.
I would love to have any of these old planes, I would build a house that is sort of like a base to mount the plane on, then I'd convert part of the interior into living space, use the top half of the wings as a deck and use the bottom of the wings for shelter, shade, possibly a car port. Weird dream right?
LSD is a serious drug
Loved this series !!! I wish they would have shown more of the Soviet air bases of the time.
The only people that actually see Russian air bases or have seen Russian air bases outside of the political party and military end up seeing a small room in the basement of the Lubyanka. That's the last thing they see.
NATO likes to name Russian bombers after large land mammals, animals known for their ability to fly.
Also, to my understanding, the bomber gap never existed because the Soviets realized it would be a gigantic waste of money.
Actually, the Tu-95, Tu-16, and M-4 were the only Soviet bombers to be given NATO codenames referred to land mammals. The Tu-22, Tu-98, Tu-22M, and Tu-160 weren't named for land mammals.
@@vahe2391 They were just named with things starting with "B"
I remember this series being in TV in the early 90’s great series. They did make a mistake in saying the the Tu-95 had a fixed forward firing cannon in the nose. It did not they have confused the Tu-16 Badger which did indeed have a 23mm cannon fixed in the nose it was removed on several versions of the Badger but they did have one.
2020 and yet another new variant is about to enter service.
Wonderful air plane
Happy to see a show dedicated to the 95, but it does take a long time to get to it!
The documentary about the Tu-95 was released in the 1990s. The Tu-95, the only operational turboprop-powered bomber ever built, still serves its country of origin seventy years after its first flight in 1952. The turboprop engine used to power the Tu-95 was based on a wartime German turboprop design, the Junkers Jumo 022, of which engineering documentation was discovered by Soviet military personnel after Nazi Germany's surrender when they entered the Junkers Jumo factory in Magdeburg in June/July 1945 (the Americans briefly occupied the Junkers facilities after entering Dessau and Magdeburg in April 1945, but handed them over to Soviet control two months later as per the agreements reached at the June/July 1945 Potsdam Conference), and the Kuznetsov design bureau developed the Jumo 022 into the TV-022, which in turn spawned the Kuznetsov TV-2, the powerplant for the Tupolev Tu-91 carrier-based attack aircraft.
My favorite from the whole series.
That's a fantastic documentary.
wow..never knew Russia was such a pioneer in flight, many firsts, many trails blazed by them, records, etc...and many accused Russia of stealing ideas from them? lol
TVTruther russia stole this turboprop
France usually gets the credit for pre world war 2 aircraft development
Excuse me from where?@@youtubefanbot6997
2017 Bear still flies over Baltic Sea :)
It does but the ones in Russian service today were built new in the mid 70’s. While the B-52H were built in 60-61.
@ 33:00 The Russian 'recruited' German engineers who had worked with Junkers towards the end of the war... that''s one way of putting it! ;-)
It's like saying the police 'invite' criminals to take holidays in a multi-room hotels with burglar-proof bars on the windows! ;-)
MrFredSed exactly, “recruited”. Yeah ok...
With respect to captured Junkers engineers who worked at the Kuznetsov Design Bureau (see 33:00), the Bear's turboprop engine was based on captured blueprints for the Junkers Jumo 022 turboprop engine, a wartime German turboprop design. The Jumo 022 design was called TV-2 by the Soviets, and a coupled variant of it was used to power the first Tu-95 prototype. More info about the Jumo 022 can be found at this link:
hugojunkers.bplaced.net/junkers-okb-2-jumo-022.html
If anyone's familiar with Nazi-era jet combat aircraft projects, the Junkers EF 131 (an advanced version of the Ju 287 forward swept-wing bomber) and EF 132 (backswept wing jet bomber with six Jumo 012 engines buried in the wing roots) were originally designed in Nazi Germany but had their development taken over by the Soviets. Only the EF 131 flew while the EF 132 was cancelled before completion. The EF 126 pulsejet-powered attack aircraft likewise was tested in the USSR after the end of WW2. The EF 131 formed the basis of the EF 140 with two Mikulin turbojets, but the EF 140 did not enter production. The layout of the EF 132 would influence design of the Tu-16 and M-4 bombers.
