Russian Giants

Wings of the Red Star, 1993

[@28ebdh3udnav]

Rest in peace An 225

[@willrogers3793]

Whatever the rivalry between our countries, it cannot and should not be denied that the Russians have made some truly impressive machines over the years. The progress that pioneers like Ilyushin, Tupolev and all the rest made under appalling conditions and at times in despite of their own government’s heavy-handedness is a true gift to the world of aviation, and a monument to their genius that lasts to this day.

[@udontknowme7798]

And you must be Ukrainian

[@zmusico]

@Dmitri Kozlowsky You are a sick lonely person. So sad.

[@AlEx-mj8ol]

@Dmitri Kozlowsky Tell me about the country who do "return favor".

[@smiley3012]

They do make some tough planes. Not to be discounted they worked in some hard environments.

[@AlEx-mj8ol]

@@smiley3012 Entire territory of Russia is one big hard environment.

[@bertcanepa5651]

Produced when the "Discovery" channel was indeed good channel. Today's "Discovery" one is a disgrace.

[@Charlesputnam-bn9zy]

just fish, treehouses, even bear grylls got disgusted

[@slojogojo2766]

The "History" channel also is a big joke!

[@sohomchatterjee]

History tv : hold my beer

[@jonathanbush8753]

I'm with yeah on that they ant nothing worth watching on their well all most all TV sucks

[@brianbelton3605]

What about Ice Road Women Truckers?! Thats one helluva show, 'specially on re-runs!

[@SerbanOprescu]

While watching the video I was impressed by the narrator, and wondered where did they find such a talented person. Not only that, he spoke Russian. After reading the credits, I thought: "Ah. Sir Peter Ustinov. I see."

[@ggurks]

Peter Ustinov indeed! I'd never thought that

[@marsdenk.6162]

​@ggurks Wow

[@neilmacleod5371]

Saw that "Dream" at Abottsford , oh my goodness , it's the size of a small town . A beautiful plane

[@anti-socialmedia8195]

In 1998 I was living in Orlando, FL attending school @ a media school called Full Sail. One afternoon I was walking to my truck when I heard the roar of jet engines but they sounded unlike any jet engines I had ever heard so I looked and this HUGE transport aircraft with 6 engines 3 on each wing was right above me. This thing was so big it seemed as though it was just hanging in the sky. Of course it was a 225 bringing modules for the ISS so the shuttle could bring it up. If you ever get the chance to see one of these, by all means do it. It is truly beyond impressive.

[@hp2084]

If you ever get a chance to see it, its the only one.

[@timpeterson2738]

Growing up 1 mile from abbotsford airport we would get "Airshow fever " about the Monday prior to Fridays first day of the airshow. As my dad was ex air force we learned the sounds of different engines and could guess which aircraft were approaching. When this Big Bird came in it was so big it looked like it was suspended in the air though we knew she was doing about 200 knots on first approach. I miss living there just for that reason alone.

[@elijah24567]

The narrator's voice really feels as if he actually built those beautiful planes.

[@alexroselle]

Peter Ustinov! Famous and classically-trained Russian-British actor, was in a lot of stuff.

[@ffejmann84]

AN-225 landed in Fargo 15 or so years ago on an overnight refueling stop. I flew in the USAF C-5 many times in my Army years and I thought they were big! GOOD LORD THIS PLANE IS A MONSTER! Could play a game of football in it when empty! Glad I was able to see it take off, as it was a sight I will never forget!

[@williammakupa5896]

Ohh, I can not believe it, my favorate actor of all, Peter Ustinov narrating. I wondered who could produce the Russian accent so well.

[@suprememaz]

Been looking for this full version for ages. Thanks!

[@NeoExtentialist]

You're Welcome. Maybe we Fans should do a Kickstarter Campaign to get The Discovery Channel to rerelease W.O.T.R.S. and other Programs on DVD/Blu-Ray and Digital Download in the future?

