Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

AN124 ---> AN225?

Recommended Posts

Guest crashing_pilot

hmmm...then why is it those planes (AN124/225) can do things no boeing or airbus can do?that alone is a "technological finesse" to mei think we westerners should learn that THERE ARE things they can do better.i also think boeing/airbus lack "technological finesse"but hey,who am i...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest PAtom

yes man, and just because of these "very special purposes", the 225 had been build. the only purpose she had been build for was to carry the sovied shuttle "buran" same as nasa uses a 747 to transport their shuttle fleet. using a standart an-124 would not do the job since burans empty weight was 75 metrical tons which is too much to be carried "piggyback" plus heavy aerodynamical problems caused by their tail and wing (upper wing instead of the lower wing of the nasa-747)design.now, instead of creating a complete new aircraft, the soviets stretched an existing 124 and added two more engines. thats what i would call cheap, easy and economical instead of paying billions to create a complete new aircraft design just to be build a single aircraft.today she

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>then why is it those planes (AN124/225) can do things no>boeing or airbus can do?AN225 can carry big loads but if you take its max weight, useful load, fuel consumption, maintenance costs, etc - it is a very inefficient and poorly designed/executed aircraft. If you call it "finesses" - you invented your own use of this word. There is probably as much "finesse" in AN225 as in the Great Wall of China - which also can do things no other wall can :-lol .Yes, certain things they can do better - building basically cheap, gas guzzling, overweight equipment that no other western manufacturer would be willing to put their name on. And then they can lease it or put it to use at marketable prices. BTW, enjoy AN225 since nothing like this Russians will be building soon (ever ?). Now the era of state propaganda is over and russian aircraft manufacturers understand they must make $ to survive and the only way to do that is build aircraft that meet international standards for economy and quality.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest panzerschiffe

>Yes, certain things they can do better - building basically>cheap, gas guzzling, overweight equipment that no other>western manufacturer would be willing to put their name on.>And then they can lease it or put it to use at marketable>prices. Thanks for your "expert" opinion.>Now the era of state propaganda is>over and russian aircraft manufacturers understand they must>make $ to survive and the only way to do that is build>aircraft that meet international standards for economy and>quality.Irrelevant for cargo aircraft. The An124 set a NEW standard for it's type, added a whole new capability that no western jet (not counting the military-only C-17) can yet match.The 124 has made extremely oversize and overweight lift capabilities available for commercial use. Dneiper, Volga, Antonov, and other heavy-lift companies make good money leasing these aircraft to people who need that capability. These monsters are everywhere doing missions no other civilian aircraft can do. And soon the 225 will only compliment the burgeoning heavy lift business.EDIT: The Progress engines on the 124 are comparable to the GE CF6-80 series and PW4000 series of American engines. ANY aircraft that has to haul the weight that it does will necessarily guzzle a lot of fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest crashing_pilot

well said Tom.i get sick and tired of people who think we in the western world do everything better.granted,we may have a technological advance,but we also tend to search for technological(read:more difficult than it has to be) solutions,and not only that,but we even brag about it!....how's that for propaganda?when boeing is capable of landing a 230 ton aircraft on a grass strip,and shows it,people can rave all they want about russian planes being ineffective,but to this date,the only plane capable of doing this,happens to be a russian one,so yes,they made a technological step forward,and with finesse i might add.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pez_man

I really must agree with you tom & tom, russian aircraft in general and the an-124 in particular are really amazing equipment in their own right. Comparing them with boeings and airbuses is like comparing apples with peas, when calling it old-fashioned and fuel-guzzling you have to remember that operating costs weren't much of an issue in the former soviet union, what was the issue was the possibility to land on badly paved runways and even grass runways, to be robust enough to be able to fly with minimum maintenance et.c. I find it quite amazing how the engineers at tupolev, antonov, ilyushin et.c. could keep on making such amazing a/c:s in a totalitary system as the soviet union!rgrds fredrik (Oh, and the last time I looked Antonov Airlines made quite a lot of money moving air cargo with these old-fashioned, fuelguzzling crappy aircrafts! :-) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I find it quite amazing how the engineers at tupolev, antonov,>ilyushin et.c. could keep on making such amazing a/c:s in a>totalitary system as the soviet union!It was actually very simple: engineers at tupolev, antonov or ilyushin belonged to a privilaged class in the former Soviet Union since this was part of the Military Industrial Complex and soviet taxpayer paid for everything regardless of cost and nobody asked his permission. The same soviet taxpayer had no access to indoor plumbing, fresh vegetables (such decadent luxury), or decent apartment but soviet engineers had plenty of money to design their aircraft or send spacecraft to Venus.So next time you marvel about soviet aircraft - think of millions of poor russian peasants or regular folks who paid for all this with their substandard (3-rd world like) living conditions. :-eekMichael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-roll Here we go again with Pro-West Anti-East BS again... As I grew up in the Former Soviet Union, in RUSSIA not Poland I take offense to having my countryland mocked in such ways, sure alot of it is true, but not all! I find it funny that when Russians make an aircraft that looks conceptually similar everyone shouts espionage, but when an American firm literally signs a contract to licence build a European airliner, and then pulls out only after collection enough data to make their own knock-off, no one cares? ;-) (no Offence) DC-9 and SE210 look at them ;-), F-15 is indeed a copy of the MiG-25 this is why it was made!The Li-2 was not a DC-3 copy It was a license produced aircraft ;-)People should note, that the Free French Airmen, given the choice of any Allied fighter, chose the Yak-3!Look at the Su-27 type engine the Lyulka Al-31F Has a comparable lifespan to an PW F100, Produces more power, And is more fuel efficient. hmmmm :-rollPS I await for the AN-225 Tom, looks awesome, just like the real thing does! ;-)Ya ne panimayu vas...:-roll Perevedite, Duroch... :( Poka! :DBest Regards Derek Beal :-wavePROUD RUSSIAN/CANADIAN! :D http://www.x-plane.org/users/ilyushin/derek_small.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pez_man

