Antonov Company Employees Refute Pilot’s Accusations Over Abandoning AN-225

[@RobbieRobbie76]

I’ve followed this pilot for a long time and continue to watch him on KZbin. He’s a balanced and intelligent guy so I would tend to follow his view. Also I’m not sure he’s making too much money from his videos as they rarely hit big viewer numbers so I don’t think he said what he said for ad revenue on his channel. He genuinely seems like a nice guy that would tell things how they are.

[@amaan_kazi]

He is making barely a money special he videos will be monetized as he talked of the war

[@miguelator-uy]

@@satunnainenkatselija4478 actually afaik on his Last video he told something like one of the six engines was removed an put on one of the ruslan due to engine service of the engine of the ruslan. And after the attack the engine was back again on Mriya and ready for departure (this is what I understood from the video)

[@GrandMichigan]

@@satunnainenkatselija4478 This comment shows your stupidity towards aviation. A Boeing 747 and Airbus A340 both are quad jet aircraft. Both can still fly with only 3 functional engines if one is lost during flight. But taking off from the ground with just 3 engines is not easy to do. That is a last resort for a quad jet aircraft. Many older DC-8s and B707s crashed because their pilots tried to take off with 3 instead of 4. There are a lot of variables that can lead to disaster when attempting a 3 engine flight with a 4 engine plane.

[@pietrooliani3251]

@@GrandMichigan although i'd say you are completly right it's also true that the an 225 is a stretched an 124 at it's core so i'd make the assumption that without any cargo besides the fuel for the trip in such an extreme situaion could have took off edit: that being said we don't have the insight to say if that was the "only" cause for the missed departure

[@savclaudiu2133]

@@GrandMichigan I cannot but to quote you "This comment shows your stupidity towards aviation.". This would have been an exceptional circumstances flight, probably with no payload and fueled only enough to reach the next airstrip which could accommodate Mriya. With an empty weight of 285 tons, max takeoff weight of 640 tons I would say there was enough room to play and depart even with 4 engines. Currently all multi-engines planes have no problems if they are losing an engine during a takeoff. Also, using literally the first jetliner from Boeing which flew the first time almost 7 decades ago does not help with your argument.

[@captmyq]

Have been following Major Dmytro Antonov for quite long time and this aviator and his team were in love with Mriya, in fact we all aviators were as it was only one of a kind of an airplane. Reality is that Mriya was expensive to fly and operate and didn’t fly much during past 6 months and a full hull loss would benefit the Antonov company to recover the monetary loss provided their insurance company covers ‘War’ as well. There were early warning by the NATO and US President Joe Biden and in fact the Antonov company had the time to relocate the aircraft to Poland, Romania and Moldova but no action was taken. It can only be justified by either the aircraft was under maintenance and unworthy to fly or no crew was available to fly it. Rip Mriya!

[@furzkram]

One engine was taken off but another could have been fitted, or even the one that was to be serviced. Mriya flew with even only r active engines just fine. The plane was fueled with 40 tons which was enough to fly to Leipzig. The crew was on standby and ready to take off with spare parts, engines and more, and only waiting to get a "go". All it needs is to watch and listen to Dmytros videos and maybe use the subtitles he provides. And any philosophizing could be avoided.

[@justgivemethetruth]

What insurance covers war damage?

[@MrSupercar55]

The Mriya could carry more weight and larger payloads than anything else. Without it, we must now put up with having to disassemble larger payloads and make multiple trips or, if this is not possible, make do with slow inefficient cargo ships. Back when Mriya was fully functional, doing it this way would have been a false economy.

[@MrSupercar55]

@@justgivemethetruth none. Even my car insurance doesn’t cover that.

[@bazoo513]

@@MrSupercar55 Aircraft insurance is not cookie-cutter retail insurance. Each contract is negotiated separately. If the hull owner feels they need war insurance, somebody will offer it - as a suitable price.

[@mbenidze]

The patheric rheroric of the letter resembles a soviet style pasquil and does not in any way reflect well on the Antonov company. The fact is the An225 is destroyed and that there were numerous indications and warnings about the expected war. It is not understandable why Antonov company did not fly their key asset to a safe location.