[@NeoExtentialist]

You're Welcome. Hopefully, we can get remastered version of this Series in the future.

[@jeepinbanditrider]

I miss the WINGS series.

[@NeoExtentialist]

That makes two of us.

[@065Tim]

Remember Discovery used to air WINGS? Those where the days.

[@waynemcfarlane1233]

That make three of us

[@wallingnaga6563]

Make it four of us

[@rmtjp3875]

@@065Tim I only had local channels

[@vasopel]

thank you for uploading this! :-)

[@NeoExtentialist]

You're Welcome. Someone should do a online petition to get the series rereleased again in the future.

[@omkr0122]

Sam: Everything is big in Texas! Dimitri: Hold my vodka...

[@marsdenk.6162]

😅😅

[@hilliard55]

I could listen to this guy talk all day every day for the rest of my life.

[@shenghan9385]

Citiera well. It sounds you will enjoy seating in a Soviet government meeting and listen to commorade Stalin speak for hours.

[@shenghan9385]

@Demo glad that you notice that. Now, why do you go back and enjoy the speeches of your great leaders wherever the hell you are from.

[@shenghan9385]

@Demo sorry. I do not seek attention. I say what I like when I feel to. Judging by the persistency of your effort in keeping the debate alive, it seems like you have described yourself more or less.v

[@manifestman132]

Used to be a An 2 at a airport where I live.

[@posban]

Peter Ustinov keeps me coming back

[@fooman2108]

There were two reason for renaming the license built DC-3's, When they went from being PS134 to LI-2 the Soviets quit paying the license fees because 'they were no longer the same air craft.' The design of the dc-2/3 is one of the world's most stolen designs, it has been stated several times that if Japan, Italy, the USSR, Lithuania and other countries paid that Douglas would still be in business and not part of the conglomerate they are now.

[@Commentator541]

Actually no, it was a settlement after the WW2 to keep some sort of peace. US never shared the German tech and Russians were not happy.

[@stanbattle7436]

AND THEY PAID NOTHING FOR THE B29 THEY STOLE

[@kingofthespazs]

@@stanbattle7436 we didn't give it to them they stole it you don't pay for what you steal

[@Charlesputnam-bn9zy]

surprise surprise when it comes to the ruffians

[@glynndonahue1159]

Boeing thought they were acquiring McDonald-Douglas- in reality Boeing was “assimilated” by McDonald-Douglas! They’ve been mismanaged ever since! The Chinese are now successfully marketing their Comac C919 737 clone! They’ve essentially ceded their 737-600 market to them!!!

[@willrogers3793]

0:48 Is that...wow...that’s both hilarious and awesome. They REALLY went with the theme from “The Hunt for Red October”. Just pure win. XD

[@wardogcompany6482]

Thank you for uploading this, really enjoying this documentary series of Russian aircraft.

[@NeoExtentialist]

You're Welcome. Now we got to figure out how The Discovery could rerelease this series on DVD/Blu-Ray and/or Digital Download to get better versions of each show too.

[@TheophilusPWildbeest]

Summer 2019, and the An12 is still operating daily cargo flights from europe into England delivering car parts, always at just 20000 feet, and noisy compared to any modern aircraft (love that it still has a place for the rear gunner).

[@melvyncox3361]

Russia is the leader in large transport aircraft,it's got to be said.That's why Antonov Airlines and Volga Dnepr are regularly chartered by the West to move large and heavy loads,including,ironically by the military.I say,fair play!❤😎👍

[@habeste200724ro]

yeah , you are 100% accurate.

[@KozakYuri]

Antonov is a Ukrainian plane. You mean Ukraine is the leader in large transport aircraft right?

[@nishantsingh5385]

@@KozakYuri he ment soviet.

[@pascalchauvet4230]

Thank you so much for posting this

[@NeoExtentialist]

You're Welcome 🙂

[@garryclelland4481]

thanks for posting Phil , very interesting, very informative , splendid indeed .

