What If The Antonov AN-225 Was A Passenger Plane?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- In a previous article, we asked the question of which was better: an Airbus A380 or an Antonov AN-225? But we focused on the cargo aspect and didn’t consider if the Antonov was converted into a passenger aircraft. What would a passenger version of an AN-225 look like? Where would it fly? And would it make sense for airlines?
Article Link: simpleflying.c...
An-225 Footage:
• Antonov AN 225 Mriya I...
• Antonov An-225 Mriya l...
• Antonov An-225 "Mriya"...
• Antonov AN-225 "Mriya"...
• Antonov An-225 taking ...
• Antonov AN-225 "Mriya"...
• Antonov AN-225 Mriya t...
• Прибуття літака Ан-225...
• Celebrating 100,000 Vi...
• Start Antonov tour 201...
A380 Footage:
• A380 from dream to rea...
• Emirates President Tim...
• The Airbus A380: New g...
• Air France F-HPJB Airb...
• Emirates' A380 makes a...
• Lufthansaflug LH452 Mü...
• Crosswind landing!!! T...
• Roaring Singapore Airl...
• China Southern A380-84...
• Airbus A380 Cabin Tour...
• Ten years of the A380 ...
• China Southern's A380 ...
Website: simpleflying.com/
Instagram: / simpleflyingnews
Twitter: / simple_flying
#Aviation #Flight #Avgeek
A380: I couldn't be a cargo aircraft!
AN-225: I couldn't be a passenger aircraft!
747: ...Okkkkkk...
@@moteroargentino7944 i think the joke was about the 747 being able to do both
777: what about me?
Mtslc 92 you mean the 747 ACC?
And 747 can also carry a space shuttle
*Laughs in cargo and pax version
If Ryanair had one of that, seats would reach 800-1000 pax
800 seats would be quite realistic, remember the A380 can hold up to 859 people in an all-economy setup.
almost has the Ryan air livery lol
@@Rafael47936 Or 2x the max cap. of A380?
The trick to Ryanair is tell the flight attendants you have a bit of a dodgy stomach and spend your flight on the loo. At least you get a bit more leg room in there.
2000 if they could get away with making them stand like on a bus. Plus 16 pay toilets.
"...To carry the RUSSIAN VARIANT of the nasa shuttle..."
Friend, neither Russia nor variant. You meant Soviet space shuttle, and it is called Buran.
I remember NASA astounded with Buran' automatic landing demonstration at its first attempt.
It's sad the Buran and energia weren't mass produced
it was better in every way
@@kenetickups6146 Yeah. Sadly, politicians had to get their hands into it and basically destroy the program.
Oh, yeah, and the Soviet union collapsed... That was a problem too I guess...
*Steel Beam*
politics destory progress
@@DonVigaDeFierro dude, (socialist) politicians were the ones who gave money for this program, without "their hands" on it, no Buran could amazed us with its automated landing. All libertarians blame the same plp that keep libertarism in power... XD
collapsed...great analysis
A country able to astound the world with its technology, just collapsed... anorther libertarian brain in action.
It was more advanced because they saved money on development... by copying the space shuttle.
Now that's crunching the numbers. When in an emergency, most any aircraft will and can carry passengers.
true, imagine the ukraine stuffing this thing full of soldiers, might even be 900
@@jannik6147 It's possible.
*Slaps roof of AN-225*
You can fit the entire population of Africa in this bad boi
Lmao
They said the antonov 124 and 225 cargo haul compartments are not pressurised, so no human is allowed in the cargo area during flights.
gio Costales The AN-225 cargo area is or can be pressurised.
An 124 have an upper deck where the operation crews sit during flights
They have the load masters go check the cargo during flight to make sure it is secure from the tossing around up in the skys
How about androids? Are they allowed to check?
@@dugroz hahahahaha
If you watch Sam Chui's video of him on an An-124, it's confirmed that it has an upper deck, so the An-225 would indeed have two decks and really long cabins, a bit like an Airbus A380 or front of a Boeing 747
I was just thinking that. The top portion of the AN225 (and 124) have a narrow passenger-like area similar to the 747, C5, etc. Was that considered in the math? Also, the 124 has 2 less engines. Would it be more economical?
