This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss
Back to Squawk list
  • 19

This Plane That Carries Planes Costs a Quarter of a Billion Dollars

Submitted
With a front end like Megamind's noggin, this massive airliner may not be the prettiest of airplanes but her whopping 47 ton cargo capacity more than makes up for her homeliness. Popularly known as the "Beluga," this super-capacity transport helps keep the European aviation industry in the air. It's a whale of a plane. (gizmodo.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


flee2013
flee2013 1
What many of us may not know is that the Beluga is fully certified for commercial use. It is available for charter - e.g. it has carried some parts for the International Space Station and other space equipment to their launch sites.

I believe the Dreamlifter is only certified to carry Boeing cargo. Please correct me if I am wrong! :)

In any case, both aircraft are very specialist vehicles and are not what we would call mainstream transport. Same with the An-225.
davidrbarnes
David Barnes 1
My understanding is that Boeing owns the Dreamlifters and has them on a contract operations agreement with Atlas Air. They were type certificated (STC?) as of June, 2007, and as such should be fully certificated for any operations falling within the weight/balance/size capabilities of the aircraft (subject to any new limitiations imposed by said STC).

That said, Boeing may have an exclusive contract on the fleet and almost certainly has a priority contract on them to ensure their access to the Dreamlifters.
chalet
chalet 1
The Beluga and the Dreamlifters are so ugly that only a mother can love
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
And I am not its mother.. LOL
chalet
chalet 1
So U can't love her, (LIMAO)
iflyfsx
iflyfsx 1
Nah, not even their mothers.

It defies the laws of physics. It's too damn ugly to fly. Looks like a terrible Photoshop job.
preacher1
preacher1 1
BUT, they do fly and haul big stuff. Terrible looking yes, but they work.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
That it flies, refutes your second statement which, in turn, refutes your first.
That leaves photoshop - a matter of opinion.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well the dreamlifter still has the biggest cargo hold and really didn't have to be built until the 787 came along and had to be transported worldwide and cross country.
preacher1
preacher1 2
And although jet powered and modernized, it chapped AB's hiney to have to use the Boeing Super Guppy in the early days. LOL
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Call it 'incentivized' .
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
preacher1
preacher1 1
LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ad8916
And the Dreamlifter is much nicer looking!
preacher1
preacher1 16
And the world has seen that it is good on short field landings and takeoffs. LOL
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
It looks like it would be too TOP heavy...
btweston
btweston 1
Well since its cargo is usually hollow (like a piece of fuselage), I'll bet it's not. And since it hasn't crashed yet...
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
When it is full however... But there are not that many yet to be crashed!
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Yeah, as they say, an army of one had best take no casualties.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!