[@berenscott8999]

Dude, those planes have character.

[@vvg916happyengineer]

Not even in 2019 has someone been able to compete with the Antonov-225

[@brianbelton3605]

at 43:34 this magnificent giant flying Polar Bear, gliding smiling through the air! Beautiful and Wonderful! !

[@Tom-Lahaye]

Except for the AN-225 I have seen all other aircraft in this documentary on local airfields, some even recently. Of those the IL-76 and AN-124 were regular visitors, the IL-76 untill they were banned from civil aviation in Europe mid 1990's due to noise levels. There have been 2 AN-124's grounded for a couple of years on the local civil airport after the owner of the planes got bankrupt and couldn't pay airport fees. After 2 years someone bought the 2 planes and had to pay hefty sums to the airport and to get those planes airworthy again, but as these planes are asked for to transport large and heavy items it was worth the extra costs. There is a military airfield nearby which houses an AWACS wing, there are flights performed from this airfield for UN, and UN owned an IL-76 and hires planes from Russia or Ukrain, like AN-12's or AN-124 depending on the flights they have to make, last AN-12 spot was just about 3-4 weeks ago!

[@guillaumeromain6694]

That's one great documentary! and the narator is very impressive indeed, it has to be said. The man can speak. I'll shut up.

[@louiswilkins9624]

Thanks for sharing ☺️

[@seansoblixe9711]

AND FINALLY THEE MOST GORGEOUS FIGHTER EVER DESIGNED....THEE SU-27 AND ITS VARIANTS

[@robertblake1032]

sean soblixe No kidding right. Amazing airplanes

[@FN_FAL_4_ever]

They’re right about the An-2 Colt’s landing gear. It’s indestructible.

[@samir9152]

"Wow, this is a huge plane! I wonder what we could name it?" -"It looks like a huge 13:20"

[@fpepefpepe3167]

That is a Bartini Beriev VVA-14.

[@only1983]

Thanks a lot

[@NeoExtentialist]

You're Welcome.

[@kamildryjski8430]

I use to watch this discovery channel back in its glory days now we have shows on how to find gold in Alaska to let's fix a car and sale it for profit

[@granskare]

I particularly like the AN-2 :) I wanted to fly the IL14 from Helsinki to Stockholm but the Czechs left at some 5 am, too early for me.

[@compteck7]

Yes another thanks, Phil, for the upload..the updated video comment was directed at Discovery Channel

[@tomast9034]

my former employer transported steel chimney with an-225 to russia. they wanted it really fast :D

[@Lastindependentthinker]

Narration by Peter Ustinov.

[@Doug6412]

Lastindependentthinker dr snuggles.

[@mkvector9539]

*Sir Peter Ustinov

[@taketimeout2share]

Music by my brother.

[@jusjetz]

Lastindependentthinker Prince John and King Richard From Disney’s Robin Hood and Old Major From Animal Farm.

[@jeremyfine1464]

Excellent narration. My first thought exactly but is just a little more even, lacking the heavy emphatics and musical lilt but definately from the same school of diction. The Robert Morleys and Peter Ustinovs in TV and cinema are missed. Very Thorough Doc.

[@nitricoxide5899]

Godspeed, Mriya.

[@trplpwr1038]

I would like to see a program on what they did to make their planes so tough to handle unimproved airfields. Tough equipment!

[@CaptainLumpyDog]

I wish I had a titanium floor :(

[@thetruth392]

A great educational video

[@d.cypher2920]

GOD, i love this documentary... they just don't make them like this anymore... I've watched this 3-4+ times ... ----> *STILL ABSORBING NEW KNOWLEDGE * something seemingly simple , subtly, suddenly surrenders some surprises so slyly, ...... seldom, hell ... scarcely seen, .... such serviced sweetness in one's stuff. Hey nice video, brother/sister citizen of earth. The Spherical One. ..... lol. That is bound to ruffle a feather of someone .... 🤣🤣🤣😮😂😂😂😂😂👍👍💥💛💥☺😀🤙🤙

[@NeoExtentialist]

Thanks 🙂

[@67tomcat]

Good Discovery Channel Series with Peter Ustinov providing narration. The old Discovery shows seemed more interesting in my opinion.

