Michael Manousakis and his Morlock Motors is nuts but hilarious to watch.

[2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Buddies_%E2%80%93_Stahlh... (Sorry German only)

Unfortunately geoblocked here. Is there another link?

Well, here's a pastebin with an NZB-file ;)

https://pastebin.com/T7BKYhMV

Or alternatively: https://www.magnetdl.com/f/flight-of-the-antonov/

the whole show, unfortunately not, but you can find many excerpts on YouTube. like here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chkIzgABFEU just search for "steel buddies Antonov Atlantik"

The Germans sure like geoblocking, don't they?

Katastrophe!

There's talk that the only an-2 produced, that resides in Ukraine, was damaged or destroyed.

The An-2 (NATO reporting name: "Cock") is a single-engined utility biplane used throughout the former Warsaw Pact as a light airliner, cargo plane, and crop duster. Its general performance is comparable to the ancient Douglas DC-3, with the added twist that it generates so much lift at low speeds that it can land and take off from very rough, unprepared fields.

Wikipedia article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-2

The An-225 Mriya is so much bigger that if you could cram them in, it could carry 77 An-2s as passengers :-)

The COCK is the AN-22 and has four engines, which iirc are the same as used on the bear bombers. The NATO name for the An-2 biplane is COLT.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-2

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-22

Whoops! Was commenting from memory.

It's very unfortunate that the An-225 is now reported as destroyed in the war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_An-225_Mriya#2022_Russ...

Damn. I was just watching some videos of this plane last week and wondered if I’d ever get to see it in person some day.

It was really something. I saw it at Houston Intercontinental once.

You're confusing the AN-2 which is a biplane, single engined mass-produced aircraft weighing about 3000kg, with the AN-225, which is a six-engined one-of-a-kind behemoth weighing about 285,000kg

ah! you're right.

Very sad, yes, this is the best source I could find https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/antonov-an-225-larges...

I'm honestly surprised it was destroyed. Why wouldn't the Russians want to use this plane in the future?

EDIT: an-2 != an-225.

It was based at the Antonov airfield, which was captured very early by the Russian special forces and then held for several days under massive assaults from the Ukrainian forces. Whichever side actually destroyed the plane (I would assume it was a Ukrainian artillery barrage), it was almost certainly not done purposefully.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Antonov_Airport

>> Why wouldn't the Russians want to use this plane in the future?

Russian-owned and operated transport aircraft arent going to be flying much internationally for a while. Many of the an-225's customers are on the other side of sanctions walls.

Years ago there were rumors, that they are developing their own super-heavy cargo plane. https://vimeo.com/103542677 Not sure if that project ever went further than the demo video though

It's also an incredibly powerful symbol of Ukrainian engineering and flight expertise. Antonov is a Ukrainian company.

It was built in 1988. If anything, it was an incredibly powerful symbol of Soviet engineering and flight expertise.

Contrary to popular view, people living in the Soviet Union didn't lose their national identities.

I don't see a lot of value in this line of argument, but want to make several things clear. You impute a single national identity to the plane designers and engineers based on their physical location. Setting aside the fact that the construction bureau itself was relocated to Kiev from Novosibirsk in the late 50s, the people who worked there came from all over in the Soviet Union. Tolmachev and Antonov certainly did not have the national identity you impute.

Regardless, it was a Soviet engineering outfit, not a Russian or Ukrainian one. Just like Chernobyl was a Soviet project and failure, not a Russian or Ukrainian one.

It's hame is in Ukrainian, not Russian, so yes, there's certainly a national identity to the plane :)

Ah, to the plane! Yes, of course -- just like the national identity of Hughes H-4 is Greco-Roman. :)

If the Hughes H-4 were built and designed in a state of Greco-Romans, and were the first airplane authorized to have a non-American name, you could make that argument.

I think you're talking about the An-225, no? the giant one. the An-2 is not a big plane and nearly 20 thousand were built of them.

That's another Antonov design , the An-225.