[@myfavoritemartian1]

When all of the smoke and mud clears, the wonderful AN225 is still destroyed. No matter who's fault. It is a serious loss to the whole world.

[@tonyt8805]

Exacly!!! 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾 💯 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾

[@atzj7062]

RIP AN-225

[@imvivalamilo]

I am a car guy, I am not interested in planes whatsoever. But I still feel pain that something could’ve been done to prevent this disaster. But thats how it usually happens, everything could’ve been prevented somehow. All we can do now is point fingers at each other, but that wont bring back this masterpiece of engineering, teamwork and history.

[@alpenfoxvideo7255]

Management: you could have flown the aircraft out by yourself Pilot: "Spends 60'000$ on fuel for the plane to fly it off by himself unauthorized

[@Syritis]

please reread the quote at 2:28

[@annsheridan12]

They’re dancing as fast as they can. Demonstrably bad decision.

[@vladsnape6408]

If the AN-225 was empty on takeoff, surely 5 engines would have been more than enough to take off and fly safely to another country. Something doesn't add up. Someone is not telling the truth or the whole story.

[@LINJ638]

The company Antonov is probably all pro-Russian anyway. They allowed the plane to get destroyed. PERIOD.

[@rkan2]

Yes, that's what Dmytro Antonov himself said. With 4 engines and empty it would've been 40 tonnes lighter than the An124. The inner engines don't have hydraulics and such.

[@Joesolo13]

Conspiracy theories help no one. Many thought this was simply bluster on Putin's part, and not everyone exercises maximum caution at all times. What's obvious in hindsight isn't always obvious in the present.

[@Kghammond852]

There sadly is no solid way of being able to tell since a lot of things can affect it. Say there were two damaged engines. If they were both on one wing then it would make it to be a hard take-off since one wing is at 100% thrust while the other is at 33% thrust making it hard to stir but if there's only 1 engine damage than in theory it should be able to takeoff and fly. Maybe not at its full range but it should fly. Take the c-130 Hercules it can take off at 100% weight capacity with only 3 engines. The a-10 could fly with only 1 engine if it didn't have any bombs on it.

[@justicelut]

Would you like to try it? I don’t think a qualified pilot would.

[@annsheridan12]

The proof is in the pudding. The aircraft was destroyed because it was not removed .

[@imbetterthanyouis]

yep and they had several weeks warning too

[@Joesolo13]

The aircraft was undergoing maintenance. Everybody's an expert in hindsight.

[@annsheridan12]

@@Joesolo13 it was destroyed because it was not removed.

[@digital4282]

@@annsheridan12 How can you remove something that wasn’t safe to fly? I’ll wait for your response but I won’t hold my breath. You’re literally choosing a plane over human life. Who’s to say they wouldn’t have taken off and Russia shot it down mid-air?

[@annsheridan12]

@@digital4282 you had a month before the invasion and the aircraft could have been maintained enough in 4 weeks to be flown out even if it were a ferry flight. Not doing so was obviously a poor and fatal decision for the aircraft..

[@jamesbambury]

What I don’t get is why an AN225 empty could not take off and fly on 5 of its 6 engines most twin and 4 engine jets can fly with one engine out.

[@iuliandragomir1]

Yes you can take off with 5 engines but if all are attached to the plane. When You take out one engine for repairing all the pipes and controls are out of service. So You can not start the other 5 engines. Sorry for my english

[@Gabriel.Vargas]

@@iuliandragomir1 I was thinking the same about flying with one engine less, but you remind something important. You can live with only one kidney, but you can't get up and walk alway during an kidney surgery.

[@1davidsmall]

@@iuliandragomir1 English was good, as was your response.

