U-2 Spy Plane down in SW Asia

Thanks again Zaphod
You would have a link to the U2 crashes would you please?

Ask and ye shall receive.

www.blackbirds.net...

Good christ! The U2 has got to be the most dangerous plane ever built. The list of crashes is very long indeed. I am now convinced that this U2 wasnt brought down by enemy fire. You get a way above for that link, very informaative

You have voted Zaphod58 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Thankee sir.

You should read the book "Blind Mans Bluff". Very interesting reading about the overflights, and air recon forces during the cold war.

One thing to remember about the U-2 is that it's very very fragile. There's about a 30 knot window when you're flying. 15 knots one way, you stall and fall out of the sky. 15 knots the other, and it breaks apart and you fall out of the sky. It's a great platform for the mission, and to be fair, there were several of those that were lost trying to get it to do things that it wasn't meant to do, or that were hit by Surface to Air Missiles. I think there were two that were lost trying do air to air refueling, at least one that was lost trying to make it stealthier, and one that was listed as lost because they wanted to see if they could put it on an aircraft carrier, so that the USN could buy them and use them off ships.

Kelly Johnson (the designer) was an absolute genius. It took 18 months to go from the design to the first flight. Then after they had this project operational, he went on to come up with the SR-71, which was another amazing feat. Until then nobody had built a plane entirely out of titanium, so they were learning as they went along. One of the more interesting things they discovered was that the grease pencils they used would eat into the titanium as they were drawing the shapes to cut out on it.

[edit on 23-6-2005 by Zaphod58]

this is what i've seen there saying he was somewhere in SW Afghanistan. heres the link www.usatoday.com...
and they say it was operational

Actually, that says that his MISSION was over Afghanistan, and he was returning and over the UAE when he went down. Final approach for a U-2 can be a very long process. They're on final approach into the base here at about 80 miles.

The high-altitude jet was nearing its base but was not yet on final approach when it crashed at about 2:30 a.m. local time, said Capt. David Small, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command Air Forces. There was no report the crash had been caused by hostile fire, he said

From cnn.com

UAE government sources said the crash was on Al Dhafra Air Base, about an hour outside the capital city of Abu Dhabi. The base is used by U.S. forces.
www.cnn.com...

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The SR-71 was NOT built as a replacement for the U-2. It was built to COMPLEMENT the U-2 and to go areas where the U-2 wasn't safe to take, as in over Russia, or over places that hard large numbers of SA-2 SAM launchers. The U-2 was modified with side scan cameras so that it could skirt areas, and the -71 would overfly them at speeds too fast to be caught.

Originally From Area51zone.com
The SR-71/RS-71 is the "true" successor to the U-2 in every way. The SR-71 took a huge leap over the U-2 instead of just a normal small step.

The SR-71 was built to succeed the U-2 and it surpassed it in every way possible.
I cannot understand why a plane as good as the Blackbird was retired, leaving a 40 yr old flying elephant to do its work!

The US Government need their heads looking at!

Blame George W. Bush. A man that has so many facial similarities with a chimpanzee would most probably not make a good president.

The SR-71 was retired because the CIA and other agencies convinced the government that they were too expensive to run, and sattelites could do the mission better. One of the arguments used is that the Blackbird was developed in the 60s, and sattelites were newer with better technologies.

which is complete dick when you look at the fact that the thing could pick up a golf ball on the fairway when it was at its top alt whatever it really is. somethign like that is never old unless you can get a plane that goes higher fast etc because if the us wants uptodate info they dont wait for a tin can thats inorbite to get over the area.

I actually found a link last night that shows how much the SR and U-2 cost to operate. I don't have time to find it again right now, but I'll post it when I get back tomorrow. It's a lot less than people think.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I actually found a link last night that shows how much the SR and U-2 cost to operate. I don't have time to find it again right now, but I'll post it when I get back tomorrow. It's a lot less than people think.

Found the costs for the Blackbird but not the U-2 yet.....

Originally From Area51zone.com
Cost: Regarding cost, the SR-71 was not cheap. The cost of running the SR-71 fleet in the 1980s was $260 million annually. ABC News has stated that the cost of a single reconnaissance satellite is about $1 billion. It isn't cheap, but it isn't too expensive. It costs $50,000 an hour to fly the SR on a routine basis.

Remember these are the costs in the 80's. The costs would most likely be higher today!

