Antonov An-225 News and discussion thread

Scott Kenny said:
The other good example would be the P-3/C-130 duo.

IIRC the wings are actually common between them.
Click to expand...

Is this true? P-3 has a wingspan of 99 feet, C-130H has a wingspan of over 130 feet. Wing area is around 1,300sq feet for the Orion and over 1,700 for the C-130.

While sharing common power plants, these seem like very different wings.
 
kaiserbill said:
As an aviation enthusiast, and an admirer of Antonovs big birds, these are facts, as painful as they are.
It's not only that it is extremely unlikely the 2nd An225 will be completed...it's also that Antonov itself probably won't survive.
Which is sad.
Click to expand...

Imo the only way Antonov could survive long term would be to be absorbed by either Europe's Airbus or Russias UAC. I could imagine that Airbus would be interested to enter into the niches Antonov used to serve. While UAC would secure the long term future of some aircraft in use by Russia and could perhaps complete the An-70 development.

Really depends on factors that are still quite far into the future. But Antonov as an independent entity in the aviation market is done for. What mismanagement and not realizing potential in a corrupt country do to an mf.
 
EmoBirb said:
A better alternative would be if Antonov would be tasked to develop a new, modern, smaller airlifter with export potential, to bring jobs and money back to Ukraine. Even though foreign help, be it financial or personell oriented, may be necessary, it's an infinitely smarter use of the money.
Click to expand...
Again, valid points all, and I do agree with that suggestion being a far better idea for both Ukraine and Antonov from an economic viewpoint.
 
Hobbes said:
So, it was destroyed because there were Russian troops on that Ukrainian Airfield. The An-225 would still be in one piece if the Russians hadn't invaded.
Click to expand...

It was destroyed because the aircraft wasn't evacuated despite several months of warning time and being stationed at a facility that's to be considered a military objective to be captured. It's simply collateral damage between two warring parties. And quite frankly, I find it hilarious how people care more about that single aircraft that was destroyed there than the people that lost their lives during that battle, lol.

The loss of the An-225 is something the world recovered from in like 10 seconds.
 
Scar said:
here we go again :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sorry, that seemed to be the accepted narrative all over the media at the time, and I played along.
Although I do not find the "open source investigation" absolutely conclusive (it's easy to take images and interpret them, either way) I'll admit that it raises an interesting question: why would the Russians have taken the risk to damage their own material which was quite close to the aircraft? So probably artillery.
 
Scar said:
here we go again :rolleyes:

storymaps.arcgis.com

What Destroyed the An-225?

An open-source investigation.
storymaps.arcgis.com storymaps.arcgis.com
Click to expand...
Hobbes said:
So, it was destroyed because there were Russian troops on that Ukrainian Airfield. The An-225 would still be in one piece if the Russians hadn't invaded.
Click to expand...

The An-225 wouldn't have been destroyed if the Russians hadn't invaded, IMO it's quite clear that the local Ukrainian artillery units destroyed it to stop the Russians from capturing and flying it back to Russia (It would've been quite the propaganda prize).

IIRC when the invasion began the Ukrainian government had ordered Anton to evacuate the An-225 to a safe airfield but that order was disobeyed.
 
kaiserbill said:
Much of the the An 225, like the An 124 components and sub assemblies, was Russian made.
Click to expand...
This is not true. Most of the components of the airframe of this aircraft are not made in Russia. But in Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Russia cannot manufacture the most important part - the wing. Therefore, the production in Ulyanovsk cannot build new An-124 Ruslan
 
kaiserbill said:
Much of the the An 225, like the An 124 components and sub assemblies, was Russian made.
Click to expand...

As another poster pointed out, that is incorrect, I think that you've confused Antonov with Tupolev. Antonov is a Ukrainian design house while Tupolev is Russian, after the collapse of the USSR Russia could no longer build the Tu-95, Tu-160 and MiG-31 aircraft due to the disappearance of the Soviet-era supply chains. The Ukrainian SSR was the engineering and heavy manufacturing heart of the USSR with many of the Soviet Union's engineers and scientists being Ukrainian (Korolev for example).
 
AlexShpi said:
This is not true. Most of the components of the airframe of this aircraft are not made in Russia. But in Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Russia cannot manufacture the most important part - the wing. Therefore, the production in Ulyanovsk cannot build new An-124 Ruslan
Click to expand...
Wings of An-124 and An-225 were assembled at the Tashkent aviation plant from the Al-alloy panels made at VSMOZ plant located in Sverdlovsk region. The most critical elements of the center-section structure were made in Russia as well, at UAPK located in Ulyanovsk.
 
