Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A bit of a stupid question, why can't they use military aircraft like the C-5 Galaxy? Those things are cheaper to run and requires much less logistics. Yes they can't hold as much cargo, but just wondering why not made cargo military planes available for civilian cargo.
A bit of a stupid question, why can't they use military aircraft like the C-5 Galaxy? Those things are cheaper to run and requires much less logistics. Yes they can't hold as much cargo, but just wondering why not made cargo military planes available for civilian cargo.
I doubt a C-5 is cheaper to run when all costs are considered or the U.S. Military wouldn't commercial carriers under contract. And the U.S. Military cannot (by law) haul commercial cargo except under very rare circumstances. If there is a commercial service available the Military cannot compete with it.
I doubt a C-5 is cheaper to run when all costs are considered or the U.S. Military wouldn't commercial carriers under contract. And the U.S. Military cannot (by law) haul commercial cargo except under very rare circumstances. If there is a commercial service available the Military cannot compete with it.
I would be interesting to see how much it coasts to operate the An-225
Our Military employs private sector contractors for a couple of reasons. One it makes the causality count in war zones lower because the contractors are NOT military personnel even though they are doing military jobs and two because it is a very efficient way of transferring government money into private hands but not be called welfare.
Our Military Industrial Congressional complex is the largest and most efficient form of welfare for private sector ever created. Just consider how much jet fuel is purchased to keep nuclear weapon loaded B-52's (yes - 50 year old B-52's) flying over the northern US and Canada as a deterrent to a nuclear war with Russia. Some aircraft fuel supplier is making a lot of money doing this deal. This is just another welfare system in action.
A bit of a stupid question, why can't they use military aircraft like the C-5 Galaxy? Those things are cheaper to run and requires much less logistics. Yes they can't hold as much cargo, but just wondering why not made cargo military planes available for civilian cargo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW
For some cargos the cost of a AN-225 is les than the alternative. That is why they use it.
true enough, but i doubt that the US will sell C5s to china or russia.
Look you can charter one here Antonov An-225 | Air Charter Service
It can transport up to 250 tonnes of cargo, including single pieces weighing up to 200 tonnes, over short and medium distances.
A 777 freight is good for around 103 Tons and 747 around 111 tons...Very interesting... I see the triple 7 taking over the 747 market. they all carry almost the same payload but the 777 is much more efficient
The C5 carries "only" 118,387kg
One of these ANTONOV 225s just landed this afternoon at BWI. My son saw it approaching the airport from Pasadena,MD, and texted me to go outside and watch for it. Never seen a plane that large before. I wish I knew when it was taking off. I would love to be near the end of the runway to watch it.
One of these ANTONOV 225s just landed this afternoon at BWI. My son saw it approaching the airport from Pasadena,MD, and texted me to go outside and watch for it. Never seen a plane that large before. I wish I knew when it was taking off. I would love to be near the end of the runway to watch it.
There's just one An-225. As of last evening (July 9) it was at IQQ in Chile.
There's just one An-225. As of last evening (July 9) it was at IQQ in Chile.
Yesterday it landed in Baltimore. I don't know what to tell you. My son texted me with a picture of it.
It had ANT0NOV 225 written on it below the pilot's windshield halfway down. Above and to the rear it says "INTERNATIONAL CARGO TRANSPORTER" with smaller writing I couldn't make out. On the tail I could make out something that must have been ANTONOV on the vertical stabilizer, but that was not in my son's picture.
I was from a distance when I saw it approaching the viewing park on Dorsey Road as it neared the runway. If there is only one, then I guess it flew here from Chile.
I can imagine it is a nice plane to fly in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