It`s these advanced prop aircraft that give light to the dream of a fully electric 100-seter aircraft.
Turbo-prop*
Does anybody know if a TU95 Bear will be flying in any European airshows any time soon? Would really love to see and hear one just once in my life (without being a target!).
Stephen Keeler IT is so loud that it is illegal to fly anywhere Else than russia and the ocean
That test of the counter-rotating propellers @33:19 was done with a V-12 piston engine . Maybe the Kuznetsov engines weren't ready yet .
13:50
"BUU-ull."
Hilaroius!
+madcat789
I almost passed out laughing so hard.
+John Lindsey uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
Its not that funny
What a utility of a machine "The Bear"
8:35 "The June flight, to Portland, WASHINGTON" 😂😂😂
The Bear was a capable aircraft but it was totally eclipsed by the B-52 in terms of speed, payload and DECM.
Range?
The 1948 design for the B-52 was very close to that of the Tu-95.
That is because it uses stolen blueprints for the B-52. How do you think almost every 'invention' or "innovation" the Soviets ever devised came to be? Look it up. They steal the plans, then try to buld it, or get ahold of a existing copy somehow and then try to reverse engineer it. The history of this way is replete with examples of these attempts blowing up in their faces because they just didn't know HOW, what to do, or what material something was made of, etc, etc. And to think we saved their asses with lend-lease too. The re-payment was in immediate lock-down of eastern Europe, theft of all they could find and then spend the entire Cold War screaming at us. Same with Red China.
Patton had it right: We shoulda armed the Germans and gone after Stalin.
OMG yet another "they stole the designs" comment! :-(
look at the history of the Manhattan Project, how they were able to sway scientists inside it to pass plans and betray the two main powers, US & GB, working on the project. It STARTS there more or less, and goes on right on up to today. They even made their own SPACE SHUTTLE Have a look: io9.gizmodo.com/incredible-soviet-rip-offs-of-western-technologies-973280252
I wasn't saying that they haven't stolen or borrowed things from the west. but in my videos featuring russian stuff ,comments about the russians doing that ridiculously outnumber all other kind of comments! :-(
P.S.
the russian "buran" space shuttle only LOOKS like the american one,but I guess it had too since these 2 space shuttles were meant to deliver similar sized payloads in orbit, they where just boxes with wings for the re-entry...
"the russian "buran" space shuttle only LOOKS like the american one,but I
guess it had too since these 2 space shuttles were meant to deliver
similar sized payloads in orbit, they where just boxes with wings for
the re-entry..."
Yes and the launch system is completely different SS-> SRBS main engines inside the shuttle
Buran liquid boosters engines in the central tank
makes a better design since the energija can fly without the buran like it did with the polyus payload.
8:36 June 37' flight to Portland, Washington? Uh no, try Oregon. Didn't actually land in Portland either but a few miles across the Columbia river at Pearson Field in Vancouver, Washington. Love catching these errors.
true
"The flight was supposed to be from Moscow to the San Francisco area, that’s where the Soviet ambassador was waiting to welcome his troika of heroes.
But engine problems and a looming fuel shortage prompted the southbound aviators to reverse course and head back for Portland. When word spread of the change in plans, people started gathering at airports in the region - just in case.
When Chkalov saw the crowd waiting for them at Portland’s Swan Island airfield, he was afraid his airplane might get torn into scrap metal by souvenir hunters. So he headed across the Columbia, where the military airfield at Vancouver Barracks figured to have better crowd control."
There's quite a few minor faux pas in this episode. I paused and rewound for a moment at about 12:55 because it said Stalin asked Shvetsov to copy the "Wright Whirlwind engines..." The Whirlwinds were an earlier series of Wright engines, the largest production versions being 9-cylinders making about 450hp. The B-29 used the 18-cylinder R-3350 Duplex Cyclone of 2,200hp each.
Definitely no stealh. The noise alone wakes up half the nation lol. Still a cool plane in its own way
They desighned planes using a xerox machine. That is why their duplicates come out 7 years after the U S models.