[@eamonwright7488]

Hehe same here. I watched this thing 10 times in last several months. I miss the "Wings" channel from long ago. Imagine 24hours a day playing great detailed documentaries and such awesome narration to help put you to sleep like a great audiobook. I remember watching the 10 hour + Doolittle Raid documentary with my grandfather on the Wings channel many years ago. Cheers mate!

[@derptank3308]

d. cypher THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH IS CLEARLY IN THE SHAPE OF OUR LORD AN-124

[@ohlawd3699]

Nice video.👍

[@pimpinaintdeadho]

Great documentary. Thanks for posting. Makes me miss the old days when Discovery Channel made great docs n wasn't full of fuckin "reality" t.v. bullshit.

[@FlightSimHistorian]

Seen at least 2 of these where I live in the USA. Carrying outsize cargo.

[@fabiosunspot1112]

Most Morden aircraft could take 7 years to develop so this is a great achievement for such a large aircraft...

[@uraninite8151]

Very sad that the Mirya got destroyed in this war. Hopefully it will be returned to service

[@Andyxylius]

General purpose agricultural aircraft. Now that's a name to remember!

[@eric3810101]

anyone know the ground effect? plane, ekranoplane, that appears at 13.46?

[@eric3810101]

edit it seems to be bartini-beriev-vva-14, but without its wings www.eurosigns2.net/wp-content/uploads/cache-7622e1acc4909f7e187818bc60f5f2b4/2016/02/The-technology-used-for-this-aircraft-is-called-Ground-Effect.jpg

[@Glen.Danielsen]

Magnificent airplane. But they could only produce one or two of them. The wisdom of the design philosophy of the West is that they took into account producibility and practicality. Showpiece aircraft are hugely impressive, a wonder to behold! But the U.S. and Europe wanted smaller, mission-oriented machines which they could produce more of. More recently, that lesson had to be re-learned by Airbus when they saw the early demise of the magnificent A-380.

[@Tom-Lahaye]

The reason why only 1 An-225 exists is the fact that this aircraft was built for one sole task, transporting the Buran space shuttle. There was a second one in production to stand in as a reserve for the one flying. But because of the ending of the Buran program, and subsequent collapse of the Sowjet Union, the need and the funds to finish the second An-225 vanished. This was also by the fact that the Antonov Design Bureau was now in the independent state of Ukrain, which didn't want to take part in any Russian military or space program anymore. Instead Antonov decided to monetize their existing fleet of An-124's and the sole An-225 hiring them out. There were some rumours they wanted to finish the second An-225 in production, but designing and building such aircraft is so ridiculously expensive that it's not economical for the limited use such aircraft have in civil transport. There would be only work for maybe 2 or 3 An-225's worldwide, as most civil transport can be done with adapted civil airliners. For the Russian army, the existing fleet of An-124's left in their air force is sufficient to meet all transport roles, including heavy battle tanks. So it's not very likely a new design this big will soon see the world.

[@Glen.Danielsen]

Tom Lahaye Thanks Tom. That is interesting info. Russian (and Ukrainian) aviation has always been stunningly impressive!

[@alreadydeadal]

I've heard the background music and it's "Squares from an Exhibition" of Mussogorski. I don't see mention him in the credits.

[@aaronkryder6186]

Good catch!

[@mickkennedy1344]

The Americans spent millions developing a pen to write in space, the Russians used................a pencil

[@Ni999]

Ah, the internet, where made up facts are the best!

[@shebbs1]

That is a myth, though the US does tend to try and reinvent the wheel, at great expense.

