Tu-114 - the most Soviet airliner in the world

[@wolfdestiny2519]

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

[@Raminagrobisfr]

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]

Ya, safe to say that kicked ass.

[@basbeestKT]

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

[@jorgegonzalez-larramendi5491]

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

[@t72shatch7]

@@jorgegonzalez-larramendi5491 Lol Okay²

[@leokimvideo]

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

[@GeeBoggs]

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]

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]

@@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]

@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]

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]

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.

[@penzlic]

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

[@martinhvam1031]

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

[@AppersonJackrabbit1915]

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

[@spazmonkey3815]

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

[@patrick_test123]

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

[@thomasjordan5578]

I too saw the resemblance. 🙏

[@danielraas2148]

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

[@PavlosPapageorgiou]

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

[@williammckinney4090]

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]

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

[@rashkavar]

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]

@@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]

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

[@pazil888]

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]

Its still not far away! Unfortunately.

[@dbvetter7485]

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

[@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24]

Most Soviet era planes from both sides look cool

[@Tom-uk2ow]

Cold war birds are beautiful..

[@stealthfur1375]

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

[@junocrusader5860]

Lol.And your pilot this evening is Borat!

[@crawford323]

Their ejection seats work.

[@draggonsgate]

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]

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]

@@nexpro6118 ‘MURICAN

[@mickeymch876]

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]

@@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]

@@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

[@CaptHollister]

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]

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]

@@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]

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

[@rocoroco15]

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]

@@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...

[@hughmccann4524]

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]

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

[@sailaab]

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]

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

[@Rudy_Play]

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

[@dryan8377]

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.

[@pip07200]

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]

Where ya from ??

[@oliverharris6782]

I studied in Russia some years ago and flew Aeroflot. Given the slapdash maintenance I observed, I was surprised to hear that Aeroflot Had the least number of accidents of any airline in the world. Later I learned that this was the least number of Reported accidents (:

[@JohnOpie]

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]

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]

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

[@leevilehtovaara2261]

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

[@JohnOpie]

@@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]

As long as it is noisy, it can fly 😋!

[@Tom-Lahaye]

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]

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]

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

[@justforever96]

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]

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!

[@calvinnickel9995]

This was for the Nomenklatura. The divide of power and wealth was surprisingly vast for what was supposed to be a totally equal society.

[@michaelosgood9876]

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

[@gbixby3453]

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]

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]

Contra-rotating propellers make every plane cooler Change my mind

[@shawnmiller4781]

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

[@justcarcrazy]

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]

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

[@salipander6570]

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

[@danielocarey9392]

I know.

[@imano8265]

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.

[@stephenmordey6371]

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

[@CH-pv2rz]

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

[@stephenmordey6371]

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

[@dryan8377]

@@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]

@@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]

@@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?

[@SiVlog1989]

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]

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

[@SiVlog1989]

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

[@petesheppard1709]

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

[@ballsaxx]

the XF-84H is faster

[@SiVlog1989]

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

[@flemmingsorensen5470]

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

[@cat637d]

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!

[@frogstamper]

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.

[@sski]

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

[@GG-sr4ww]

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

[@laurie3546]

GG

[@paulkile9998]

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]

Cool starry bra!

[@sethrich2790]

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

[@skeetrix5577]

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]

@@skeetrix5577 👏🏼🎯

[@natquesenberry6368]

Truly beautiful!

[@OldGeezer55]

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]

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

[@JTA1961]

You are speaking plane English...

[@twistedyogert]

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]

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]

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

[@pierremetral6121]

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]

They have several similarities too.

[@awuma]

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]

or Concords front leg

[@loiclaronche5675]

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

[@ChattanoogaDave]

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]

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

[@mycosys]

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

[@camil721]

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!

[@AviationHorrors]

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]

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]

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

[@ImpossiblyBlack]

@@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]

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]

@@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.

[@eisenkopf69]

This channel is a gem. You watch one video and know you will never miss one again. And what a great plane!

[@Dingomush]

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

[@deltavee2]

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.

[@joe08867]

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

[@VariableRecall]

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

[@crp5591]

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!

[@8MoonsOfJupiter]

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!

[@FloridaManMatty]

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]

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]

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]

@@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]

@@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]

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

[@LuigiLong]

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

[@Arthion]

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.

[@ryanhampson673]

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]

Hey 👋

[@marhawkman303]

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

[@mpgingdl]

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

[@xfirehurican]

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]

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

[@hakan737]

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]

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

[@hakan737]

@@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...

[@pstewart5443]

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]

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

[@agoogleaccount2861]

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

[@cannonfodder4376]

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]

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

[@aadityas.9820]

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

[@ML-dl1cp]

I love how the icon for the cabin staff call button at 16:16 is a stern-looking matron. I'm surprised she's not wearing a babooshka.

[@TheGrenadier97]

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.

[@jeffreymontgomery4091]

What an awesome vid! Blown away by the sophistication and attention to detail that was engineered into this plane from the Soviet Era!

