Why The Soviets Never Built Their Darkstar DSB-LK?

Support the channel and get Morning Brew (It's really good!)
www.morningbrewdaily.com/fande
NAZI Sun Gun!
• Nazi Sun Gun - Using T...
Discord: / discord
My News Channel: / @aviationstationyt
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @foundandexplained
Patreon:
/ foundandexplained
This video is brought to you by Morning Brew.
Meet the ultimate bomber.
A secret Soviet project from the late 50s that could’ve been the fastest military aircraft ever built - so fast even the SR-71 wouldn’t catch it.
Flying at hypersonic speed, this plane would’ve been unstoppable and could bring destruction to any western city without them even realizing it.
Or blown apart an entire US carrier group before it even appeared on radar.
Was this russian design something completely crazy or a feasible design that would have changed the world forever?
Today we’re going over Mach 5 with DSB-LK bomber.
Let’s face it, late 50s and 60s are probably the coolest period in cold war aviation history.
Engineers on both sides of the iron curtain were being given a carte blanche to create the ultimate weapon which could carry nuclear bombs to the targets on the other side.
Everything from giant nuclear powerd flying tug boats, to top secret hypersonic submarines. Yes both of these are real ideas, and both are right here on the channel.
These bomber designs would bring both tactical and political advantage in any potential conflicts or proxy wars between america and the USSR.
But there was one major problem with many of these bomber projects. Interceptors.
Both the west and the east were in a constant game of rock paper scissors, each trying to develop a faster bomber, and, in turn a faster interceptor to beat it.
The United States would eventually turn their SR-71 into a interceptor called the YF-12, the fastest of its kind - but it would still struggle to catch what the soviets were cooking up.
A nuclear bomber that could fly as fast as the hypersonic nuclear missiles it carried.
Unlike many other Soviet projects which you’ve heard about so far on this channel, this one had a much weirder origin. It was started by Leningrad military aviation engineer academy and led by Alexander Moskalyov - not the big engineering firms famous for aircraft such as MIG or Sukhoi.
Moskalyov was an interesting figure, an aerospace engineer who designed his first aircraft when he was only 26, and his first flying prototype when he was 29. Truely a engineer prodigy.
By his 40s he was a prominent aerospace engineer and started working on new concepts for a supersonic seaplane bomber aircraft, some of which you can see here and are quite frankly ludicrous.
Various different shapes were used, from the duck design to the tailless and of course, the flying wing.
Its this last design that held the most potential.
Hearing of the constant one upping between the home soviet bureaus and the capitalist americans, he thought it was time to end the fight once and for all.
And thus the design of the DSB-LK was born. But it was also the wrong place at the wrong time.

[@karl0ssus1]

Gun turrets on a supersonic bomber? The 50s and 60s were a wild time indeed

[@anotherdave5107]

Gun turrets on a hypersonic bomber... LOL

[@AscenderPrime]

METAL

[@FEURVERM]

Hahaha damn if that was the case firing that turret is equivalent to hitting yourself

[@karjalasta]

Obviously these were not meant to be used at that speeds.

[@rishivald]

@@karjalasta then it has no use to begin with

[@spol]

You've gotta admit the DSB-LK is incredibly cool looking. It's kind of sci-fi looking.

[@kenetickups6146]

Looks like a lost UEF unit from Supreme commander

[@panan7777]

New PhotoShop just kicked in? On the other hand: Russia is sourcing IRANIAN drones. I firmly believe that from this point in time we can relegate ALL of their supernatural projects to "Pure fiction", staring with SU57. PS Israel has allegedly just destroyed the factory producing them. ENDLESS string of "those MONDAYS" for Putin.

[@beeleo]

Sci-fi looking because it was as likely to have been build as an X-wing fighter.

[@shottyman6013]

To be honest if the black bird weren't realized ot design would look really sci-fi. It looks kinda like a spaceship.

[@HandFromCoffin]

Ya I can draw cool looking planes with guns and lasers too.. I'm sure if you look this thing would have never flew.

[@sssbob]

For an airplane moving at that speed, you would definitely want all the engines on the centerline of the aircraft. With the engines set so far apart, if you have an engine out situation the plane will be violently wrenched to one side and most likely break apart. Pilots of the SR-71 said that when they had an 'unstart' happen at speed, it was like hitting a brick wall.

[@Starcruiser81]

I'D say, losing all power on one wing at those speeds would be an issue, but the Russian plane shown here had 3 engines on each wing, so if an un-start happened on one issue would be 1/3 that of the SR-71, the pilot could simply throttle down the engines on the other side to compensate during restart attempts.

[@fork9001]

Compensate for thrust loss/engine failure by shutting down or throttling down an engine on the other side.

[@divyansh8944]

It's more look like a star wars spacecraft

[@fwix771]

Not to mention, at high speeds any differences in thrust will definitely be felt and will send you falling out of the sky in and a flying fireball of debris, balancing that many thrusters isn’t really practical especially with Russian/Soviet engines

[@juicyjack3331]

Im sure the people who spent decades and millions researching this didnt think of this lmao u clown

[@PORRRIDGE_GUN]

Beautiful CGI. I particularly like the cockpit and crew images.

[@matthewfergusons4318]

This thing could definitely play the Phoenix in Omega Force the fact that's why I would think the Phoenix was kind of look like something like this thing something like Omega Force being made in the 90s and early 2000s

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

This thing looks like one of these aircraft you'd see in an alternate-history franchise. Just like the Silbervogel which was a German project for an orbital glider during WW2 to reach the east coast of the US

[@FoundAndExplained]

Which is another video I can’t wait to do!

