PDA

View Full Version : Ukraine is building a second An-225!!!



Mustang
01-07-2005, 03:34 PM
Found this whilst searching on another site :)

For those of you who dont know what it is its the largest aircraft in the world capable of handling over 250tons of cargo, traveling at 850kmh with a max range of 15, 400km...

Now thats impressive :eek:

Its quite impressive that they are building a new one. The current one is booked for a few years in advance, and it is doing a lot of AID related flying, it brought goods to Iraq and probably is now working on South East Asia.

this is the current one

http://img101.exs.cx/img101/3552/an225buran7yh.jpg

http://img101.exs.cx/img101/227/an225158yu.jpg

http://img101.exs.cx/img101/2196/933463an225ra82060rightsiderev.jpg

my porsche
01-07-2005, 03:41 PM
dude thats so huge!!

sutton4481
01-07-2005, 04:01 PM
When can I get mine?

SPHFerrari
01-07-2005, 04:03 PM
look how many wheels there are !!!! thats awesome. i wonder how much they cost to build

r1ckst4
01-07-2005, 04:20 PM
look how many wheels there are !!!! thats awesome. i wonder how much they cost to build
and look how many jet engines there are.... 6 freakin jets! how many of them are there in the world?

Mustang
01-07-2005, 04:22 PM
currently thats the only one

there is one more being built :)

pimp_squeak
01-07-2005, 05:11 PM
its only purpose was to beat the americans, it's only 3 inches longer than a C-5 Galaxy, of which there are over a hundred in service...I think...

Tuscan666
01-07-2005, 05:26 PM
HOLY HELL!!!! That thing is HUGE would hate to think of the cost for 1 flight lol!

Coventrysucks
01-07-2005, 05:28 PM
its only purpose was to beat the americans, it's only 3 inches longer than a C-5 Galaxy, of which there are over a hundred in service...I think...

An-225 Length - 84m
C5 Galaxy length - 75.5m

3 and a bit inches perhaps

CdocZ
01-07-2005, 05:28 PM
wow.......holy crap that thing is big! i thought the b52 was big, but this?! holy crap!

baddabang
01-07-2005, 06:30 PM
Wow I looked for a few more pics. Check out the inside

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=201621

pimp_squeak
01-07-2005, 07:43 PM
An-225 Length - 84m
C5 Galaxy length - 75.5m

3 and a bit inches perhaps
really? I thought the difference was less...maybe I'm thinking of a different aircraft. Either way the Galaxy is huge...

r1ckst4
01-07-2005, 08:05 PM
Wow I looked for a few more pics. Check out the inside

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=201621
you can have an ashley simpson concert in that thing! :D

SPHFerrari
01-07-2005, 08:14 PM
but the bad acoustics would mess up her beautiful voice:D

Niko_Fx
01-07-2005, 08:18 PM
but the bad acoustics would mess up her beautiful voice:D

At least she would have an excuse...

crisis
01-12-2005, 06:27 PM
An-225 Length - 84m
C5 Galaxy length - 75.5m

3 and a bit inches perhaps
More important would be its payload and the cubic metres thereof.
You can always guarantee you will get a sensitive reply from a US patriot somewhere eh. And all the better for its innacuracy.

crisis
01-12-2005, 06:30 PM
At least she would have an excuse...
baitch. :D

clutch-monkey
01-12-2005, 06:47 PM
i'd hate to be the pilot of that thing, especially if you wandered into a combat zone...

crisis
01-12-2005, 06:56 PM
i'd hate to be the pilot of that thing, especially if you wandered into a combat zone...
I dont think it is owned by the military.

clutch-monkey
01-12-2005, 07:03 PM
i didn't say it was, but if you're flying aid into a country that isn't exactly stable, someone might take potshots at you
besides, i'm not saying it would happen, i'm just saying i'd hate to be behind the controls of it if you fly into a combat zone

crisis
01-12-2005, 07:09 PM
i didn't say it was, but if you're flying aid into a country that isn't exactly stable, someone might take potshots at you
besides, i'm not saying it would happen, i'm just saying i'd hate to be behind the controls of it if you fly into a combat zone
I saw a video of an airshow at Avalon where they had the next one down from this flying around (four engined) . It got so low at one point I bet the organisers shat. The guy banked it hard and it looked like it was dipping its wing tip in the ground. I would love to have been there (I think).

