Breaking News : U-2 Down

[usa320]

Just saw on Foxnews, a U-2 Spyplane has gone down in South Korea.

Ill post a story as soon as one is uploaded.

[Wilco]

Well South Korea is our Ally right? Shouldn't be to worried.

[usa320]

reports say the crew was killed in the crash.

:(

[scm77]

How many people in a U2 crew?

[MEGR]

Don't see anything about it right now on the news websites.

[Kilgor]

thank **** it wasnt down in north korea.... :|

[EvanL]

thank f*** it wasnt down in north korea.... :|
but u can bet your lucky charms, thats where it came from.

[Uncle Sam]

How many people in a U2 crew?

1, but I think some have been retro fitted for 2

BTW...One crashed there in 2003 also...Link (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i.cnn.net/cnn/video/world/2003/01/26/tm.spy.plane.vs.ap.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/01/27/skorea.crash/&h=49&w=65&sz=6&tbnid=MBrOBJdcU6MJ:&tbnh=48&tbnw=63&start=41&prev=/images%3Fq%3Du2%2Bspy%2Bplane%26start%3D40%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN)

[MEGR]

Does the US even fly U-2s any more? Thought they were now just a cold war relic.

[Flagg]

How many people in a U2 crew?

1


And assuming it wasn't engaged by an NK SA-5 battery, it's likely to be just another aircraft accident.

With the size of the US aircraft fleet, accidents occur quite frequently.....and the U2 fleet has had more than its fair share of attrition over the years.

[Uncle Sam]

Does the US even fly U-2s any more? Thought they were now just a cold war relic.

NASA

[szr]

Does the US even fly U-2s any more? Thought they were now just a cold war relic.

NASA

I believe the CIA also. The SR-71 went out with the cold war, but the U2 still flies.

[Obergefreiter]

I think the modern version is called the TR-1. It looks just like a U-2 with a large petrol tank on each wing. I do not know if they are really petrol tanks though.

It is always called a U-2 on the news though.

[He219]

Does the US even fly U-2s any more? Thought they were now just a cold war relic.

Absolutely Not (http://www.af.mil/photos/index.asp?galleryID=50)!
:D

http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/web/web_030411-F-0000J-002.jpg

The U-2 "Dragon Lady" still reigns supreme as the leader among manned intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance sytems

http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/web/web_021107-O-9999G-030.jpg

The U-2 is a single-seat, single-engine, high-altitude, reconnaissance aircraft. Long, wide, straight wings give the U-2 glider-like characteristics. It can carry a variety of sensors and cameras, is an extremely reliable reconnaissance aircraft, and enjoys a high mission completion rate. Because of its high altitude mission, the pilot must wear a full pressure suit. The U-2 is capable of collecting multi-sensor photo, electro-optic, infrared and radar imagery, as well as performing other types of reconnaissance functions. However, the aircraft can be a difficult aircraft to fly due to its unusual landing characteristics. The aircraft is being upgraded with a lighter engine that burns less fuel, cuts weight and increases power. The entire fleet should be reengined by 1998. Other upgrades are to the sensors and adding the Global Positioning System that will superimpose geo-coordinates directly on collected images

[Kilgor]

thank f*** it wasnt down in north korea.... :|
but u can bet your lucky charms, thats where it came from.

:lol:

true ;)

say cheese kim !

The U2 is a classic like the B52... its got years of life in it

[usa320]

yes, it is technically called the TR-1 (tactical recon 1). But everyone calls it the U-2.

They are flown by the Air Force for recon and NASA for research.

The images are analysed by the NRO (national reconnaisance office) and the CIA/DIA makes their decisions based on the film developed and analyzed by the NRO.

[He219]

Just to add:

http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/web/web_030410-F-0000C-004.jpg

Upgraded with more than $1.7 billion in new avionics, engines and sensors at regular intervals throughout its 48-year lifetime, the U-2 "Dragon Lady" today still reigns supreme
;)

[szr]

Just to add:

http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/web/web_030410-F-0000C-004.jpg

Upgraded with more than $1.7 billion in new avionics, engines and sensors at regular intervals throughout its 48-year lifetime, the U-2 "Dragon Lady" today still reigns supreme
;)

The MFD on the left; is that supposed to be southern Calif? Looks sort of like the coast of CA between SD and LA.. actually closer to LA.
Edit: Anyone live in or near LA? (http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/photos/030410-F-0000C-004.jpg)

[Kilgor]

US denies spy plane crash in S Korea
11:44 AEST Fri Jul 9 2004


The US military in South Korea has denied a local media report that an American U-2 spy plane has crashed near Seoul.

"There was no accident involving US aircraft today," said Arthur Bosker, a spokesman of the 7th US Air Force based in Osan, south of Seoul, said on Friday.

KBS television and Yonhap news agency reported earlier that the high altitude surveillance plane had crashed, without providing details.

