Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AN-225 Predictions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AN-225 Predictions

    Quick question...

    Do you think Antonov will make a newer, improved AN225 as it has been destroyed in Ukraine :<

  • #2
    No

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • #3
      I've seen it mentioned in articles that Ukraine intends to rebuild Mriya. I guess the first question would be whether that means dusting off the plans and straight-up rebuilding the aircraft, making a new and improved version that's still a one-off, or attempting to establish a new type that they could offer for sale.

      Regardless, while any of those would be wonderful to see, I think it's hard to see an economically viable path. Boeing and Airbus have proven that they can build one-off mega freighters, and at the risk of stating the obvious, a new Antonov program is unlikely to garner Russian support, so there doesn't seem to be any potential market for such a plane. Unfortunately I just don't think national pride and aviation geekery can justify what would certainly be a multi-billion dollar price tag.

      Comment


      • #4
        Ok, much appreciated

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sevenfortyfour View Post
          Quick question...

          Do you think Antonov will make a newer, improved AN225 as it has been destroyed in Ukraine :<
          First of all, let me welcome you to the jetphotos platform, you shiny new member.

          You have an interesting nickname, which and I try to be honest with you, does not really correspond with your avatar. Or what would you say?

          Since a few days, I am 44 years old, but when you see me at the bus stop, I rather look like 34. That at least is the compliment which I earned four or five hours ago, by a man who himself presented as quite firm in the history of Serbia and in the history of Congo. After a few minutes we perceived that I am the older one of the both of us, but not by much, he said that he is 37 .

          So, what I tried to say, it is not important how old you are, it is only important that you are here. And somewhen during the next 13 years somebody will find out

          why you walk through this brilliant aviation platform with an EK-A388 as your avatar and the 744 as your nickname.

          Back on topic.

          One or two days ago, I declared the one and only AN-225 as destroyed beyond repair. But since President W. Selenskyj has closed the Ukrainian civil air space, nobody really touched
          the AN-225 to perceive how bad her status really is.

          So, what I said, damaged beyond repair, only came from photos which have been uploaded here at jetphotos.

          Since today, nearly all members of the Star Alliance (aviation friendship) have decided, that there will be an international fund-raising to rebuild the Ukrainian infrastructure. Among these members are: the Lufthansa of Germany, the LOT of Poland,
          and, if you ask me, the Scandinavian SAS of Denmark, Norway and Sweden as well as the United Airlines in the USA will join us.

          So. I am not the one who can guarantee you that there will be a second brand new AN-225, but I am also interested in the fact that the longest Cargo jet on this planet
          should not be shorter than 80 meters. Although I wear this nickname and this avatar since more than 13 years, and although that really would be a statement,
          the LH-B748 now is the longest jet on Earth (76,3 meter).

          Very dear greetings, my friend.

          PS: Do you know that the President of the Ukraine W. Selenskyj is only 4 weeks older than me? Yesterday, when I perceived that fact, I thought at once, now he has two 1978 men against him.
          That's a war which he could not win.
          The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
          The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
          And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
          This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

          Comment


          • #6
            Btw, have you ever looked into the sky, and then have you ever seen something like this:
            Click image for larger version  Name:	Jetphotos Upload 053.jpg Views:	0 Size:	461.3 KB ID:	1133816
            https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10511672

            Six jet engines on a Cargo jet. Quite unique, worldwide, as I would say. The smaller sister, the AN-124, and also the today longest Cargo jet, the B748F (76,3 meter) only need
            four jet engines, and I haven't yet heard of one 747 pilot who had ever complained of a lack of 'horses' during his take off.

            So, if your Cargo jet is shorter than 80 meters, then you probably don't need six jet engines.

            But that also seems like one of the problems. The AN-225 was a sort of a prototype, only one a/c has ever been produced.

            Thus, even if the fund-raising results in enough money to build a second brand new AN-225, an aviation engineer like Joe Sutter (father of the 747) would need the Original construction plans
            to build a second AN-225. Now we all can say a prayer that someone on this planet still has the Original AN-225 construction plans in his desk since 1988.

            You can see me say such a prayer.

            PS: The money. The B748F unit cost is ... ? And I don't have CEO Spohrs telephone number so that I could ask him until saturday evening.
            But let's assume 225 million US-$ for a brand new Swiss 747-300 back then in 1983, or what did you pay for it, Alex..

            And the internet says, 268 million US-$ for a brand new Cargolux 747-400F back then in 1993.

            And the internet says, 418.4 million US-$ for a brand new Boeing 747-8 . Now you know how far the international fund-raising has to take us
            for a brand new AN-225...
            Last edited by LH-B744; 2022-03-25, 23:48. Reason: Unit costs at the McD drive thru counter: please give me one 76 meter long haul freighter...
            The German long haul is alive, since more than 60 years.
            The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
            And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
            This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
              Btw, have you ever looked into the sky, and then have you ever seen something like this:
              Click image for larger version Name:	Jetphotos Upload 053.jpg Views:	0 Size:	461.3 KB ID:	1133816
              https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10511672

              Six jet engines on a Cargo jet. Quite unique, worldwide, as I would say. The smaller sister, the AN-124, and also the today longest Cargo jet, the B748F (76,3 meter) only need
              four jet engines, and I haven't yet heard of one 747 pilot who had ever complained of a lack of 'horses' during his take off.

