Apart from the undercarriage, this aircraft does seem quite well designed. Any wing is designed to induce drag, and depending on shape, a thick wing can work perfectly well.

@@thefreedomguyuk But those insanely large sponsons. And the irregularly shaped flat bulbous nose. And all those flat open manholes for machine gunners? The sponsons alone add a huge amount of drag and dead weight.

"Challenge accepted!"

Add maximum instability and that’s a decent description of the F-117

Just like in KSP. If it doesn't get off the ground, it needs more boosters! If it doesn't hold together, it needs more structure! You can go back and forth with this balancing act until you have a flying skyscraper that moves at 80 miles per hour

It reminds me of the separatist landing ships from Star wars pre-sequels and clone wars.

I'd love to see the cockpit controls. I have fun picturing some steampunk version of a ship's bridge, complete with brass engine telegraph.

Dual porpoise

@@philiptownsend4026 Aargh. And on Christmas Day!

@@donjones4719

Yes please!😀

Shorts Skyvan, for instance

I think you can make your own play lists

Nothing compared to the advances in late 1940s early 50s

The pace if aviation development from the 1920s to the 1990s was incredible tbh

The pace of development of air travel between 1 AD-1800 AD was fascinating, I memorized every heavier than air flight made and the name of every pilot during this time period. Here is the list:

1935 to 1945 saw biplane fighters evolve into turbojet monoplanes.

The pace of aviation in general is incredible. You could be born in 1890s, and live to see aa man on the moon. Only 66 years between the first powered flight, 1903, and the moon landing in 1969. Like, sure, having a Civil War veteran stand next to a F-100 Super Saber is cool, but imagine being just a kid when planes were created, and seeing all developments culminate in a man on another planet.

More mind blowing is how Bolsheviks were lying about everything... even the name of the Bolshevik faction is a solid prove of that, Lenin faction was only a small minority so he called his faction Bolsheviks->"bolshoy"="bigger" and the real majority of communists were called by him Mensheviks=>minority(and this is the official name of them to this day and thx to the ignorance of Russians Lenin faction was in the end a majority...). Only picture of this plane in air is super small resolution and of very bad quality it is safe to assume that only the pictures that are sharp are real and all of them were made on the ground. Pilot and the whole crew died before anyone was able to see this plane in the air and the designer of the plane was executed for no good reason apparently...

@@Bialy_1 Stalin loved keeping the People off balance by Executing totally loyal, innocent, and needed followers. Everyone knew that many who died or sent to the Gulags were just random people with no crimes or political opinions. The NKVD was tasked with totals of people to exile and to execute; men, women, and children. Sometimes the NKVD were given a list of names and what to do with them.

@@Bialy_1 I think you go a bit far in assuming the plane never flew. Perhaps an approach from a more neutral point of view is better. I mean, we have the design, someone would have certainly already pointed out if it wasn't airworthy. Don't assume everything soviet is false, but also don't assume what they say is true. Judge on a case-by-case basis.

@@Bialy_1 what was the quality of the recording media then? was it just as difficult to take pictures of a static and take pictures of a dynamic object at that time?

@@Bialy_1 Why wouldn't it have flown? It's not like building an airplane that crashes during tests from structural problems is good propaganda. Less then a year later the ANT-20 "Maxim Gorky" would fly, a plane that fully loaded, was 10 tons heavier, and it would fly for almost a decade. And while there are very few pictures of the K-7, there are loads of pictures of the ANT-20 in flight.

Wrap that in a Girls und Panzer like plot and I'm in for at least 7 seasons and movie.

- And if it were built in Germany, Hitler Youth would fly it, eh jax?