[@GrandMichigan]

The B747, A380, A340, DC-8, B707 were all 4 engine aircraft that could continue to fly after the loss of a single engine. But that is if they lost 1 of the 4 during flight. Even an empty plane taking off with 3 of 4 engines is a risky thing to do. Many older quad jets crashed while attempting that. One side of the plane has more drag and less lift while the other has more lift and less drag. Trying to keep the plane level and facing forward isn't easy on a good day. Add some crosswinds or bad weather and take off isn't possible. Also keep in mind the An-225 only had 5 engines on it. The 6th was off for maintenance. To take off without an engine attached to the wing is suicide. The weight distribution for the wing structure would cause multiple issues.

[@romanb.6905]

Remember 9 11 ? Was it not strange that at least one of the critical elements as NORAD was shut down? The same is taking an engine for "repair". There are people and cults in background you seem to have no clue.

[@andreaslehmann8617]

A conspiracy theory that has been bothering me since the destruction of the An225 and the sum for the restoration mentioned a few days later. The AN225 wasn't really economical... what if it was a 'warm demolition'? In my opinion, the 3 billion restoration costs sound like the sum insured.

[@gamerfan8445]

That good theory

[@therealmotorcyclemichael]

Generally insurance companies don't cover losses that happen due to a war.

[@gamerfan8445]

@@therealmotorcyclemichael then it’s looks like Russia is paying the bill

[@rkan2]

War is a special insurance case, and usually part of force majeure conditions.

[@boldford]

@@gamerfan8445 Where's the money coming from? Russia will be bankrupt after Putin's escapade.

[@LaczPro]

The only thing I would think is the drama of this situation. I think the pilot is so right when saying the letter seems written by a kid because it's a lot of complaining and crying, without adding anything good to the crisis.

[@Syritis]

is that not what the pilot antonov is also doing?

[@gravemind452]

from the pics released the 225's wings look fine and there is a half completed 225 in storage, where it is located I'm uncertain but if it to hasn't been destroyed then there is a chance the 225 can fly again someday. Antonov is running their company as if it was still the soviet union

[@ollyk22]

No chance! The shock from the blast will have caused untold damage to the wing structure. This type will never fly again, pretty sure of that!

[@teenagerinsac]

Right wing is destroyed at the root look at the melted structure.

[@bemusedpanda8875]

It was a case of too little too late. They didn't get the 6th engine installed in time and should have acted far earlier. They are lucky to have at least saved their An-124 fleet.

[@rkan2]

They could've flown out with just 4 engines - afterall the An225 is just a bigger version of the An124. Dmytro Antonov confirmed this himself. The An225 had 70 tonnes of fuel onboard also, which is probably the reason why it also burned like it did.

[@teenagerinsac]

AN 124 fleet is mostly in Russian hands as part of CCCP possession. The flag of the CCCP is showing again- the Hammer and Sickle of OPPRESSION.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

does rather smell of a letter crafted by managers - not employees. its not up to the pilot to demand maintenance for the aircraft. the 6th engine issue sounds like a long term thing. i cant imagine they would pull it out days before. it must have been waiting for parts. any word on the insurance of the aircraft and if its covered for war damage? if its insured, it could well have been a dirty play to get money for an aircraft that was not used so much in recent times. it is worthy of note that the an225 has been stripped for spares to keep an124's flying before.

[@christophergrimes12]

Antonov is a great company and is just bad management

[@mjphillips76]

It's a Tragic Loss as it was a one of it's kind aircraft that has done so much... No other airline company has built a comparable aircraft.

[@Supernaut2000]

It’s gone, destroyed. Like a sandcastle on a beach. Bickering is childish now. Someone else will step up and build another “world’s largest airplane” soon enough. Step up or go home Antonov.

[@wdwerker]

Sounds like the company values employees lives over a very special aircraft.

[@mathewgarrard3621]

Sounds a lot like he said shes said i dont think we will ever know the trough ever way you look at it its a sad day when the world lost such a amazing aircraft

[@stoptheplanetiwantoff6906]

They probably did leave it too late to get the plane out however hindsight is a wonderful thing.

[@martinsykora4492]

Super video 🤩📽️🇨🇿❤️🇺🇦

[@dougharris7665]

Leaving for Germany and safety on five engines with no payload would seem a no brainer, had the right people made the right decisions. With it's destruction and an insurance payout possible, I smell a rat.