              So, if your Cargo jet is shorter than 80 meters, then you probably don't need six jet engines.
              Are you serious? Do you think that the number of engines depends on the length of the plane?

              Do you think that maybe the maximum gross weight of the plane and the thrust of each engine might be more important than the length of the plane to decide how many engines to hang from its wings?

              B-52:
              8 x 17000 lb thrust each = 136000 lb
              MTOW 488000 lb
              Thrust to weight ratio: 0.27

              AN-225:
              6 x 51600 lb thrust each = 309600 lb
              MTOW 1411000 lb
              Thrust to weight ratio: 0.22

              A380:
              4 x 78000 lb thrust each = 312000 lb
              MTOW 1268000 lb
              Thrust to weight ratio: 0.25

              747-8F
              4 x 66500 lb thrust each = 266000 lb
              MTOW 987000 lb (yes, your plane may be longer but you need 3 747-8F to take what you could take with 2 AN-225)
              Thrust to weight ratio: 0.27

              BAE-146:
              4 x 6990 lb thrust each = 27960 lb
              MTOW 93000 lb
              Thrust to weight ratio: 0.28

              777-F
              2 x 110000 lb each = 220000 lb
              MTOW 775000 lb
              Thrust to weight ratio: 0.28

              By the way, let's compare:

              747-8
              Engines: 4
              Length: 250 ft
              Range: 4300 NM

              777-9
              Engines: 2 (50% of the 747-8 and never a pilot complained of not enough horses)
              Length: 252 ft (longer)
              Range: 7300 NM (also longer)

              No wonder why 747 is out of production and the 777 is still the future. Your chick became old. Perhaps it's time for you to look for a new girlfriend.

              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

              Comment


              • #8
                Don’t they have a second Partially built fuselage on hand, unless that has been destroyed as well?. They could use that instead of building another AN225 from the ground up.?

                regards
                Sentinel

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sentinel View Post
                  Don’t they have a second Partially built fuselage on hand, unless that has been destroyed as well?. They could use that instead of building another AN225 from the ground up.?

                  regards
                  Sentinel
                  They have a fuselage that is expected to be finished from around 70%, mostly rebuilding the plane means finishing this particular fuselage.
                  However they already wanted to finish it around year 2000, then they teamed up with the Chineses and even maybe Turkey wanted to finish it.
                  The problem is, that even this fuselage would cost around 300-400M$ to finish.
                  But Im not sure, whether there might be a possibility to for example cannibalize some AN-124, although that would not be a good deal I guess.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                    Are you serious? Do you think that the number of engines depends on the length of the plane?

                    Do you think that maybe the maximum gross weight of the plane and the thrust of each engine might be more important than the length of the plane to decide how many engines to hang from its wings?

                    B-52:
                    8 x 17000 lb thrust each = 136000 lb
                    MTOW 488000 lb
                    Thrust to weight ratio: 0.27

                    AN-225:
                    6 x 51600 lb thrust each = 309600 lb
                    MTOW 1411000 lb
                    Thrust to weight ratio: 0.22

                    A380:
                    4 x 78000 lb thrust each = 312000 lb
                    MTOW 1268000 lb
                    Thrust to weight ratio: 0.25

                    747-8F
                    4 x 66500 lb thrust each = 266000 lb
                    MTOW 987000 lb (yes, your plane may be longer but you need 3 747-8F to take what you could take with 2 AN-225)
                    Thrust to weight ratio: 0.27

                    BAE-146:
                    4 x 6990 lb thrust each = 27960 lb
                    MTOW 93000 lb
                    Thrust to weight ratio: 0.28

                    777-F
                    2 x 110000 lb each = 220000 lb
                    MTOW 775000 lb
                    Thrust to weight ratio: 0.28

                    By the way, let's compare:

                    747-8
                    Engines: 4
                    Length: 250 ft
                    Range: 4300 NM

                    777-9
                    Engines: 2 (50% of the 747-8 and never a pilot complained of not enough horses)
                    Length: 252 ft (longer)
                    Range: 7300 NM (also longer)

                    No wonder why 747 is out of production and the 777 is still the future. Your chick became old. Perhaps it's time for you to look for a new girlfriend.
                    Don't forget about the Stratolaunch

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by LHB
                      Less than 80 meters means less than 6 engines

                      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      Are you serious?

                      [Excessive data with near zero length information]

                      new girlfriend.
                      1. Did it occur to you that that might be a tongue-in-cheek comment.

                      1a. Very much in line with LH-Bs typical whimsical postings.

                      2. Could you have been a whole lot briefer listing the B-52, 747 and 777? Or 707 & 757.

                      3. I can probably show you statistical correlations between length and weight? And maybe even a weight to engine number correlation…yeah, sure, modern big ass engines cover for any number of old ones…but it’s not like he blasphemed ATLs god of the moth, or suggested aggressive pull ups with no consideration to speed, bank, or stall warnings…


                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X