Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonov An-325
:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was merge to An-225. seems to be the consensus. Andy, would you please do what's necessary. DGG ( talk ) 01:51, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
=[[:Antonov An-325]]=
:{{la|Antonov An-325}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|Antonov An-325}})
No reliable sources to attest to notability. This information, with reliable sources, would be better of as a mention on the Antonov An-225 article. BilCat (talk) 16:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 16:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 16:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and agree if a reliable source is found it can be a one liner in the An-225 article. MilborneOne (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to An-225, with a further mention in HOTOL.
: AIUI, this was a plan for around 6 months in early 1991 in the euphoria of post-Soviet cooperation before their collapse into non-working plumbing. The first plan was to resurrect HOTOL as the smaller Interim HOTOL with conventional (and Soviet) rocket engines, piggybacked from the back of an An-225. This had a payload of around 5 tons. Increasing the payload to 7 tons was considered necessary to make this a commercial launch vehicle, which increased the vehicle weight still further. However that then made the takeoff roll of the stacked aircraft too long for the available equatorial launch site airfields (Kourou). Options were considered: longer flights from a longer field (but from where?), RATO (too high structural load on the pylons), an enlarged aircraft or the An-325, an An-225 (probably the #2 airframe that's still incomplete) with the inboard engines doubled up, as the lowest-cost option for greater thrust and a shortened takeoff roll.
: Other than as a HOTOL launcher, there was no point to this aircraft as it was still just a STO(L) An-225, which no-one else needed.
: Then the endemic HOTOL cold feet did for it, as did general Russian unrest.
: As a supposed potential customer for this (and probably the people who'd broken it by asking for larger payloads), by 1993 it was a bit of a joke around ESA and Eutelsat, mostly for the French to taunt the British and their "Dan Dare spaceplane" vs. the French and their "Tintin" rockets. Then the Arianes blew up anyway and the French rocketeers went quiet. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete/Merge as above--Petebutt (talk) 11:35, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete/Merge as above--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.