[@therealmotorcyclemichael]

One engine "not functioning" is completely different than "one engine missing".

[@dougharris7665]

@@therealmotorcyclemichael Other planes occasionally fly with an engine imbalance, having lost an engine in flight ( Canadian Airlines DC8 HNL-SYD via Nandi 1970's ) or carrying an extra engine needed quickly. Whether the An-225 could depart with a missing engine would have to be answered, honestly, by Major Antonov.

[@rkan2]

@@therealmotorcyclemichael Dmytro Antonov himself said that there should've been inoperative engines ready to be fitted to fly the An225 out even on 4 engines.

[@therealmotorcyclemichael]

@@rkan2 And then when it crashed on takeoff, you would have been right here whining about corporate greed putting the value of the planes over their employees....

[@rkan2]

@@therealmotorcyclemichael Why would it have? Why would a multi-engine aircraft crash on takeoff even if you loose an engine? Anything is of course possible - but from a performance point the An225 with 4 engines is not much different to the An124 with 4 engines - especially when flying empty.

[@andrewjones-productions]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. The truth of the matter is, no one at the time had a crystal ball and even if they did, it is very unlikely that they were able to see the future through it. Perhaps it was easier for those of us detached from the situation to see that Russia would actually invade. Light burns dimmest at the base of the candle and there was possibly, perhaps even likely, an overwhelming optimistic view that Russia wouldn't actually invade. Either way, I cannot see how Major Antonov's accusations at this juncture is of any help in the midst of Ukraine fighting for something far more important than an iconic aircraft. This discussion should occur following the end of the war and not during it.

[@ipanzerschrecku4732]

Maybe they got more from the insurance than they could ever make by flying. Looks like 225 had been on the ground for a good while and with the war in Afghanistan over the client list drying up.

[@Dogsnark]

The whole situation is so tragic. The 225 is gone and there’s really only one party to blame for that…Russia. I hope the Antonov company can continue operating, and perhaps even resurrect the 225 with the unfinished 2nd plane and salvaged parts from the Mriya.

[@pat36a]

It was the Ukrainian military that shelled the hanger. Russia wanted the airport intact. Umraining military shelled the buildings and runways to deny the Russians use. So the blame goes to them.

[@theotherohlourdespadua1131]

@@pat36a Not really surprised. That is standard SOP for equipment you can't carry back with you on retreat. This is very true for Ukraine which saw a good chunk of its navy and Air Force fell into Russian hands intact during the invasion of Crimea in 2014...

[@LectronCircuits]

Antonov AN-225 must be restored at all costs. Nothing less will do. Cheers!

[@cranklabexplosion-labcentr8245]

Keep pointing the finger at eachother. It’s what Putin wants you to do.

[@gabu114]

but it does not involve military so putin dont care

[@jyfoord]

It is hard to believe that a company that has such an asset would leave it to be destroyed. Being linked with the aviation industry, I am more inclined to believe that a service maintenance issue prevented the aircraft from departing for a safer destination. Aircraft are very complex machines and any one of dozens of items could have forced the aircraft to remain on the ground. The loss of the aircraft is a tragedy to the aviation industry, Antonov and Ukraine. If the remaining incomplete aircraft can be completed , there is an opportunity to upgrade systems in the aircraft to bring it into the 21st century and make that aircraft just as significant if not more impressive than the original AN-225. Long may Ukraine survive. The world is behind you. God bless Ukraine.

[@marbella-elviria]

is it better to be dead than loose Krim?

[@alanpontet1671]

Well, the company's response is that they tried to fit the final engine the day before the invasion. This doesn't answer the allegation that they had sufficient advance notice of the invasion to get the Mryia out of there long before they attempted to.

[@therealmotorcyclemichael]

Sufficient notice? So you obviously knew when the invasion was coming?

[@alanpontet1671]

@@therealmotorcyclemichael They did - the Americans warned them a couple of months before.

[@rkan2]

They flew the An124 out .. Probably didn't have the pilots to do it at that time..

