Posted on 08/02/2025 8:30:38 AM PDT by texas booster
Wow I can’t even imagine how incredible that was
Did the U2 seem really advanced?
Did you feel part of historic change in How we conducted espionage ?
When the U2s were headed to China did they take off from Beale?
I am surprised there weren’t more accidents on landing
Yes, 6000+ miles just so they could say they did it.
They did not surpass the maximum flying ceiling for an aircraft.
In the last years of his life, Powers reported on traffic in the San Fernando Valley of Southern California over radio station KGIL, and he also did airborne TV broadcasts. He signed off his traffic broadcasts as “Francis Gary Powers.”
He died when his TV news helicopter crashed in the Sepulveda Basin in the San Fernando Valley.
Thanks
And I think it was cool
The planning of that is amazing
Figuring how to touch each of the 48 states would be challenging
“I am surprised there weren’t more accidents on landing”
When you realize how this is done, even with the evolved plan of landing, I’ll leave it to your imagination how many things can go wrong besides mechanical failure, winds, pilot error, and other things that could be called a “controlled crash,” both pilot and car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txVHB8k0rTI
“Did the U2 seem really advanced?”
Anything that can fly up to, and possibly higher, than 70K feet to take pictures that can help identify foreign military assets to assist us in controlling our sorties, is well advanced. Most of that now is done by satellites now and we have a lot of them up there.
But they have been used for other things, also. In 1978, a Soviet nuclear-powered reconnaissance satellite, Cosmos 954, malfunctioned and re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere, scattering radioactive debris across a wide swath of northern Canada. The onboard nuclear reactor failed to separate as intended, leading to the dispersal of radioactive material.
The US sent up two U2’s to check the trail. After the fly through one landed at Beale AFB, CA, and the other landed at a secret, at that time, location in the Indian Ocean, Diego Garcia. I was in the initial recon team that deconned the U2 and the pilot at Beale. It was clean so it was just a wash down for the maintenance crew and getting the pilot to PTSD getting out of the suit and debrief. They do more than just take pictures. But most of it is sensitive. BTW, the suites they wear are the same ones the NASA astronauts wear, air conditioner and all.
wy69
I looked Kosmos 94 up. Had a nuke reactor. That must have been a tense time?
I know you lived it and may not want to relive it
BUT it is interesting to the rest of us.
When you took the pilot out of the U2 Did he know where the Russian satellite crashed? I am guessing the press didn’t know any of this?
“When you took the pilot out of the U2 Did he know where the Russian satellite crashed? I am guessing the press didn’t know any of this?”
Here is a fact sheet that was not down graded for many years of a report from the CIA:
Cosmos 954 Decays
TOSE
FOREIONTVATIONALS
OPERATION MORNING LIGHT
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS, COSMOS 954
-September 18, 1977 Soviets launched Cosmos 954.
ULULIOOIILU
AuBrority NND947003
BY E NARA Date 1012H
-November 1977 Intelligence sources determined Soviets experiencing difficulties.
-December 1, 1977 Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (Admiral Murphy) alerted by his staff.
-December 19, 1977 NSC interagency task force on space debris established (State, Defense, NASA, CIA, Energy and OSTP).
-January 6, 1978 Through intelligence sources, determined Soviets had lost control of satellite; reentry date established January 23 or 24, 1978.
-January 12, 1978 Approached Soviets on the issue.
-January 14, 1978 Soviets’ response confirmed that nuclear power source was on board and that they had lost control of satellite.
Projected reentry on January 24, 1978.
-January 17, 18, 1978 Informed key Congressional leaders (Byrd, O’Neill, Baker, Rhodes, Inouye and Boland) of problem and steps we were taking in event the satellite landed in the United States.
-January 17, 1978 Dr. Brzezinski memorandum making Energy responsible for clean-up and other safety considerations relating to possible reentry in the United
States, receiving support from Defense and from other agencies as appropriate. Slate was made responsible for foreign requests for assistance, calling on Energy and
Defense as appropriate.
-January 17, 1978 Approached Soviets for clarification.
-January 18, 1978 Informed our allies and other countrics with which we have a special relationship, e.g., tracking facilities.
+-
-January 19, 1978 Soviets responded, indicating the reactor would not go critical and that it was designed to disintegrate during reentry.
-January 20, 1978 The Department Energy Task Force went into operation.
-January 22, 1978 Approached the Soviets and asked if there were any new developments.
January 23, 1978 Soviet response indicated that reentry was projected for January 24, 1978.
-January 24, 1978 Satellite reentered atmosphere at 6:53 a.m. EST over Queen Charlotte Island and impacted last at Great Slave Lakc.
-January 24, 1978 Prime Minister Trudeau was immediately informed that the satellite had landed in Canada. United States offered assistance in locating fallen debris and in cleanup. Trudeau accepted by a return telephone
-Januaryу 24, 1978 Dr. Brzezinski informed the Soviets that the satellite had landed in Canada.
-January 24, 1978 AFTAC/MAC aircraft and Nuclear Energy Search dispatched to Canada. Teams
NOT RELEASAPLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS 기
The satellite was breaking up and the calls from Carter to Moscow were very hush so what ever story you got or the feds released, can easily be questioned. But because there was no residual radiation of the test aircraft, it was determined no risk except at the immediate site which was never made public.
wy69
This reads like a novel but is real.
That the US created an agency to track space debris not long before we would need it is remarkable
Do you think Russia would be as forthcoming with info now?