"So next time you marvel about soviet aircraft - think of millions of poor russian peasants or regular folks who paid for all this with their substandard (3-rd world like) living conditions."Of course I don't condone with the old soviet system, but surely you can't hold the engineers at the russian aircraft manufacturers responsible for it? And even though the "intelligentia" had privilegies far out of reach for the normal ussr-citizen building aircraft under such a system couldn't have been an easy task with constant short supply of essential parts, missing tools, poor equipment, pesky party officials et.c. et.c.rgrdsfredrik-Edited for change of mind! :-) -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest crashing_pilot

>So next time you marvel about soviet aircraft - think of>millions of poor russian peasants or regular folks who paid>for all this with their substandard (3-rd world like) living>conditions. :-eek>>Michael J.>well then,next time you marvel about the wonderfull european/american aircraft,please also consider the millions of poor people there,as surely the state subsidy package for Boeing could also be used to ensure poor americans get proper health care,instead of dying outright because they've got no money,and Boeing is a business...so let em do business,or fade away,instead of running to the government like my 3 year old everytime the industry turns bad.the same goes for the airlines btw....imagine your plumber running to the government for backup because of the "harsh economic environment" .... and the same goes for your and our space agency:who cares about what's on the moon....i don't,but i do care about the billions of taxpayers money WASTED on "exploring space" ....if those space agencies were a normal business,they'd be long gone by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>next time you marvel about the wonderfull european/american>aircraft,please also consider the millions of poor people>there,>as surely the state subsidy package for Boeing could also be>used to ensure poor americans get proper health care,Tom,You clearly have no clue about the former Soviet Union Empire and the Eastern block, do you ?. You never lived there probably - so for you comparing poverty here and there, propaganda, health care, state budgeting is natural - these are just to you "equivalent" topics worthy direct comparison. You don't even have my friend a concept for example what "propaganda" word means. Not to mention that regardless whether state subsidies (assuming this is what they are) for Boeing are good or bad there is a political discussion here about it and many voices on both sides. There were no voices on the "other" side over there. But I am afraid you are just another gullible (my favorite word "egg-headed") westerner like Madam Roosvelt who toured Soviet gulags and admired living conditions while 50 feet away people were starving to death.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An225 is a beautiful aircraft!I saw it at JFK some time ago.I'm happy that they get him back to the service.Come on.... He is asking if someone is going to make an225 for FS9 and that's all.Guys, come on. You dont have anything better to do then fighting here? Go to the airshow! It's little late for esam but atlantic city is coming this wednesday! JacekEdit: WOW, an225 will be released in a few days, YEAH!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest crashing_pilot

>Tom,>>You clearly have no clue about the former Soviet Union Empire>and the Eastern block, do you ?.more clues then you'll ever find mate.i know people weren't free to express their own opinions there,and i also know people DIED because they believed what i believe.or even for their own opinions.my good golly...i even happen to know two of them personally,and what they tell is ugly...really ugly.i'm glad,and thankful,i don't have to face that.>You never lived there>probablycorrect - so for you comparing poverty here and there,>propaganda, health care, state budgeting is natural - these>are just to you "equivalent" topics worthy direct comparison.what is different about being poor in russia,as to being poor in for instance the USA?...you lost me here bud.poor is poor,and no matter what,it'll always be a struggle to survive.>You don't even have my friend a concept for example what>"propaganda" word means.yes i do,and your answer clearly shows you've been influenced by "the western" propaganda.like it or not,propaganda is used extensively these days....you do not think the former soviets had a copyright on it do you?what about the germans in,and before,ww2?....thewy knew how to use it as well...btw,i'm not your "friend" (yet) Not to mention that regardless>whether state subsidies (assuming this is what they are) for>Boeing are good or bad there is a political discussion here>about it and many voices on both sides.sure...and my opinion is that they are bad. There were no voices>on the "other" side over there.luckily,i can give my opinion here,and i can clearly see you don't agree...no problem.i feel for people who can't,and i cannot even begin to imagine how it must be.mind you though that this also happened/happens in many other countries around the world.russia was not the only one:what about China?or Algeria?or Vietnam?or Northern Korea?and on and on and on....we as humans are not as civilized as we all believe. But I am afraid you are just>another gullible (my favorite word "egg-headed") westerneri'm offended.>like Madam Roosvelt who toured Soviet gulags and admired>living conditions while 50 feet away people were starving to>death.i'm even more offended.....i can't help Madam Roosevelt did not have eyes,or ears,or a brain...i happen to have one (surprise surprise!) and also an opinion(surprise surprise again!).i'll state my opinion once more:i'm sick and tired of people who think we westerners have got all the clues....we DON'T....and we are not "heaven on earth,the promised land" or whatever,there's much wrong in our society,it just doesn't show that well,we don't build walls around our countries,or hire 1.5 million secret policemen to spy on the other 1.5 million inhabitants.this does not mean we do everything right.i happen to think the an225 is a good aircraft,and unique...i don't give a rats xxxx about who built it,if Boeing or Airbus had done it,i would feel the same.if that bothers you,i'm sorry,but it's a free world,and i can share my opinion.also,i would ask you to judge me a little bit later...i'm not that bad actually.so,i'm off to boil some eggssalute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...