[@Joesolo13]

@@alanpontet1671 They knew it was possible, they didn't know when or if it would really happy. The plane was undergoing maintenance at the time, the likely answer is simply that they wanted to complete the needed work before moving it.

[@rexmyers991]

In times of crisis, people sometimes (I think out of frustration and despair) point fingers rather than cooperate together as a group and begin the process of rebuilding

[@teenagerinsac]

Well remember that most of the older ones still are SOVIET in their thinking.

[@lucdelhaize4029]

I saw elsewhere in fact of the Operator Starsky channel that one engine was not installed in the plane. His unit was in charge of that airport defence so I reckon he has some closer insights.

[@wasted-blaster.]

Just rebuild the bloody thing! What has happened has happened end of story.

[@the3rdid485]

This is not a plane you just "rebuild"

[@samkelo27]

@@the3rdid485 but there is another unfinished one that they could complete and it would save them money 👀

[@BritishBeachcomber]

Whatever the reason, the destruction of the Antonov was such a sad loss

[@MSRTA_Productions]

Oh boy

[@DaveMiller2]

Sorry. I have to go with the pilot on this. The company letter sounds like finger pointing and CYA. Just like the Ukraine situation in general, the the information we are being given about the situation with the 225 and its destruction is dodgy.

[@johnthemachine]

Who are you getting information from? This is the most reported on/covered war in history. Vice News has had journalists on the ground in Ukraine covering this conflict since 2014, for example.

[@chunkymonkey55555]

I think it was a missed opportunity to fly the thing out a few days before. Considering the place is nearly irreplaceable it would have been a prudent precaution

[@Nafets-C]

Its clear as day sky that antonnov management just abandon the an 225. Which it will be covered as colateral damage of the war and be included in funding rehabilitation. The response of the management is just to save face. The pilot is just expressing what would be best to save the plane.

[@rkan2]

Agreed - the An225 was worth more as a source of engines, hence the one missing engine that was being used on a An124 instead...

[@mikeclifton7778]

Hindsight is always 20:20, however if they were that concerned about the safety of the aircraft then why fly it back to Ukraine at all?

[@Joesolo13]

You do understand that's where they normally repair and maintain it right?

[@ElitistMagi]

Dmytro is pissed off and rightly so because I bet losing the plane was a big blow to him emotionally. It was just a difficult situation, maybe with a little more foresight this could have been prevented but everything is 20/20 in retrospect.

[@zalmaflash]

The plane was 30 years old, in the "SUNSET" of aircraft life, terribly inefficient fuel wise, and just not worth saving. A lousy way out.

[@q80aziz]

What’s done is done . Now I believe that there is a second airframe that was not completed so I guess it is time to plan for the next AN 225 instead of sitting around and exchange useless accusations . 👍🏽🇺🇦

[@pvkoinch]

Mr Antonov is right. That wasn't his plane. That was company's plane. However, there must have a serious meeting week before the war to safely transport An225.

[@Mortimer_Duke]

Jesus. The body isn’t even cold.

[@exist7309]

Management working “around the clock” Is that 24 hours a day? That’s a PR statement if ever I heard one.

[@RonPiggott]

What I don't understand is why the aircraft could not have made a short trip with a missing engine and treated it as an engine out exercise.

[@rkan2]

It could've - not with the engines detached but with 2 inoperative engines it would've flown pretty much like an An124

[@RonPiggott]

@@rkan2 I am wondering what would have been needed to do a low flight ferry flight. Like 8,000 or 10,000 feet. Enough to get it out of Ukraine.

[@rkan2]

@@RonPiggott Flying empty it would not have been that different to flying an An124 since it would've been lighter than the An124 flying with payload..

[@MonkPetite]

He ..mister Antonov was right .. A long letter is clearly a desperate move to talk is right. Darn managers as always try to talk them out of their flaws

[@williamsion3000]

I cannot beleive that it was not moved ahead of all planes, something stinks here.. MAJOR WHO!!

[@MuellerNick]

Looks like the cooperation between Boing and Antonov finally reached Boing's goal.