“Incredible Flight on Antonov AN-124 Cargo Transporter” - title of RUclips video
ruclips.net/video/5FSyTuY1rGg/видео.html
Nope, three decks. The project actually existed and some pictures of it were declassified.
Airlines are scrapping all of their 4 engine airplanes, they wouldn't even look at this plane
Ryanair would
to put 1000 passengers in it.
@@FBI-ej8zr yeah i can see that happening
Antonov is looking at building more 225s!
@@TheEmeraldMenOfficial yay i might get to see one.
maybe.
possibly.
only when theres so many i cant not see one
Asking the real question
what if it has GE90 engine?
it wouldn't be so reliable.
Those Russian engines are made to swallow stones and other heavy debris not for fuel efficiency .
@@obelic71 the airframe it self are not so reliable in the first place. it just reliable, enough.
Fuel efficiency? what are you talkin bout?
mentioning fuel efficiency gives you a one way trip to the gulag
The project of remotorization of An-124 aircraft to GE engines exists, it has been discussed a lot. The Volga-Dnepr Airlines wanted such planes 10-15 years ago. But political problems with Putin are constantly interfering, either the war in Georgia or in Ukraine.
Although, aesthetically, the Rolls-Royce Trent engines would be better suited to the An-124, because its native D-18T are analogues of the RB-211.
The An225 is huge, I saw one at my local airport dropping off Airplane assemblies.
It was parked at the far end of the airport, a 737 was at the near end and the AN225 was still larger.
Martin Horowitz there is only one of it mate. Where did you see it?
@@richardbersaky Long Beach,California Airport (LGB), Boeing rented the AN224 for a while to transport Aircraft Assemblies between factories.
4:59 - The narrator counted passenger weight but forgot to count the weight of baggage.
Why would he include wives and children?
It's always the baggage. Right?
He also forgot that most people are up to 100kg now.
Also didn't count the floor height between decks 2:33
5:52 you know the situation is bad when you call the A380 relatively more efficient.
If you divided up the An-225 cargo bay into two passenger decks, the plane would then be a 3-decker, because it already has an upper deck in line with the cockpit. It is divided into two sections, separated by the wing spar - the forward section runs back from the cockpit to the wings, the aft section from the wings back towards the tail. I'm not sure where the passenger baggage would go though. Maybe in the large tail cone.
Not "one of the world's largest aircraft".
It **is** the largest aircraft.
Not quite the new Stratolaunch (widest aircraft ever ) , A380 (highest passengerload ever) and AN-225 (longest and cargoload ever) are the biggest in different dimensions.
@@obelic71 well, passenger count and cargo load to me say more than having wider wings.
@@rickt151 The stratolaunch hauls spaceships and sattelites, launching them from atleast 13 Km height into space.
@@obelic71 I know, but for me that doesn't play as a big plane. I know you are probably more right than me but...
@@obelic71 The AN225 also hauls spaceships ruclips.net/video/FzbwUyx0apo/видео.html
Were the A380 cargo decks taken into account when comparing it with the An-225? If so, it wasn't mentioned. Only the 2 passenger decks were described in this video.
Rip wouldn't get a single order
true
pilot sam 004 yep
all cause of wings, if it was designed to be a passenger one, I believe it would outdone the A380
Emirates would order at least 50 just for the sake of it 😂😂
@@misterff1629 lol
🅱️reaking news: Ryanair has placed an order for 150. According to Michael O’Leary, the CEO, he said the following: They will be configured to fit 2000 seats (100 on the upper deck and 1900 in the main deck) with 1 aisle only on both decks. There will be 2 loo’s (1 for upstairs and 1 on the main deck) for which you’ve got to pay a Euro to use. The seat width selected is 7 inches so wider aisles can be fitted for faster boarding whilst the seat pitch is 14 inches
😂😂😂😂
The perfect airplane for times when flights are mostly empty. Maybe it could economically restore service to markets such as Muskogee, Oklahoma or Wolf Point, Montana. Borger, Texas? Parsons, Kansas? Chadron, Nebraska? The possibilities are endless.
