Blix says Iraq refusing U2 spy flights

HA'ARETZ ^ | January 20th, 2003

[Mossad1967]

Top UN weapons inspector Hans Blix said on Monday Iraq had refused to allow reconnaissance flights by U2 aircraft over its territory to aid inspectors in their search for any weapons of mass destruction...

[pfflier]

Who really needs the U2 when we have satellites?

Other than commanded time on target, optimal sunlight angle selection, minimal parallax distortion, positive command and control and selectable sensor packaging I really can't see why a U2 is better.

[DJ Frisat]

1, 2, 3, 4 ---

We don't care what Saddam don't allow, we gonna fly them U-2s anyhow.

Saddam don't allow no U-2 flyin' in here...


Yee-haw!!!

[Bobby777]

it's been reported that Lockheed was test flying Mach 5 aircraft as far back as 1983 ... obviously the X-planes flew faster but on various rocket engines ...

and then there was the Firefox ... hehe ... "Mach 5, even Mach 6, and able to sustain it" ...

[1stFreedom]

>>the aircraft pictured above, the SR-71 BLACKBIRD, could overfly any nation on Earth TODAY with impunity. It remains all but unstoppable when at full speed, and it's over 40 years old.

I don't think this is the case anymore. Some Russian SAM's can travel high enough to catch an SR-71. Some air to air missiles fly faster than the SR-71, and are way more manuverable.

Russian aircraft have infrared seekers which can spot and track the SR-71. The question is can the SR-71 outrun the infrared air to air missile launched from a SU-27 tracking it. My assumptions are that 9/10 times the answer is yes, since infrared missiles tend to be short range -- they'd run out of fuel before actually catching the SR-71.

If the Russians develop a long range, mach 5 air to air infrared missile, it's over. Granted, the aircraft firing such a missile still have to be in close vicinity of an SR-71 to be effective.

Once hypersonic missiles are fully developed, the venerable SR-71 will then be totally vulnerable.

Got to give this aircraft credit, as it's ruled the sky for decades. It's still my favorite aircraft.

[pfflier]

You are about three recon generations behind the power curve. The U2 was replaced with the TR-1 which is a U2 airframe but redesignated mostly because of the "fallout" from the Powers U2 shootdown. If you don't call it a U2 it must not be a U2.

The SR-71 has come and gone and returned and gone again as a replacement for the slower TR-1 which has now been redesignated as the U2 but is still here although re-engined.

Got it?

Tomorrow we'll discuss unmanned recon vehicles. Take notes.

[Bobby777]

side-imaging radar can see through the clouds and even peek a bit underground ... hence the SIR-A and SIR-B, etc. tests on the shuttle where they were looking for "underground water" ... hehe ...

the images aren't necessarily highest photo quality but reportedly are very good ... nonetheless, the "hang time" over the target area is the limiting factor ...

[Poohbah]

If the Russians develop a long range, mach 5 air to air infrared missile, it's over. Granted, the aircraft firing such a missile still have to be in close vicinity of an SR-71 to be effective.

Once hypersonic missiles are fully developed, the venerable SR-71 will then be totally vulnerable.

I don't see how a hypersonic heat-seeker would work, given that the hypersonic flow would tend to block the seeker's view...

[Bobby777]

I don't know if the missiles can steer in the thin air between 100,000+ and the highest rumored to be 125,000 feet ... or the Mach 4 max (not cruising) speed makes it ('71) tough to catch ... PAC-2's and PAC-3's are Mach 5 ...

I'm not sure of the Mach speeds of the Russian SA10+ missiles but they're obviously in the same category ... I don't know if rocket-steered provides enough manueverability at those extreme altitudes ...

either way, with an "unstart" the pilot has to drop below 65,000 feet I think to relight ... and that's when they're especially vulnerable ...

[Bobby777]

I checked some of the sites ... the TR-1 designation came in the 80's and then as some said, all went back to U-2R designations and there seems to be a model or two after that ... U-2S and U-2ST trainer ...

[kabar]

"Top UN weapons inspector Hans Blix said on Monday Iraq had refused to allow reconnaissance flights by U2 aircraft over its territory to aid inspectors in their search for any weapons of mass destruction"

Disagree with the caption that states, "Blix says Iraq refusing U2 spy flights." They are not "spy" flights, which is the Iraqi characterization.

[glock rocks]

Looks like a Guppy giving birth.

aye, captain, and a lovely guppy she is, eh?

[cake_crumb]

LOL...gee, Hans...you don't need U2s anyway. Didn't Saddam promise you that he'll put together his OWN inspection teams to search for Iraq's WMD, which Saddam says Iraq does not have???

And didn't YOU say you're confident Saddam will honor his commitments??

Good old "dynamic and effective" Hans strikes again!!

[Reactionary]

Nah, that isn't Aurora. That's one of our flyin' UFOs. :)

[Tommyjo]

"The Iraquis have no chance of shoting down a U2 so why ask permission except to get another refusal."


The Iraqi's came very close to downing a U-2 on 24 July 2001.

Snippet from DoD transcript:

"DM. QUIGLEY: Charlie, I am very limited in what I will be able to be -- not going to be very helpful in the details of that entire engagement. But let me do what I can.

An American U-2 was shot at by an Iraqi surface-to-air missile. What I will not be able to get into with you is details of altitude, flight profiles, proximity of the shot, any sort of tactical details of the engagement for the obvious reason: so as to not provide any advantage or information to the Iraqis that might improve their chances should they do this at some point in the future."

The Iraqi's have in their arsenal improved versions of the same SA-2 Guideline with which the Soviets used to shoot down Powers back in the 1960's.

[Long Cut]

"The question is can the SR-71 outrun the infrared air to air missile launched from a SU-27 tracking it."

Yes, actually, especially when you figure in the scramble time. Assuming that your first indication of an approaching BLACKBIRD came when it was 100 miles out, and it takes, MINIMUM, 10-15 minutes to launch the interceptors (which, in the case of the FLANKER, can neither overhaul NOR reach the altitude of the SR-71), the BLACKBIRD will be marking on top your position as the interceptors release their brakes. Two minutes later, it will be about 20 miles or more downrange. Checkmate.

As for the SAM threat, I'm STILL not sure that any can catch the Habu. I studied her quite closely in college; her TRUE performance figures, don't forget, have NEVER been published. I do know, for example, that her max altitude was far higher than the 80,000 feet commonly spoken of. I actually SPOKE to an ex-Sled driver, who just smiled as I asked him about the "3,000 m.p.h." rumor, and said something to the effect of," maybe...if we don't push it all the way..."

[wharfrat]

Mach-6+ sereaming Hell across the sky!

[wharfrat]

Check that, Mach-6+ Screaming HELL, sorry...bifocal Alert!

[cake_crumb]

"They are not 'spy' flights, which is the Iraqi characterization."

It's a convenient keyterm for the mindles, drooling, anti-war crowd to spew at their next chanting session.

[demlosers]

They fly in excess of 70,000 feet.

Russia tried for years before they shot one down.

Back in the olden days, If I remember this correctly, the U2s would drop to a lower altitude and then run the cameras for better resolution making them vulnerable to hostile SAM fire.

I'm sure they don't do that now.