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

@@FoundAndExplained Awesome. It's amazing to think that things like Orbital Gliders were already conceptualized in the 1940s

[@obamagaming-zv4vy]

The germans had alot of crazy stuff behind the scenes

[@masterofbread]

Those Germans were truely ahead of there time

[@xekoan507]

I thought the same

[@glsracer]

Given the sweep of the wing leading edge and the design of the engine inlets, this design would have encountered serious issues exceeding mach 2.5 or 2.8 sustained. It looks really cool though.

[@ronidude]

I'm sure the team of scientists who designed this plane know what there doing lol

[@nostic4979]

@@ronidude nah

[@glsracer]

@@ronidude they knew more than most people at that time no doubt, but we have the benefit of hindsight. We (the public) have known what a hypersonic design looks like since the early 90s which means the best scientists new what it looked like in the early 80s or late 70s. The engine designs that will enable sustained hypersonic flight are only recently being tested. So, like I said, the design is cool but it would have had virtually no chance of reaching the targeted speeds with available technology at the time. In fact it's almost certain to have been slower than the SR-71, even with more engines.

[@rajaydon1893]

@@nostic4979 ok Mr.aerospace engineer

[@user-do5zk6jh1k]

What's the angle from nose to wingtip?

[@matirs342]

The presentation, editing and renders just keep getting better and better. Awesome stuff. What a mad plane, it seemed like a much more versatile platform than an ICBM

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

The thing is ICBMs offer long term deterrence and the advantage of being effectively uncounterable. They're also unmanned, which may or may not be an advantage depending on how your on ethics. The ICBM was and still is the biggest reason for the invalidation of some of the coolest projects, like the P6M Seamaster, XB-70 and several soviet projects. In a sense the ICBM made warfare a bit "boring" but that's what the most efficient way usually is, boring.

[@KombatKrab]

I'm sure the explosions will be boring too. Very anticlimactic.

[@Charlesputnam-bn9zy]

@@DefinitelyNotEmma & don't forget too the folly of cancelling the Dyna Soar.

[@Charlesputnam-bn9zy]

@@KombatKrab when you see one you see them all.

[@beeleo]

Airplanes can be 'mad' and SEEM incredibly versatile as you can imagine while they're still on the drawing board. For example, look at the design projections of the Avro Canada VZ-9 Avrocar.

[@edwardfletcher7790]

Truly crazy bomber ! Love how you added the realism of heavy black smoke to let us know it's got Russian engines ! LoL

[@atilllathehun1212]

More likely dirty orange-yellow smoke.

[@weldonwin]

Powered by the tears of capitalists and Stalin's Back-Hair

[@CoPoint]

I dunno, but wouldn't that be the biggest problem with a plane like that? Even if it's fast like hell, all you'd have to do is track the direction the smoke clouds are pointing at, and you know where it is going... Kinda big hole in the concept, if you ask me 😁...

[@weldonwin]

@@CoPoint That is assuming you have anything that can actually catch it. Its not just flying fast, but incredibly high too

[@peppapig9987]

@@CoPoint well catching a radar lock for the sam is what maters. I supose a thermal lock is possible too, but idk if those were a thing when it was made.

[@memofromessex]

Surely those gun pods would either melt or be torn off by the speed and heat. And the bullets would travel slower than the aircraft and shoot itself down or else be completely useless.

[@martywood9299]

excellent points!

[@AaronShenghao]

The turrets will be inside the shockwave, so they are fine, heating will be only some 150 C or less. The turrets will be inside the shockwave, so they are fine, heating will be only some 150 C or less. And that is not how bullets shooting out of aircraft works. At a straight line, the bullets/shells will still fly forward at aircraft speed + muzzle velocity, but slow down. That may hit the aircraft at certain conditions (which happened to several aircraft with external gun pods)

[@mcole1987]

My thoughts exactly

[@Make-Asylums-Great-Again]

@@AaronShenghao you should look up the video of the fighter that shot itself down, good watch.

[@robert.m6755]

@@Make-Asylums-Great-Again Because the plane was in a dive and was accelerating unlike the bullet.

[@KomradZX1989]

Your ability to take some technical drawings and descriptions and turn them into such quality-made mini documentaries simply blows me away with every single video you make. 10/10 as always

[@ArmadaOne]

This is such a cool looking aircraft. Even today, this looks like it was designed yesterday for combat roles in the future. It actually looks more advanced than the MSV Normandy SR2 from Mass Effect.

[@tonymante8759]

Yea except the actual airframe of this plane would fail at mach 2.8 the way its designed with the engine inlets like that. cool "concept" for its time reason why it hasnt come to fruition to date is because its a flawed idea. Cool shapes dont make good planes at high speeds. they wanted to go mach 5 plus with this good luck it would shred apart at mach 3

[@PoisoNouS_2326]

@@tonymante8759 did you really watch the vedio it can rech mach 5 because of the airframe is made of titianum

[@amazin7006]

​@@PoisoNouS_2326 It takes more than a titanium airframe to reach those speeds... You need a Scramjet or a highly advanced Ramjet that uses materials that did not exist at that time to withstand those temperatures. On top of that, you need computer aided aerodynamics because there were no wind tunnels that could reach hypersonic speeds at that time, and computer flight controls/fly by wire which did not exist at that time would be necessary to maneuver at such speeds without destroying the plane. Then comes the massive issues with fuel, heat, cooling, plasma, drag, and much much more. How the hell is this thing going to open its bomb bays at mach 3+? Impossible. Why does it even have turrents? What does that do to the airflow? Those wings too.... everything about this is bad design for hypersonic speed. TU160 was superior to this. This never left the paper it was drawn on for a reason. It would have been impossible, and likely still today is impossible. Australia has Hypersonix and there are many American companies doing research for a reusable hypersonic aircraft, but so far nothing can reach production for a reason.