Economically Airbus A380 failed, Antonov AN225 wont make it commercially too.
Wouldn't.
@@trezapoioiuy wouldn't. 👍 Right.
Perhaps but not because of size alone; both airplanes are different cases. Airbus bet on the "Hub and spoke" model where a big aircraft with a lot of passengers arrives to a "hub" airport from where passengers then took several smaller airplanes in different directions... but modern smaller jets' increased range allows them to fly point to point without need of a hub airport. Moreover, not all airports can take the hulking A380 even if they indeed can take the Boeing 747.
Incidentally, the 747 is sharing the A380's fate. No US passenger airline currently flies the 747 anymore though the freighter variants are very busy.
As for the An-225... who knows. Only one example was ever built and that for ferrying the soviet space shuttle Buran. Antonov does not have the resources for building it en masse and anyways though not as capable weight-wise, the 747 freight's range is almost double of the 225. The 747 did not eat the 225's lunch; the lunch was never there = )
Still, it'll be sad to see the A380 go. No other commercial plane could offer suites and even showers in flight... it'll be truly the end of an era.
Before parting, just let me note if you ever need a lovingly maintained 747 with lavish interiors and even a shower and room for 80 of your buddies, the japanese government put on sale its former Air Force one for the low low price of $28 million. Check it out!
M. Sergio Armendáriz R. When I specified “wouldn’t”, I was meaning that no one ever actually considered making a passenger An-225.
It would make no sense.
Boeing's C5 Galaxy might rebut that based on payload.
I get the Concept but it's not that simple to convert the plane to be a passenger plane. First the max wingspan allowed for passenger plane is 80 meters, the an225 has a wingspan of 88 meters. Airports are not able to accommodate this big of a plane. So after that we have issues with the amount of lift necessary to get the aircraft airborn is not enough so to solve that we need to replace the engines to get more thrust to replace the lost lift, so lets give it 6 GEnx engines (just like the 747-8). Now i didn't find the amount of runway need for the an225 to take off but with smaller wings, the min speed drops so it needs a longer runway and I'm sure it already needs a long runway. Ok so the GEnx engines are more powerful then the an225 engines so lets say it cancels out the amount of runway needed. Ok now we solved the first problem.
Second problem, landing gear, 32 wheels are not needed the plqne is not going to carry as much wieght, so we will need to completely redesign the landing gear. If we are doing that lets make it higher so we can move the wings to the bottom of the fuselage.
After we did that lets redesign the tail.
Ok now lets check if we actually need 6 engines since we are not carring as much wieght. Ok now again redesign the wings for the smaller payload.
You see what my point is, there is so much work needed to convert this plane. And didnt even list half of the things needed
It wouldn't be worth converting an An-225 to a passenger plane, it would be both easier AND cheaper to design an entirely new plane.
Engineer: How many wheels do you-
Designer: Yes
Engineer: What do you mean y-
Designer: Yes
Nice to assume that the engineers will just somehow figure out how to get two decks into the Antonov.
And 62 kilogramm is very optimistic, especially since there is no clothing or luggage considered:
"Since 1995, most airlines have assumed a weight of 180 pounds for each adult passenger in summer and 185 pounds in winter; checked bags are assumed to weigh 25 pounds each. Some airlines that fly small planes with 19 or fewer seats have already raised their weight allowances by about 30 pounds, the F.A.A. said today."
So 100 Kilo for one passenger with luggage would be far more realistic. And one could assume that the luggage tends to be heavier in long hauls.
Last but not least commercial planes also take cargo with them to make extra money. Either you deduct this revenue, or you add the additional weight. Cargo has become quite expensive since commercial travel has gone down dramatically and this extra cargo capacity has gone down accordingly.
You used passenger weight, but what about added weight of seats, lavatories, and galleys, and things that are probably already included in a380 empty weight?
