It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oops...U2 fries LAX air traffic control computers

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2014 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Just read that the resent LAX and corresponding area air traffic control shut down was possible caused by a U2 flying above the LAX area:



On Wednesday at about 2 p.m., according to sources, a U-2 spy plane, the same type of aircraft that flew high-altitude spy missions over Russia 50 years ago, passed through the airspace monitored by the L.A. Air Route Traffic Control Center in Palmdale, Ca. The L.A. Center handles landings and departures at the region’s major airports, including Los Angeles International (LAX), San Diego and Las Vegas.
The computers at the L.A. Center are programmed to keep commercial airliners and other aircraft from colliding with each other. The U-2 was flying at 60,000 feet, but the computers were attempting to keep it from colliding with planes that were actually miles beneath it.



“FAA technical specialists resolved the specific issue that triggered the problem on Wednesday, and the FAA has put in place mitigation measures as engineers complete development of software changes,” said the agency in a statement. “The FAA will fully analyze the event to resolve any underlying issues that contributed to the incident and prevent a reoccurrence.”

Sources told NBC News that the plane was a U-2 with a Defense Department flight plan. “It was a ‘Dragon Lady,’” said one source, using the nickname for the plane. Edwards Air Force Base is 30 miles north of the L.A. Center. Both Edwards and NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center, which is located at Edwards, have been known to host U-2s and similar, successor aircraft.


Interesting that this is the first reported occurrence of such an incident. I would think that this scenario would have happened before now. Maybe a U2 wasn't to blame?

www.nbcnews.com...
edit on 3-5-2014 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Same thing happened in Paris when we started the gulf war.

the AWAC's were ordered to fire up their anti radar gear as soon as the got air born so no one would know where the fighter's were coming from or headed too.

Prob was, when they did that thousands of cars parked at the airport had their computers fried.

in other worlds, they already knew this would happen, since they did it before.


edit on 3-5-2014 by HardCorps because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Yeah, Maybe a newer toy.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: HardCorps

This had nothing to do with radar or ECM. It was, apparently, a software problem. The software did not know the altitude of the U2 (very high). It freaked out, thinking that the plane was in amongst lower traffic.
edit on 5/3/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: HardCorps

This had nothing to do with radar or ECM. It was, apparently, a software problem. The software did not know the altitude of the U2 (very high). It freaked out, thinking that the plane was in amongst lower traffic.

Sounds like the Computer needs therapy.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

The only thing that doesn't sound right to me about this is a "spy" plane being picked up on commercial radar and tracking systems. You would think that a spy plane would be undetectable to some degree. But then again I have no idea how the U2 eludes detection... Maybe it's just with extreme height.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Trapjaw

The U-2 is a 1960s recon plane. It's not stealthy at all, and it's slow as can be. There is a 15 knot difference between stall and break up in flight. It attempted to avoid radar, and interception by flying above 70,000 feet. It was thought that even if the radar could see that high, there wasn't anything that could intercept it up there.

There were attempts to make it stealthier over the years, that only resulted in the loss of aircraft and at least one pilot IIRC during testing.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   
annie jacobsen wrote a pretty good book on AREA 51 that has a very hefty portion dedicated to the U2 and its exploits throughout our history. a very very very interesting read. I'm not an expert myself so i tend to just buy most of it how she presents it and she definitely has some rather "convenient" answers for some of the more Obscure Area 51 stories. the U2 however she seems to cover in GREAT detail and depth.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: mindseye1609

Take that book with a big grain of salt in some portions. She almost guaranteed that the Road Runners would never talk to anyone again about their exploits.

There is a lot of information on the U-2 out there to be found, except where they flew, and when they flew there. Although to an extent you can find out, until about the 70s. After that the flight information dries up.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Project Rainbow was the attempt to make the U-2 more stealthy. Attempts including adding a honeycomb RAM material, topped with a conductive graphite grid. The RAM was up to 1 inch thick in places. It reduced the altitude by 5,000 feet, and the range by 20%, as well as preventing heat dissipation through the skin.

The test article crashed April 4, 1957, killing the pilot. The engine flamed out due to overheating, and the aircraft entered a flat spin, and when the pilot tried to jump, the tail struck him, killing him.

Dirty Bird

There was also Trapeze. Trapeze put a wire cage around the airframe in an attempt to hide it from 70mhz radars.

Trapeze



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mindseye1609

Take that book with a big grain of salt in some portions. She almost guaranteed that the Road Runners would never talk to anyone again about their exploits.