[@Funny-rus]

@@amazin7006 You just need to climb higher.

[@michaeltuggle9602]

Fastest bomber ever designed, you should have seen the stuff I used to design back in middle school. Super fast, warp speed stuff.

[@chrisshackelford662]

Came here for this.

[@joshm3484]

Yes, but your designs were probably more likely to be built than the Soviets actually building this vaporware pipe dream.

[@b-17gflyingfortress6]

@@joshm3484 Soviets still managed to build Mig-25 which still hold fastest fighter record. I don't know why people really underestimate Soviet capabilities sometimes. Sure Soviets had more problems than Americans when developing their things. But they still make great weapons to cause US develop a counter against them. Who do you think F-22 was designed against? British fighters? B-2? British radars? Sr-72? Against British missiles?

[@avgVar]

@@b-17gflyingfortress6 Because USSR can’t make anything good cuz of communism or smth. Communism = bad, USSR = bad therefore anything good ussr ever made was either fake or stolen. 👌

[@ms-terious]

@@b-17gflyingfortress6 ah yes the Mig 25, an aircraft far heavier than it should have been due to Soviet manufacturing limitations. An aircraft that handled poorly at high speeds, terribly at low altitudes and who's engines would often overspeed leading to failure and exuberant maintenance schedules. The Soviets made great weapons....on paper. In practice they often never performed as billed and the US would often develop weapons systems to counter what they THOUGHT the threat was due to Soviet bragging. To give credit where credit is due, the Soviets (and Russia now to some extent) were responsible for western designs pushing the envelope due to their hyperbole.

[@Shadow-Banned-Conservative]

The graphic renderings in your videos is top notch! Amazing work.

[@SomeOrdinaryJanitor]

im such an aviation nerd that if i had unlimited funding and resources, i would personally fund every cancelled/unrealized projects to have at least one model in existence for my own enjoyment.

[@gangstercheesefries1112]

Exactly I hate hearing about test vehicles being literally scraped just put that shit in a museum and perhaps if you need a reference for a future design we have it around to be inspected

[@harleyme3163]

you realize some idea's simply CANT Be.. obly because we lack the materials.. I doubt they'de know the expabsion zones required on the sr 71 werer there so the plane had room to shrink and expand under the friction mach 3 creates? I mean.. th thing leaked until it got to speed because of this... oops now the have to redesign AFTER lots of testing and losing ever aircrradt till the find it.. impossible, they didn't have the computers it took back then

[@serge7633]

I remember this project, when I was in the Belgian Air Force. Thanks for sharing mate. Keep up the good work.

[@atilllathehun1212]

Fastest bomber ever designed? I think you will find that that is the Sanger Silbervogel which would have reached 13,500mph.

[@user-rl8hf8kt1r]

May i know more détails about this project so i can comment.....and thank you

[@emaheiwa8174]

@@user-rl8hf8kt1r Silbervogel on wikipedia. It was a WWII space plane/bomber too unrealistic for the time

[@naughtyUphillboy]

It was unrealistic.

[@jaysonwallker1648]

And NASA had a similar project

[@jaysonwallker1648]

Now wait a minute, I might buy the fact that they had an aircraft under development but they didn't have hypersonic missiles back then. Now that's just crazy

[@senoJSR]

I designed a space cruiser that could have been the fastest craft ever. Sadly, it never went into production

[@PresidentEvil]

same!

[@tiagofatturi]

Me too. Mine could even go underwater at supersonic speeds.

[@Kevin-bl6lg]

Nice. Did you overcome the problem I came across getting the design finalised?

[@three33three33]

Same, my design could've been an intergalactic conquering machine, loaded with supersoldiers and WMD's unknown to anyone outside of this planet. Too bad, I was a 10 year old kid at that time...

[@badasshuh69]

@@Kevin-bl6lg yes i had to bribe some suits and came across it pretty easily. only after many dinners and parties tho. mfs are adament asf.

[@lightspeedvictory]

Requesting videos on the following: -switchblade aircraft designs such as the FA-37 Talon from the ‘05 movie “Stealth” or the X-02 Wyvern from the Ace Combat franchise -Super Tomcat-21 and ASF-14 -the NATF program as a whole -early ATF proposals -Sea Apache -F-20 Tigershark -aircraft with forward swept wings

[@grey5135]

As far as the American one resembling it I mean you can really only make a flying wing so many different ways before compromising performance I'd imagine. Their can't be very many flying wing designs that give the desired capabilities so by evolution they will all look more and more alike as designs are optimized further.

[@peppapig9987]

Your videos are the highlights of my week! I absolutely love planes, and I absolutely love random planes that I knew little about or nothing about. Thank you for all the work you put into your videos!

[@FoundAndExplained]

Thank you for your kind words, this is the nicest thing I’ve heard all week

[@captain_commenter8796]

*“Honey, the Russians are designing crazy vehicles again!”*

[@Tadhakes67]

Wonderful video. It still stands fantasy vrs reality. Sr71 was built and flown.

[@seanbigay1042]

I love how futuristic the DSB-LK (didn't they ever give this bird a proper name?) and its rival the SR-71 Blackbird look, especially for designs from the 1950s.You look at the DSB-LK's engines and you go, "Warp drives." You look at its gun turrets and go, "Phasers." You look at its intended payload and go, "Photon torpedoes." Knowhutimean?

