Back to Squawk list
  • 43

Video shows Antonov AN-225 wreckage

Enviado
 
A video broadcast earlier today showed the mangled wreckage of the Antonov AN-225, the aircraft was confirmed destroyed on Saturday but we had yet to receive any images or video of the aircraft’s state after the attacks... (www.aviationweekly.org) Más...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


ADXbear
ADXbear 35
For those admonishing the aviation posters, please remember that we are commenting on the loss of this airplane only, none of us has forgotten the big picture and terrible loss of lives to the invader Putin..
Our hearts go out to all lost and prayers to those fighting for their motherland.

But, pleasure remember this web site is about aviation only, not the war... again my condolences.
imtxsmoke
Jeffrey Bue 6
RIP AN-225
ghstark
Greg S 6
I have a flightaware alert setup for this aircraft that I had forgotten about and suddenly a short while ago I received an email" FCKPUTIN/UR-82060 spotted in flight near Pawtucket, RI at 03:35PM EST. I'm not sure if someone hacked the flightaware systems but it gave me a laugh.
Pissedlobster
Peter Lobster 1
I got the same alert, the flight track has been removed now - probably a hack but very creative!
djames225
djames225 1
I too got the same alert..was good for a WTH chuckle
ToddBaldwin3
ToddBaldwin3 19
While this loss is a shame, the 225 was an impressive aircraft, let’s not forget that there are far greater losses happening.
BSJ
Brian Johnson 10
Slava Ukraini!
srobak
srobak 14
Nobody has forgotten. It is on all our minds, every day. But let's also not forget that This is an aviation forum.
emkostiuk
Ed Kostiuk 1
Бог благословить невинних людей
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 3
Such a shame to lose such an aircraft. Nothing else in the world could carry as much or as large of pieces of cargo.
vertgreen
Lawrence Green 7
Terminate Putin eternally.
yarnoca1
John Yarno 2
First I am so sorry to see what has happened to such an iconic aircraft.
I would find it hard to accept an accidental hit. I saw where the government stated it would be repaired or rebuilt. It does not look like it would be possible to repair that wreckage, and I am sure the tooling has long been recycled. I sadly doubt this Phoenix will ever rise from its ashes.
mikehe
There was a half-completed airframe for MSN#2, about 30 years ago
yarnoca1
John Yarno 1
Yes! I do recall reading about that and I think it still exists. It would really be sort of cool if it could be completed.
ssmith3104
Stewart Smith 2
there is a partially built "new" one that exists. It might be that there are enough salvagable parts from the wreckage to make it feasible to complete building the 2nd airplane, but I doubt it.
djames225
djames225 2
They have wing schematics and can make engine pylons quickly. From the look of the video, all but 1 or 2 engines, looks pretty much destroyed.
And they have the components necessary to build AN124 landing gear which is exactly what the 225 used...only a lot more of them. Plus they could wire in newer avionics.
srobak
srobak 1
the partially complete airframe is in the hangar directly to the south of the one the 225 was in. That hangar was heavily damaged and smoking in satellite photos and you can see the some of the damage in the Russian news report (which btw claims that Ukrainian forces conducted all the destruction). The chances of it being intact are not high.