A U2 crashed in January last year in a remote region south of Seoul. The US pilot survived unharmed while three people on the ground were injured.

Around 37,000 American troops are based in South Korea to help counter any threat from the Stalinist North.

The two halves of the peninsula are still technically at war, more than 50 years after the end of the Korean war.

The North has accused US spy planes of increasing surveillance missions over the country since President George W Bush took office.

[scm77]

good news...if its true.

[wyrm_142]

Lemme clear a few misconceptions up:

It's a U-2S, crew of one (1). There are two seat trainiers but those stay at Beale AFB, Cali. During the mid-late 1980's under an upgrade / basing issue, the type was changed to TR-1 (to allow basing in the UK as far as I can recall).

The deuce has the worst crew survival rate of any USAF manned aircraft - not goint to speculate what happened this time, but in the last ROK crash the pilot stayed with the aircraft to keep it from crashing into a really populated place.

[Midav]

Would be crazy if true. One crashed in S. Korea last year....

[ZoneOne]

On CNN headline news

it said that the U2 spy plane was shot down in North Korea and landed / crashed in south Korea

Check the headlines on CNN

thats where i saw it

[Romulus]

CNN.com has no news on this.

[Merik]

If North Korea shot at one of our planes we would be at war with them right now. Actually we are at war with them right now but you get the point.




One more thing, the SR-71 is not out of service, NASA still uses them.

[Pooga]

Still not in service. ;)

I hope this isn't true. I don't know how all this info pops up if it isn't though. :(

If it was "another aircraft accident" don't you think the pilot could've ejected? Seems to me one would have to be plucked out of the air by a SAM.

[Colt45]

U- (2) duh!

[RuSoKaR]

If North Korea shot at one of our planes we would be at war with them right now. Actually we are at war with them right now but you get the point.

Well it was flying over N.Korea, which is not really good for US record in that conflict.


But I really hope that it wasn't true, It would only heat up that conflict.

[BusterHyman]

If North Korea shot at one of our planes we would be at war with them right now. Actually we are at war with them right now but you get the point.




One more thing, the SR-71 is not out of service, NASA still uses them.

NASA retired the blackbirds. In 2002. Just for the record.

[Midav]

There is the case of the USS Pueblo in 1968, which was in intl. waters and was boarded, resulting in the death of a US sailor and the ship being confiscated.

Another example of the two US servicemembers that were hacked to death in S. Korea with axes by N Korean soldiers in 1976.

Both times we did nothing.

[usa320]

US denies spy plane crash in S Korea
11:44 AEST Fri Jul 9 2004


The US military in South Korea has denied a local media report that an American U-2 spy plane has crashed near Seoul.

"There was no accident involving US aircraft today," said Arthur Bosker, a spokesman of the 7th US Air Force based in Osan, south of Seoul, said on Friday.

KBS television and Yonhap news agency reported earlier that the high altitude surveillance plane had crashed, without providing details.

A U2 crashed in January last year in a remote region south of Seoul. The US pilot survived unharmed while three people on the ground were injured.

Around 37,000 American troops are based in South Korea to help counter any threat from the Stalinist North.

The two halves of the peninsula are still technically at war, more than 50 years after the end of the Korean war.

The North has accused US spy planes of increasing surveillance missions over the country since President George W Bush took office.

Something wierd is going on i think...

First it was said to have crashed in S. Korea, killing the crew according to Foxnews and South Korean reports.

Then DOD says no plane crashed at all.

Then CNN says it got hit over N.Korea and crashed in S.Korea...

My guesses are either The mission was sensitive and therefore the DOD will not disclose that the plane went down, or perhaps it was a UAV and someone mistook it for a U-2?

Or the North Koreans shot the thing down and all hell is about to break loose?


NASA retired the blackbirds. In 2002. Just for the record.

I believe at least 2 planes are kept "in mothballs" which means they are inactive, but can be made operational in a day or so... and frankly, id be surprised if they werent in use. They were officially retired from USAF service in 90...but they put them back into service for the Persian Gulf war, retired them in 91, used them again in 96-98 over Kosovo...so chances are they are still being used...we just dont here about it or see it.

And the picture on the U-2's MFD in that photo is indeed Southern California- the AF birds fly out of Beale AFB.

NASA flies out of Edwards.

[hood]

or it was a weather balloon. :)

[wyrm_142]

The SA-5 (which according to FAS / Global Security - North Korea has) might be able to reach out and touch a U-2 (in ROK airspace), depending on where everything was.

We didn't fly the EP-3 in Chineese Airsapce (and look at what happened), and I doubt we fly the U-2 over N Korean airspace.

[seruriermarshal]

Allies using RC-135 in there ?

[usa320]

more than likely, amongst other SIGINT and ELINT aircraft.

And we definately are operating U-2's in N. Korean airspace...without any doubt.

[wyrm_142]

And we definately are operating U-2's in N. Korean airspace...without any doubt.