[@september_eleven]

Fascinating!

[@combatdoc21]

DSB-LK if it have gone past the drawing board this would have been the real life equivalent to the fictional Firefox from the 1982 film.

[@1mezion]

This is such an awesome channel I wish full scale replicas of these could be built today and placed in a museum. Partially because you do such an awesome job with your animated renditions

[@alt5494]

It's rather doubtful that the engines could have been developed as the needed alloys & design concepts did not exist. Even for short periods to say nothing of 13,500KM!!

[@alt5494]

@@stuartemmanuel3735 It one thing saying make the impossible real with the needed research & funding available. It entirely different when industry is only just past the point where they had to import engine technology to build a crude subsonic fighter.

[@alt5494]

@Daniel Vipin It not titanium or even titanium alloy they needed for hypersonic engines. The alloys they required where not available until after the soviet union's implosion.

[@hwoods01]

Just like the KV-6, this is fake AF.

[@b-17gflyingfortress6]

@@hwoods01 Isn't KV-6 is internet design

[@yourmanufacturingguru001]

Agreed material science in Soviet Union could not have supported this project.

[@countdookuismaximus4911]

The 50s made way for the best nuclear jet designs, they really looked like they were ripped out of a sci fi movie and way ahead of their time with the fancy space age type aesthetic

[@Michael_Michaels]

If you increase the smoke speed, the sense of speed would be higher... 😉Awesome animations and story! But it seems that there's little consensus about the aircraft top speed. Thank you!

[@Justanotherconsumer]

Consider the XF-103, another “extreme speed” design of the ‘50’s. They didn’t really understand the “heat barrier” encountered around Mach 3. The calculations on thrust work out, the Vne is the problem.

[@Horesmi]

Moskalyov: "I might not have the big bureau behind me, but through grit and determination I will design the most powerful bomber to ever exist!" Korolev: "Parry this you filthy casuals."

[@thelightaddict80k]

My Friday just got much better thank you 🙏

[@nemesis7774]

The SR-71 is actually older than the YF-12 interceptor variant of the A-12 Oxcart..

[@A12OxcartHabu]

Yep the first YF12A flew 16 months before the first SR71 had its maiden flight. In fact the Sr71 was the last of the 4 Blackbird variants to take to the sky.

[@nemesis7774]

@@A12OxcartHabu There also was the M-21 variant with the D-21 drone attached to it, The titanium goose for training, and the SR-71 had the A production and the B and C training variant, with the C being a bastard of YF-12 and SR-71.. However, A-12 is also the designation for the Avenger II flying wing fighter program (and the Curtiss A-12 Shrike according to wikipedia, but that's a piston-propelled fighter)

[@tubois2025]

Can we have more high speed videos? I really enjoy them and they give me inspiration for planes in a game! Thx f&e

[@phoenixrising9785]

Another great video. I really enjoy these x-plane videos, bring list history back to life. Keep them coming!!!

[@rendelbariuan7583]

Theres no need to be stealth when your fast enough you can get out of the Radar in seconds -Mig 25, 31 and 41

[@The_Raydinator_2008]

Hey, Found and Explained, can you maybe do a vid on the “Die Glocke”/“The Bell”? Also incredable vid, love your work man, keep it up

[@wilhelmmaxkepler1711]

De longe esse é o meu vídeo e avião nunca construído favorito (da URSS). Se, e mesmo considerando as capacidades e tecnologias de hoje, esse avião fosse construído nos dias atuais, seria talvez um dos mais ambiciosos e mais caros projetos de aviões bombardeios da Rússia. Não consigo imaginar ela sozinha desenvolvendo e construindo o projeto por inteiro. E certamente, para haver parcerias internacionais, como com os chineses e com os indianos (espero que o Brasil um dia chegue a esse mesmo plano), a Rússia teria que compartilhar tecnologias sobre esse megaprojeto de aviação. Eu invejo e admiro esse avião tanto quanto qualquer outro que já apareceu neste canal.

[@danielnesta5015]

لقد نسيت الجزاءر الحليف الاستراتيجي والوفي لروسيا العظمى

[@wilhelmmaxkepler1711]

Olá Daniel Nesta Seu otimismo com a indústria aeroespacial argelina é realmente impressionante e me choca saber que, em sua opinião, a Argélia colaboraria com a Rússia em um projeto de desenvolvimento de um avião hipersônico. Mas eu penso também que quanto mais países trabalhando juntos, melhor fica. Mas quanto à aliança e importância estratégica da Argélia para a Rússia, eu tenho que discordar. A Síria que é bem menos relevante no cenário internacional é mais importante para a Rússia nesse momento que a Argélia. Isso porquê as vendas de gás e petróleo do Oriente Médio para a Europa poderiam atrapalhar o crescimento da economia russa se, por exemplo, alguns gasodutos e oleodutos saindo da Arábia Saudita, do Iraque e do Kuait passassem pelo país do regime Assad até os portos no Mediterrâneo. Simplesmente não há comparação com a Argélia, que já vende o seu petróleo e gás para a Europa sem ter a mesma presença e ameaça militar russa na Argélia para controlar esses recursos e assustar os europeus com mais cortes. Desculpa o texto grande mas eu tenho opiniões grandes sobre certos assuntos.

