Tu-22M, Tu-95 and Tu-160 Flypast Zhukovsky, Moscow 2012 | Ту-22М, Ту-95 и Ту-160 в Жуковском

planestv.com/sh...
A Flypast from Engels Air Force Base from Tupolev Tu-22M Backfire, Tupolev Tu-95 Bear and Tupolev Tu-160 Blackjack aircraft at the Russian Air Force 100th Anniversary Airshow, Zhukovsky, Moscow.

[@ComandanteJ]

Ruskis sure know how to design gorgeous aircraft, even the Bear is awesome-looking.

[@Legitcar117]

ComandanteJ it's because it was developed from the TU-4, which is a copy of the American b-29. Of course it's beautiful lol

[@ComandanteJ]

The Bear looks nothing like the Superfortress, tough. Even if they are technically cousins.

[@Legitcar117]

@@arthurschmidt1208 the fuselage of the tu-95 is from the tu-4 but with turboprops and other different modifications

[@ryanibrahim8176]

TU-95 most fastest turboprop aircraft with contra rotating engine, also most loudest aircraft in the world

[@LeToplache007]

Nope F84 Thunderscreech was the loudest aircraft alltough a prototype

[@Thunderbolt_1000_Siren]

they don't call it "The Bear" for nothing. Those Turboprops have such a distinct roar

[@sovetski8893]

It sounds demonic

[@philipselden7264]

A completely original design on the Soviet’s part. No reverse engineering for the Tu-95 Bear.

[@flxgreen6346]

Maaan the bear has a nice sound

[@shannonhemming3914]

flxgree

[@sovetski8893]

It gives me the chills everytime

[@applepine613]

Beautiful and deadly Tu95MS

[@thepianomaker6334]

Wow, three Tu-160's in formation! Seeing one is a wonderful enough sight, but three! That's nearly 1/5th of the entire Tu-160's in active duty service with Russia right there.

[@joecozzi3725]

Just like how the F-35 copied the Yak-141?

[@vintagesurvivor]

Lol. Some people are really funny. US weapons are over-rated hype? Go stand in front of one then . Soviets and US both had excellent weapons when I was military, though our Abrams was quite far ahead of Soviet armor at the time. The US weapons are typically High tech, while the Soviet/Russian stuff was an excellent example of making something simple that will work with whatever was available. Personally, I like the MiG and Lavochkin stuff from WW2, and of course I like the Fw190's and 109s, Spits/Hurricanes,and P47 Thunderbolts.... Todays stuff, no character. I'm not going to stand in front of any weapons any more, too smart for that ;)

[@vintagesurvivor]

Funny how the Buran looks EXACTLY like a US Rockwell Space Shuttle though. If our stuff is supposedly such crap....why did they duplicate it so closely ? hahaha

[@johanvanrijnweerd2902]

Goshh i love the TU-95 Bear!!!

[@Dionismgn]

Tu-160 is a follower of Sukhoi T-4 and Tu-144, which was built before the Concorde.

[@sihebat1]

The white swan is beautiful..... Love it.

[@fakshen1973]

At the time, Russia couldn't engineer a jet engine appropriate for the Bear. So they figured out how to make it work with what they had... and make it work well. It's still relevant in 2020. That's a good design.

[@riccardosmirnov5063]

The Tu95MS first flight is in 1979, it is NOT a "Tu95 Bear", but a modified Tu142MK for the long range aviation. Production from the eighties.

[@thebrummierailenthusiasts5329]

1:03 that aircraft has the same two propellers one in front of the other

[@Honey-Crunch]

really Tu-160 is one of the most beautiful aircraft ever.

[@edrenabomba2338]

even on external it is visible that planes different, at 144 there were small wings ahead and the cabin of pilots could fall, it our development

[@adamus000]

Tu-160 is beautiful

[@ahmadtheaviationlover1937]

The bear lives up to its name.... some beastly airplane

[@ramil90]

The Blackjack is sophisticated and much deadlier

[@xb70valkirie31]

RUSSIAN POWER!!最高です！！

[@andyhowden4463]

I love the bear,worried I bloody would be!!!!!!