I can understand why this incident was kept from the press and public
In today’s world there would probably be a disgruntled fed employee who would link it
How much were you ground crew told?
“How much were you ground crew told?”
This “job” was like any we would encounter, it just wasn’t an exercise. We were instructed by the base commander to do a normal approach and inspect the aircraft for radioactive products at any level we could find above normal ground radiation. We took two types of reading devices with us, ANPDR’s and PAC -1S’s. I was using one of the ANPDR’s and we did an aircraft perimeter reading then the pilot and then the aircraft. It was a normal background reading so after checking everything we could on the aircraft after the pilot was transported to PTSD, the aircraft was already on the wash rack so it got a bath and then the maintenance people went to work doing what they do. Everything back to normal.
We were lead by a visitor from the national NBC Defense and Response team along with the deputy base commander, the fire martial, and protected by the base security.
The work we did for the coverage of 954 was assisted by the cooler temps of that time and being in MOP suits normally is blazing hot in the summer and you roast in one of those. The pilot had air conditioning, the IRT members did not. Lucky. But we were told not to sway anything to anyone for fer of public panic. The old chicken little routine.
wy69
I can’t even imagine what you were thinking,”inspect for elevated radiation levels “???? We don’t deserve you people who serve our country.The noble ones of you anyway. I have relatives who did similar stuff and accepted it as just following orders.
Me? I would have run screaming for nearest shelter if there was one. Did that plane fly more missons
“Did that plane fly more missions”
Yep, lots of them.
“I can’t even imagine what you were thinking, ”inspect for elevated radiation levels “????”
We didn’t go in there naked. We were dressed for anything. We were wearing the correct masks, I preferred the M17A1 since it a wider face and I wore glasses, mop suits, and taped to the gills to seal off any possible contaminated matter (also called particle pollution). We didn’t expect any gamma radiation so everything else was covered.
Side note. You mentioned shelters. At every base like Beale there is an underground shelter with a decon area. Beale’s is under the flight line. Radiation weakens relatively quickly in the initial period after exposure, particularly from nuclear fallout. The intensity of radiation decreases dramatically in the first few days, following a “seven-ten rule,” where radiation levels decrease tenfold for every sevenfold increase in time since the initial exposure. After 48 hours, radiation levels drop significantly, but it’s still recommended to stay indoors for at least two weeks.
I was ordered to be the monitor of shelters at Beale and Mather AFB’s while I was assigned to them. Basically you don, go out and take a sample, and get a sample to determine level and make some general officer happy it is going down so they can see some sunshine. And northwest Washington state was ground zero for an attack with Beale, Fort Lewis, Bremerton sub base, Whidbey Island, The Navy brain box in Everett, and Kitsap. We would be one of the first to take one for the gipper.
wy69
I have been looking things up
It seems interesting that U2s are still flying with no modifications to take off and landing
I would have thought technology and materials have advanced enough in 60 years that the gear for wings could be added permanently
Well you say you donned protective gear but at the time you could not be sure
I am also reading about the SR71
And the SR72
Interesting to me is U2 is still used and SR 71 not
Is it subsonic surveillance craft is still relevant but hypersonic replaced supersonic?
I have been looking things up
It seems interesting that U2s are still flying with no modifications to take off and landing
I would have thought technology and materials have advanced enough in 60 years that the gear for wings could be added permanently
Well you say you donned protective gear but at the time you could not be sure
I am also reading about the SR71
And the SR72
Interesting to me is U2 is still used and SR 71 not
Is it subsonic surveillance craft is still relevant but hypersonic replaced supersonic?
“Interesting to me is U2 is still used and SR 71 not”
Reasons for retirement were cost, In 1989, the USAF retired the SR-71, largely for political reasons, although several were briefly reactivated before their second retirement in 1998. NASA was the final operator of the Blackbird, using it as a research platform, until it was retired again in 1999.
Reasons for the retirement were cost and maintenance while never really coming up with a real use. It was originally supposed to be a fighter bomber but was so fast it ran over anything it released. I had friends at the 9th SRW at Beale and they were constantly doing repair for engine modification, heat generation concerns, navigational problems, and stealth considerations. Another major problem was fuel leakage.
The SR-71’s airframe was designed with gaps and seams that expanded during Mach 3+ flight, but at colder temperatures on the ground, these gaps would contract, leading to significant fuel leaks. The special JP-7 fuel, however, was designed to be difficult to ignite, minimizing safety risks from the leaks on the ground. It got expensive and the US was getting involved with military spy satellites and they were cheaper and caused less threat to human accidents. It was fun to watch the thing take off an night from the housing area to the flight line.
The SR-72, nicknamed the “Son of Blackbird”, is a real, though still largely secret, hypersonic aircraft development project by Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works. It is intended as a successor to the SR-71 Blackbird, designed to reach speeds exceeding Mach 6 (over 4,000 mph). While not yet operational, the SR-72 is envisioned as a platform for both intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike missions. But the public doesn’t know a lot about it.
“I would have thought technology and materials have advanced enough in 60 years that the gear for wings could be added permanently”
Never did due to mission requirements. Aircraft design involves a series of compromises and trade-offs. The U-2’s designers prioritized maximizing altitude and range, and the chosen wing design (high aspect ratio without winglets) best suited those specific requirements. Adding winglets would have introduced additional weight and potentially compromised other aspects of the U-2’s performance at its intended operating altitudes. And remember costs. We currently have 247 military satellites in the atmosphere so we are getting closer to retiring all manned surveillance aircraft.
wy69
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.