How big do you want the plane mr Stalin? Yes!
Used to be Discovery Wings, then the Military Channel, then I just didn't care. TV is refuse of garbage that historians will be laughing about for many years to come. If you want to watch what you want. Streaming is the way.
Vincent Chen , AHC plays World War 2 in Colour which is an amazing series. Also, they rarely play World at War which is even better, but you should buy it in eBay cheap so you can have all 20 some odd one hour episodes. It's finominal.
Lets build a prop plane now that the rest of the world is building jets.
Is the speaker Peter Ustinov? It sounds like him.
yes ;-)
please yes use just the two 15 second music themes 10 times during a 50 min documentary, riveting and original.....
15000 HP EACH oo my FUCKKING god 😰
make a good car engine for JAY LENO
It would seem that, given the speed, range and "intelligence" of current self-guided missiles, any platform capable of lifting them to minimum launch altitude is a credible threat. And, given the immense radar cross section of this aircraft, a flight of TU-95's would occupy a great deal of one's targeting resources to the advantage of faster, more stealthy platforms. Add to this the near panic of dealing with multiple threats, with velocities ranging from high subsonic to hypersonic, and it might be a Bear carrying the one with your name on it. In the insanely crowded threat environment anyone would face nowadays, even against a relatively unsophisticated enemy, everything is dangerous. Just ask the crew of HMS Sheffield.
Fun fact: the Law of the Sea is an internationally recognized set of rules regarding territorial waters, rules of engagement, and generally just making sure nations don't bully each-other when it comes to shipping.
The United States Navy is by far the most powerful enforcer of the Law of the Sea... (seriously, at this point we could probably take on the rest of the world's navies, including our allies, and still win, despite all the whining about our navy being 'only half as powerful as it used to be')
...and yet the United States is one of the few countries with a navy never to have ratified this Law. Basically, we are outlaws enforcing the law on others while claiming to not be subject to it ourselves...
That explanation is somewhat deceptive. The reason the United States is not a signatory of UNCLOS is more to do with internal US bureaucratic squabbling, and not a belief it should not be subject to it. Originally territorial waters were set at 3 miles (this issue was a contentious issue within the treaty, some nations wanted it to be 3 miles, some 12 miles, some even further) and while the US initially supported the 3 mile position, in 1988, as more and more countries started abandoning it and just declaring a 12 mile territorial limit themselves anyway regardless of UNCLOS, President Reagan announced the same. However it was the view of the US justice department that this was not his decision to make, determining US territorial waters should be a matter for Congress, and essentially the issue has been stuck in an inter-governmental legal logjam ever since. Although it’s all a bit of a moot point now because the definition of territorial waters has since been moved to 12 miles anyway.
However more importantly, even though the US did not sign, it still adheres to the conventions of UNCLOS anyway, while many countries who DID sign it now completely ignore them, some almost mockingly so. Such as China who despite ratifying UNCLOS, then declared it would completely ignore an international arbitration ruling based on UNCLOS that ruled overwhelming against China. With Beijing claiming the court in The Hague had no authority and it’s ruling was “ill-founded” and “naturally null and void anyway”.
Since then Beijing has stepped things up even further, despite China being undeniably a continental country, Beijing now audaciously claims it is an ‘archipelagic state’, which is a status conferred by the UN on a small number of nations (hint, China is not one of them) that are made up of large numbers of islands like Indonesia, the Solomon Islands and the Bahamas. This is important because archipelagic states have sovereignty over the small sections of ocean that separate each island as it is viewed as their internal waters just like a river or stream. With this interpretation in hand and it’s scattering of recently built artificial islands, China now views the ENTIRE South China Sea as the ’internal waters’ of it’s ‘archipelago’, which is just crazy! As you correctly point out, apart from the US, there is no other country in the world with a large and strong navy and so without their help these sorts of shenanigans would go completely unchallenged.
Also, I have no idea why you thought America’s position on a UN naval treaty has any relevance to a documentary about the history of bomber aircraft design in the Soviet Union....
evidently this aircraft makes so much noise that it can be heard miles away - ?
