26 thoughts on “Mriya”

    1. That was my thought too. I know it is home based there, but it was widely used in oil and gas, and you would think someone would want it sitting at a safe location not near a potential war zone.

        1. Until pretty much the day of, nobody there really thought Putin would try to swallow all of Ukraine. Prior to that I doubt they could justify the fuel costs flying it elsewhere, much less finding a hanger for it.

    3. Apparently down for maintenance after a previous flight. Antonov says one of the engines was dismantled and she was unable to fly on the 24th, and they didn’t have a chance to get it airworthy before the Russians took the field. Things become muddy after that, with conflicting accounts of Ukrainian forces retaking the base or it remaining under Russian control, but apparently during an exchange of fire between opposing helicopter gunships the Mriya caught a golden 80mm S-8 BB.

  4. A few years ago, it spent several months at MSP inop, awaiting parts. If that was the case this time, you have your explanation

  5. My little sister works in global logistics. When the aircraft flew into Houston she was invited down to tour it. She’d been inside 747 cargo planes, C-130s and C-5s. The Antonov astonished her at how big the cargo deck was.

  6. The world probably needs about 3 of these kind of aircraft but with Western turbofans. Any idea of which aircraft could be used as a basis for a super heavy/large volume lifter?
    OK I just looked at AN-225 specifications. You only need 4 GE 115 to get 460,000 pounds of thrust which is more than the AN-225’s 309,000 pounds.
    There are some surplus Airbus A380’s around to the extent that at least one has been parted out. Maybe use the big GE engines,use the cockpit and do a Hyper Guppy conversion on the rest of the fuselage? You probably need to re-design the tail (twin tails?) so make it swing sideways for loading.

  8. There is an unfinished An-225 airframe. If it wasn’t damaged, there might be enough interest to finish it.

  9. We’re not past the 72 hour rule yet. These are the same news sources that told you HCQ would kill you, the vaccine was safe, you wouldn’t get the China virus if you got the vax, Hunter’s laptop was a Russian Hoax and Hillary didn’t pay to spy on Trump.

    1. These are the same news sources that told you HCQ would kill you, the vaccine was safe, you wouldn’t get the China virus if you got the vax, Hunter’s laptop was a Russian Hoax and Hillary didn’t pay to spy on Trump.

      The Herald Scotland has a lot to answer for!

      But I have to say that I find it interesting how you’re conflating relatively simple reporting of war damage with anti-vax and Trumpster stuff. You do realize that you’re just a joystick to Putin, right? He doesn’t care about your concerns any more than how usefully they can be exploited.

      He’s vaxed and socially distanced, for example.

      1. My point, the usual news sources are as reliably!! true as the cases I cited. Why would their “simple reporting of war damage” be any more true or accurate than their usual fake news? All proven to be fake with the passage of time.

        Karl, give my regards to Groucho.

      2. The you are a Russian Agent if you disagree with me thing hasn’t worked since 2016.

        Before you disagree, remember that disagreeing with me means you are literally Putin’s best friend.

        1. Well, why do we have someone conflating war reporting from a source they didn’t bother to check with the usual Trump media bias issues? It looks to me like Rand went to some effort to find a relatively unbiased source. Yet we get the narrative anyway.

          I think there’s something fishy about a poster who complains about the source when they’re really complaining about how bad the news makes their sacred cow look. Sure, fake news can do that, but so can real news when your cow has invaded another country.

  10. I suppose it doesn’t help that those news sources were right on some of your points? Like the vaccine actually being safe and having better odds with covid, if you’re vaccinated and boosted?

    Why would their “simple reporting of war damage” be any more true or accurate than their usual fake news?

    First, do you have reason to believe that the Herald Scotland is a typical generator of fake news? Or that there’s reason to believe this story is fake news. I think it’s highly dishones to tar the entire media for the behavior of a few sources.

    Second, the story seems straight-forward. They claim this is what was reported to them. And what’s reported seems plausible enough. The airport and it’s structures including the hangar in question) being hit by both rocket fire and shelling.

    Maybe the plane survived all that, but wouldn’t be a stretch, if it didn’t. Seems bizarre to be attacking this as fake news, unless you are of the frame of mind that everything which portrays Russia in a negative light is somehow always fake news.

Comments are closed.