[@talismenf2253]

B2 Maximum speed: Mach 0.95 (525 knots, 604 mph, 972 km/h) * Cruise speed: Mach 0.85 (470 knots, 541 mph, 870 km/h) * Range: 6,000 NM (11,100 ... B1 Maximum speed: At altitude: Mach 1.25 (721 knots, 830 mph, 1,340 km/h at 50,000 ft/15,000 m altitude) At low level: Mach 0.92 (700 mph, 1,130 km/h at 200-500 ft/60-150 m altitude)

[@TheKilroyman]

Say what you want, Russia has some of the most iconic aircraft of the Cold War Period. There's no denying that.

[@kjrivas7419]

Amazing video, as I lived through the cold war, and now these planes were leaving Engels AFB? It really pleases me to see Russian and American planes together instead of preparing to shoot each other down! I love Russian planes, especially the TU-95 Bear, with its normally quite alien sound. The three approaching the videographer here are rather quiet, maybe Russia did a redesign? These used to deafen their crews, even wearing hearing protection.

[@nicksikoryak1467]

The tu-160's flying in formation like that was very cool. I have always wanted to see one in flight. I have seen the B-1 which was very cool and I have always wanted to see one of these fly.

[@Seralious]

+KJ Rivas They must have modified the Bears seen here, as you are correct, their normal sound wouldn't have a very good effect on the crowd.

[@fastheinz039]

Sweet...you don't see that sort of fly-by very often.

[@patricklundstrom8376]

According to NASA test were concluded in February 1998, Concord was in service till October 2004...

[@Vovantro]

Какие же они красивые. Красивее оружия Советского, нет ничего в мире. Потому что с душой... даже к созданию оружия.

[@monte61]

niet comrade

[@matthewthorpe2485]

Lovely looking planes all of them, just outdated to a certain point, mind if the 160 really but the beans on it would be a handful to the west

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Excellent argumentation skills, bravo...

[@sovetski8893]

Those tu95s sound demonic as fuck

[@2008bikey]

Why can't U.S. military planes look like the Tu-160? That is one beautiful plane..and potentially so deadly.

[@garreth629]

Its not that different the the B-1 bomber looks wise. Now all the designs are dated from a capability standpoint compared to the B-2 and upcoming B-2. I will agree the TU-160 and B-1 are beautiful aircraft however.

[@alfred963]

I just love love the, all!!! Nikki, I hope the TU160s will teach the west some more new lessons. Once they said good morning and good bye to the englands coast guard at 5AM, without being noticed above the uk shore.

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Oh man, did you get your facts wrong... The Tu-144 flew two months before Concorde. Tu-144 stopped flying in 1997 and made 103 commercial flights, 55 with people, Concorde flew regularly between 1976 till 2003 with a short break. At least two people were arrested in France with stolen plants for the Concorde on their person. And yes, it was a bad copy.

[@UnderOakitsky]

Why I was not there with my camera? Its really pitty...

[@alfred963]

Well, the Russians had their pioneer Igor Sikorsky, the inventor of the helicopter while the Romanians had Henri Coanda, the inventor of the jet engine for airplanes. Boeing use it also his principles, and The Coanda Effect (phenomenon). Look for the Russian Ekranoplan, will be amazed about what Russia did in 60's

[@Gilicus18793420blazingfury]

The Tu-95s props are louder than the jets on the Tu-22M and the Tu-160.

[@johnjusko4789]

Even though this is a old video it does give the USA a stark reality of what RUSSIA has in their military both then and now today.

[@renatocamurca2713]

Very IMPRESSIVE, Tu-95 "Bear"

[@makehut]

You do not expect to be shot down. Tu-22.

[@patricklundstrom8376]

And in that article it says about a french intelligence operation were the Russians were supplied with falls drawings. But you don't believe it anyway, so why should I waste time making arguments?

[@romanscharkov]

Just because cola and coffe looks similar doenst mean one of them is a copy of the other. Completely different taste, completely different consistency. caffeine might be something both take advantage of, but thats a basic element of the fundamental part of their design. the only difference you can see is their outer look, whats inside is hidden to your eye, you won't ever know the real difference. if all jets have wings and engines than it does not yet mean they're all the same.