[@Desire123ification]

Not an ideal time for internal squabbling. In the midst of all the chaos, the fate of a company is at stake. The focus should be on more important things instead of finger pointing and arguing.

[@rkan2]

Meh - the Antonov airline's fate is barely at stake. All their An124 are evacuated and still flying cargo. The only problem becomes when they need to service them. They can probably do some maintenance at their 2nd base in Leipzig but the engines are manufactured in Zaporizhzhia. Commercially the An225 was only worth it as a marketing excercise, a few oversize loads per year and ir's six engines - one of which was being used on the An124 because it is much more economical to fly those instead if the An225.

[@davecollins7934]

While I have followed the pilot and crew through there adventures on Utube for a long time. If the pilot has hinted to the company that an invasion was on the cards, why did the company management NOT take into account a plan B. Before it came to the point that the local airport was about to be closed down. (Maybe busy fleeing) instead of asking the pilots to get all aircraft out of the way in the first place.

[@Mr.-Wint]

What remains is that it was utterly stupidity to let it go back just 3 weeks before the war broke out, - no statement what so ever can rectify that..

[@therealmotorcyclemichael]

How do you know what will happen three weeks from now?

[@trukr817]

I don't know who's at fault, I only know it's such a shame that the plane was destroyed. I was always in awe of that plane. It didn't matter to me who made it, it was made and it was amazing and a show of what mankind can do.

[@adrianbalboa5353]

Its only an aircraft and maybe they can still make a mock up with the second unfinished one to be used as a museum static display.

[@bazoo513]

Well, Мрія _was_ at its home base for repairs, so the claim that the staff tried, but failed, to relocate it in time sounds plausible. Then again, the invasion was not really a surprise, was it? It is sad that in moments of such catastrophe people hit by it turn against each other.

[@rkan2]

Apparrently, according to Dmytro it wasn't repairs but the 6th engine was just being used on an An124 because there is a lack of engines and the An225 doesn't fly that often.

[@sylviaelse5086]

I have to wonder whether the aircraft could have flown on five engines, with no cargo, and if necessary only enough fuel to reach Poland. Granted, it is probably not certificated to take off with an engine out (or actually missing), but arrangements could probably have been made.

[@furzkram]

The employees have been blackmailed to sign, and also signed some OTHER document. Do your research better. Speak to Dmytro.

[@stradivarioushardhiantz5179]

Blaming then announced crowd funding.....🛫🤔

[@marbella-elviria]

As a symbol for ucraine the plane was sacrificed to gain more support in this useless war. Zelensky should give back the Russian areas of Ukraine and stop putting the world in danger of a nuclear strike.

[@morphthebear3091]

the thing that we all should remember that Mryia was Destroyed not because it wasn't moved but because Putin Knew that the Antonov company would've moved it sooner or later. hence why he attacked the airport as soon as he could

[@gzhang207]

It is the operating company’s mistake, but it is the loss of the world.

[@tapanikittela]

War ia war and something like this happen. I wil hope that this war cont continue any more longer.

[@imbetterthanyouis]

its a similar argument to the civilians " trapped " in the ukraine , its not like this came out of nowhere there was several weeks warning

[@geoh7777]

It doesn't seem that there is anything much that can be done about this unfortunate situation now.

[@jorgemanso521]

Not going to miss this soviet-era plane...time to go...

[@predragbalorda]

It's OTHER PEOPLE'S fault

[@makomadns4]

There is no question in my mind that this was a deliberate attempt by the company to write off the aircraft and then fight for either an insurance payout or for Russian reparations once this conflict ends. The aircraft was over 30 years old and desperately needed a modern upgrade especially to its fuel inefficient engines. Many point to the fact that it was flying often for jobs, however a second airframe has been started and stopped several times over the years. If this aircraft was so dominant in the niche market, surly the company would have been able to find the financing to finish the second. Multi engine aircraft have flown without an engine before. Yes there are probably modifications that need to be made however the company had plenty of notice of rising tensions to get the aircraft out of harms way. All you need is a google search to see 4 engine aircraft flying on 3 engines with one missing. There is no way that empty this aircraft would need all 6 for the power to takeoff, if so it would never be able to carry the massive cargo loads it did. I find it very convenient that the other aircraft left just in time but not this one. It’s the kind of story you tell if you are trying to scam someone. Again, it’s not like there wasn’t warnings and rising tensions for weeks.