[@danielnesta5015]

@@wilhelmmaxkepler1711 لم أستطع ترجمة ردك لكن يبدو انك معجب بالجزاءر ادا كنت محق ابعث لي بجام تحيا الجزاءر وعاشت روسيا العظمى وحلفاءها وعاش بوتين اللدي قال الجزاءر خط أحمر واي تحالف ضدها سيدخل روسيا على الخط مباشرة

[@scottmoore6131]

Reminds me of the US star raker, it’s big and fast.

[@dimoichi5841]

FYI it was known as the Firefox Project, and had more than just this hypersonic bomber. It also has hypersonic fighter aircraft as well as Recon aircraft platforms. Very interesting read, their research was fairly spot on for the technology level of that specific time period.

[@justandy333]

Loving the content, the rendering is getting better and better every video. The subject matter however, Not so sure, I'm sure there have been 1000's of hypersonic bombers designed over the years that never made it past the drawing board. Anyone can design a bomber. Building and testing one sucessfully is something else entirely. I'd be willing to bet that design, with the tech available to the Soviets at the time, it would barely squeek past mach 2.

[@emmaegede1262]

@Justandy333 Cry harder😭

[@justandy333]

@@emmaegede1262 Found a troll!

[@JesseKnight2000]

It looks like Russia's SR-71 bb, but it's a bomber, awesome

[@aurorajones8481]

11:20 Thats a leap man. Id agree that "generally" its "similar" in shape but in no way was that a lift akin to say a Tupolev Tu-4 and B-17 which was CLEARLY a total copy.

[@aurorajones8481]

And your not saying its a total copy I get that but I just don't see any correlation there.

[@user-do5zk6jh1k]

You mean B-29

[@datathunderstorm]

I believe the Tu-4 Bomber was a Russian copy of the Boeing B-29 Strato-Fortress - not the B-17.

[@amenboughanmi5819]

It looks futuristic for its time and it also looks 100% achievable technically and engeneeringwise using the NK 32 engines that was already existing in the late 60s and and used for Tu144 supersonic passenger airliner and and upgraded versions on Tu 160 Black jack bomber

[@HH-xf9il]

OMG that cockpit shot was insanely cool !!!

[@stevenhoman2253]

Hiya, great to see a new episode mate. I could be wrong, but wasn't the YF-12 the predecessor of the SR--71?

[@DocWolph]

I have been thinking about the Star Raker off and on for a while, and one thing that bugs me is that spaceplane is simply gargantuan. An SSTO spaceplane would make a great rapid response vehicle. But more often than not, you would not need something as huge as the Star Raker, which is fine for moving large amounts of cargo, personnel, or longer trips, say to Geosync orbit or the Moon and back. But looking at the DSB-LK, adding a single rocket booster, which would be fired off at the correct altitude, you would have a space plane roughly half the size, or less, that could get to orbit, with emergency parts, personnel, or to get someone home in a hurry. If stationed in orbit, with a space station would be a, if still large, a rescue vehicle. We'd still be years, if not decades, from something only the size of fighter plane. Having a turnaround about as long as a normal airplane, space planes would go a LONG way to making space travel less expensive and convenient. But we have to look at making them less big, to that end, first.

[@chronocommander007]

It would have to carry a lot of fuel to have any useful range, so it would have to be gargantuan.

[@williamstock3007]

StarRaker was purpose designed for large solar power stations. It had to be huge

[@DocWolph]

@@williamstock3007 Not knocking that. Each "Pearl", power station, in the String of Pearls is HUGE, like building a offshore oil rig in space HUGE. You would need something huge for that. I feel like the Sea Dragon would be better though. But more to the point, The Star Raker was meant to be the REAL Space shuttle, not the craft we ultimately got. It is wildly more doable today than in 1960s, an ironically less likely to happen if we rely on Govt to do it.

[@DocWolph]

@@chronocommander007 All Earth-to-Orbit space craft are HUGE for that reason. The Star Raker however would carry considerable more than C-5 Galaxy.

[@warhawk9566]

@@chronocommander007 which would then hamper it's speed cause it would also be heavy, the guns and anti air missiles wouldn't help in this regard either

[@0utc4st1985]

A fleet of these with those hypersonic missiles would have been a much more cost effective and combat sustainable way of dealing with Allied carrier groups than what the Soviets ended up actually doing, building insane numbers of TU-22 bombers and expecting to lose most of them in a sortie.

[@robertolopez9483]

6:04 🤣🤣🤣 not me laughing so hard for the picture in the corner 💀

[@TheMemeDynamics]

Your animations are starting to look like Mustard's animations(although the missile smoke effect needs a bit of improvements) Keep the good work going on!

[@WolfeSaber9933]

Well, I heard that the true speed of the SR-71 is still classified. It could've gone past Mach 4.

[@nostic4979]

Yep but eventually it comes down to 3 main things, fuel, engines, and space for them

[@RidinDirtyRollinBurnouts]

The plane was on the verge of melting as it was at mach 3.5. The altitude it would've flown at to achieve that speed is the biggest indicator of this possibility. 90,000 feet is not high enough to go mach 4 without melting

[@user-do5zk6jh1k]

The aircraft maybe, just maybe could have gone that fast for short periods, but it would have been thermally limited when it came to sustaining that speed. Many fast aircraft can reach their thermal or structural limits before reaching drag limitations.

[@joshm3484]

The SR-71 is held back by reality. Soviet, and now Russian military fantasies don't have the weakness of actually having to exist.

[@vmj361]

@@joshm3484 The Soviets probably had their own version of the black budget, so we don't know what they could have produced in secret just like there are still likely classified projects in the Pentagon's black world. I agree though that the SR-71's still secret top speed was probably Mach 4. Look at other Mach 3 aircraft like the MiG 25 and the XB 70 Valkyrie bomber and how different they look from the Blackbird; the latter just looks like it could go faster than them

[@tylerk2533]

You always drop diamonds. Great work!