Additionally - the full 225 was ablaze. The amount of heat caused by that fire has without a doubt caused heat and fatigue on what is left of it, and should not be trusted. It is doubtful that even the tail is salvageable - despite being mostly intact.
djames225
djames225 1
Actually the second airframe sits at the factory. However, what condition it is in is unknown. The airframe tail was to be of conventional design much like the 124.
That said, the way it was engineered, it can use the same spilt tail setup the original used.
srobak
srobak 0
I believe they had moved it to the 2nd hangar at Antonov HQ (UKKM) quite some time ago with the prospects of finishing it there. It is quite apparent that this is not at all the traditional tail design of the 124. http://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/180831151911-antonov-fedykovych-10.jpg
djames225
djames225 1
It was not moved to the hangar. It was thought about, to allow finish, to move it to the hangar but It still sits at the factory for 3 reasons. The first, how do you get something that big 44 km to Hostomel airport from Sviatoshyn Airfield. Second the hangar would not be large enough to do heavy maintenance on the 225 with it parked there. And third, logistics to move pieces back and forth between Hostomel and Sviatoshyn Airfield would be a nightmare.
If you look under the back of the airframe, you will see a piece if the tail mockup. It was designed to use either standard non T-tail or can use the split tail as was on the 225. Remember everything on the 225 is larger than that of the 124 to accommodate the extra weight lift capacity.
sluepsch
Following ADB flights since quite a while. Anybody knows what happened to both AN-124s (UR-82009 and UR-82073), I think they were also at GML plus the smaller AN-22A, AN-74T and AN-26 aircrafts.
al300356
Albert Golshan 1
How unfortunate that we never saw him again, it was a pleasure to follow and photograph him during his visits in Israel
onwardlam
Onward Lam 1
How many AN-225s are there in the world ?
djames225
djames225 2
Unfortunately for heavy cargo, non now. There was the craft that got destroyed, and a partially built airframe.
As Todd stated, "let’s not forget that there are far greater losses happening." and they continue to happen.
srobak
srobak 8
Let's not forget that we haven't forgotten the other losses, and that we are reminded of them every day. Let's also not forget that this is an aviation forum and that focusing on the aviation losses in it is ok, as such.
ssmith3104
Stewart Smith 1
none, now.
RobinSrMayorga
This and other atrocities perpetrated by the savage "vandal" viking
RobinSrMayorga
continued: ....by the savage "vandal" russ tribe horde of animals, the Russians, should "tell the world that the moral of the story is to, never, never ever, give up your nuclear weapons to be able to negotiate with these animal scoundrels, on a plain level field. The Hermitage museum in St. Petersburg should be pulverized into the ground in kind;the savages, the Russians should not be allowed to exist.
srobak
srobak 1
This is the wrong forum for this discussion.
crumplehorn
Andrew Taylor 0
That one in the hanger was the airframe parts plane. Myria was long gone. Don't believe me? Write to Antonov and ask them. After you read the email, it is recalled and vanishes.
djames225
djames225 1
Parts plane?? The only "parts planes" they use are comparable parts off AN124s. Otherwise they make it in machine ship.
Sorry but I'd rather listen to the chief pilot Dymtro Antonov sending out spotty video from Kyiv..and the pictures of it in the maintenance hangar, the pictures of it on the ramp a few days before the idiot invasion etc
crumplehorn
Andrew Taylor 0
Antonov built 2 of them before the Soviets dropped the Soviet space race. You know it was built to transport the Soviet Space Shuttle on its back? When the space race was axed, the two aircraft were mothballed. Only one was used in commercial flights. Time will tell if I am right or wrong, but a level headed good friend wrote to them. It is all apart of the propaganda war running alongside the real one.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya
djames225
djames225 2
SMH...I should know a bit about the AN225 as it was part of a thesis project in school, decades ago. It was the replacement for the original shuttle carrier, the Myasishchev VM-T Atlant. It was designed, and built, to carry Buran on the back, and the Energia rocket boosters in the belly.
No Antonov did not build 2. They fully built 1, and they had started work on the 2nd airframe but the USSR could not afford to continue the space program (or itself for that matter) so the 2nd airframe was never finished and the first unit mothballed. The partial airframe was never a "parts" aircraft. It still sits in 1 of the factory assembly hangars.
Perhaps next time you may want to pay heed to that which you link to: "Produced 1985
Number built 1"
717up
steve dinnen -7
Totally avoidable. It's not as if the Russians sneaked in during the middle of the night. They broadcast their intentions weeks ago. Prudence would have dictated flying it out of harm's way as soon as sabers started rattling. Arrogance, or stupidity, left it on the ground for Russian target practice.
ghstark
Greg S 6
Arrogance or stupidity is the only explanation for your comment. Russia has been "invading" since 2014, but Ukranians still have to get on with living their lives. The plane was in for periodic maintenance and when the actual invasion hit it was not flyable. Airports were an early target for Russian forces. In the end it's just an airplane, magnificent as it is. The Russians have now contented themselves with other targets for practice, like hospitals, civilian cars, and busy intersections, and none of those can be flown out to safety.
srobak
srobak 8
Ut landed there on Feb 5 and was undergoing scheduled C maintenance check. An engine was removed. I am also pretty sure the workers had other priorities when things started going sideways - like their own families.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

