Actually, they were afraid of revealing the 14 different Noah's Arks that have been found, for fear it would reveal the existence of the antediluvian mass-cloning program and the veritable naval fleet of arks which are scattered all over the place:
CH500: The ArkThe only answer that comes to my mind is that there are scientists and archeologists that do not want Noah's Ark found.And: Sun Pictures and the Noah's Ark Hoax
- CH500. Noah's ark has been found.
- CH501. We can expect to find Noah's ark on Mount Ararat.
- CH502.1. Noah's ark may have been photographed on Ararat in 1949.
- CH502.2. ERTS satellite photographed Noah's ark in 1973.
- CH503. Noah's ark has been found near Dogubayazit, Turkey.
- CH504.1. James Bryce found a 4-foot timber high on Ararat.
- CH504.2. Navarra retrieved hand-hewn wood from high on Ararat.
- CH504.3. Hardwicke Knight found soft wood timbers on Ararat.
- CH505.1. Yearam guided three vile scientists to Noah's ark in 1916.
- CH505.2. An 1883 Turkish expedition found Noah's ark.
- CH505.3. Prince Nouri of Baghdad found the ark in 1887.
- CH505.4. Hagopian visited the ark with his uncle around 1908.
- CH505.5. Russian aviator Roskovitsky photographed the ark.
- CH505.6. Resit, a Kurdish farmer, found the ark in 1948.
- CH505.7. Local Kurds led Ed Davis to the ark in 1943.
- CH505.8. Ed Behling was led to the ark in 1973.
LOL! If that's the "only" possible reason that comes to your mind as to why aerial photographs, especially from intelligence agencies, might have been classified, then you're suffering from a severe lack of critical thinking. Hint: What about the dozen or more reasons that aerial photographs of areas *other* than Ararat are routinely classified?
I mean, how far would that set them and their theories back?
Ah yes, the nefarious "them"... And their "theories" Which Must Not Be Named...
Looks like it's time to buy more Alcoa stock...
Actually, neither "they" nor "their theories" would be "set back", because the theories are based on the totality of the evidence and research, and none of that would change whether or not someone found a boat. The evidence would still indicate what it indicates, and the research results would still be what they are. Nuclear isotopes would continue to decay at the same rate, population genetics would still behave the same way, etc.
CH505.1. Yearam guided three vile scientists to Noah's ark in 1916.1916 was the yeat that the elderly Armenian allegely spun the tale to Rev Harold Williams. The event supposedly happened in the mid-1850s
"I showed the ark to three atheists, who were then called scientists" 
"Actually, neither "they" nor "their theories" would be "set back", because the theories are based on the totality of the evidence and research, and none of that would change whether or not someone found a boat"
And their "totality of the evidence and research" Which Must Not Be Named. Science has become a religion with people who defend their "theories" as profound facts and death to anyone who dares not to believe. All of your theories are based on a set of assumptions, some of which are probably correct, some of which are probably incorrect. For you to say that a discovery such as this would have no impact is proof you lack an open mind. Who knows what will be discovered tomorrow, maybe its fusion in a bottle with speakers attached, maybe its liquid water on one of Saturns moons.
Yeah, I know how hard it is for some scientists to adjust their thinking. They certainly don't have a problem adding or subtracting a million years to their estimates but to actually face evidence and deny it is certainly their modus operandi.
My guess is that it's close to the old Soviet border. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to find some serious electronics in the area.
bttt
If you want to know the general creationist consensus regarding these T.O talking points, see:
http://www.nwcreation.net/wiki/index.php?title=Creationist_claims#CH:_Biblical_Creationism