[@mickkennedy1344]

@@shebbs1 It's an allegory

[@codys8754]

I've watched all of these documentaries back in the mid 90's, and recorded them all on VHS, now DVD. I've always tried to find the music from this video series on-line, or learn who wrote and composed it, but I haven't been able to.

[@Ni999]

I could be wrong but I think that many of the interspersed musical pieces are excerpts from Mussorgsky's Pictures At An Exhibition.

[@Ni999]

And as Will Rogers pointed out in another comment, 0:48 is the Hymn To Red October by Basil Poledouris.

[@pascalchauvet4230]

There also was no transport derivative of the Boeing B-29 copy Tupolev TU-4 bomber, like the Boeing C-97 derived from the B-29/B-50 later developed into the "Pregnant Guppy"

[@compteck7]

It would have been nice to get an updated video made, however this 1 needs some fact checking..eg the AN-124 actually carries more cargo than the C-5, and further and the updated versions further and heavier than the C-5B

[@morgangrey4020]

Further nowadays means almost nothing when you can refuel by air.Also the C-5 had the advantage of speed.....that can be critical to a battlefield that needs supplies quickly.

[@citizenblue]

1:17 Yeah they built some B-29's under license, too...

[@AtheistOrphan]

Chris Odom - Correct. The Tupolev TU-4 ‘Bull’.

[@Charlesputnam-bn9zy]

They name their giant 4-turboprop transport ''Antea", but in Greek Mythology, the giant Antea was downed by Hercules. The C-130 Hercules outoutoutlived the Antonov Antea.

[@andymadden8183]

One An-22 is still in service, registered UR-09307 to Antonov Airlines.

[@AtheistOrphan]

Charles putnam1982 - The AN-22 is a much, MUCH larger aircraft than the Hercules! The Russian equivalent of the Hercules is the AN-12, of which there are many still in service all over the world.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

interestingly lockheed provided training for an export customer some years ago of the an12 in exchange for some c130 orders. to lockheed's surprise the an12 was not as terrible as 1st thought and with some special training was quite capable.

[@morgangrey4020]

but the AN-12 falls way short of the C-130 in overall capabilities and versatility.

[@matthiashornbostel8240]

Voice of Sir Peter Ustinov. I miss Hercule Poirot.

[@reneegiese6315]

Me too, YT has deleted all those movies.

[@orange70383]

That thing is like a flying cruise ship.

[@MrTaxiRob]

Airbus and Boeing keep upping the size of their airliners, why not license the AN-225 design and fit it for passenger service? I bet there are even more efficient and quiet engines available for it today, as it's a 30+ year old design...

[@johnklar5131]

FooBar Maximus As in Basler BT-67s?

[@AvengerII]

@@soulsphere9242 I don't think the A380 WILL be a commercial failure -- it IS already commercial failure. It'll never make back its development costs. It came too late in the jumbo cycle and economics have gone against these planes now. The 747 is being retired quickly now. The original -100 versions are gone and nobody's ordering new -400 versions (or whatever they called the latest passenger model) and they actually had (last I read) two brand-new planes built for a Russian airline (or East Asian carrier) that were put into storage after that airline went bankrupt! Boeing may go ahead and convert those planes to head of state/executive planes. The 747 was launched at the right time and Boeing wisely designed the plane to be easily converted or built as a cargo/transport vehicle. Airbus did NOT engineer the A380 to be easily built as a cargo plane and missed that market entirely. The 747 production line is surviving almost solely as a cargo-type. They still have enough orders from delivery companies like UPS to keep building 747s for the time-being -- perhaps a decade or more. Also, heads of state STILL prefer to order 747s as executive planes (Air Force One, Japan, China, etc.) because of A) prestige and B) the access 747s have around most large commercial airports around the world. I don't know that the A380 is supported as well... many airports support the 747 well enough but the A380 is at the upper limit or past it and isn't supported as well. On paper, it seemed a natural to build a plane bigger than the 747. It wasn't appreciated at the time that BIGGER wasn't the direction to go in. It's only about 10 years after the A380 first flew that it was obvious Airbus made the wrong engineering decision. In the meantime, Boeing hedged its bets between twin-engine development and a stretched 747 (still cheaper than a fresh paper design) and while "experts" derided Boeing for NOT being as ambitious as A380 in the end they had the last laugh... The problem with the jumbo is A) it's not as economical fuel-wise as a twin jet and B) they weren't filling those planes half the time and it was more expensive to support (additional engines to maintain) and fuel them (less economy, greater fuel burn for less range by the pound). Some of the twins can carry nearly as many people as the early jumbos and go farther.