[@frankdrevinpolicesquad2930]

So, not only do I have to put up with double unskippable ads from KZbin, I also have to watch embedded ads as well ?

[@Rose_Butterfly98]

In a way, it's like a cruise missile range extender. Which is probably the best type of bomber ever if those missiles are accurate.

[@michaelhopf3249]

In the end, a project with this scale and magnitude at that time was far out of their skill and innovativity to built it. I'm sure, Russia had it's prototype-version of a SR-71 counterpart, but not the money to produce and run it as a "Silver Bullit" - system.

[@robert506007]

My Goodness man and I thought I was well informed on odd Soviet designs never made. You continue too amaze.

[@Shazzaka]

Whats the anime intro count down from? Your original work or borrowed?

[@jonremmers1828]

Kind of fascinating how all we tech-history-buffs went aaaaw over the nazis napkinwaffe in the ninetieties. And now twenty-something years later the soviet napkinairforce is all the rage.

[@martinhayes2273]

I'm probably genuinely gonna burst out laughing deepening on your answer to this question but does napkinwaffe mean weapon concepts that never got any further than a quick sketch on the back of a napkin?

[@jonremmers1828]

Yes you got it right. Wild concepts that seldom came to more than sketches. Fascinated the nazi leadership into believing they actually had a chance to win a war that was already lost. Also fascinated producers of sketchy researched Discovery documentarys in the nineties.

[@martinhayes2273]

@@jonremmers1828 still fascinating Wehraboos to this very day. My take on it is that the the first sign that the Nazi's didn't have a chance to win was the Brest Fortress siege at the very beginning of the war.

[@adamfistler465]

It was a beautiful looking plane. Seems like they dreamed up all kinds of cool stuff in the 50

[@chrisi06]

It makes no freaking sence that they stopped this project in the 60s due to ICBM's but then made a competition in the 70s between three soviet aircraft brands to build the best bomber (this was the time also when the Tu-160 came out).

[@juryfilatov4520]

It's just that the first launch of a Soviet ballistic missile with a mock-up of a nuclear charge took place on October 4, 1957. After the first intercontinental dummy nuclear weapon flew around the world sending a peak-to-peak signal, the USSR no longer had a need to develop a super expensive bomber. At the same time, the USSR had the Spiral project. And the launch of Buran led to a treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons in space. This agreement lasted until 2014.

[@Elthenar]

This is the fastest bomber ever designed because they never had to come close to actually building it. To this day, I doubt the Russians have the material science needed to build a hypersonic manned aircraft. There Helicarriers from the Avengers is more realistic than this airplane.

[@Nurhaal]

The idea of having gun turrets on something going mach 5 is just... hilarious... no rounds are going to exit those barrels are Mach 5 lol That shape is also not conducive to Hypersonic. It's just not. The nose itself would've been too hot, even for titanium, as it's clear at the time of this design, the designer didn't understand the physics of hypersonic flows and pressure. Which, this isn't to knock on him, hardily anyone did back then. The irony is that no one would really learn about Hypersonics in true detail until the Space Race itself. So in order for this bomber to built more effectively, the Space Race that put it out of commission would've still had to of happened anyway. What a twist. All in all, blunt front ends is what you need for hypersonic speeds. The air itself creates such a sharp shock boundary that your aerodynamics is more or less decided by the shockwave you create, not by how the flow glides over the aircraft's skin itself. With that in mind, I'd worry that the two nacelles of engines are spaced way too far to the outside of the aircraft to be functional during hypersonic flight. They're far enough out that they're outside the protective shock angle generated by the nose. Unless the nacelles intended to use ramp extensions to control the shock boundaries prior to engine ingestion, those engines would've likely encountered the turbulent shock boundary air which would have destroyed the laminar transonic flows into the compressors and would've have caused engine unstarts by blowing out the combustors. As cool as this design looks, it would've likely killed some test pilots. Also the note about Titanium is hilarious as the USSR was so abusive to the Jews in the southern portions of the USSR that they lost much of their workforce that was trained in electronics and computing fields. Much of them fled the USSR for Israel, US or Western Europe. The legacy of such bad decisions by the Soviets stands today as Israel is a power house of Electronics development, so damned good at it that they often order US Weapons without their electronics systems, as the Israeli's are so good that they often add their own. This lack of electronics work force meant you had no real base to develop CNC machining and proper smelting of Titanium. Titanium is extremely hard. This makes it more brittle than steel but in term of strength, it's way up there and it requires a lot of effort to machine. The Soviets CLAIM that they were going to use Titanium for this bomber when in fact they didn't have the workforce nor infrastructure to even work the crap to begin with. This is the reason why the OXCART Program bought so much Titanium from Russia using shell companies. Russian couldn't work it so the best they could do was sell it. Reference the later high speed project, the Mig 25 Foxbat. Even then, on a later program, the Soviets STILL Couldn't effectively work with Titanium so they chose to use Steel for the Foxbat. This bomber was pumped up purely by propaganda. In reality, there's no way the Soviets would've ever built this thing. Ever.

[@jwandel]

Facing rearwards they should

[@katrinaanon1038]

It was still quite detectable. Since it is moving so fast it has a tremendous thermal signature and withtheimage sensors available quite detectable. Also because of its great speed it is somewhat limited where it can be deployed. Just to make a turn you might violate several countries airspace.