[@Itsjustme-Justme]

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]

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

[@henryatkinson1479]

This channel just keeps getting better

[@mrc6182]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

[@van84agon]

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.

[@Reepicheep-1]

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]

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

[@owen368]

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.

[@eugeneostrander-iw2np]

Very nice video , historical aircraft where one learns something new every day . Very interesting - saw the video the other day on the Tu-144 too !

[@generalbutterscotch4887]

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]

Yes.

[@djaneczko4]

I'm always happy to see a new video from you! Hope you're doing well!

[@rustysickle2528]

definately the most exotic airliner ever built!

[@danielocarey9392]

Maybe so. But the Convair 990 was exotic.

[@motorTranz]

This was one of your best videos! Unusual but beautiful airplane! Thanks Sky!

[@kevinheard8364]

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

[@lumen8r]

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

[@laurie3546]

Men

[@kevinbarry71]

Wonderful video. It's great to see that aircraft. A 707 was a loud airplane; and this was much louder. I can only imagine what that was like to experience

[@imano8265]

Oh. There is a difference between the noise inside and outside. Inside the 114 was louder but outside it was the opposite.

[@Max_Da_G]

@@imano8265 Tu-114 quieter on the outside than inside? With all the sound insulation it'd have had? Seriously?

[@imano8265]

@@Max_Da_G May be you can misunderstand easely what I said. What I mean is: Outside, when the airplanes start for example: the 707 was much louder than the 114. Whereas inside: inside the cabin for the passengers in flight: the 114 was louder than the 707.

[@danielocarey9392]

At takeoff the DC-7 was very loud with its turbo-compound engines and 4-bladed props.

[@kevinbarry71]

@@danielocarey9392 I don't think it compares to this thing. And this thing was loud whenever the engines were running

[@7thsealord888]

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

[@frankz5864]

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]

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

[@jakekaywell5972]

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

[@misterwhipple2870]

@@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.

[@edwardcarberry1095]

WOW! Very Well Presented! a few more details which only I would find interesting , very good! Have always Loved Aircraft.

[@frankthomas855]

What a cool aircraft. Excellent job making another fine presentation. Thanks.

[@scotty6346]

Excellent video, The TU-114 is in my top 5 favorite airliners. It's a close 2nd to the VC-10!

[@kikechiriboga2481]

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.

[@papavictorromeo5079]

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

[@johnmajane3731]

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

[@LONE_WOLF_GANG]

I wish every documentary was done this way. Excellent work altogether!!

[@h_enrix_92]

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

[@oxcart4172]

Some aircraft just look 'right' and, imo, the Tu-114 is one of them. Thanks for this!

[@markhoney9566]

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

[@JSDesign.Hongkong]

This is an absolutely brilliant video, chock full of history and information. Excellent job, and very well done.

[@Hloutweg]

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

[@1959Edsel]

I've long been a fan of the Bear and aircraft derived from it. Your narration and accent are a perfect fit for this.

[@laurie3546]

Edsel 🌚

[@fhwolthuis]

Excellent video, very interesting!

[@mustang5132]

Thank you for having background footage that is actually relevant!

[@GeorgeMCMLIX]

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

[@paulmillard1130]

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

[@seanavery7265]

What a beautiful airplane ,passiva sky .✈️💗

[@SkyshipsEng]

Spasibo)

[@stevoschannel4127]

Really a beautiful aircraft, brings to mind the Lockheed constellation with its long nose gear…very very good video.

[@Flies2FLL]

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]

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]

@@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.

[@DanielMacCabe]

Thank you so much for this video! It was amazing to see the interior pictures and the your excellent operational history. What an amazing machine! :)

[@herzglass]

Wow! Very good work on this video! Random suggestion by KZbin, enjoyed every minute of it! I'd love to know how it actually felt and sounded to make a long flight in one of these. I always wondered what could be done in modern days fitting airliners with turboprops. More suitable for shorter ranges, I assume, but I find them aesthetically highly appealing, combining some prop romance with turbine efficiency and power. The Tu-114 might've been a dead end in many regards, but it certainly was an outstanding aircraft both in performance and design for its era. As with many vehicles undergoing decades of improvement I find modern jetliners to all look roughly the same. Not back then!

[@Yosemite-George-61]

Formidable presentation, thanks!

[@geiroveeilertsen7112]

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!

[@discoverlight]

This is what I call an antual in-depth review of a passenger airliner. Excellent Video of a interesting plane. Soviets were very clever and creative with their machines, Trucks, Cars, boats and planes.

[@eneking2022]

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

[@FriendlyScholar]

dude this is amazing!!!! I love the production what a beautiful tour :) :) totally satiates my curiosity about what are in these giant aircraft :)

[@craigpennington1251]

Great video of a colossal airliner. One of a kind for sure. Too bad there isn't a place for them now in passenger service. Thanks for sharing this story.

[@machpodfan]

One of your best videos, about an iconic unique machine. Thank you!!