[@stevegiboney4493]

All the linkages and the fuel lines to the engine make trying to fly with one engine missing would make that improbable at best. Asymmetrical thrust on takeoff would be another issue.

[@danieldrayet2364]

Fly with 1 less engine yes, but not takeoff with 1 less The thrust imbalance of that could cause the plane to crash

[@joesterling4299]

@@danieldrayet2364 So take off empty (zero cargo) with 4 engines in reciprocal positions? Don't tell me that can't be done.

[@danieldrayet2364]

@@joesterling4299 that also depends which engine was removed

[@danieldrayet2364]

@@joesterling4299 and that would also mean it would need a longer runway to get off the ground

[@andyowens5494]

I'm not sure what the point of him posting the initial accusations was: seems it just p!ssed some people off, who lets face it, probably have more important things to worry about until recently. Seemed an unnecessary first strike that was always going to receive retaliation.

[@vsmitson]

Do they get insurance as I think it is force majeure and they shouldn't be getting insurance when war starts unfortunately

[@BonnieTheBunnyOnYT]

Why cant they literally take off the Mriya with only five engine though it could’ve been a live for the Mriya

[@Joesolo13]

One engine was physically off the plane, which was undergoing maintenance at the time. Many people didn't think Russia would really invade, and even if they did the company likely would've wanted to finish the work before taking it out. It's not like they had a memo on exactly when it would all start.

[@chrismechanic2000]

simple, if you want to get mad about its destruction, blame the people that destroyed it, no one else is at fault here.

[@charlescanton4740]

Seeing that a B-727 can ferry out with only two operating engines, I can't see why the AN-225 couldn't go with ONLY five of six in a war emergency.

[@chesterwang3070]

If the engine is not physically on the plane, all the piping, electronics, wires, etc would all not be on the aircraft. In that case, how could the plane take off? Having one engine inoperative is very different from having one engine not there.

[@rkan2]

@@chesterwang3070 @Iulian Dragomir Dmytro Antonov himself confirmed that the An225 could've flown with 5 or even 4 engines and that it was loaded with 70 tonnes of fuel on the eve of the war. Furthermore the inner engines don't have hydraulics and the like and thus could fly normally without them. Also 40 tonnes lighter than An124 when empty. The An225 was in complete operational form on the eve of the war with all of it's six engines installed and said 70 tonnes of fuel loaded, which would've been enough to fly it to Leipzig. Also Dmytro wasn't suggesting to fly with engines detached, but with inoperable engines which he stated there would've been available.

[@louisserapiglia8619]

@@rkan2 ò

[@vojislavvukmanovic7061]

I'm not worried, with all the support from the world to the Ukraine, they will be able to make even bigger and better aircraft.

[@owenchuarbx]

is Major Dmytro Antonov related to the founder in anyway?

[@jacksimper5725]

Looks Like a pass the buck if the company was warned supposedly 1 month beforehand

[@49525Bob]

There was about a month warning that the attack would happen. Plenty of time to save the plane.

[@happyguy4525]

It was an inside job that the airport and an 225 to be destroyed to claim insurance. It can take off with 4 or 5 engine's without payload.

[@mauriceclemens3286]

Plain and simple,the An 225 should have been move to a safe place.

[@LINJ638]

What kind of a mockery is this towards a pilot who written like a spoiled entitled first grader!!?!?!?

[@450sl79]

If the problem was in “one” engine. Why they don’t took of with 5 engines running? Better safe than sorry.

[@mrjefrannerichardson1637]

The AN 225 should have been the first aircraft to fly out as it had greater value both financial and sentimental

[@LINJ638]

But nobody cares right????

[@Ayrshore]

Why would it matter if the airspace is closed? Take off, fly to Poland, land. Deal with the fallout later. Too late now, of course.