[@AvengerII]

@FooBar Maximus Yep, I think they're being sensible with modern transport designs. They will keep a few jumbos and mega-planes for the few loads the smaller cargo transporters can't handle but there's no economic incentive to keep building more of these 4-engined jumbos after the orders finally dry up. I think the situation with Emirates airlines sealed the fate of the A380. The A380 cost the 747 some orders but I think the 747 would have faded away without the A380, too.

[@turbotroll8605]

​@FooBar Maximus About 20% as fuel efficient as a modern American aircraft indeed, none of which can carry 250 tonnes of payload. This is the same argument Boeing uses for its KC-46 against the A330 MRTT - one is designed to carry 250-300 passengers and one is designed to carry 180-230 passengers. Don't load an A330 up with 300 passengers and see what happens to fuel burn

[@mrrolandlawrence]

50.000 lb per engine for the an124? Could be remade as a twin jet today! I hope they make some more soon

[@imrekalman9044]

12:36 This has to be K-36, ejecting upside down then turning 180. Ouch!

[@rickautry2759]

Titanium floor? There goes lawn my darts !

[@JohnSampson]

Wow! That is all that one can say!

[@krzysztofrodak876]

12:20 ouch !

[@NeoExtentialist]

Fortunately, it was a crash dummy that was used in the ejection sequence. Someone ought to do an online petition to get the W.O.T.R.S. series re-release on DVD/Blu-Ray and Digital Download. I would sign it in a heartbeat!

[@pascalchauvet4230]

It seems strange that such a capable aircraft-building nation which Russia undoubtedly was brought forth a design as the rather pedestrian designs as the Iljushin IL-12 and IL-14 at a time when much more advanced transport aircraft as the Douglas C-54 and Lockheed Constellation were already in service

[@eamonwright7488]

If i'm not mistaken the An-225 was used in the first Chechen war in 1994.

[@AtheistOrphan]

Shay Wilkerson - No it wasn’t. Only one exists and it has been VERY selectively used. And solely for civilian purposes.

[@eamonwright7488]

@@AtheistOrphan Yeah, it was the IL-76.. It's sad to see that the only AN-225 was recently destroyed in Ukraine fighting.

[@MiguelMartinez-nu2jj]

Great planes dont let the gringos hate on russian technology all of this planes were on a leage of its own

[@jamesmandahl444]

Nah we love Soviet and Russian designed aircraft.

[@Carolinacaveman]

14:09-14:12 beautiful sound.

[@roeva2]

THE CRATE LOL

[@MiguelMartinez-nu2jj]

Russia allways breaking ground on technology

[@MyFabian94]

Without breaking the Ground on unprepared Runways.

[@mdb831]

10:49 holy eyebrows Batman!

[@mrrolandlawrence]

and now the tu22m3m has re-fuelling probe added again!

[@compteck7]

Too bad Boeing had not watched the section on here, about Midas, before messing around with the 767 derived KC-46..interesting to be able to re-fuel 3 at once

[@KAMA3AC]

refueling 3 jets just for show. Normally they refuel only 2 jets Middle line is for heavy bombers. Refueling 3 jets just for show normally they refuel only 2 jets .