[@AntonyMurithi-xt4ep]

Creates plasma membrane

[@jwaller51]

Love the pinups in the cockpit!

[@datathunderstorm]

The Russian VVS would have never allowed such a decadent western style tradition of scantily clad female pinups in the cockpit. More likely to have Lenin or a picture of the reigning Soviet Premiere.

[@sop1918]

Hello nick this stream is too late for me but pls do die Glock and continue the amazing work u do I’ve already learnt so much from your vids and want to learn more

[@tylerclayton6081]

The SR-72 is going to be a hypersonic reconnaissance/bomber aircraft. It’ll be operational by 2026. Basically the same aircraft that was in Top Gun but it’ll be unmanned and can only fly at mach 6

[@romankovalev7894]

This is at 26. In the meantime, the United States cannot even make a hypersonic missile, just like holding out on hypersonic for more than a few seconds. And yes, in 26 hypersonic SR72, in 27 colonization of the sun 😂

[@DefinitelyNotEmma]

@@romankovalev7894 The military with the biggest budget could definitely develop such a thing, especially since you don't know how long it's already been in development. The US had several hypersonic platforms in the X-Series of experimental aircraft. However if I remember correctly the SR-72 will enter service in the 2030s, together with the NGAD Sixth Generation Fighter

[@romankovalev7894]

@@DefinitelyNotEmma Why dont know? Since the 60s, experiments have been carried out, some are successful - some are not. There was no apparatus flying at hypersonic speed in the atmosphere and not in the fall. And those that were flying like that for a few seconds. Not everything is decided by the budget, although a lot. Let's see of course. Print more money 😂😂

[@giannismentz3570]

The SR-71 was built in 1961, so I'd guess this 72 would retire by 2026 - hence the rumours for it.

[@the23rdradiotower41]

These A-12 hints are killing me!

[@kartikeypatel7426]

Well information. Good show.

[@georgerogers5954]

With what I've seen over the last few months, I would feel the Russian 'Empire' has more chance of turning chocolate into gold than be capable of producing something like this, let alone it actually being able to fly and even less so being able to drop bombs accurately. I can imagine it sat on the tarmac with Moskvitch wheels and tyres, truck radiators (Like on their helicopters) riveted underneath and clingfilm stretched over the canopy.

[@maryrafuse3851]

True, please see my comments.

[@nihluxler1890]

Tf you mean « Russian empire » ? It’s a soviet design, Ukraine alongside the rest of the eastern block would have had a part in it.

[@Cube-3710]

Basically flat MiG-31.

[@obamagaming-zv4vy]

Amogus 69420 sussy imposter

[@billyelliot4141]

Thunderbirds are go. Great video man. 💪🍀

[@jamesclukey7488]

Even cooler than Clint Eastwood's FIREFOX. Definitely Stealth technology. The radar signature must have been like a seagull.

[@scottlowther9967]

Hardly the fastest bomber ever designed... Mach 5 is just plain pokey compared to the likes of the Mach 6 Boeing Model 813, the Mach 6.8+ Lockheed HCV or the McDonnell-Douglas/Boeing DF-9 and General Dynamics Configuration 902, both capable of Mach 10 cruise. Never mind the numerous orbit-capable bombers such as the various WS-164L competitors or the Rockwell MRCC.

[@bigtony4930]

At this point in time, there's no way Russia can economically come close to designing one of these, let alone actively produce it. Awesome video, though!

[@TheBigExclusive]

They could, but it would be a matter of allocating their military budget. And cutting back on something else. Like any nation, Russia would need to decide how to spend their limited military budget. And historically, Soviets/Russian leaders have always favored quantity over quality. They prefer the safety of having lots of cheaper units over a limited amount of expensive units. The United States is the opposite. They prefer to spend huge amounts of money and even go into debt to build advanced military units. Sometimes it works (like aircraft carriers) and sometimes it doesn't (F-22 being too expensive to mass produce).

[@bigtony4930]

@@TheBigExclusive A: the invasion of Ukraine is proof that the Russians and their technology are shit. B: Quantity over Quality only works if you can actually design the thing you want to mass produce.

[@pedroferrr1412]

Don´t Believe in GDP. Just think like that: a screw can cost in USA 20 Dollars, in Russia the same, will cost maybe 1 Dollar.

[@robert.m6755]

Sorry to burst your bubble but the Russian military is excepted to rise by 17.9% this year due to higher gas and oil prices as well as re-adjustment of PPP for the Ruble.

[@karjalasta]

6:25 Correction: Depending of where it takes off in the *Warsaw Pact* :) Edit: Very good vid, non-biased quality info. Thumbs up!

[@aandc2005]

Only thing it seems to have to much wing area.. At hypersonic you hardly any wing area or control surface.. Those wings would melt off at mach 8 or higher

[@DerSpeggn]

Russia did not have the required engine technoly to build a plane capable of hypersonic flight. What they had in the Mig 25 was pushing their capablitys to the absolute limit. And the whole design would not be able to handle hypersonic flight either. It was designed at a time where this was all still unproven, almost fantasy. The only things at the time that could reach such speeds were missiles, and rockets, but only for a very short time, and not inside the stratosphere, but high above it. Its a fabulous looking beast though, I have to admit!

[@romankovalev7894]

Kinzhal flies hypersonic most of the way. In contrast to the achievements of the United States in a few seconds or in the fall from the stratosphere. Plus, the Russians have learned to control a body flying at hypersonic speeds in a cocoon of plasma. This means that the Russians will have a plane faster than anyone else. In the future, missiles with an unlimited range have already been announced - this means that a miniature nuclear engine has actually been created. And on the MiG 31, the task of overcoming hypersound was not even set.