Voltronski

Well, I think it spun backwards, too. Making it act like a forward propeller. I hope.

love how you put this. I think the same will happen with electric cars. they will stop mimicking the appearance of normal cars and choose something entirely new

@@12gauge_shawtyy I was thinking exactly that the other day! I tried to imagine how it would evolve, but didn't get far. If you imagine a car with batteries underneath and motors on the wheels, there is no need for an engine compartment, so you just get rid of the front of the car? We've got used to that being there, so would we feel safe without it in front of us? Maybe use it as s boot/trunk instead - but then what do you do with the back of the car? As you can see, I couldn't get the traditional shape/idea of a car out of my mind! Or maybe, after 100 years, we're so used to that form that this will be the exception to the 'rule' and we'll stick to the three box design?

@@paulhaynes8045 the front is still necessary as a crumble zone Incase of accident

​@@paulhaynes8045 and Crimea is still what it should be.

Great observation! This thing is basically an airship with the gas envelope replaced by a wing. There's a very similar process of evolution when new materials appear. The Iron Bridge in Telford was the world's first cast iron structure, and as such there was no precedent for how to make connections and joints in the new material. The designers turned to what they knew, wood, so the cast iron bridge was assembled with dovetail joints and tenons. A similar thing happened when carbon fibre was first used in bicycle frames - builders retained traditional lugged construction and just replaced alloy tubes with carbon ones. It took a while before the entire frame was made all in one continuous piece, taking full advantage of carbon's benefits.

How is this prototype called? :o Never heard of something like this before :D

@@raytastic2461 Tupolev ANT-29 for the plane with 150 mm and Tupolev ANT-22 for the twin flying boat.

You obviously didn't watch to the end .

@hey it's pete I've been thinking the same thing. YT removed ratings ages ago :D

@@kringe700 the Tupolev ANT-29 / DIP-1 carried a single Kurchevsky APK-8 102mm recoilless rifle in its fuselage - it was the largest-caliber Kurchevsky gun to actually be tested on Soviet aircraft. There were also flown prototypes with two Kurchevsky guns, one under each wing, like the Grigorovich I-Z, which carried two APK-4 76.2mm recoilless guns, and there was also the Kurchevsky MK-1 152mm recoilless gun he tested on G-5 Motor Torpedo Boats, but there were no 152mm recoilless guns that were actually flown on an aircraft.

Huge carbon emissions though. Not such good progress.

@@EternallyDisappointed Same as any jet. Also NOx, particle emissions and sulphur. Jets are really bad news, but people gotta go places:)

Good to know

@@EternallyDisappointed Carbon emissions aren't a factor in war vehicles. They are made to fuck things up, not make them better. Would a zero emissions drone strike be more moral?

@@filonin2 No.

Can you imagine how insane those vibrations would've felt, whilst also the amount of noise those engines would've created. Terrifying and exciting.

You would have a great view of the ground rushing towards you.

You can do that in the here and now with a Ford TriStar. There's one still flying near Lake Erie, in Port Clinton, Ohio. Like $80/ticket

@@FarmerDrew I think you mean the Ford Trimotor, which doesn't make sense as you can't ride in the wings or see out the front unless you're in the cockpit...

all the worlds a stage, this is surely one of the stranger examples.

So Stalin was basically Darth Vader..."now the design of the new aircraft is up to you...ADMIRAL."

Just like a ship

We should be grateful for wind tunnels

To be fair, they were still figuring such things out back then.

Ahahha this plane actually look really nice! There was also an IS2 variant with a new engine

Fantastic. Thanks. Will check it out.

what kind of madness is this

@@theoneandonlyartyom Agreed. Soviet prototypes, whilst being poor in quality, I find often explore the recesses of "what if I do THIS?" which more stabilized manufacturers have long since learned not to do. That's what makes Soviet Aircraft very interesting to look a and learn about.

Oh god... The IS-1 and 2 were already scary on the ground, but in the air?

But an excellent victory to the political landscape.

Kalinin was purged in 1938

@@None-zc5vg ...happening today under Putin's regime , somethings never change.

Sort of makes you wonder what he could have produced if he'd skipped town and ended up in the UK or US.

flying a target that large you would never have to worry about landing it because it would get shredded by AA

That’s probably why it crashed.