Anyone else catch "Portland Washington? at 8:35?
That triggered me
Vancouver, Oregon.. Lol..
This was one of the destinations of the 1937 flight by the Tupolev ANT-25 record-breaking aircraft. Tupolev would later adapt the ANT-25 into a long-range bomber, the ANT-36/DB-1.
You must suck at geography there is no Portland Washington.
Russia a truly innovative aero country.im a big fan of Russian aviation.imagine if Stalin was not around be even more formidable country in those days.
Mark Ward yeah, truly innovative (reverse engineers B29)
@@zanstuart2809 dude if they did reverse engineering what's bad in it USA reverse engineer do many technologies from Germany in world war 2 even Soviet and Americana were toke captured German scientists to space program and missile program also USA have inspected russian mig31 fighter after pilot defected to japan
They would have been easy meat in a nuclear conflict. NATO interceptors would have swept them from the sky.
GrtSatan the US bombers would also be easy meet. And the TU-95 is not conventional bomber and it was never ment to be one.
Before the Soviets even launched Sputnik it was the Tu-95 that forced the creation of NORAD. After the Tu-95... Oh wait, the Tu-95 still exists, and NORAD still has to exist in large part because of it! Guess how the Russians still think about our B-52 force...
USA pilots say the opposite saying getting into Russian planes is like stepping into a rolls Royce.solid functional aircraft
Any evidence of this statement?
Panzer Faust Yes, a very interesting statement...
Don't know about the Rolls Royce comparison, as it implies luxury.
But the Russians did have a different strategy. Rather many uncomplicated machines then a few high tech ones. The US follows the opposite strategy.
Personally I would rather fly an old Soviet plane, then an American of the same age. The same goes for the AK vs M16 choice.
Why did only the USSR forces construct ALL their combat planes, fighters, bombers, cargoplanes, to have big, very rugged undercarriage so ALL can take-off and land from fields of grass!? Whenever WW3 would have broken out in Europe, ALL airbases and runways would of course be main targets on both sides so pilots returning from missions would be forced to land on grass or eject. The west only constructed the VTOL-capable Hawker Siddely Harrier.
All Soviet bomber aircraft were designed for propaganda purposes. Besides making easy targets, they didn't do much else but not crash.
I miss sir Peter Ustinov. Do you by any chance have the one he narrated on Soviet Rotors???
unfortunately no
Peter Ustinov+Soviet Rotors! here you go: ua-cam.com/video/M5LSP2m-iww/v-deo.html
Earned my sub
vaso opel COOL THANKS
PETER USTINOV NARRATING?
yes ;-)
Sir peter
we must act to avert this threat!
25:28 "8,000 pounds of bongs"
that was a tupolev 16 at the thumbnail.
hm... yes maybe I should change the thumbnail. (if youtube lets me...)
vaso opel okay, just make sure commit the same mistake as it is misleading.
no.
it' s not misleading if the thumbnail IS from the video.
youtube auto chose that thumbnail it self.
look at 23:20
vaso opel oh didn't know that.
Music 14:05 Mussorgsky but what movement?
Promenade 4
6:51
Soviet Engineering at its peak
If it works, it works.
In Soviet Russia you don't drop bombs, the bombers will drop you.
in America at this time, even a bicycle was not invented
anyhting else after that was generally a stolen copy
The Tu-95 was developed (as sayed) from the B-29 copy the Tu-4. So the basic concept is american. The key for it's longevity are the engines efficiency that can now be compared to a modern Hi bypass turbofan.
I wonder if the propellers on Tu-94 build up any torque at all ? . Its a bit like Kamov's helicopters the propellers/rotor runs in opposite directions . I wonder if that prevent torque ? . That must be an enormous advantage on a strategic bomber .
Contra rotation does eliminate torque completely. It is also more efficient. Only downside is the increased complexity which will reduce reliability.
36:50 what is this song?
They should let their airplane engineers develop cars, so maybe they are able to produce the first car, someone is interested in.
December 2017 the bear had landed in biak, indonesia
24:00
Does anyone know the song played on the background ??
almidi3 mussorgsky promenade 4 pictures at a exhibition
Yeah Russia you're welcome a 2nd generation reversed engineered b29 bomber.