NMaude said:
As another poster pointed out, that is incorrect, I think that you've confused Antonov with Tupolev. Antonov is a Ukrainian design house while Tupolev is Russian, after the collapse of the USSR Russia could no longer build the Tu-95, Tu-160 and MiG-31 aircraft due to the disappearance of the Soviet-era supply chains. The Ukrainian SSR was the engineering and heavy manufacturing heart of the USSR with many of the Soviet Union's engineers and scientists being Ukrainian (Korolev for example).
Click to expand...
The density of misconceptions in this post is remarkable.

The last thing first: Korolyov wasn't Ukrainian, he was Russian and his Last Name, with it's ending "ёв" and letter "ё" in it which doesn't exist in Ukrainian alphabet is literally screaming about this. So, please, PLEASE, just shut up on these cool stories who was who by nationality, especially if you're telling these stories on the forum where the people living in Russia consisting a significant part of its community.

Second, the person you agree with made a wrong point. And i already explained why it is wrong in my previous post.

Third, the most part of scientific institutes, NII, which R&Ded nearly all core and critical technologies for the whole Soviet industrial complex, including Aerospace and MIC, were located in Soviet Russia. TsAGI, VIAM, TsIAM, VILS, GosNIIAS - all were located in Russia.
 
Another fact that many don't realise.
More An124's (36) were assembled in Aviastar-SP in Ulyanovsk than in Kiev Aviant. (18)


There were over 100 factories across the USSR connected with the production of the An124.

This was a USSR project.

All of which comes back to the point that the An225 is dead and buried unfortunately.

The only likelihood of a resurrection of An124 production lies within Aviastar, for the simple reason that they have an actual client who might have a requirement for such an aircraft.. the Russian Airforce.
And even this is extremely unlikely, as they have enough airframes for their requirements, and stored airframes which could be used either for parts, or to complement numbers.
A new engine would also likely need to be fitted for any new production anyway.


The resources they have make it seem likely they will utilise these until a replacement heavy lifter is needed sometime in the near, mid, or distant future.

And finally, the production jigs no longer exist in Kiev, apart from the tail unit jigs.
The production jigs are still intact at Aviastar.

Edit: The suggestion I confused Antonov with Tupolev by a poster is just ludicrous..
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
On a rather limited scale IIRC.
Click to expand...
IIRC they completed so far 2-3 newly built ones and modernized an additional two (four in that press release in the hall, two were newly constructed, two newly modernized)

Not an incredible pace, but two newly built strategic bombers are two newly built strategic bombers. I think the Russians ordered 10? So that leaves additional 8 to roll off the assembly line.

But back to the An-225, I'm still favoring the static display route for the second hull. It would fulfill the symbolic value some mentioned, it would draw tourists from across the world and compared to a flying aircraft the cost would be drastically reduced. A static display would still cost a lot of money to finish, obviously, but much less compared to a usable aircraft and the maintenance cost are reduced as well to a bare minimum to not have it fall apart. While the running costs are zero. I could see US museums paying good money for such a display piece tbh.
 
A stupid argument. Ukraine was not able to finish building 2 copies before it. This is not like riveting a UAV on your knee. There are no necessary components. And to build additional plants for one An-225 is utopia. Ukrainian aviation survived only at the expense of the USSR, and then Russia. An illustrative example of the An-70, as soon as Russia abandoned it, the An-70 was left behind.
Only Russia coddled Ukraine.
The rest of the world doesn't even need Ukrainian planes as scrap metal.
 
Scar said:
Wings of An-124 and An-225 were assembled at the Tashkent aviation plant from the Al-alloy panels made at VSMOZ plant located in Sverdlovsk region. The most critical elements of the center-section structure were made in Russia as well, at UAPK located in Ulyanovsk.
Click to expand...
The processing in Verkhnyaya Salda was carried out on super-heavy presses manufactured in Ukraine at NKMZ. The final processing of the wafer panels was carried out in Kyiv.
 
