spantax From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 334 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 3 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5176 times:
Just a theoretical exercise:
1. Forget about any kind "87 x 84 box" or whatever limitation
2. Use only real/existing components
3. But you can modify wing and/or engines or ad engines
4. Forget about economics, of course
Would it be possible a sort of An-225 with 750-800 t/MTOW "just" by adding a couple of sections 6-7 meters long fore and aft the wing and with new engines? How long can the fuselage be stretched before it relly breaks down?
glen From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 247 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4932 times:
Quoting spantax (Thread starter): Would it be possible a sort of An-225 with 750-800 t/MTOW "just" by adding a couple of sections 6-7 meters long fore and aft the wing and with new engines?
Increasing the size (length) of an aircraft does not help to increase its MTOW. It only helps to increase the possible volume to be loaded.
To increase the MTOW you need to increase thrust (you mentioned engines) and lift (higher speeds or different wing). Besides this you have to strengthen the structure, especially wing and its fixation and the gear (which is already quite impressive on the AN-225!)
"The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view." - Albert Einstein
spantax From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 334 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 4183 times:
Hi, Thank you to all for your wise (as always) comments, and specially to Rez, who catched really my thoughts with his design (although he forgot the canard mentioned by Wingscrubber.... ). In any case, let's hope that sometime/somehow the second AN-225 will be completed and will fly and be admired as it deserves.
bond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5630 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3598 times:
I guess the big question, is why? Is there a market for it?
It would seem there isn't much market, else we'd see the other AN225 being finished and more on the way.
Companies are building equipment to fit the available freighters, not the other way round. Everything shipped in the AN225 could have been broken down into smaller pieces and/or shipped another method (albeit more expensive perhaps).
If the costs of building them could be justified, we'd have more than one flying.
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
Totally agree. The AN-225 is a one off plane. It was designed and built to haul something that doesn't exist, anymore. Why would they make a bigger one, when they have not built another like the original?
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning...Smells like victory!