djames225
djames225 6
Then why the H did the Russian helicopters, Russian troops and Russian aircraft attack Hostomel to begin with...2 times.
There is no need to rally the world against Russia..the world is ALREADY against Russia!!
thecohorts
Matt LaMay -5
Except for China, Iran, N Korea, India, etc. The West is against Russia because they need to bolster their abysmal polling numbers. I'm not too young to remember when the Russians shot down a 777 when they were invading Crimea. But nobody really cared. Now everybody is screaming their heads off, and they have idea why.
ghstark
Greg S 2
Moronic. What "polling numbers" are you speaking of?
mikehe
err... actually a lot of people DID care about MH15. The Dutch in particular lost a significant number of civilians and have issued indictments against the Russians responsible.

I shall refrain from commenting on the rest of your post.
jeffinsydney
jeff slack 11
Kevin?
What planet are you on?

"I cannot imagine Russia targeting this aircraft. Why?"

Seriously?
I can not imagine Russia or any other country attacking another country without provocation and yet Russia has.
thecohorts
Matt LaMay -3
America has invaded how many countries in the past 50 years? It doesn't make it right, but let's not get too high on our horse. Of course, I'll receive a significant number of down votes, but it doesn't make my point any less valid or true.
ghstark
Greg S 1
Your point is irrelevant. No, we shouldn't be invading other countries but our own misdeeds don't require us to be silent about others. Plus I speak for myself, not America, and furthermore America's foreign policy was personally selected by me, so I'm fine with people criticizing our foreign policy. Finally, it's not just Americans speaking our against Russia's invasion, it the entire Western world.
ghstark
Greg S 1
foreign policy was *not* personally selected by me.
thecohorts
Matt LaMay -2
And never once do you stop and wonder just why that is. Why did Biden tell the Ukrainian military in 2020 "your fight is our fight?" Why is the West backing Zelensky when he seized control of Ukraine by military coup and imprisoned the leader that won the election. Yet America overthrows other governments for way less? Why don't we hear anything about COVID-19 anymore? Why was the DOD funding Bioweapon laboratories in Ukraine? Why did the left impeach President Trump over a phone call with none other than Zelensky? Why did Biden suddenly pull us out of Afghanistan so quickly? My point is only irrelevant to you because you and others are comfortable with the idea that America is righteous and Russia isnt. And when Russians bitched about us running into Iraq in 2003 with absolutely no reason to, we told them to go poud sand. High horse indeed.
djames225
djames225 2
I'm not a US citizen but it seems you like comparing apples to lemons, and then love perpetrating conspiracy theories. Basically you are saying it's ok that Russia is purposely bombing and wounding civilians.
Please...stick to aviation
ghstark
Greg S 1
Ok, I see now you're a Russian troll who can only lie. That's Putin's Russia, a dysfunctional failed state that lashes out in violence and must pay trolls such as yourself to lie on their behalf non-stop.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
As impressive as this aircraft was - I am pretty damn certain the Ukrainian people had far more important things to do.
ghstark
Greg S 1
Awww, you think your crush Putie-baby is too smart to hit this aircraft, that's so cute. By the way, you had said that the report itself was a false flag a few days ago.

You are completely incapable of honesty, that bone is simply missing from your body. But stupidity you seem to have in excess.
srobak
srobak 1
They aren't there to target threats to the invasion. They are there to destroy everything and make it uninhabitable to drive people out of the country and claim it for themselves.
btweston
btweston -2
Jesus Christ the internet is friggin’ crazy.

“Why would the Russians target the single most capable heavy lift aircraft in the world during an invasion of the country that owns that plane? Obvious false flag!”