Fuel efficiency isn't a comparable metric, due to 1980s vs 2000s technology. It produces 301k lbf thrust, which can be achieved with 4 RR Trent 1000 engines.
the an225 is highly specialized to carry oversized cargo, and the a380 is highly specialized to carry as many humans as possible. neither can do what the other does. i once read that the a380F did not make it into production as the a380 decks would need a large amount of strengthening, as palleted cargo is more dense per volume compared to carrying passengers, and no GSE available are designed to load palleted cargo into the upper deck of the a380. hence why Fedex cancelled their order.
in conclusion, if you want an airplane that can load cargo via the nose for long cargo and carry passengers as well, the 747 is still the only option available to this day. i personally think that the 747-8F will be in production long after the 747-8I production ceases
Interesting so apart from the an225s massive wingspan the a380 is actually larger in all other areas!
RIP Mriya, you will be missed :(
You cannot compare a cargo plane, built in the 80s with a relative modern A380. Especially about the fuel burn. The engines are not comparable anymore.
Antonov 225 would beat airbus 380 for beauty any day hands down. Antonov 225 is a masterpiece 🥰🤩
who would win; a very nice plane with a very nice first class, that makes economy class like first class, or one thicc boi
I'm not sure it's ever been used in such capacity but as an emergency transport it could be retrofitted to carry passengers similar to any other cargo plane. They wouldn't be comfortable, but you could load several hundred people easily.
It would not be good as a passenger plane but amazing at a combination, cargo rear end and passenger front end, this would be epic.
Nice Video, I always wondered about that, but I would have liked it if you would have talked more about the fuel efficiency
Well, it's low. Six engines would be overpowered - and overconsuming - for passenger flights. Especially if you compare with the A380 that was built keeping that in mind.
@@trezapoioiuy The six engines on the AN-225 are about as powerful as the four engines on the A380, and because of its higher weight, it only had a top speed of 850 Km/h
@@Rafael47936 I didn't say it's faster, the 6 engines are to just allow its huge mass to fly. But the fuel consumption is high and that's why I said fuel efficiency is low.
I feel like an AN225 would have 3 decks instead of 2, with the 2 in the cargo space and the already existing 3rd behind the wings. This would mean more room for seats and passengers.
A very fresh video right out from the oven
Saints Row The Third had this as a passenger plane with Steelport Airlines in the beginning of the game
when the entire eastern bloc ran out of vodka but the closest vodka warehouse is in Albania, Ivan get the An-225.
And with some airlines like Air France retiring their A308s for the larger A350 models, it seem that larger isn't really better. The only cargo aircraft with a large upper deck is the C-5M Super Galaxy that can carry 88 passengers, usually the crews for the cargo, usually vehicles that it's transporting.
Tell that to the Boeing putting out their 777x.
@@petersue8549 The 777x isn't in production yet, that one was just a demonstrator.
A308s lol
Peter Sue 0l
Just because Boeing isn't delivering their huge 777x right now, doesn't mean they are not going to do it. Otherwise they would have spent billion$ for nothing. They had to increase the passenger count to make it more efficient in passenger/fuel miles than the A350.
Also I don't even think emetaites would buy it its just you big maybe we could use it for raids during war by you can bring alot of crew so you would have probably thousand of crew.
I have an Idea for a topic: what if the 747 Dreamlifter was a passenger plane (with three decks)? But I don't thinks there's so much information on the Dreamlifter.
And you can land them at small regional airports!
ruclips.net/video/p82x9e3ovs0/видео.html
They’d have to be really skinny passengers. Dream lifter is made for carrying more volume, not more weight than a regular 747.
@@midnightmechanic4622 I'm pretty sure an A380 could do that too
@@xiaoka I don't think the passengers would be heavier than a 787 fuselage
An225:I'm the biggest
747:hold my 787
He didn't mention that at least a third of the upper deck of the Antonov wouldn't have windows because of the way the wing is attached. In fact he didn't mention the increased weight - and therefore range reduction - of fitting windows at all.
What needs to be done is to extend the fuselage, then load it with 1500 passengers. Or 3000 passengers and fly it between Tokyo and Osaka. All economy. Then again, you could take out the cargo compartment in an A380 (or 747) and carry nearly as many.