[@compteck7]

KAMA3AC Maybe just show but, in theory, it does and has been shown to work...the KC-46 only refuels 1 at a time, and even then, they have/had issues with getting it to work properly.

[@Nope-wm8dd]

compteck7 I flew KC-135s for 20 years. We had that ability for decades. The problem isn’t the refueling system (MPRS) Multi Point Refueling System, it’s the wingspan of the jets being refueled and the width of the refueling aircraft. If the wingspan of the receivers are too long then it was too dangerous, refueling 3 jets at the same time is just for show. Also, I have friends flying the KC-46 with Boeing. There are no issues with the refueling system. In fact, the KC-46 has a more advanced version of MPRS. Just like the KC-135, they can refuel 2 receivers at the same time and will do it operationally.

[@compteck7]

I knew the KC-135's had the wing ability and I know that the refueling 3 at a time was show. I also know that the KC-46 will be able to do it once they get everything sorted out..Yes I also have friends working with the program and they have had issues with the boom digital imaging system, which has allowed some aircraft to have paint scrapes on the receiving aircraft fuselage. That is why it is past its intended start delivery date of Aug 2017..why I said about the messing around was, if they had left well enough alone instead of trying to overtweak a working system, those tankers would already be in the USAF hands almost a year ago..Midas uses the KISS approach.

[@Nope-wm8dd]

compteck7 I heard electrical issues regarding the faulty wiring was the delay. At least that’s what my Director of Ops friend at Altus Ok the site of the first Sq told me. But either way it’s good they are tweaking the boom. The KC-135 boom is 50s tech and the KC-10 boom is 70s tech so a new digital fly by wire boom was necessary. Neither those nor the KC-46 boom have anything to do with refueling 3 receivers at the same time.

[@mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm420]

Inappropriate background music singles out American production

[@dsnodgrass4843]

All these comments, and no one's mentioned Viktor Bout. He's the guy who wound up owning a lot of these, for his cargo-shipping/arms dealing business in Africa. He's (at last hearing) in jail now somewhere, but someone for sure ain't letting those aircraft sit and rot.

[@mb32174]

And now he's free

[@jarhead565]

Discovery messed up by cancelling Discovery Wings. BIG TIME

[@ReachForTheSky]

I think mph and kph were confused a few times. I doubt these prop transports could go 450mph. Otherwise, very good and great to hear Ustinov

[@imrekalman9044]

They do go that fast, 720 kmph. :) The big boys, Tu-95/114 are even faster, 900+ kmph!

[@neilmacleod5371]

Why not , the "Bear " pokes along at over six hundred miles per hour , and look at the size of that thing, built in the fifties and still the fastest prop driven large aircraft , still flying

[@MrKafrovich]

This is very sad that will not be made any other planes like this in the future...I think we already reached the top. Rip USSR the real motherland.

[@Curling12341]

What airshow is this?

[@AtheistOrphan]

Curling12341 - It’s an old Discovery Channel programme.

[@paulomastromano2344]

Rússia Grande Rússia! Eis o equilíbrio da paz Mundial! Viva Grande Rússia! Viva a paz entre todos os povos do mundo! Viva V.Putin e a união entre os povos de todo o mundo!

[@FPVREVIEWS]

Stratolaunch is here now..

[@evilelf5967]

that an 12.....looks like a b2 during takeoff.hmmm.

[@christinestill5002]

DC 3 COPY is right. Didn't two crash in Russ & were copied by them bolt for bolt? I'm waiting to see an Antonov 225. Just which was "The Great Patriotic War"?

[@AtheistOrphan]

Christine Still - Not quite. It was the Boeing B-29 Superfortress which crashed and was copied, appearing as the Tupolev TU-4 ‘Bull’. ‘The Great Patriotic War’ is what the Russians call WW2.

[@jamesmonahan1819]

AN-2 The Russian Caravan.

[@punman5392]

Why do they even bother getting a license for manufacture? They’re on the other side of the world all they have to do is just buy one and copy it’s design! They’ve done it before.