AlexShpi said:
The processing in Verkhnyaya Salda was carried out on super-heavy presses manufactured in Ukraine at NKMZ. The final processing of the wafer panels was carried out in Kyiv.
Click to expand...
Even, EVEN, if it's true, what does the origin of pressses have to do with the fact panels were made at VSMOZ located in Ural? Futhermore, composition and production technology of this alloy and the panels were developed in VILS located in Moscow.

Therefore, the statement Russian part in An-225 wasn't significant - is still not true.
 
HaveVoid said:
Is this true? P-3 has a wingspan of 99 feet, C-130H has a wingspan of over 130 feet. Wing area is around 1,300sq feet for the Orion and over 1,700 for the C-130.

While sharing common power plants, these seem like very different wings.
Click to expand...

The engines are also mounted differently (above the wing on the P-3, below the wing on the C-130) and there are a ton of differences in the flaps and other control surfaces. Not interchangable at all.
 
About new An-225. As I wrote earlier, it's a pipe dream. Ukraine couldn't pull it of at the height of it economic ability in late 00, despiter having a fuselage in storage, which is kinda obvious as An-225 required USSR-level cooperation.
Just look at it (wikipedia):

Below in the table are listed only some of the main enterprises participating in the creation of the An-225 aircraft:

Main works performed by the enterpriseCityName of the company at the time of productionCurrent name of the company (as of IV.2014)
Design : major design work on the aircraft.
Production : most new components, small fuselage parts and system parts, fairings and fairings , nose section of the center section and others.
Assembly : fuselage assembly in the jig, general assembly of the aircraft.
Other work : all work after assembly.		KyivKiev Mechanical Plant (KMZ) / OKB named after O.K. Antonov
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
State Enterprise "ANTK named after O.K. Antonov" (division of the State Enterprise "Antonov" )
( Ukraine )
40px-Flag_of_Ukraine.svg.png
Production : new large-sized milled power frames, low parts and fuselage brackets , some serial units and aircraft partsUlyanovsk" Ulyanovsk Aviation Industrial Complex " (UAIC)
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
JSC "Aviastar-SP"
( Russia )
40px-Flag_of_Russia.svg.png
Production : new central parts of the wings with flaps and end (detachable) parts of the wings - serial consoles from the An-124Tashkent"Tashkent Aviation Production Association named after V.P. Chkalov" (TAPOiCh)
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
State Joint-Stock Company "Tashkent Aviation Production Association named after V.P. Chkalov"
( Uzbekistan )
40px-Flag_of_Uzbekistan.svg.png
Production : fuselage nose , front landing gear mounts, new horizontal and vertical tail , engine pylons and cowlings, ball screw mechanisms for the front fuselage struts, and others.Kyiv"Kiev Aviation Production Association" (KiAPO)
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
Antonov Serial Plant (a division of the Antonov State Enterprise)
( Ukraine )
40px-Flag_of_Ukraine.svg.png
Design : new modernized A-825 flight control equipment complex (A-825M aircraft control complex)
Production : A-825M aircraft control complex		Moscow" Moscow Institute of Electromechanics and Automation " (MIEA)
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
JSC "Moscow Institute of Electromechanics and Automation"
( Russia )
40px-Flag_of_Russia.svg.png
Production : serial engines D-18TZaporozhye"Zaporozhye Engine Plant" (Engine Plant No. 29)
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
Public Joint Stock Company "Motor Sich"
( Ukraine )
40px-Flag_of_Ukraine.svg.png
Design : new aircraft chassis
Production : aircraft chassis.		Bitter" Gidromash "
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
Nizhny Novgorod Open Joint Stock Company "Gidromash"
( Russia )
40px-Flag_of_Russia.svg.png
Painting : specialized painting with polyurethane paint (specialists from Voronezh were brought to Kiev)Voronezh" Voronezh Aviation Plant "
( USSR )
40px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png
Voronezh Joint-Stock Aircraft Manufacturing Company
( Russia )
40px-Flag_of_Russia.svg.png

And that's not including smaller parts, or complex parts such as engine that also were result of USSR-wide cooperation.

Foreign countries like China knowing this also declined cooperation when offered.

In 201x Antonov was shadow of it's former self, slowly declining, while trying to make upgraded versions of older planes for foreign customer, with constant attention from unsavory and corrupt politicians to it's lifeline - Antonov airlines. Now, with war and current form of mobilization? Forget it, there are no people to make it.
 
Elon is about all that is left of the Dandridge Cole mindset...a pity
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom