Posted by unregistered user at 9/1/07 2:35 a.m.

It only becomes impressive when you notice the teeny-tiny little bus in the picture.

One has to wonder that even with the cargo jobs, if this airplane costs more to keep flying than it's earning?

The Soviet Union could build something like this...although building things like that eventually bankrupted them. Today, the economics would completely prohibit spending huge amounts of R+D money on a niche aircraft, especially when no more than a handful would ever be built...economy of scale.

The reason why the B-2 is so expensive is because the production run was cut short. I believe only 21 were built. The same thing is happening with the F-22. I believe the AF originally wanted around 700. The number that will be built is now less than 200. Ironically, people are now talking about building a new long range bomber, which we probably wouldn't be if the full production run of B-2s had gone ahead. The B-52 will probably be flying until something like the year 2050.

Is this Antonov aircraft owned/managed by a private company or by the Russian government? If it's managed by the gov, that would explain why it's even still flying.

BTW, did you know that the Soviets used plans for the space shuttle to help them build Buran? They weren't classified. I remember lots of people having cutaway drawings hanging in their offices. While the shuttle and Buran are not identical, as when the Soviets created the TU-4 by making identical copies of confiscated B-29s, the resemblance between Buran and the Shuttle would not be missed by anyone.

P.S. The first Russian a-bomb was nearly an exact duplicate of the American a-bomb. Soviet agents had infiltrated the Manhattan project. Stalin knew about the a-bomb before Truman did.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/1/07 2:58 a.m.

Score: Maintenance Building - 1, Airbus A380 - 0

Maintenance Building wins by a knockout!

An Airbus A380 discovered that yes, maintenance buildings can jump out into the taxiway and bite you.
The A380 scraped its winglets on the building during a demo flight. The winglets had to be removed before the flight could continue. There were 150 people on board at the time. The story does not make it clear if the winglets have already been removed and the flight resumed, or not. Sign of things to come?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=axCBuvBmW9es

Posted by unregistered user at 9/1/07 3:50 a.m.

well, better be knocked by a building than burned by a bolt...

Posted by unregistered user at 9/1/07 4:47 a.m.

Is this bird Ukranian or Russian?

The way MRIYA is spelled, it looks to be Ukranian.

Posted by James Wallace at 9/1/07 10:13 a.m.

For more photos, go here:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/photos/popup.asp?gtitle=World%27s%20largest%20airplane&SubID=2831&page=0&css=gtitle.css

Posted by unregistered user at 9/1/07 11:26 a.m.

The plane flew over Tukwila this morning and being under it is somewhat eerie as it climbed in altitude.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/1/07 2:09 p.m.

Did some webbing around on this plane...

There was a second aircraft that was partially built and then moth balled. As far as I can tell, it still is.

The aircraft that you saw in Everett was originally mothballed too after the demise of the Soviet Union.

As you probably already know, lots of web sites just massage info from somebody else's web site and then reprint it. News orgs do it all the time.

Anyway, there's not much info out there on the AN-225 but websites that mention the second airframe all parrot the same info... "if the first one makes money, maybe the second one will be resurrected"...paraphrasing. Since there's no info beyond that, I'll assume airframe #1 is not making money and there's no effort to bring back to life its stillborn sibling.

#2 is probably being cannibalized for parts anyway.

Supposedly, the cockpit was updated back in 2000 with new avionics. The pictures I saw looked like a typical Soviet cockpit, ancient and uncomfortable but maybe the photos were pre-upgrade?

And yes, Antonov is a Ukranian company, not Russian.

Posted by Dougloid at 9/1/07 9:02 p.m.

A couple of the four engine jobs showed up here back in the mid nineties, hauling steel mill machinery out of Austria for a steel/rebar mill IPSCO built in the northeast part of the state. One went over the house, I looked outside and saw this thing like a barn with wings going by blotting out the sun, and the engines sounded like Maytags full of loose hardware. I was thoroughly impressed

Let it be said-Antonov does heavy metal thunder like no other.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 4:03 a.m.

So #49295 you are still mocking airbus...
At least the 380 was delayed due to non safety issues. Boeing WILL fly the B787 ASAP regardless of safety. They will take a gamble as the whole project has been risky! Airbus could at least hold off until everything was safe!
Anyone who wants to argue, forget it, Boeing are still trying to play this washer thing down. They should be banned from flying globally until all checks are complete.!

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 7:32 a.m.

Isn't having wing walkers in congested areas standard safety procedure?

Who is ignoring safety?

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 9:04 a.m.

More fun quotes from Airbus sales guys. It's just too bad they aren't from Leahy.

Regarding the A380 crushed winglet...

'This sort of thing happens every day, in every airport around the world,' said Edouard Ullmo, Airbus' executive vice president of sales for Asia Pacific.

Hmmm....driving A380s into buildings every day?