There is a lot of information on the U-2 out there to be found, except where they flew, and when they flew there. Although to an extent you can find out, until about the 70s. After that the flight information dries up.


hmmm im gonna have to look into this controversy you speak of? any links? did she reveal to much of what was being said to her like where they were ? i know theres a few stories in there that felt a "Little too detailed" to be an ex SPY mission, ya know what i mean?



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: mindseye1609

No, they were actually thrilled with a lot of it, and being able to get their stories out. But she jumped the shark with the Roswell portion of it, which upset them.

Huff Post


But did all of this really happen? Barnes, an ex-Area 51 employee, says he and other Roadrunner Internationale colleagues were upset when they read about the Nazi-Soviet connection to the fabled base. He claims it never happened and shouldn't have been included in Jacobsen's book.

"Everybody's up in arms over the book -- it's got its good points, but the last chapter just destroys what would've been a good book," Barnes told AOL Weird News.

"We're the group that worked at Groom Lake back in the 1950s and 60s," he explained. "We worked on the U2 program and then the A12 [a CIA project that lead to the supersonic SR-71 spy plane]. Our group bonded so closely because of the work that we did, and we've stayed a family all these years. We even had reunions for over 40 years, but they were all secret."

Everything was so secretive at Area 51, Barnes admits, they never talked about it outside of work.

"You really didn't refer to it much. No one knew that it existed, like at home, our wives didn't know where we were working or what we were doing, so it just really didn't have a name."

Barnes says that he and other members of the Roadrunners Internationale felt betrayed when Jacobsen's book came out.

"That's been a real dilemma for us. We originally talked with her for the book because it was an opportunity for us to get our stories told once and for all for the sake of history, our friends and our families.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

!! jumping the shark is a bit of an understatement lol! the book felt historical and textbookish but written in a fun way until you get to that part, felt like a bad tabloid.

i will give her credit tho at penning the most terrestrial yet outlandish explanation for the roswell incident I've ever heard lol. it was so outlandish that even the people wanting it to be aliens might grab on to it and it seemed just plausible enough with enough trigger bad guys in it to make the non alien people think it might be true too.

was this an intentional disinformation? was it just her attempt to try and deal with the elephant in the room? i cant imagine what the blowback would of been if she just completely ignored the event but to just make this up? seems like a worse move.

if i recall they did interview one of the heads of security in there and she asked him a question along the lines of "anything special going on out there?" and his answer was something rather cryptic like "who knows, i know i dont!" and this was supposed to be the guy who would know either way, so him saying "Idk" kinda leaves ya wondering. man i cant remember is name it was one of the main characters of the book.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: HardCorps
a reply to: Sammamishman

Same thing happened in Paris when we started the gulf war.

the AWAC's were ordered to fire up their anti radar gear as soon as the got air born so no one would know where the fighter's were coming from or headed too.

Prob was, when they did that thousands of cars parked at the airport had their computers fried.

in other worlds, they already knew this would happen, since they did it before.



Hope the USA paid for all the cars they royally screwed up!

I know if a US plane screwed my car up and didn't pay Id go full jihad on your arse

edit on 3-5-2014 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: mindseye1609

Yeah, it was HUGE that the Roadrunners talked to her at all. That's one reason that they're so pissed about the book. This was their big chance to pass these stories down to posterity, and tell people what they did. They felt betrayed that they took this huge chance, and she completely jumped the shark on them.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

i havent really been able to find much of what ole annie has to say for herself yet. seems like a real shame.

my favorite part of the whole book tho had to be the stories of the giant tarps they cut to different outlandish airframe shapes and laid them on the runways to make weird heat signatures for the russian satellites.. LOL proper trolling IMO.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: mindseye1609

Yeah, both sides used to do weird stuff to spoof the satellites. It's fun to read up on the really low tech methods used to defeat high tech spying.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

looks like the roadrunners might be end up with a little more to grumble about.




the first couple minutes are just random UFO news, they talk about that flying triangle from texas and kansas a bit and then at 3:47 they go into detail how annie jacobsen and chris carter (Of x-files fame) will be making a new show based on the book. being described as "a contemporary conspiracy thriller revealing the true story behind the infamous area 51"

i doubt adding commercial sales to this story is going to help bring it back to the truth sadly.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: mindseye1609

Oh yeah, that's probably going to piss them off to entirely new levels.



posted on May, 3 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

to bring this little tangent back full circle is the U2 in question in the OP being flown by one of the old timers? or is it a currently in service plane? for training purposes obviously but still being flown and trained on by new generations? is this the reason for the 60,000ft mark?

if it was just in transit is there any reason it should of been at 60,000ft? i forget if the planes tolerances only let it fly good when its way up or not? like the oxcart needing the heat to expand and get to full performance i dont remember if the U2 does better up there or not? 60,000ft just seemed like an odd cruising altitude lol.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join