[@calvingreene90]

Stalin need to hire experts to design industrial plants and other infrastructure and it was cheaper to license the DC-3 production than have to go black market for the experts. When they no longer needed the outside experts they stop paying the licensing fees.

[@shenghan9385]

Matt Bowen look, they were not as dishonest as the Chinese...

[@shebbs1]

Licencing and stealing plans is easier than reverse engineering an aircraft.

[@bruceblake9942]

Peter, Unlike your description, the AN-225 was a Ukrainian design !!! [Aussie in BC]

[@jcsandygobotobkkbo2192]

That's a c130

[@tedhernandez2394]

Jcsandy Gobot obkkbo......B-29 ring a bell?

[@Torahboy1]

2.10 Imperial Stormtroopers?

[@rikuurufu5534]

Inflight refueling is batshit.

[@roysterfutrell8889]

And there probably wont be anything to match its size. At least not for a long time since there's no real big advantage to that much size given the cost. The Russians just want to be seen as BIG!

[@Imman1s]

Those are the only planes in the world capable of lifting heavy machinery on that scale. So definitely there is a need for those, albeit in small numbers.

[@MiguelMartinez-nu2jj]

Bears do fly only in russia

[@tylerj2710]

I really do get tired of watching shit that is 30 years old when it comes to tech documentaries,. -need more current shit !

[@jebise1126]

and nothing probably will even match those since there is no need for something like that anyway.

[@aaronosborne4906]

What are you talking about the 225 is in constant demand all over the world for heavy lift jobs, as are the 124's which were still being made right up until 2004. True you don't need many of them but they do serve a roll or else they wouldn't ALL still be flying to this very day would they ?

[@jebise1126]

its not enough to develop new ones and probably even those that were build didnt really pay their development.

[@aaronosborne4906]

They all have paid for the cost of building them or else they wounldn't have continued to make them would they ? If you look on the wiki page about the 124's they almost started another run of them in 2013 but problems between russia and ukraine stopped this - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-124_Ruslan . The 225 was one of a kind and costs HUGH amount's of cash just to hire - www.quora.com/How-do-the-economics-of-flying-the-Antonov-An-225-Mriya-compare-to-other-planes . Infact it makes such good money that is daft to not allow people to hire it for heavy lift run's.

[@jebise1126]

it was made as military plane so all development cost was provided by the state. so cost of making new ones is fairly cheap since you dont need to include development cost. my point was that we wont see any new types of such big planes

[@aaronosborne4906]

So why say they didn't pay back devlopment cost then turn around and say you don't need to include development cost as it was low anyway? As for your second point that we won't see new types of large planes like these i would say you are correct, after all why bother with a new design if these fit the bill. If they need more planes like these then they have the option to just build more of the same type, they seem to fill a niche market. So yes the days of new large planes like these is probably been and gone, a shame really.

[@user-os4rr2pq8g]

AN-225 made in Kiev, Ukraine. AN-124 too. It's Ukrainian Giants.

[@rock3tcatU233]

IKR? These blyats don't even know the difference.

[@nstvm82]

Володимир Пшеничний , purely made with russian assistance and critical components without which they'd never have moved out of the drawing boards.

[@masterwingchun8546]

All aircrafts of Antonov are from Ukraine: An-2, An-10, An-12, An-22, An-24, An-32, An-124, An-225

[@rasosteva]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Antonov_(aircraft_designer) first read Master wing Oleg Antonov is Russian

[@borisfohrman3133]

Crock of shit in 1949 Russians transferred Antonov bureau to shithole Ukraine land of Nazis, Fascists Executioners German collaborators, just look at these miserable pigs now - zero industry, one-third of the population gone either in Russia or in Poland working menial jobs.

[@shebbs1]

Early An-124's had a short service life due to airframe design, though this was corrected in later iterations.

[@slojogojo2766]

I like the AN-2 but the range really sucks!