[@thomasharris3272]

Sounds like an insurance job...follow the money..

[@britishneko3906]

the problem is just humanity so blame everyone

[@xx-yt2fb]

This plane have respect lots of respect it carry ukraine all over the world please please please give all tribute to who build it who maintain it who fly it who managed it lots of respect to this big bird.

[@catfish252]

I don't know who to blame except for Putin, it is a damn shame that such a beautiful aircraft and world asset was destroyed. Perhaps sometime in the future another 'Dream' can be realized. I hope so.

[@johnroutledge9220]

This letter doesn't ring true. A 747 can fly on 3 engines quite happily. The An-225 should have been able to easily fly on 5 engines. When the priority is LEAVING, then either physically bolt the engine in place and fly it as deadweight, or unbolt it, and let it rot on the tarmac. If management made any other decision other than GET OUT ASAP, or specifically issued orders that the engine must be properly and completely fitted before take-off, then they are guilty of severe negligence.

[@Joesolo13]

Hardly. It was being maintained before the war, once the war started it was directly on the front lines and if it had take off, it might well have simply been shot down.

[@ricardoh.3947]

Have we forgotten who destroyed the plane? just saying. they should pay for the reconstruction.

[@commerce-usa]

Agreed. They say Putin has around 20 billion socked away around the planet. Perhaps part of that could go to replace this beautiful example of aviation history.

[@dennischallinor8497]

If I could have got that plane off of the ground with 5 engines I would have been tempted to fly it to Germany empty. What a shame it was destroyed!!!

[@richardgraham1167]

The awesome machine Mriya is gone, and that is a tragedy. The plane couldn't save herself, and finger pointing won't undo the damage.

[@accountdeleted1898]

No one is right in this case. The war is breaking out, and what do you expect Antonov to do?? They are not rich like boeing and airbus, and their staff probably is working around the clock. We are humans, error are made, thats it. I am sure the first priority in a war is not to move a not-so profit generating plane out of their place just beacause it holds a world record. However, Antonov shouldn't question what did the piot do though, what can the pilot do？ Fly the plane out without permission? He would end it in jail then.

[@SuperAgentman007]

Mr. Antonoff is kind of right they could have gotten that aircraft out of there and put it into a friendly country just before the invasion and they knew it was coming it was just a matter of time. But what is done is done can’t be undone. Question now is can Ukraine build another one like it.

[@bearabletable7527]

lmao what can he even do? its not like he can just fly it out of Ukraine....... Antonov is funny lol

[@MoskusMoskiferus1611]

Should have fly it to Russia

[@amkgskjsi3840]

@@MoskusMoskiferus1611 and get shot down? This man is smart

[@satguy]

So they're saying that airplane couldn't have been prepared to fly on five engines to get out of that dangerous situation?

[@Joesolo13]

That Dangerous situation includes Russian Anti-Air and fighters which might've shot the plane down

[@ESPirits87]

Should have flow away with 5 engines.

[@Riv12001]

Wow

[@triadwarfare]

Had the AN225 survived, it would have done wonders such as transporting Western donated Soviet tanks to Kyiv after the liberation of the Hostomel Airport. That's probably why Russia made sure to destroy it as soon as they captured the airport. Should they lose it, they can prevent Mriya from helping the war effort in Ukraine.

[@jdf1stats]

Very sad, why destroy such a landmark in aviation? It flew for Russia too! 🙄

[@wizard3z868]

Let's face this plane was a costly old money pit they left it there to be destroyed and got rid of a huge costly liability& insurance and government pay off too

[@zv223]

Antonov do not exist any more forever.

[@zv223]

@C LETTER i mean fabrics not a plane. And they never exist anymore what is build is build and all other will died soon because no spare parts.

[@gooner72]

They shouldn't be bickering about this, they should be working TOGETHER to to firstly.... getting Russians out of their Country and secondly..... helping each other to get at least one of these magnificent aircraft flying again. Слава Україні слава героям!!!!🇧🇧🇧🇧✌✌