AN-225 Mriya
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 10
From: Just South of the last ice sheet
AN-225 Mriya
I know that this monster requires 3,500m to take off but what runway length is required for landing? Does anybody know the runway strength required for landing?
Last edited by LowNSlow; 8th December 2008 at 09:21. Reason: The usual.....
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 10
From: Just South of the last ice sheet
She requires 3,500m with the maximum payload of 250,000kg on board. I would suggest that she wasn't fully loaded taking off from East Mids or she would still be there in kit form at the end of the runway.
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: luton,beds,uk
"Can't imagine she has flown fully loaded with all 250,000kg of cargo in the past.
Far more likely to have "volumed out", or "dimensioned out"
Are you for real ? have you ever been inside that thing and seen how big it is ?
its like a warehouse.
I have hundreds of pics of interior and exterior of this plane on my picasa account. if anyones interested pm me and i will send the you link
Far more likely to have "volumed out", or "dimensioned out"
Are you for real ? have you ever been inside that thing and seen how big it is ?
its like a warehouse.
I have hundreds of pics of interior and exterior of this plane on my picasa account. if anyones interested pm me and i will send the you link
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Still in the Midland Radar overhead
AC ops said Can't imagine she has flown fully loaded with all 250,000kg of cargo in the past.Far more likely to have "volumed out", or "dimensioned out" and then flown with full fuel I'd reckon.
On September 11 2001 it lifted four main battle tanks (253,820kg) with max fuel
VEEPS
On September 11 2001 it lifted four main battle tanks (253,820kg) with max fuel
VEEPS
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 10
From: Just South of the last ice sheet
Aircraft Ops I would have thought the landing run would have been significantly less than the MTOW takeoff run. The An-124 needs 3,000m to get off the ground but only 800m to return to it!
I would assume that the runways available in the FSU would be able to accommodate her weight on landing?
Just found out that the PCN for the airport in question is 19 and the Mriya has an ACN of 45. Not a viable proposition methinks!
I would assume that the runways available in the FSU would be able to accommodate her weight on landing?
Just found out that the PCN for the airport in question is 19 and the Mriya has an ACN of 45. Not a viable proposition methinks!
Last edited by LowNSlow; 9th December 2008 at 07:48.
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,681
Likes: 10
From: Just South of the last ice sheet
Asdrius unfortunately the PCN table I have found doesn't show the figure for Poznan. The length is similar (+100m) to the runway I'm thinking of but the PCN must be significantly higher!
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 712
Likes: 16
From: UK
Sorry guys. Deleted my earlier post whilst trying to add this message.
Apologies for a lack of knowledge regarding MTOW and Max payload flights with the AN-225. Can't imagine it's flown with close to 250,000kgs on too many occasions though??? I was told by a handling agent who has overseen this aircraft on many occasions that it was nearly always carrying bulky items, but was rarely over 200 tonnes.
I have indeed been inside the aircraft, as well as others in the Antonov fleet and it is cavernous. I seem to remember thinking the hold was about as high and wide as an AN-124, but just a bit longer.
Apologies for a lack of knowledge regarding MTOW and Max payload flights with the AN-225. Can't imagine it's flown with close to 250,000kgs on too many occasions though??? I was told by a handling agent who has overseen this aircraft on many occasions that it was nearly always carrying bulky items, but was rarely over 200 tonnes.
I have indeed been inside the aircraft, as well as others in the Antonov fleet and it is cavernous. I seem to remember thinking the hold was about as high and wide as an AN-124, but just a bit longer.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 14
From: Europe
AircraftOperations
This is correct. It has the same cross-section, in fact it is a streched AN124 with modified wing and tail (and no rear ramp door!). Cargo cabin volume is only 25-30% bigger than AN124, while max payload is double. Not good for volumetric cargo, but main battle tanks are not bulky 
I seem to remember thinking the hold was about as high and wide as an AN-124, but just a bit longer.
AlwaysOnFire
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
From: **** you PPRUNE!
She was built to carry Buran, which weighs 80 tonnes (if I recall right)
so 80 tonnes on the back and rest in cargo hold gives plenty of space to stuff
things. Donīt remember the MTOW with buran on the back?
so 80 tonnes on the back and rest in cargo hold gives plenty of space to stuff
things. Donīt remember the MTOW with buran on the back?