'We can fly with one winglet or no winglets,' said Ullmo. 'This is standard procedure.'

Standard procedure to remove winglets? Is that why they are held on with velcro?

Many things can be observed just by watching.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 10:50 a.m.

if you are not good enough, make the others look worse...
another round Airbus-bashing?
What is your problem recognizing that other countries are able to build airplanes? Are yours not so good?
Open your eyes and your mind! You are not the only life form in the planet too ;)
Thanks James for the Antonov Pics!

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 11:25 a.m.

You Airbus guys all drive on one-way streets.

Fact: An Airbus pilot and the push back driver were not paying attention and did not require wing walkers when they should have. He put both his aircraft and his passengers at risk. The pilot is lucky he wasn't fired. If there were wing walkers and they didn't do their jobs, then they should be fired.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 11:41 a.m.

The pilot was NOT moving this A380 under power! It was ground support staff driving a bogey. Typical US citizens jumping to conclusions. A380 is a great aeroplane and its going to be eating you guys up inside every time you see one for a long time"

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 11:46 a.m.

Why are americans attacking the A380 again. Come on guys this is the biggest plane in the world so it must be American right?
Like our other achievement, the fastest airliner, Concorde.
I'm so glad we Americans invented composites too so we could make the most exciting airplane ever. Its so advanced it looks just like a B707 but with 2 engines less!!! That wavy blue stripe makes it faster too...

YAwn!

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 12:08 p.m.

According to the reports, I believe the aircraft was being pushed back prior to departure and that the pilot and passengers were on board. In any case, SOMEBODY screwed up and it points to Airbus or the airport not having validated/required safety procedures in place for their new bird. Yep, it's a new airplane and there's a learning curve. That's why I won't fly on one for at 2 or 3 years.

The number of orders for the A380 is at 173, right about where they've been for the last two years.

Sure, there will be some A380s flying passengers around for a long time but let's not forget the crucial point...Boeing decided that bigger was not better while Airbus decided it was the way to go. So far, Boeing's appears to be the correct strategy.

The airlines were, and are, buying 60-90% small, like A320s and 737s. They were and are buying a much smaller percentage of medium and large. So if your customers have a choice of small, medium and large but they are buying mostly small, why would you figure that big would be a big seller? Two years ago, 90% of Airbus sales were for single aisles.

The fact that Airbus was forced to play "me too" with the A350 to answer the 787 validates Boeing's strategy.
Had Airbus done a proper job with the A350 long ago, Boeing would probably be in very bad shape today. Airbus had plenty of chances to get the A350 right.

As it is, Boeing may outsell Airbus this year on both aircraft sold and dollar value. Next year, Boeing will likely deliver more aircraft than Airbus. It will likely stay that way for the next 5 years.

The A380 will probably be around for the next 50 years and maybe its fortune will change over time.

P.S. The A380 is not the world's largest airplane. I believe the AN-225 is. For more information, visit www.seattlepi.com. ;)

Posted by unregistered user at 9/2/07 9:58 p.m.

Sarcasm just doesnt seem to work with you lot. Not surprised when half you turkeys are waiting in line to go to Eye-rack to get your heids kicked in!

Posted by LDB at 9/3/07 11:46 a.m.

Boeing/GE use Antonov An-124 aircraft a couple times year for the same purpose they used the An-225, I suppose they may all have been busy at the time? They've used Volga-Dnepr's, Polet's and Antonov Design Bureau's who all fly An-124's.

I got to see one of Volga-Dnepr's An-124's at BFI in March, I never in my life imagined I'd see the Mriya there. In fact, when I first found out about it through their DOT Emergency Exemption filing, I did a double take to really confirm that I read 'An-225' on it.

It was great to see it land and prepare to unload.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/3/07 2:43 p.m.

Can we drop this stupid little game of Boeing vs. Airbus?

Time to grow up folks...

Posted by unregistered user at 9/3/07 4:39 p.m.

my plane can beat your plane up. can so.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/4/07 4:02 a.m.

This blog, by its very nature will always be something of an Airbus vs. Boeing competition.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/4/07 7:10 a.m.

We both make great airplanes. There is always room for inprovement.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/5/07 10:48 a.m.

If any of the hotheaded idiots was correct we would have only one company remaining. Airbus and Boeing will have to take turns at being the best and both have their individual strengths!

I think its sad that more companies are not in the race!

Posted by unregistered user at 9/11/07 3:22 a.m.

The Antonov airplanes are the biggest cargo airplanes in the world and it is fact! The world first large-body airplane An-22 had been built in Ukraine, and it was real succes. Nor 747, nor A380 can land on unprepared aerodrome. An-225 and An-124 can be landed on any field with full payload.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/11/07 3:43 a.m.

Это наш украинский лайнер!
Its our plane,from Ukraine