
Inside America's U-2 Spyplane [video] - philip1209
https://www.wsj.com/video/spying-high-a-rare-trip-in-america-u-2-spy-plane/3CB35386-FE9E-4DF7-8B1C-8074FB4E026E.html
======
nyolfen
if you're interested in the mechanics of flying a u-2 and the protocols usaf
pilots used (at least in the 50s and 60s), i transcribed a series of letters
my grandfather wrote about it after his career ended.

[https://hyperstition.al/u2-james-black/](https://hyperstition.al/u2-james-
black/)

~~~
privong
Very interesting, thanks for posting the link.

I saw a minor typo, but couldn't find an email address for you, so posting
here in the hope you see it. In the first paragraph of the addendum you have
an "Out contact" that should be "Our contact".

~~~
nyolfen
appreciated!

------
thedrbrian
If you liked this James May did a documentary called James May at the edge of
space for the bbc a few years ago.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May_at_the_Edge_of_Space](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May_at_the_Edge_of_Space)
and a companion about the moon landings
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May_on_the_Moon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_May_on_the_Moon)

~~~
trothamel
There's also a very good late-season episode of Mythbusters that almost
entirely dispenses with their format because Adam Savage had the chance to
ride in a U-2.

------
notveryrational
Fascinating history. The original intention of the planes was for the purpose
of breaking international law (violating airspace in a way believed to be
undetectable) until flights, in practice, showed that other countries were in
fact able to detect them. Rather than retract the program, the US doubled down
on stealth technologies so that it would be able to continue.

Also, the history (70 year old plane) has a great look into military and
intelligence collaboration with American industrial design firms, like
Lockheed Martin.

The "grown up versions" of this are probably all classified at this point. The
declassified modern capabilities give some hint to what the CIA is able to do.
The ARGUS-IS is able to surveil, in high definition, in real time, entire
cities while tracking thousands of targets, identifying them as people by
their shadows, synthesize data with other sensors (cellular, wireless
surveillance, etc), all without being detected.

~~~
mikeash
Note that overflights of the USSR started well before the U-2. As early as
1946, the US was flying reconnaissance planes (usually modified strategic
bombers) over the Soviet Union. The U-2 came about because the Soviets began
to gain the ability to intercept and possibly shoot down those flights.

------
erentz
I hope all the film from over the decades has been kept and one day it can be
declassified and digitized. It would be amazing history.

------
philip1209
The details about the camera equipment seems to be newly declassified. Super
interesting.

~~~
b5ec5a483dfd14
If you enjoyed this video definitely check out Skunk Works by Ben Rich. He ran
the experimental R&D wing that developed the U2, SR-71 and the F-117. It has
really interesting information about the development and operation of all
these planes. Some of which I was shocked as allowed to be printed.

~~~
edge17
Second this. Skunk Works by Ben Rich is basically a real life Tom Clancy novel

------
bduerst
I've been there! Friends/family of U2 pilots sometimes get to ride in the
chase cars, which follow the jets as they land.

You basically go from 0 to 95 in a few seconds to catch up with the landing
U2. It's definitely worth the trip to the base, which is north of Sacramento -
they're amazing aircraft.

------
drivebycomment
[https://youtu.be/hJtrZrPCUuY](https://youtu.be/hJtrZrPCUuY) is a full episode
on U2 from Smithsonian channel and has lots more details.

------
ForHackernews
Does anyone know why the U-2 is still flying but the SR-71 was retired from
service? At least on paper the SR-71 seems like a clearly superior aircraft in
a very similar role.

------
philip1209
What happened to the SR-71? Is it still flying? If not, why did the U-2 last
longer in service?

~~~
unit91
Cost. SR-71 was very expensive to operate.

LA Times article from 1989 when it was discussed (the first time; the SR-71
was retired twice):

[http://articles.latimes.com/1989-04-09/opinion/op-1582_1_air...](http://articles.latimes.com/1989-04-09/opinion/op-1582_1_air-
force-chief-blackbird-spy-plane)

------
theoh
This might be of interest too:
[https://www.academia.edu/5901305/Undetected_Media_Intelligen...](https://www.academia.edu/5901305/Undetected_Media_Intelligence_and_the_U-2_Spy_Plane)

------
williamxd3
wow, they still use analog film

~~~
lb1lf
When what you’re after is very high resolution, film still scales better than
digital; the largest (somewhat common) film format is 8x10».

A sheet of slow (fine grain) film at this size can capture detail way beyond
what any digital sensor I know of - surely it can be scanned with the
equivalent of multi-gigapixel resolution - and if one were to develop such a
monster sensor, it would have a hard time competing with the film in all but a
few edge cases. (Most notably the ability to transmit imagery to the ground
immediately, provided the necessary bandwidth is available.)

~~~
libertyhouse
Film alone doesn't determine performance - the whole instrument must be
considered. The OBC trades "resolution" for area coverage rate. The digital
electro-optical imagery from the U-2 is produced using an instrument (SYERS-2)
with a different optical design. Intelligence Imagery (IMINT) is rated on the
NIIRS scale and the OBC imagery is most-likely unclassified now due to it
being at the mid-range of the NIIRS scale.

You make a good point about the scanning. Any wet film product these days must
generally be scanned to allow for further production in our "soft-copy" world.

~~~
lb1lf
-Film definitely is only part of the equation, and I have to admit I have no idea how optics scale (that is - is it easier or harder to make a lens with a large image circle with excellent resolving power, as opposed to a smaller image circle?)

My (attempted!) point was that fine-grain film* creates a negative which will
be a challenge to match for most sensors out there - it is my understanding
sensor yield drops drastically as it increases in size, so if you need a huge
sensor, film is still the most cost-effective solution for a lot of
applications. Then again, 'cost-effective' and 'national security' are two
phrases which do not often come up in the same sentence!

*) My favourite - ADOX CMS20, has a resolving power which easily outperforms even a Summicron 50 at a sensible (not diffraction-restricted) aperture - more than 500lp/mm; the manufacturer claim up to 800lp/mm are resolvable (!)

That translates into some 12,500 line pairs/inch of film/sensor, as long as
the optics are holding up their part of the bargain - or somewhere just short
of 1 gigapixel from a 24x36mm frame, if scanned using -cough- sufficiently
expensive equipment.

------
sombragris
Very interesting. I would suggest you tag this as video.

------
qrbLPHiKpiux
And a simple Bic disposable pencil to write with.

------
keypusher
What is the benefit vs satellite imagery?

~~~
frankydp
Flexibility of mission and sensor.