[@edrenabomba2338]

why all of you consider that it is copies of other planes?

[@leneanderthalien]

fantastic Tu95...

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Because you can't, sweetheart. It is a well known fact, if you read any books on the subject, I have at least two you can borrow. The Tu-144 isn't a Tu-4 version of the B-29 kinda thing...

[@soyounoat]

Russian aircraft are fascinating and awesome to see, designed and built by talented people. I am a US citizen who does not want war between us. I wish we could all work together without the insane politicians wrecking everything.

[@WarhammerWings]

I spied the Red Arrows in the background! What were they doing there?

[@Markthebasketballplayer]

1:17 TU-95s TURNING

[@highlander7771]

The tu-95 must be the loudest aircraft in the world :P

[@YUSKHAN]

highlander7771 the vulcan is

[@sovetski8893]

It is you can hear it 20 miles

[@hazmatt3250]

If I’m not mistaken, it is. Which is surprising given it’s a turboprop. I’ve heard a B-1 takeoff before and that’s loud as heck. I can only imagine how loud this must be.

[@leneanderthalien]

Yes the Mig 29 is totaly different (much bigger) from the F18, but the early Il76 are not so good (underpowered), but much better with the newest engines, but the Tu 144 was realy heawy inspired from the concorde: the blue pints was stolen...the Tu144 fly first because the security tests from the Concorde was extremly long and extensive...The Tu 144 was fast retired from passenger transport because many problems and burn too much fuel :Concorde fly mach 2.02 without afterburner, Tu 144 not...

[@AxCYeR]

i just said that because i had never known of the Tu-160's existence until that day. I just thought "oh this tu-160 kinda looks like the american lancer" ..

[@bassmaster1231]

cold war memories

[@edrenabomba2338]

planes are similar as were created for this task and physics laws identical both for Russia and for America

[@patricklundstrom8376]

So you don't agree on the history description. :)

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Tu-144 is still in service? I didn't know that...

[@0HippyHunter0]

If I'm not mistaken only two nations still maintain strategic bombers: Russia and US.

[@user-dp4ok9ox5w]

That is why Russians call the Tu-160 "The White Swan" :)

[@jorritpolder3409]

hahalol, i live in holland. The only plane we have that can carry bombs (kinda) is the F-16, however we have ordered the F-35C. But we dont have any strategic bombers.:(

[@nazigermany1945]

Tu-22M, Tu-95 and Tu-160 VS B1, B2, B52 .

[@Dionismgn]

And who was the prototype of the Tu-160 and Tu-22?

[@ridhorabbihi7467]

Well all bomber is awesome

[@K1w1scot]

Igor Skorski did not invent the helicopter. He only perfected the tail rotor stabilised concept.

[@adenilson727]

Os TU-95 é o som do Apocalipse

[@Dionismgn]

So I don't understand what you just write. I wrote my vision of the facts. If you do not agree - write your point of view, please.

[@aczjbr]

Hello! the KGB stole plants from manufacturers in the USA. The Mig29 = F18, IL76 = C141, tu160 = B1 and so continues today. Outside the Concorde also copied, Tu144. remember what fell in Le Bouget?

[@skramern]

Tu 95 speed of 900 kilometers per hour, the B-52 600 kilometers per hour.But TU 95 is much cheaper and more efficient

[@ledheadpilot27]

I want one of each...just for fun!

[@hazmatt3250]

My medicinal Tu-95 Bear. It’s therapeutic, I promise…

[@osty109]

Gotta admit, the russians make em prettier

[@AtomicHamburger1]

These are extremely cheap and extremely deadly. Smart generals use older cheap yet highly effective tools while saving the new toys for when needed only. These bombers consume little fuel by using propellers and with modern tech on the inside they can do every thing a B2 stealth bomber can. The only difference is this thing can't evade radar and it's slower but you can build hundreds rather cheaply. War tends to be more about logistics than Tech as shown in Stalingrad during WW2.