Mic

Originally posted by Canada_EH
which is complete dick when you look at the fact that the thing could pick up a golf ball on the fairway when it was at its top alt whatever it really is.

I think Not!!!!!!!!!!!!

"The pilots are briefed on the mission prior to suiting up. The crew dons the Dave Clark S1030 pressure suit (similiar to what an astronaut wears) only with the help of the Psyhiological Support Division (PSD) crew, at a special facility with large recliner chairs built for the crew members. The "Daveys" as the they are called, cost up to $30,000 each. The suit up takes up to 20 minutes, which is followed another 30 minutes reclining in the oversized recliners while breathing pure oxygen. This last step is to purge their bloodstream of any nitrogen, thus avoiding the possibility of the "bends".

I just threw that in, because it's pretty cool.

"The SR-71 costs about $200,000 for every mission, and this may have been one of the factors in the decision to retire the aircraft. Of course maintenance of a 30 year old airframe, with a very limited number of parts, and major parts not producible due to the absence of tooling (thanks again Mr. McNamara) all adds up to a complex maintenace problem"

"The SR-71 costs $38,000 per flight hour to operate; in comparison, the U-2 costs $6,000 per flight hour."

www.washingtoninstitute.org...
www.milnet.com...

Both links make for some interesting reading.

[edit on 25-6-2005 by Zaphod58]

[edit on 25-6-2005 by Zaphod58]

First, I'd just like to say that I love it when reporters that don't know what they're talking about write stories and try to act knowledgable.....

"The Blackbird wowed with its sleek looks and Mach 3 speed, but it was a royal pain to operate. It leaked fuel on takeoff, guzzled gas midflight, and required extra-long runways for takeoff; nearly all Blackbird missions originated from domestic air bases, where the sensitive planes could be lovingly tended."

Point 1: Fuel leaks on take off. The plane was designed to fly at Mach 5. At that speed it would become up to three feet longer due to heat expansion. They couldn't use rubber bladders in the fuel tanks due to the heat. It could cause fuel contamination if it melted, so the wings themselves were the tanks. They HAD to leave room for expansion of the aircraft because of the heat. No fuel bladder plus expansion joint equals fuel leaks until the fuselage heated up and expanded, which generally occured pretty quickly in flight.

Point 2: Guzzeling fuel. Of COURSE it guzzled fuel. You're using 1960s engines, propelling a plane at Mach 5, what do you THINK is going to happen.

Point 3: Extra long runways. It did NOT require an exta long runway. You have two engines producing 32,500 pounds of trust apiece, and a takeoff weight of 140,000 pounds. It required the same runway that most other planes required.

Point 4: Nearly all missions were flown from the US. Lakenheath in the U.K. and Kadena in Okinawa were major bases for the SR-71 and U-2 both. Many missions were flown out of both bases, and out of the US. But when you have an airplane that can be anywhere in the world in a matter of a few hours, why not fly from the US.

As far as the U-2 operating costs, it's 6,000 per hour to fly, but there isn't much information beyond that out there to find. Anyone else that can find it good luck. heh. Total fuel capacity is about 3530 pounds of JP-8, not sure what the cost of JP-8 currently goes for, but it was about $1 a gallon three years ago, and it's 6.8 pounds to the gallon. So, about $520 for fuel per mission leg, plus cost of the KC-135 to carry support crew ahead of them, which is about $2.0 million a year/aircraft, so for 1 U-2/KC-135 pair you're probably looking at about $5-8 million/year to operate.

This is a rough guesstimate based on things I found on the net, and my really bad math skills, and is in no way official. If anyone can find something official, then feel free to post it.

Have they released the details of the pilot yet?

Give me a few and I will do a search. I have not seen or heard anything on the news yet. I would do the search now but I am in the middle of putting another thread together

Ask and you shal receive
Sorry for the delay but It took some time to dig this up and I cannot 100% vouch the validity of the source. They seem to be the only onles reporting the name.

U2 Down - Spyplane Goes Down in Asia
On the 22nd June 2005, a USAF U-2 Spyplane crashed in Southwest Asia.
The pilot did not survive the crash. Maj. Duane Dively, 43, of Rancho California, Calif., had completed flying a mission supporting Operation Enduring Freedom and was returning to base when the crash occurred. He was deployed to the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing from
the 1st Reconnaissance Squadron at Beale Air Force Base, Calif.

The cause of the crash is under investigation.

www.black-triangle.co.uk...