An-225 revived!

[ImmaStegosaurus!]

China, Ukraine and Antonov have agreed on reviving An-225 and opening a production line in China.

This is great news in many ways for everyone! As more planes are being produced on established production line cost by unit should go down, and as more planes are being built replacement parts should become more affordable and hence aircraft can be stressed more with heavier payloads and generally more demanding flying should become possible. I'd bet we'll see someone enter the launch market with affordable, 225 mounted launch system in few years.

Maybe we'll see MAKS or similar project revived/developed as suitable carrier aircraft become more numerous and presumably widespread.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/an-225-revival-proposed-in-new-antonov-china-pact-428949/

http://www.janes.com/article/63341/china-and-ukraine-agree-to-restart-an-225-production

http://www.rusaviainsider.com/antonov-agrees-on-an-225-assembly-in-china/

[mikegarrison]

As I understand it, they had parts sitting around to build a second one for decades, and nobody wanted to buy it. The air freight market is pretty depressed right now. To me this sounds like perhaps China has some military payload need that this would serve.

[Nibb31]

It can also be used to transport rocket stages or aircraft fuselages. MAKS is off the table.

[ImmaStegosaurus!]

18 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

As I understand it, they had parts sitting around to build a second one for decades, and nobody wanted to buy it.

It's going to be completed now and sold to unnamed Chinese corporation.

I've understood that Mriya and Ruslan have somewhat limited parts commonality, so if something breaks in 225 there is a real chance replacement parts need to be custom made for that specific aircraft. No commercial operator wants to take a risk of having this large jet sitting on tarmac for half a year while they wait for replacement parts but with open production line parts should be available faster and cheaper. No-one would have bought the second 747 either if there was no spare parts available.

[mikegarrison]

Boeing has delivered over 1500 747s. There has only ever been 1 AN-225 ever built (so far). Your comparison is rather strange. The AN-225 is a lot more comparable to the H-4 than the 747 in this regard. (Built under government contract, and only one was ever completed.)

Perhaps it would be more valid for the 707, for which the prototype was built several years before any customer ever ordered one.

[Kryten]

11 minutes ago, ImmaStegosaurus! said:

It's going to be completed now and sold to unnamed Chinese corporation.

It's not unnamed, it's AVIC, parent company of most Chinese aircraft manufacturers.

[jwenting]

47 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

It can also be used to transport rocket stages or aircraft fuselages. MAKS is off the table.

ICBM stages. complete IRBMs, SLBMs... 

[mikegarrison]

51 minutes ago, Nibb31 said:

It can also be used to transport rocket stages or aircraft fuselages.

I don't think it would be a good candidate for that. The specialized airplanes for that purpose have all featured hinges that completely open the entire fuselage.

I know it has been used to transport very large jet engines, though.

[LN400]

I am indeed curious what uses China sees in this plane. Surely it's not for sending post cards to remote areas and a space shuttle program that demands a small fleet of 225s doesn't seem very likely.

[ImmaStegosaurus!]

22 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

Boeing has delivered over 1500 747s. There has only ever been 1 AN-225 ever built (so far). Your comparison is rather strange. The AN-225 is a lot more comparable to the H-4 than the 747 in this regard. (Built under government contract, and only one was ever completed.)

Perhaps it would be more valid for the 707, for which the prototype was built several years before any customer ever ordered one.

225 and 747 are both big planes and financial commitments.
- Boeing committed to 747 heavily making commercial operators feel confident in buying them. Airlines and such knew that economics of scale would benefit them greatly. One An-225 was built and they had another kinda under construction.
- Antonov had no clear commitment to this project and no sane person would buy unique plane with high initial and operating costs associated with it's uniqueness. 
- On the other hand Antonov had committed itself on Ruslan and it became sort of economic success with 55 delivered so far. Production line remains open.

No-one wants to invest in aircraft if technical support for the type is unsure.

31 minutes ago, Kryten said:

It's not unnamed, it's AVIC, parent company of most Chinese aircraft manufacturers.

I hadn't seen any info on the buyer. Thanks!

11 minutes ago, LN400 said:

..a space shuttle program that demands a small fleet of 225s doesn't seem very likely.

As 225's price tag and operating costs come down it might become viable. We have Scaled Composites which created it's own carrier aircraft and as space tourism takes off everyone wants to get involved.

[Kryten]

It is built for outsize cargo on top of the fuselage, so could potentially be used for transportation of e.g. C919 fuselage.

17 minutes ago, LN400 said:

I am indeed curious what uses China sees in this plane. Surely it's not for sending post cards to remote areas and a space shuttle program that demands a small fleet of 225s doesn't seem very likely.

While a shuttle isn't likely, AN-225 was also used to transport the tank sections for Energiya; a similar role for future large Chinese rockets would be feasible, in particular CZ-9.

[Nibb31]

22 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

I don't think it would be a good candidate for that. The specialized airplanes for that purpose have all featured hinges that completely open the entire fuselage.

An Airbus A320 fuselage has a diameter of 4 meters. The An225 cargo hold is 4.4m tall. It would be a tight fit, but you could fit it. It also has external attachment points for larger cargo.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Nibb31

[DDE]

9 minutes ago, Kryten said:

While a shuttle isn't likely, AN-225 was also used to transport the tank sections for Energiya; a similar role for future large Chinese rockets would be feasible, in particular CZ-9.

It can, in theory, do a lot of fun things, like carry an Orlyonok ekranoplan out to 1300 nautical miles for maritime emergency management purposes:

Then there's the related Topic 52:

Depends on how the Chinese eventually decide to play around with it.

Edited September 1, 2016 by DDE

[Nibb31]

11 minutes ago, DDE said:

It can, in theory, do a lot of fun things, like carry an Orlyonok ekranoplan out to 1300 nautical miles for maritime emergency management purposes:

Imagine the guys on the site of the "emergency" scratching their heads... "Ok, so how do we get this thing off the plane and in the water now?"

[magnemoe]

3 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

Imagine the guys on the site of the "emergency" scratching their heads... "Ok, so how do we get this thing off the plane and in the water now?"

It was actually and operation like this in the 1920, A flying boat cared an seaplane whp was released and flew the rest of the distance. 
Yes part of the issue was that you can fly with way heavier load than you can take of from water with. 

[kerbiloid]

Still not copied a working 747, but would copy experimental, 30 years old, 225? Looks incredulously.

Edited September 2, 2016 by kerbiloid

[Nibb31]

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

Still not copied a working 747, but would copy experimental, 30 years old, 225? Looks incredulously.

It's not a copy, it's going to be built under license, probably with available spare parts. This is a unique aircraft with unique capabilities that are totally different from a 747. If the Chinese have a need for those capabilities, it makes sense to use an existing design.

Airbus went through the exact same process with the Super Guppy. They had a unique requirements, and there was only one existing design that met those requirements. So they bought two of the three existing aircraft from NASA, then they purchased the plans and built two more under license in the 1980's, 20 years after the first batch.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Nibb31

[Van Disaster]

6 hours ago, magnemoe said:

It was actually and operation like this in the 1920, A flying boat cared an seaplane whp was released and flew the rest of the distance. 
Yes part of the issue was that you can fly with way heavier load than you can take of from water with. 

Yeah, but the Short Composite was made of two aircraft, not one aircraft and a ground-effect vehicle . I suppose the ekranoplan pilots could try for a completely terrifying airborne separation & hope they don't hit the sea too hard, technically they do have a flying vehicle... ( more likely it'd flop onto the 225 & remove the tail, I'd imagine ).

Edited September 2, 2016 by Van Disaster

[YNM]

I guess this is for local use. What that use is, don't ask...

Also, the AN-225 "failed" (because the only built plane is extensively commercially used) only because there wasn't any clear use of it - USSR didn't have any war to do that needs such planes and alternative domestic use isn't viable. Now if the chinese has solid plans on how to use it, maybe it'll be extensively used. My opinion is that they'll modify it out and develop it into different planes of any sort.

[Nibb31]

Actually, the AN225 is used quite a lot for oversized cargo, including satellites, rocket parts, aircraft parts, locomotives, nuclear plant equipment, oil drilling equipment, generators, military equipment (including for NATO), wind turbines, disaster relief, etc... It's flown to Afghanistan, Iraq, Alaska, KSC, Kourou, Haiti, Australia... It's really a rather busy aircraft, and I can understand why a second one would be useful.

This is Mriya #2:

Not quite flight ready.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Nibb31

[mikegarrison]

21 minutes ago, YNM said:

I guess this is for local use. What that use is, don't ask...

Also, the AN-225 "failed" (because the only built plane is extensively commercially used) only because there wasn't any clear use of it - USSR didn't have any war to do that needs such planes and alternative domestic use isn't viable. Now if the chinese has solid plans on how to use it, maybe it'll be extensively used. My opinion is that they'll modify it out and develop it into different planes of any sort.

It's also hideously inefficient by modern standards, but new engines would go some ways to fixing that.

[DDE]

12 hours ago, Nibb31 said:

Imagine the guys on the site of the "emergency" scratching their heads... "Ok, so how do we get this thing off the plane and in the water now?"

Easy.

The Orlyonok flies, albeit sloppily, and it is much more resistant to waves than a regular floatplane. Plus the broad wings are much easier to board. Combine it with the state-of-the-art medical center that could be installed onboard the GEV because, and you get the proposed Global Maritime Rescue system.

Edited September 2, 2016 by DDE

[K^2]

Ayup. Ground effect planes are perfectly capable of free flight. They just typically don't have the engine power for it. If you have a carrier plane release it at high enough speed, it can separate, maneuver to the destination, and perform a powered landing. Of course, it lands under power about as well as most planes do without. It's a safe and controlled decent, but you are committed to it. Fortunately, it's rarely a problem for a ground effect plane if you let it go over water.

[DDE]

33 minutes ago, K^2 said:

Ayup. Ground effect planes are perfectly capable of free flight. They just typically don't have the engine power for it. If you have a carrier plane release it at high enough speed, it can separate, maneuver to the destination, and perform a powered landing. Of course, it lands under power about as well as most planes do without. It's a safe and controlled decent, but you are committed to it. Fortunately, it's rarely a problem for a ground effect plane if you let it go over water.

To be more articular, the Orlyonok is rated for a service ceiling of 3000 m; it's a Class B GEV.

[mikegarrison]

45 minutes ago, DDE said:

The Orlyonok flies, albeit sloppily[...]

Well, in theory it does. In practice only five were built. One was a static test article. Two crashed. The other two? My guess is that they are not flightworthy, but I don't know for sure.