You should do the same analysis on the dreamlifter, it could accommodate at least a thousand pax in an unpressurized cabin while been barely able to liftoff. lol.
The Buran was not a Soviet version of the Space Shutle. The Buran was design with other features in mind and was a much better design concept that the space shutle.
You also didn’t mention that the main deck of the An-225 isn’t pressurized. In order to pressurize it to be able to accommodate living organisms, the body needs to be reinforced, increasing the plane’s weight and lessening its range and amount of people and cargo it can carry.
It wouldn't be safe. Imagine the AN-225 making a water landing. The wings are top-mounted and loaded with heavy engines and fuel. The weight of that would push the lower passenger deck underwater, preventing evacuation. Normally emergency exits open onto the wings but that's not possible with top-mounted wings. Even for emergency landings on a runway, you'd need to add a ton of exits and evacuation slides to get so many people out in the event of a fire. This was only narrowly achieved by the 747 and A380. With the AN-225's wing configuration and even wider decks, they probably couldn't design it to have fast-enough evacuations to pass standards.
imagine just driving under a bridge all casual and all of a sudden the worlds largest aircraft comes taxiing along
💡Did you know: There is only 1 AN-225 still flying around
Did you know that only 1 AN-225 was ever made?
@@michaelbujaki2462 that's basically the exact same thing like he commented
It's called the Buran, way ahead and advanced than the NASA counter part.
Very informative comparison
Rest in piece(es)
Antonov 225
Boeing 737 classic wingspan is 28 meters. Just tail of Mriya is 32 meters wide. And it has fuel tank inside. Just think of it.
The dimensional informations are wrong. The An-225’s cabin is 84m long, while the A380 is only 73m (and the B747-8 is 76m). The useful space inside the aircraft is calculated using cubic feet, and the An-225 is rated at 46000 cubic feet, 6000 more than the A380 (which holds maximum 40000 cubic feet). Given that the cabin of the A380 is ~20centimeter larger in height, it’s smaller space volume means it has quite a lot lower floor space, which could hold LESS passenger to an An-225 pax version (we all know that wouldn’t happen since even the 747 is too large for pax airlines nowadays)
If you need large service to a location with a short rnway, it could fly when A380 or 747 Might not Make it, but it might be easier to lengthen the runway...
another point: the passengers would not like the engines blocking areas of their view out of the airplane.
Just get rid of the seats and make it 2000 ppl standing
Perfect video for my question in my brain lol
You missed a very important aspect...where are you going to put the baggage? There is no lower deck. And that also throws out the possibility of belly cargo as well.
It would be like a heavy double decker bus carrying 100 people.
That would be like a flying train to me
When he did a breakdown on the A380, the bottom picture isn't an A380 is it....
What if B737 MAX was a fighter jet?
That 43 meters of internal space is excluding the giant cargo door on the lose of the plane which is empty space during cargo flights but would be used for passenger seating in a passenger configuration as the door would not be there.. would be much like the nose of a 747. Neither does it take into account the tail section which is also empty space nornally. But would be full of passengers if it were a passenger variant.
0:50. "The Russian VARIANT of the NASA SPACE SHUTTLE." I'm fairly certain you mean the shuttle the Soviets built with their stolen plans from the NASA shuttle. The vehicle was called, "Buran," and was put away in a hangar after collapse of the Soviet Union.
2:50. The Antonov 225 is a full 37 feet longer than the a380. However, I will assume that you are referring to the interior cabin length, as the loading doors on the AN 225 take up a considerable amount of space. Again, with more clever engineering, the AN 225 could be fitted to be able to carry almost 100 more people than the a380.
I also assume you only used the cargo cabin in your estimates for how many decks the AN 225 could have. You completely ignore the deck already in the aircraft with the cockpit and crew seating area. The area is only enough for a 2 by 3 seat configuration and maybe 5-10 rows, but with some extension it could carry much more.
Just my thoughts!! Not an expert on the jet.
If you think the A-380 is implausible, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Well, if the fuselage was enlarged and elongated to accommodate more passengers to is full carrying load, it would snack the a380 out of the sky
This Antonov dwarfs the a380 in every way
No it doesn't...did you even watch the video?