@@richardstrachmesserschmiti4979 - You probably didn't pay attention to the video. Severe vibration caused the starboard fuselage boom to fail. This is the most probable reason for the crash.

@@scootergeorge7089 got it , the designer was a Bolshevik Marxist communist, that kinda lost interest with me as I know their crimes and lies . However , aviation engineering is always interesting. Wings only stabilize an aircraft the tail steers it - only brute power of trust makes thing fly - even gliders are falling and steer and stabilize the fuselage. All that shit about curved wings and pressure is bullshit. This plane must have a lot of power . Probably a German v12 design, imitation. Ok enuff , thanks for the correction

@@caralho5237 Early WW2 anti-aircraft ammunition was very unlikely to cause actual damage to aircrafts.

It is not "photoshopped", this is digital art - a 3D render. It was made in the early 2000-s as kind of a joke.

@@SQSNSQ G'day, You left out the "F". It's a Digital FART Total Bullshit, shined up and sold to morons with more money and enthusiastic gullibility than sense...; it's a Fraud, perpetrated on a generation of fact-free Computer-Heads. Such is life. Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

@@WarblesOnALot Ok boomer

@@kenetickups6146 G'day Infant. For the record, the Post WW-2 Baby Boom lasted ONLY for the 10 years from February 1946 - when the Babies concieved during the drunken Street Orgies occurring to celebrate "VE-Day" commenced to be born..., until May 1956, which was 10 years after the Drunken Street Orgies held to celebrate "VP/VJ-Day". The official story was that the DECADE long Baby Boom was a result of all the people who had refrained from initiating a Pregnancy because they were all too busy trying to kill Strangers, over Political Differences. However, in fact the actual birthrate started to drop back in 1951, when Unkle Spam bogged itself in an Asian War on the Korean Peninsula I was not born until 1961. One of my sisters was a Boomer, (1947) but my other sister, my brother, and my mother (1939, 1941..., and 1936,) were all of the "Silent Generation" (1930 to 1945, the Great Depression & WW-2)... When I started Kindergarten in 1966 the "Boomers" were 5 years ahead of my age Cohort..., we were regularly told why we were NOT "Boomers", and it was not until the 1980s that some demented wannabe Sociologists wanted to rave about "Generation X" that they began to PRETEND that the "Boomers" included everybody born from 1945 to 1970..., and idiots and ignoramuses sucked up that Lie. Anybody with any integrity agrees that as the "Boomers" were a Decadal Phenomenon and as a Generation lasts for FIFTEEN Years, and as Gen-X didn't show up till after 1970...; then in fact Everybody born between 1957 and 1972 - after the Boomers and prior to GenX, are in fact the SPACE CADET Generation. We were born between Sputnik-1 and Apollo 17..., we grew up watching My Favourite Martian, The Jetsons, I Dream of Genie, and Atom Ant on TV - and we all expected that Human Space Flight, and Space Colonisation, was all imminently about to become ubiquitous... And it never happened. Ho Chi-Minh ethnically-cleansed the Moon of all AmeriKans (with the cost of losing in Vietnam) and Nixon put 3 Apollo Moonshots into Museums and then he pimped the Pentagonal Haemorrhoids to fight the designated Enemies of King Saud, wherever they may be - for continued US access to OPEC Oil, and an agreement binding OPEC to only sell Oil for US Dollars, which magically created a "Value" for the US Greenback at a time when Unkle Spam's EcoGnomie was internationally bankrupt. The Boomers have trashed the Planet. I am NOT a Boomer. For 32 years I have paid the Council Rates on the hundred acre Endangered Species Sanctuary within which I reside. Backtrack moi to my Playlists, if you care to dare to fact-check that..., of the 18 scrolls, 5 are Wildlife Encounters, sorted by Species. The Booroolong Frog (Littoria booroolongensis) is the only Species which I've taken in when it was "Rare & Threatened" in 1996, which was declared "Biologically Extinct" in 1998, which sheltered here through the 10-year Millenial Drought, and in 2011 when I posted Video of the 180,000 Booroolong Tadpoles swimming wild in one if 3 Dams within my Boundaries..., was taken off the Extinct List and is now "only" Critically Endangered. Border Striped Geckos (Endangered) live here too, and Bent-Winged Pippistrelles use my old Coats hanging under my Verhanda Roof as an Emergency Outlanding Station when trapped by a sudden Sunrise after a cloudy Moonlit night - 3 miles from their Colony in a Cave over the River. What have YOU done, personally, to try cleaning up the mucking fess which the actual bloody selfish Boomers have made of every Ecology within the Biosphere ? Just(ifably ?) askin', Such is life. Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !

@@WarblesOnALot chill out dude

The potential for harmonic vibration is enormous. Oh hang on, 12:00 covers just that. It’s almost certainly why it failed especially as stiffening weak areas usually makes the problem even worse.

Yeah I was searching for this comment. I can barely find any real photos of this thing, most of them are clearly fake. It looks bigger than the AN-225 even though based on real life stats, it's shorter than a 737 and has about as big of a wingspan as a 767.

I think it got too close to the wingtip and got caught in the wingtip vortex, which drew the fighter toward it like a vacuum cleaner.

"hold my vodka, comrade"

It was called Maxim Gorky, a sort of TB-3 derivative with 10 engines and it crashed killed 35 on board. Nikolai Blagin was the fighter pilot and wasn't especially popular afterwards, it's probably just as well he perished in the collision.

@@larslarsman I think that was the American XB70

@@zxbzxbzxb1 The giant aircraft held a printing press that was used to print propaganda leaflets that were dropped as the aircraft circled cities.

"But what we really need is a couple of bridge supports as landing struts."

"It'll have lots of engines, of course, but with such silly little propellers that they'll essentially be desk fans trying to pull a garden wall by blowing at it." "Makes sense. Let's do it!"

well its a bit like the Spruce Goose it also uh " flew "

@@SuperErikRoss With the difference that it was in the air and there is no doubt about it not to mention that the plane survived this experiment. In case of the Soviet Russia the only picture of the plane in the air is super bad resolution and the picture is super bad even for that crapy resolution... all the pictures that looks real are on the ground so in my oponion the plane most likely broke apart during the first "flight"... the whole crew died and the designer was executed.

@@Bialy_1 yeah yeah, commies can't invent war machines, blah blah blah. One austrian painter already fell for these stories

Very good! Yuri- We going to crash, we get killed! Yakov- Not to worry, we not crash and die. Yuri- Is wanting to know, why not? Yakov- Because Party will deny everything. Then tell people we had slight hiccup and now resting somewhere in Siberia.

Keep a lot of fluid nearby. I record with a giant bottle of water and a cup of tea/coffee!

@@RexsHangar Thanks! 😀

You're right the B-17 could carry 8,000lb externally along with it's full internal bomb load. It could do only 790 miles if you wanted to get to the normal cruising altitude (around 25,000ft. But if you didn't mind everyone with a rifle being able to shoot at you (your cruising altitude would be 6,000ft), you could fly about1,170 miles.

5-year plans took their toll on industrial growth? What? Last time I checked, these plans built the industry.

не гунди!

@@user-jj3zv8qo4i это правда

120 passengers a 80kg are already 9600kg, if the civilian version of the K7 would have to be able to carry 120 passengers plus 7 tons of cargo, the bomber version should be able to carry more than 9600kg of bombs, alone the 120 seats that are not needed in a bomber make up a few tons

Perhaps they thought that ground effect would cause this aircrafts enormous wing to behave too unpredictably if it were any nearer to the ground. Although I think of the Bristol Brabazon with its similarly deep wing and it seemed to do OK on its fairly low undercarriage.

Where did you find the model?Sounds very interesting.

@@burtbacarach5034 The model was designed by a Russian manufacturer. You can find it all over the Internet. I believe, the wing is formed from fiberglass. And you don't want to know, how much they ask for it. :-)

Nope. Let the past be the past

@@theairstig9164 I have nails. Do you have wood and fabric?