Yeah USA you're welcome here are the plans on how to make a stealth airplane and the titanium to build your Mach 3.3+ planes.
"stealth aircraft first became possible when Denys Overholser, a mathematician working for Lockheed Aircraft during the 1970s, adopted a mathematical model developed by Petr Ufimtsev, a Soviet scientist"
"Titanium was in short supply in the United States, so the Skunk Works team was forced to look elsewhere for the metal. Much of the needed material came from the Soviet Union"
vaso opel you’re welcome
Thanks to your government, President Trump has provided your country with plans on how to build hypersonic nuclear tipped cruise missiles.
WATCH...BOMBERS OF THE COLD WAR WINGS OF RUSSIA.... to complete this doc. set if you want to see all about the TU 95. The Russian are still flying in Syria today....it's a cool set up with the counter rotating props....we also tried this with the F-84 turbo prop version but it did not really work without counter rotating props....actual speed estimates of this are questionable....see the Wiki article for both...
What is the them songs name on this video please
I'd love to see one in the real.
Whats the Music starting at 23:00 (the flute, the organ, and the bass) ?? Thanks is advance!
Mussorgsky - Promenade 4
the Pe-8 originally designated the TB-7
That's right. Tupolev built a prototype heavy bomber larger than the TB-3, as the ANT-16/TB-4, but that design didn't enter production. Tupolev proposed a gigantic heavy bomber much larger size than the TB-3 and TB-4, the ANT-26/TB-6, which had 12 Mikulin M-34 piston engines (8 tractor engines on leading edge of wing, four engines in two pusher/puller nacelles above the wings) and whose wings spanned 311 feet, but the TB-6 remained a paper project only.
Another example of great Design and production. So pragmatic, Russia perfected counter rotating propellers to meet a Design requirement.
makes me want to play war thunder
DC 3 Douglas paratroopers leap from the rear door. Russian Parateoopers hold my Vodka! proceeds to slide off wing why jump when you can slide
That was great!
Love qualit image 😏
politely asking: Which is the music score at approx 13:00?
Fraternally thankful.. . .
Mussorgsky - Promenade 4
do the modern TU95s still use the rear gun turret? Seems a bit anachronistic now!
No not anymore been replaced with ECM or radar
0:09 Ahahaha they beautified Brezhnev so much in the intro! Ahahaahahahaha :D :D :D I was like who is this model acting as Brezhnev hahaahahah
They just made him look younger. He wasn't that bad looking in 1936. But the awesome weight and responsibility of having to wear those collossal eyebrows all his life is what really aged him.
noisiest plane.
I came for Tu-95, not the truncated history of Soviet bombers.
Awesome. : )
Whe the Discovery it was "The Discovery"
anyone knows the name of the music @24:04 ?
Does anyone know what medal 5:09 is? I've tried Wikipedia and some other sites but haven't found it
the Hero of (Socialist) Labor medal.
РСФСР=Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic.
Пролетарии всех стран, соединяйтесь=Workers of all countries, unite.
ГероЮ труда=hero of labor.
the page shown just before the medal is too blurry and I can't see which was the recipient...
but the dates suggest it was in 1927 ;-)
Thanks so much!
@@robertjackson9050 ;-)
@@robertjackson9050 one question... do you know that your comment is "invisible" on YT??, only I...the owner of the channel can see it, do you know why? did YT send you any notification about that? it is strange...
I checked and I can see it with a different account
TU-95 with its contrarotating turboprop engines designed by engineers "recruited from Germany", with an airframe strongly resembling the American B-29s copied during WWII. Soviet system sure did produce some world-class engineers, didn't it?
american copy of V-1:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic-Ford_JB-2
american missle made by the team that made the V-2:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGM-11_Redstone
german engineer helping americans making swept wing airplanes:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Busemann
so according to your logic the "american" system sure did produce some world-class engineers, didn't it? :-)
anyway, what I'm trying to say is that copying somone else's technology doesn't mean that your country doesn't have good engineers.