It will be interesting to retain the air frame but retrofit it with GE9X engines and western flight management system.
Ah... "Range" alone usually means range when loaded. When the aircraft is empty the range is referred to as "Ferry range".
Easiest way is to pack it with high end motorhomes and bus coaches.
Love this idea! - TB
Can you please do a b 757 VS A340
Wat if you added 4 or 2 fuel efficient engines?
I'm not sure how it would work with the structure of the aircraft designed for six. - TB
Although your final conclusion is spot on, the weight/passenger is way off. Most Wester carriers calculate that figure at 91kg or 200 lbs./passenger. Also, the fact that the Antonov AN-225 has six engines vs. four would make it a non-starter.
Emirates: *vigorously funds Antonov*
If antonov was a passenger plane the biggst one would fit 800 passengers
Yo bud. I think you got your length wrong. The a380 is approximately 73m long and the an225 is approx. 84m long. So how the hell is the an225 smaller than an a380 when it is 11 m longer?!
the AN-225 has one option an A380 would not be able to.
The AN-225 can land on a simple grass and gravel airstrip because of its huge amount of wheels.
Can u make a vid of twin otters in Maldives 🇲🇻🏝💙
Wouldn't need 6 engines for passenger service.
I don't think so, the 6 engines on the An-225 produce about as much power as the 4 engines on the A380, at a higher weight. Even with it's 6 engines it only has a top speed of 850 Km/h
If this was a passenger jet it would have been so expensive to maintain and purchase for some airlines🤔🤔
Saw it land in houston TX. Its soooooo big
You could have the Ultra Luxury Buran Class, where you ride in a soviet era shuttle.....
The range calculation is so wrong...You only count people but what about the added deck, the seats and all the ammenities ?? It just doesn't make sense
That would be so weird
A a380 can carry four 737 loads at once will this not make a better frieghter?
I know the topic is The Antonov-225 but my favorite plane is the AirBus A380.Its big,Spacios,Comfortable and SAFE! I will miss it when it goes out of production in 2021 :( if i was a CEO of a company.I would buy A380's and modify it to be a cargo plane.Pls dont make the Airbus A380 go out of production AirBus :( Maybe its because of covid-19 and not because of airlines dont like.Pls keep the A380 AirBus.
-Zachs_Hobbys.
Empty A-380 cannot fly as far as An-225 because its not empty, Its has a whole deck in the middle lavatories, seats, kitchen and more. On the other hand An-225 is literally empty.
There's an error in your calculations because you lack information. There exists another unfinished Mriya, the so-called Specimen 2 (Izdeliye 2). It was not supposed to carry any space shuttles and has a single-fin tail, unlike the first one. So, what was it supposed to carry? Military equipment and/or troops. To be specific, the maximum "passenger capacity" was supposed to be 1500 fully equipped military personnel. Once again, in letters: ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED soldiers.
That was awesome!!!
I saw it carrying Buran in 1989.
Let's see a passenger version of the Boeing pelican project
What was the Crj450?
I believe you have presented a very low figure for weight per passenger. The last verifiable numbers I found was from a European study, which suggested a weight of 86 kg (190 lb) for the average passenger plus baggage. Search for a document named "R20090095.doc", Survey on standard weights of passengers and luggage.
What if the A350 was a cargo plane
If the 777f didn't exist maybe it would
The retirement of the 380s from passenger flying will be for freight which will cut into Antonov profit for large hauling
Could you maybe add in the future smart and usefull measurement systems?
Hey there, we used the units universally used in the aviation industry. - TB
Because the AN-225 can carry cargo on it's roof you could probably strap an extra passenger deck to the top of it.
Put extra people in a space shuttle on the top!
What if B737 MAX was the ONLY aircraft model in the world?
As long as it is not the Max-8 variant
all passengers will board deboard with stairs. and get that exercise they need before the flight...lol. no boarding at terminals.
Why even compare a plane that wasn't even meant to carry much cargo on the inside with the largest freighter. It wont even land on all airports just like the A380 has the same issue.