It flew for over a two months until they decided to modify it. That pretty much says it was functional… The similarly sized ANT-20 that replaced it flew for eight years.

*Dieselpunk

@@The_Str4nger . Steampunk is a Manga Genre . No such thing as Dieselpunk .

@@johncunningham4820 What? no? Steampunk isn't just a Manga genre. It even has not originated in japan. it's a general art style like Cyberpunk, punk, or goth. And Dieselpunk exits also a an general artstyle like Steampunk

I'm sure it would have been a solution, but such engines/upgrades weren't available at the time. Notably better engines entered production only by the end of 1930s. But by that time there was no rationality in producing things of such an outdated design as K-7. But they were used on Pe-8, a heavy bomber which was smaller than K-7 but still impressive, larger than B-17 for instance.

In combat. Trials of a copy of the grand slam were undertaken with a modified B-29. Bomb hung on an underwing pylon.

@@mpetersen6 mate the b-29 never dropped a proper grand slam. only mockups. the british refused to give the US a real one as they had none to waste. if japan had stayed in the war. the Lancaster's the british sent down to be used to drop fat man and little boy. would have been used to drop any grand slams on japan. the b-29 was supposedly found to be unstable when dropping grand slam mockups. the bomb seems to have messed with the airflow over the tail. this was the exact issue reported after dropping fat man and when dropping some of the first X craft to.

@@tommyfred6180 @tommy fred mate he never said that they droped the bomb the whole point is that the plane was capable of taking two grand slams at once and you can easly find picture of the B-29 in the air with two grand slams under the wing and the description of the picture is that the B-29 never droped them in combat. And even if the plane was using some non live version of the bomb for the test its safe to assume that the "mockups" was identical in the size and most importantly the mass. Doing test like that with some wooden mockups would be just silly excercise and waste of fuel. B-29 droped two much more powerfull payloads during WW2 and in comparison to the two type of devices that B-29 droped the Grand Slam looks like a toy (Grand Slam got inside only 4,309 kg of torpex D1 and the uncertainty of power of the two devices droped Hiroshima and Nagasaki is in multiple hundereds of tones of TNT...).

@@Bialy_1 i get your point and your sadly failed to get my point. the photo showing a b-29 with grand slam payload was, and is something people getting confused over. they are just mockup bombs. the test was to see if the bomb would "fly" nothing more. not one person involved questioned if the b-29 could take the load. but the aerodynamics was a different thing. as it was it was found that the grand slam messed big time with the aircrafts stability. so the test, even if the British had been willing to give them real bombs to play with, was bind. the fact is the b-29 could not safely carry the bomb type and never carried a real grand slam. just mockup models. as for your point about the b-29 carrying the fat man and little boy. that again is off point and irrelevant. remember Lancaster's carried test mock ups of both the fat man and little boy. it was also intended for them to carry them to target at one point and three Lancaster's got converted and sent down to stand by to do the job. but no one makes the jump people are making over the grand slam thing. by saying that Lancaster's carried nukes'. hope you now get the point mate. have a good new year.

It's kind of sad if anyone, other than a child, who saw the Photoshopped version with turrets would actually be so ignorant as to think it was real.

Funding, it’s all about funding $$$ Is anyone interested in my jet powered turbo for a electro magnetic 🧲 3rd stroke both applied to a flathead v8 idea 💡 ? I think about $300, 000 in research and development can get it done. 700hp from 240 cubic inches and no compounding computers needed How about a two stroke Vtwin air cooled Diesel for a motorcycle- ? Might have enough money left over from first project. Yes, I can bolt either engine to an airframe.

They had ridiculous quotas and ideas, it was all about bigger, better etc. Obviously by 1930s standarts, plus you just had the civil war which wiped off most of intelligent people who were either dead, emigrated (sikorsky) or scared into submission. Free thinking wasn't a thing so everything was redwashed

matrix minions unite (jk they are already clones), this is one of the sillier examples of the world being a stage.