[@Zhoolik]

Russia had a lot going for it. But the ruinous war, to both Ukr and Rus, and historically poor leadership has always been Russia's downfall. Just look at the Russian space program. Sad.@@romankovalev7894

[@tiborpurzsas2136]

In the 1950s the Soviets didn't have the technical knowhow to create something as ambitious as this fictional plane ! What kind of an engine would it use, to propel it above mach-4? A ram jet would come to mind, but I don't think that the Russians have a working ram jet today never mind 60 y ago

[@AdotLOM]

any idea what music they were using in the intro?

[@hughmacdonald3595]

Wow. A new galactic record! 11:53 of complete and utter bullashitta! Coulda woulda shoulda crapola! Well done!

[@kestutisstugys1189]

When a plane is at a conceptual stage you can claim it has pretty much any capability you can think of. The is, that considering challenges SR71 has faced during its development and the fact that it has reached only about match 3.5 and the fact that it was enough to avoid any attempt to be shot down throughout its service time up the too early 2000s, as well as the fact that the first hypersonic missiles were used in a conflict only recently, I think I could conclude that the project was unrealistic at the time.

[@britzwickit]

TLDW: because they could not. Like all other russian CGI planes.

[@gugurlqk]

nah they are just not so dumb as americans and figured out cheeper and more efficient approach

[@craigsaunders7037]

I just designed a time travelling laser shooting aircraft on a bit of paper . I don't have the tech or materials to build it but it's still relevant , right .

[@dougshaw7128]

The SR-71, YF-12 and A-12 were flown, the only way this could have been flown is if someone took the paper it was drafted on and folded it into a paper airplane and gave it a good toss.

[@MazzerFXDesigns]

if those defensive remote cannons fired backwards when the aircraft was at full speed, the bullets would actually be flying backwards

[@Raptorman0909]

Jack Northrup designed his first flying wing, which was actually built and flown in 1947. His design came after the German Gotha Go 229 which was a jet engined version of the Horten HO 229 -- the glider version flew in 1944 but the engined version was abandoned. So, yeah, the Russian flying wing would have been years after the German and American versions. Many ideas get put forward that never see the light of day for one reason or another.

[@tombrunila2695]

Northrop got a contract with the USAAF in October of 1941 to build the XB-35 flying wing bomber! It made its first flight in June 1946. Earlier he had designed and flown smaller flying wings.

[@JFrazer4303]

Northrop and the Hortens weren't even close to the first. See the Dunne flying wings of 1908-1918.very successful and stable. The Stout "Batwing" of 1918. The Cheranovsky BICh-3 of 1926 Northrop and the Hortens were late-comers, and unlike these others, never produced a really safe fly-able plane.

[@axelbender1]

cool video man! :D

[@powerhousepaperairplanesrogers]

You always know how to find the aircraft most people have never heard of

[@supermaster2012]

Much better appearence on camera, as I've told you many times already DISTANCE, don't breathe on my soul.

[@shirotatsu1]

"The SR-71 would have struggled to catch up with this plane the soviets were cooking up". *SR-71 exists* *Darkstar does not*

[@kostka4876]

Imagine going so fast that dropping any payload is impossible

[@FuzzyPyrate]

Like most other projects with unique vehicles and crafts, the short explanation is funding, or lack of sufficient funding. The Soviets were outpaced by the west at the time so they were forced to burn through money like crazy to try and keep up. They would start these projects and use them for propaganda, then quietly shelve them because it was too expensive to complete. Same thing happened to their version of the space shuttle, the soviet Concord, their idea for a moon base, and the list goes on. They needed the money to try and maintain their (at the time) current equipment and infrastructure, which ultimately came to a screeching halt when the Soviet Union collapsed.

[@littleb9298]

The Darkstar DSB-LK shares a similar predicament with my intergalactic fleet: everything from design to technology and scope are perfect, except for the budget, making it a letdown.

[@thaddeuswilson654]

Makes me think of Fire Fox

[@jtjames79]

It only works if you think in Russian.

[@jammiedodger7040]

So it would of been a similar speed to Tempest (6th generation fighter) that is going to go 5,000 MPH

[@rafvanraevels]

Great graphics. Blender or ...?

[@greensoplenty6809]

i had some die cast planes as a kid in late 80's early 90's. was one shaped like a flat tear drop with slightly up turned wing tips, dont think it had a tail, i assume it was real or a concept design for a early stealth bomber or interceptor. had 2 slits for jets at the rear like stealth planes any idea what it was? ive seen a lot of concept videos and ive never seen it

[@greensoplenty6809]

the other planes were very realistic f-16, f-14, maybe a f-15, they were all very real, think this was probably a real concept or test craft somewhere around 1989-1993

[@datathunderstorm]

Would that be the F-19 Stealth Fighter? It was a game simulator by MicroProse. Fits your description precisely.

[@greensoplenty6809]

@@datathunderstorm close, more like x-44 manta. without stabilizers, in a more tear drop shape with bomber looking slit engines. was probably a early concept design for one of those or could have been a test bed for using air thrusters instead of stabilizers. looked more like one of those wacky test bed planes for new tech more than a fighter design

[@chucheeness7817]

this looks like one of the MiGs in Red Alert 2 that Boris calls in if they were squished flat.

[@pseudotasuki]

I think that would be more of a blended wing body than a flying wing.

[@rustymustard7798]

Lol, "Cervice Ceiling" at 6:10