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Actually, it has more in common with the Tu-144, which was a Concorde copy. A bad one, since the plans stolen were planted by french intelligence service...

[@K1w1scot]

Really? How so?

[@ForgottenBeastMetal]

Look up the B-1 Lancer

[@omega4chimp]

why dont they upgrade thier bombers.

[@Fomor59]

Oh rly? The last B-52 - 1962, the last Tu-95 - 1992.

[@Gilicus18793420blazingfury]

Not a copy, just similar design.

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Do you have anything to add or you're just trolling? "FAIL" isn't a very impressive argument... And you can read about it in several books and on Wikipedia, you can read?

[@TennnouheikaBanzai]

2nd-hand Chinese Planes?

[@AxCYeR]

the tu-160 looks like the american b1b lancer doesnt it?

[@avnregt]

do you even know what strategic means..we have bombers right now..russia just "say" the will produce or modernize more..anyone can say they will come out with a better plane..

[@Eisenberg99]

watch out, the youtube experts are coming! Any person with the slightest understanding of aviation will tell you that both planes are completely different, but why even bother explaining

[@TennnouheikaBanzai]

Because nobody answers them. Everybody says China has a Large Military with New Chinese Weapons.

[@edrenabomba2338]

I have a news to you, KGB not when wasn't engaged in espionage

[@MrAIRSHOWFAN100]

A Red Dawn type of invasion

[@BladeXstrike1324]

Lol you got that from a flyby??? come on dude give your own country some credit!

[@sovetski8893]

Imagine seeing thousands of those flying over head along with a another few thousand Antonov 22s dropping paratroopers on the day Russia finally decides to invade the US

[@Fomor59]

well, that's a fact. But B52s r still older.

[@emilpolaczek7571]

The F-16 would bring the bombers from the sky;) They are still from the old cold war ;)

[@ryanhandley6256]

U.S.S.R. Moscow » copy « `Titaniun Man"nanotech= Nano Spherical = 2654 West Horizon Ridge, Henderson, NEVADA 89052

[@Orimbar]

sure, that's why us soldiers done "duty" in irak got them selves AK's.

[@Dionismgn]

Do you have a normal arguments? To make sure my words - just open an article about the Tu-160 on Wikipedia. You accused person that he did not write the arguments. Now you're acting this way. Good luck.

[@kylietravers3466]

Well Stalin designed 3 bombers but not the PAK-DA Because of Marina Ikekura She designed her flying creation in 2020 Her plane was canceled in 2022 for the tu-95MB-21Raider Bear-R Bomber While that she built her boat called RF Moscow Battleship Her Weapon is The RSM-56 Bulava Nuclear Missile She putted the missile in RF Dimitry Donskoy(TK-208) ballistic missile submarine While the Other submarines are anti-tank Her plan is to buy 250 B-21 Raiders to replace the B-1B,B-2,Tu-22M,B-52, and Putin(tu-160) but not the tu-95

[@jorritpolder3409]

Wow, what a relieve, Lol

[@TennnouheikaBanzai]

I'm not trolling.

[@iytuyuydr7]

such a bad copy that it flew a whole month earlier and one is still flying cargo and being used by NASA for testing today? the shape is no mistake just like the american xb 70a Valkyrie and other prototype supersonic aircraft, it is the best shape, simple.

[@TheGratziani]

No ejection seats, no russian airshow!...

[@Markthebasketballplayer]

1:07 TU-95s

[@Th3Sh4d0wH0und]

Why ask those ridicules questions then?

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Google it.

[@Eyelesslllok]

Concorde is dead and Tu is alive. know the difference.

[@jorritpolder3409]

I pissed my pants, if we will be at war with russia like in all cod mw games and things like that. WE ARE GOING TO BE CRUSHED! :'(

[@edrenabomba2338]

you aren't right

[@patricklundstrom8376]

Can you prove that's a myth? Because others say it is true...

[@jamesnoble8854]

the tu 95 is an excellent and impressive bird. the tu22 and the tu 160 are meerly poor copies of other aircraft.