pimp_squeak
01-12-2005, 08:26 PM
More important would be its payload and the cubic metres thereof.
You can always guarantee you will get a sensitive reply from a US patriot somewhere eh. And all the better for its innacuracy.
....I'm Canadian....and I expected inaccuracies....what do you expect? I was doing it off the top of my head

crisis
01-13-2005, 03:45 PM
....I'm Canadian....and I expected inaccuracies....what do you expect? I was doing it off the top of my head
It would have taken Coventry no more than a minute to come up with the accurate figures from the net. If you are going to post things you know are innacurate then be prepard to be told so. Just like my assumption that you were American. Thats what you get with generalisations, make you look stupid. ;)

henk4
01-14-2005, 01:09 AM
It is actually interesting to know that this plane was left to rot for a number of years after the Soviet space programme collapsed. It was used to carry the Buran space shuttle on its back, just like the americans use a 747.
Antonov decided to recommission the plane and it took more than a year to get it back in order and to obtain all certificates of airworthiness. (A long feature on Discovery Channel told me all of this). It's payload is 250 ton.
Its smaller sister, the 4 engined Antonov 124 is a regular visitor at cargo terminals all over the world. It "only" carries just over 170 tons.
The large amount of wheels is a feature of many russian aircraft which are designed to use low quality air strips. (like a C130 Hercules for instance).

crisis
01-16-2005, 03:24 AM
It is actually interesting to know that this plane was left to rot for a number of years after the Soviet space programme collapsed. It was used to carry the Buran space shuttle on its back, just like the americans use a 747.
Antonov decided to recommission the plane and it took more than a year to get it back in order and to obtain all certificates of airworthiness. (A long feature on Discovery Channel told me all of this). It's payload is 250 ton.
Its smaller sister, the 4 engined Antonov 124 is a regular visitor at cargo terminals all over the world. It "only" carries just over 170 tons.
The large amount of wheels is a feature of many russian aircraft which are designed to use low quality air strips. (like a C130 Hercules for instance).
We have been graced with the presence of the An124 here in little old Adelaide a couple of times.

clutch-monkey
01-16-2005, 03:30 AM
when i was doing my general service training at amberley i saw some of those in-flight tankers, and i though they were big. nut they're nothing compared to this an-225, how can the ukraine afford to build such a huge plane?

henk4
01-16-2005, 03:39 AM
when i was doing my general service training at amberley i saw some of those in-flight tankers, and i though they were big. nut they're nothing compared to this an-225, how can the ukraine afford to build such a huge plane?

It was during Soviet Union times that the plane was built, but after the dissolution of the Soviet Union the Antonov factory found itself to be in the new indepent state called the Ukraine.

henk4
01-16-2005, 03:46 AM
We have been graced with the presence of the An124 here in little old Adelaide a couple of times.

Last year it was announced that the AN225 was coming to visit one of our airports, and they even gave an ETA. Thousands of spotter flocked there until the news came that the plane had stuck with fuel problems in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. It never came.

The An 124 I have seen many times, both in ex-soviet republics and overhere

clutch-monkey
01-16-2005, 03:47 AM
ok, but i thought the ukraine was rather poor, so is antonov building the plane with its own funds?

henk4
01-16-2005, 03:51 AM
ok, but i thought the ukraine was rather poor, so is antonov building the plane with its own funds?

They are probably earning money on the chartering out of the An-124's many of which are still owned by the factory.

Matra et Alpine
01-16-2005, 07:32 AM
IIRC the 225 is fully booked for years. There was a TV show a whilw back.
Awesome plane designed to carry their shuttle piggy back same as NASA used a 747.
BUT it was also intended to act as the first stage of the MAKS launhc system !! Dpn't know what happened to that concept.

250,000kg payload weight is a lot of "stuff" - thats half a million pounds :)

It flew at Farnbrough show many years ago. It makes a Galaxy look small. It is HUGE !!!

dashers
01-16-2005, 08:30 AM
It flew at Farnbrough show many years ago.

Define many,because the Farnbrough planes fly over my house(well,very very nearly :D )

Matra et Alpine
01-16-2005, 08:53 AM
It was like 90 or 91. Too long ago for an old man like me to remember for sure :)
I'm sure it must have come other times as well either to exhibit or while working

dashers
01-16-2005, 09:06 AM
Ah,I was a bit too small then to remmeber!:P(and would have been in cambridgeshire:D)

man 430gt
01-16-2005, 09:59 AM
Man that thing is HUGE!

Matra et Alpine
01-16-2005, 10:03 AM
its only purpose was to beat the americans, it's only 3 inches longer than a C-5 Galaxy, of which there are over a hundred in service...I think...
There are about 40 AN-124s in service in Russia.
These carry 25% more payload than the original C-5 Galaxy and still 10% more than the uprated B Galaxy.
The 225 is BIGGER still.
Seeing a 225 and a Galaxy is like seeing a Galaxy and a C-130 Hercules !!
Seriously it is BIG, big.
Payload for the 225 is 500,000 lbs v the Galaxy 'B' 290,000.

It's purpose was to transport "Buran" the Soviet shuttle and of course double the military artillery helicopters, fighters of the AN-124 :)