Wow, man.
jmilleratp
jmilleratp 5
When 4chan is offline, their users seem to flock to sites that are supposed to be non-political.
ADXbear
ADXbear 2
The 225 belonged to Ukraine, it appears they are bombing building at the airport so they could take over.
ssmith3104
Stewart Smith -1
are you really suggesting that the Ukrainians destroyeed their own pride & joy AN225? No way.
djames225
djames225 1
I think you should be replying to the poster "[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]"
srobak
srobak 1
That is precisely what the female russian reporter is saying in the news video from in front of the wrecked 225.
GaAubie
Ken Hardy -5
The 225 was built as a political statement by the Russians, it's really not a very practical aircraft for general cargo, to big for most airports and with 6 engines, a fuel and maintenance hog
djames225
djames225 4
It was not built as a political statement, it was built to carry the Buran shuttle AND Energia boosters. Antonov was tasked to design/build a carrier to replace the Myasishchev VM-T. So why not stretch out an AN124, re-enforce the airframe etc. Thus the 225 was born.
No one used it for cargo they could use a smaller craft for. They used it for cargo to haul huge loads across the world, loads that would take weeks via ships and trucks, including world record lifts such as the Alstrom generator to Armenia back in 2009.
GaAubie
Ken Hardy 0
The 225 was built to be a " One Up " on the USAF C-5, if it had a justifiable mission, the Russians would have built a fleet, it all goes back to the Cold War days of " Mine is bigger mentality " like the 50 mega ton nuclear bomb the Russians built and exploded just to prove they had a bigger one than the US had. All politics
djames225
djames225 2
There was only 1 US Shuttle carrier. Why? Because they only needed 1.
They didnt build 225 to 1 up the C-5. They built it to carry Buran on its top AND Energia boosters in it's belly. That was its mission. And you can only do that if it strong enough and big enough.
mikehe
I thought that NASA converted TWO 747s into their SCA fleet?
djames225
djames225 1
I should have been more descriptive in why I mentioned only 1 in comparison to the 225. N905NA, a 747-100 purchased from American Airlines, was the only carrier when 225 was built and used for the first time to shuttle Buran and the Energia boosters, around.
N911NA, a 747-100SR purchased from Japan Airlines, was brought onboard in 1989 and first used in 1991. Both were stationed at Edwards.
GaAubie
Ken Hardy 0
There were two NASA 747's that could carry the Shuttle one was kept on the West coast the other mostly at the Cape.
srobak
srobak 0
After the fall of the soviet union it went unused for a while, but was modernized a few years later and has been used extensively since to haul massive cargo all around the world. It had over 20 flights on the books between Jan 1 and Feb 5, all but a few were over 5 hours in length, with many in the 7 to 10 hour range.
srobak
srobak 0
After the fall of the soviet union it went unused for a while, but was modernized a few years later and has been used extensively since to haul massive cargo all around the world. It had over 20 flights on the books between Jan 1 and Feb 5, all but a few were over 5 hours in length, with many in the 7 to 10 hour range.
KicksOnRoute66
Roger Anderson -5
More spam? Where is the video?
ebafu
ebafu 3
Video is there, from the Russian broadcast.
KicksOnRoute66
Roger Anderson 0
👀 Oh a placeholder post
linbb
linbb 1
Huh: Wsorked fine for me dont know whats up on yours.
KicksOnRoute66
Roger Anderson 0
It was a one liner initially. I figured they posted it just to be the first lol. But it's loaded up now.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

djames225
djames225 5
First off Mary please stop screaming (caps locked online makes it appear you are screaming..lol)
Secondly, last week I posted the Youtube URL video of the Polish person who intercepted the actual Russian broadcast from Hostomel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3BoKbpOF2E Their still pictures were posted just before the video went out. You will see, starting about 1:00 minute mark, her broadcast and the craft..3 engines on port side. It was in the maintenance hanger getting a starboard side engine changed out when all this happened.
JohnTrolinger
JohnTrolinger 1
I saw this airplane land here in the USA and it was just amazing to see. So I have an interest/connection so I looked and found pictures of the destroyed airplane, look at The War Drive for the story.

Also Mary, why the caps lock and lack of spell checking? Did twitter kick you off again?
Cat3508
Neil Ward 0
Dont shout, we are not deaf
thecohorts
Matt LaMay -2
I'm beginning to wonder by the sharp turn left this site has taken in the last few years. Deaf is the only thing that makes sense.
ghstark
Greg S 3
LOL, opposing Russia's invasion is "left wing"!

Entrar

¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos y mucho más!
Este sitio web utiliza cookies. Al usar y seguir navegando por este sitio, estás aceptando su uso.
Descartar
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de FlightAware.com. Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Descartar