Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

ch-aviation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 178 posts

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#141

Post by Twirrim »

mlac wrote: post #83

I posted this comment on a less popular thread a few days ago: I had the luck of seeing this plane on approach to IAH airport while driving in Houston. For the first few minutes, it looked like a normal size plane, but felt too low and too slow. Then for the next few minutes, it kept getting bigger and bigger. Then I saw it had 6 engines. And a tail wing that seemed as large as a normal plane’s wingspan. I was lucky…

I used to live in Kaneohe, Hawaii.

What you're describing matches my experience watching C-5M for the first time, heading in to land at what was Marine Corps Base Hawaii. I was out walking and watched one flying around the bay, turning in to land. Thought it was low and slow. I remember quite a feeling of cognitive dissonance, as subconscious parts of my brain were refusing to accept what my senses were really saying. Then this slowly dawning realisation no, it's bloody huge! I stopped in my tracks with my jaw dropping.

To some degree I still didn't believe it, until it had actually touched down at the strip in the distance, and I could see how it was in scale next to other planes and buildings.

I haven't seen the AN-225, guess I never will. Comparing specs I'm staggered.. I can't fathom what it would be like to see that one. C5 on left, AN-225 right:

Wingspan: 222' 9" 290'

Length: 247' 10" 275' 7"

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#142

Post by p_l »

mrcheesebreeze wrote: post #115
supreme_berry wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is Russian Ukraine? How old are you?

ukraine was pretty much always at least partially owned by russia. One of the first centralized slavic states were the kieven rus. russia and ukraine are tied and its not offensive or wrong to say something like "russian ukraine"

Well, "Kievan Rus" was Ukraine centric state, as the name says.

Moscow, and future tsarist Imperial Russia, happened much later

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#143

Post by p_l »

masklinn wrote: post #91
Stevvo wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a sim; https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Antonov_An-225_fli... Not sure if all of the cockpit is in that sim; there are 6 seats! I expect the pilots all started out flying other types, so will go back to doing that.

> Not sure if all of the cockpit is in that sim; there are 6 seats! That would be correct, like the AN-124 the An-225 has a crew of 6 (plus 2 loadmasters I think?). While the planes were retrofit and modernised they kept a pretty heavy crew scheme, nominal crew is 2 pilots, 2 FE, and 2 comms. Might be that they didn’t see the need to change the crew scheme, or might be the origins in strategic military transportation…

It also had space for extra people (not many), whether for transit or as second/third crew

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#144

Post by gambiting »

mtnGoat wrote: post #128
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire western section of Ukraine was Polish before WW2.

Haven’t Polands borders been moved like a million times though.

Name one European country that hasn't had its borders moved a million times lol.

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#145

Post by post_break »

mlac wrote: post #83

I posted this comment on a less popular thread a few days ago: I had the luck of seeing this plane on approach to IAH airport while driving in Houston. For the first few minutes, it looked like a normal size plane, but felt too low and too slow. Then for the next few minutes, it kept getting bigger and bigger. Then I saw it had 6 engines. And a tail wing that seemed as large as a normal plane’s wingspan. I was lucky…

It's like seeing the Guppy in Houston. It looks like it will just fall out of the sky.

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#146

Post by bpodgursky »

Aldipower wrote: post #117
Iwan-Zotow wrote: post #114

Quoted post unavailable.

Even is this is true, without Russian invasion, there would be no need for Ukrainian shells barrage.

Yeah, even if it was true, it means the Russian paratroopers were using the hangar as shelter from Ukrainian counterattacks after they violently seized the airport.

(my understanding is all these paratroopers were shortly eliminated, so it was a huge waste of life all around)

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#147

Post by Etherlord87 »

mrcheesebreeze wrote: post #115
supreme_berry wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is Russian Ukraine? How old are you?

ukraine was pretty much always at least partially owned by russia. One of the first centralized slavic states were the kieven rus. russia and ukraine are tied and its not offensive or wrong to say something like "russian ukraine"

I think it's up to Ukrainians to say if it's offensive to them (probably).

Is it wrong? I don't know, is it wrong to call the Sun cold, or the Universe small? Maybe not. Googling "russian ukraine" will not result with articles about Ukraine, it will result with news about the war between Russia and Ukraine.

Can you point to some respectable sources that use the term "Russian Ukraine"?

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#148

Post by chaoticmass »

KMnO4 wrote: post #130

Does anyone know why this will cost "over USD$3 Billion to restore"? The entire aircraft costs approximately $300 million, so I would have expected a number less than or equal to that. Even the B-2 Spirit bomber, most likely the most expensive aircraft only costs $2.1 billion.

I can't read the article right now-- are they seriously talking about restoring, as in repairing it? I'd think it would be a total loss and not possible to 'restore'.

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#149

Post by masklinn »

p_l wrote: post #143
masklinn wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not sure if all of the cockpit is in that sim; there are 6 seats! That would be correct, like the AN-124 the An-225 has a crew of 6 (plus 2 loadmasters I think?). While the planes were retrofit and modernised they kept a pretty heavy crew scheme, nominal crew is 2 pilots, 2 FE, and 2 comms. Might be that they didn’t see the need to change the crew scheme, or might be the origins in strategic military transportation…

It also had space for extra people (not many), whether for transit or as second/third crew

Yes there’s a crew compartment, pretty large one really. It’s also for ground crew as there’s load-mastering, a lot of specific knowledge, plus probably the ability to do some maintenance even far from home base.

The 124 also has a passenger cabin which can hold 80 but I don’t think they’d kept that in the 225.

Re: World's only An-225 destroyed by Russian airstrikes

#150

Post by masklinn »

m2fkxy wrote: post #67
jpgvm wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At GTW of 640T it could support up to 260T of multi-item cargo or 190T single item payloads, truly in a class of it's own. Even Boeing and Airbus internal transports pale in comparison. RIP beautiful bird.

Boeing and Airbus freighters being a pale comparison is not surprising. They are optimised for cargo volume, much less weight. Comparing the Mrija to heavy military airlifters (Ruslan, Galaxy, Globemaster III...) would make more sense. The impressive thing about the Mrija is that it's both good at lifting volume (over-wing transport) and weight.

> They are optimised for cargo volume, much less weight.

An other interesting bit is Mriya’s hold was pressurised (though apparently relatively low, it was not a plane for paras), neither dreamlifter nor beluga have pressurised holds.

> Comparing the Mrija to heavy military airlifters (Ruslan, Galaxy, Globemaster III...) would make more sense.

It still dwarfs them all since it’s an enlarged version of the Ruslan (124). It could carry almost twice the weight a 124 can.

Post reply on HN