Hacker News Reader

Comment by H8crilA | Hacker News Reader

There are still the Boeing Dreamlifter and the Airbus Beluga.

This is true, but according to the Flexport CEO [1][2], the An-225 and An-124 were vital parts of the global air freight network/system. And only 5 of them were outside Ukraine when the invasion started.

[1] https://twitter.com/typesfast/status/1498406751749611521 [2] https://twitter.com/typesfast/status/1497656877731094528

The AN-225 was in a category of its own. In fact, the Dreamlifter was modified to fit components for the 787, but it actually has a lower max takeoff weight (803k lbs) than the original 747 it came from (875k lbs).

Meanwhile, the Beluga XL only has a max takeoff weight of 500k lbs.

The AN-225 had a max takeoff weight of 1.4m lbs.

wow 747 doesn't mess around huh, just a naive lb/engine would bring 747 up to 1.3m lbs (4 on 747 and 6 on AN-225) very cool

Well yeah, both the Dreamlifter and the Beluga were designed to carry aircraft parts, which are large, but not particularly heavy. Also, they are modified versions of civilian cargo aircraft. Both the AN-124 and the AN-225 are (were) basically military transport aircraft with high wings and short landing gears to allow loading via ramps - so a different kind of beast...

Mriya also has internal crane to help in loading and unloading - a legacy of being designed for carrying all sorts of "project cargo" that isn't easy to palletize (it, and M4 bombers modified into VM-T, had to carry rocket parts that were too big to move by rail as Baikonur can't be supplied easily otherwise)

There really isn't.

The Beluga has especially low (not to mention unpressurised) lifting capabilities, it can only lift about 45 tonnes. The XL can lift a bit more, but the main change was internal volume.

The Dreamlifter is better (by quite a bit), but also way short.

An other issue is because both were designed for ferrying airline parts between plants neither is autonomous: both need lifting gantries (especially the beluga but the dreamlifter isn't exactly ground-level), and the dreamlifter needs dedicated trucks to open and close its tail.

Meanwhile the Antonovs are fully autonomous. Both the 124 and 225 were roll-on/roll-off (and able to "kneel" for easier access, not sure about the 225 but the 124 even packs extension ramps for even shallower angles), with a very capable internal crane. On the 124, the crane even extends out back so you can just drop containers there and let the loadmaster handle it. They even carry a bunch of spare parts and a maintenance team. In fact they even carry their own tow bar.

The Belugas and Beluga XLs are only used internally by Airbus. The biggest cargo aircraft Airbus sell are the A330 and A340 cargo versions.

This is not correct. The older Belugas entered chartered service recently.

https://www.flightglobal.com/air-transport/airbus-setting-up...

Oh, didn't know that, thanks! That's a fairly recent development ( dated January of this year), and is only for the old Belugas, not the XLs, which will remain exclusive for Airbus. I don't see why they can't build a few more for charter.

> I don't see why they can't build a few more for charter.

I guess they could but then again, not sure how their customers feel when you enter their very own segment long term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com