Ever heard of psrl 1. Guess who's copying who?
@@vasopel The JB-2 was created by reverse-engineering captured or crashed V-1s, and the pulsejet used to power those V-1s was reverse-engineered by the Ford Company and used to power not just the JB-2 but also the Northrop JB-10 flying wing cruise missile.
The turboprop engine that powered the Tu-95 was based on wartime Junkers documentation for the Jumo 022 turboprop engine that was analyzed by Soviet engineers after WW2, the Junkers factory in Dessau having been handed over to Soviet control in the summer 1945 after the Americans captured the plant near the end of WW2. Captured V-2s formed the basis for not just the Redstone missile (people may feel tempted to thank Wernher von Braun for giving the Americans the tips for building the Saturn V rocket to take men to the moon) but also the R-1 ballistic missile.
@@vahe2391 yes I agree ;-) but the OG comment is correct about the engines of the tu 95,they were designed and completed by german engineers,after they completed their work they were permitted to leave the soviet union.
ANT-25 flew to "Portland, Washington" - 🤦
Portland Oregon obviously :-D
What song is in the background 12:59-13:40 ; 23:04-26:20
Mussorgsky, "Pictures at an Exhibition."
rofl @ the awful sound mixing
4:06 50 guys fire rifles
"small pow"
What is the first background song?
I think it's the theme from the movie "the Hunt for Red October"
But you oughta admitt... Those russian/soviet planes are so uncomfortable to fly in... Lol
The Random Dude XD take a look at the Russian t-34
I have a great respect for the Russian people. They are quite clever and industrious. However, the fact that the best they could do to counter the B52 was the TU-95 exemplifies (industriousness aside), how their technology has lagged behind the west ... and still does.
hello Robert.
I don't think they made the Tu-95 to "counter" the B52 or tried to make it as good, they just wanted to make a strategic bomber.
most people agree that the Tu-95 is more cost-effective, can operate in harsher conditions, is more reliable and maintenance-friendly than the B52, but of course the B52 is better in ALL other aspects.
I am not trying to defend the russian (soviet) technology but it's is wrong to say that they "lagged behind the west", the truth is that the russians were better in some things and the USA in others.
also is wrong to say "and still does" how do you know? it will be decades before we now for sure what military technology russia has today (in 2018).
P.S. interesting bonus fact: the Tu-95 engines were designed by german (and austrian) engineers and scientists, prisoners from WWII that were promised to be released when they finished it, the engine was first tested successfully in 1953 and the head of the team Ferdinand Brandnerhe was released from the USSR in the same year.
@@vasopel Come to think of it I agree with your observations! There is no denying the TU-95 is an efficient and effective platform, particularly in maritime patrol and reconnoissance ... even today. And ... it is a beauty.
I like the Tu-95's looks but for me personally the B-52 is more beautiful :-)
The Bear was inferior to the B-52 in nearly every category; range, speed and most especially PAYLOAD.
U.S. is inferior traitors to give refuge to nazi war crimminals and became like dirt reigh themselfs right now.
The 95 Was much cheaper
@Stephen Beck-von-Peccoz You could buy 3 bears for the prize of one b52, wich is making up for the few disatvantages
18:24 é a bandeira do Brasil?
B-29 "Wright Wirlwind.."??? No!
Wright R-3350 Cyclone 18 oder R-3350 Duplex Cyclone
between the slow grandpa's narration and the depressing music... oh, boy...
bear starts at min 32:00
EurojuegosBsAs Thanks
EurojuegosBsAs I like this grandpa voice, it's a nice series
what's the melody in 1:43 ?
I think its actually Basil Poledouris's "Hymn to the Red October".
thank you very much :D I don't know how I haven't recognized it before... maybe because I heard only some silent version so I couldn't catch the rhythm. Thanks :)
Thank you very much for helping us to figure this out. I have spent the last 12 or so years trying to figure this out. As far as I can tell it is "Hyme to the Red October". I am still trying to figure out what the Discovery Channel used for the opening theme? I am now wondering what the melody that ends at 1:43 and starts at the beginning of the show is? Thank you in advance for helping me to figure this out.