Think about what you are saying for a second. Why would we do anything to provoke a country that has most of its standing Army within a day's hike of the DMZ?

[hood]

Because we can. :) A country isn't going to launch "Impending Doom 2" because an unarmed plane was flying around. No matter how much yelling and screaming goes on, I really can't see it happening.

[usa320]

yeah....

U-2's flew over the Soviet Union, hell they shot one down...they did go nuke us over it.

Im certain that U-2's operate over N. Korea.

And they arent based out of S.Korea...

They either fly right out of Beale or they are forward deployed to Kadena AB, in Japan.

[seruriermarshal]

US Air Force denies reports of US spy plane crash

SEOUL (AFP) Jul 09, 2004
US Air Force authorities on Friday denied local media reports that an American U2 spy plane had crashed in South Korea.
"There was no accident involving US aircraft today," Arthur Bosker, a spokesman of the 7th US Air Force based in Osan, south of Seoul, told AFP.

Local media including Yonhap news agency and YTN cable news televisions earlier reported that a high altitude surveillance plane had crashed on the southern outskirts of Seoul without providing further details.

Yonhap news agency, who was among the first to break the report, said the episode had begun with an anonymous caller telling the news agency's bureau in Hwaseong, south of the capital, that "something went down" near the village.

Yonhap said a South Korean military official had misinterpreted a denial of the report by a US military official.

"While I was talking to a US airforce official, I misinterpreted what I was told (in English) by the other side and gave the press corps (covering the defence ministry) wrong information," Yonhap news quoted the unidentified South Korean military official as saying.

A U2 crashed in January last year in a remote region south of Seoul. The US pilot survived unharmed while three people on the ground were injured.

Around 37,000 American troops are based in South Korea to help counter any threat from the Stalinist North.

The two halves of the peninsula are still technically at war, more than 50 years after the end of the Korean war.

Pyongyang has accused US spy planes of increasing surveillance missions over the country since President George W. Bush took office.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From (http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040709023913.tmsg5q93.html)

[szr]

My guesses are either The mission was sensitive and therefore the DOD will not disclose that the plane went down, or perhaps it was a UAV and someone mistook it for a U-2?

It could have been one of a number of CIA operated aircraft. A globalhawk, perhaps. The USAF only said that none of it's planes crashed on the Korean peninsula.

[Durandal]

Think about what you are saying for a second. Why would we do anything to provoke a country that has most of its standing Army within a day's hike of the DMZ?

You do know that we were flying them over both China and Russia right?

North Korea isn't going to do jack. Remember, they need food to feed their people. They cross that DMZ and they ain't getting it.

[M1A2U2]

http://www.u2.com/images/u2_kwestenburg.jpg

the real U2

[szr]

http://www.u2.com/images/u2_kwestenburg.jpg

the real U2

Maybe that's what crashed last night. The USAF denials are making more sense now. :D

Anyway, I'm still puzzled at the info/mixed info/lack of info. Odd that it would be reported initially, then no follow-up coverage either confirming or denying anything. I'm watching CNN International and there's absolutely no info on a U-2 crash.

[Fargin]

I wouldn't mind Bono going MIA over North Korea. p-)

[Flagg]

yeah....

U-2's flew over the Soviet Union, hell they shot one down...they did go nuke us over it.

Im certain that U-2's operate over N. Korea.

And they arent based out of S.Korea...

They either fly right out of Beale or they are forward deployed to Kadena AB, in Japan.

I disagree.......

My opinion is that the U2/TR1 isn't up to the task of entering the SA 5 engagement envelope...unless it's carrying some flash new ECM doohickey.

Considering the relatively small size of the Korean peninsula and the U2/TR1's considerable oblique/side-looking sensor capabilities I doubt it's necessary to put it in harm's way.

I'm all for the occasional overflight for surveillance reasons as well as just to pass on a bloody good message ;)

BUT....in my opinion, a manned U2/TR1 is far from the best platform to perform that role.

Whip out the SR71 or whatever may or may not have replaced it.....or just send over some unmanned strategic UAV's.

Even if the odds of North Korea getting their grubby hands on a single American aviator POW were a million to one...it's just not worth it...especially considering how close the election is.........not a chance

[Flagg]

http://www.u2.com/images/u2_kwestenburg.jpg

The real U2

I saw U2, The Joshua Tour at JFK in Philly in 1987.....Springsteen came out to help with an extra long encore....

They rooooooooooocked!

[Mark Sman]

Risk vs Advantage

North Korea is not that large of a territory.

A goodly portion of it can be flown near without entering its airspace. At that distance a great deal can be learned.

There are also other means of gathering information.

Spy sattelites, HUMINT and such.

The U2 might be useful, militarily, in a role NASA developed.

Air sampling.

If someone is doing something sinister/hidden it might leave interesting traces in the upper atmosphere.

I can think of a couple of things along the air sampling line that we might want to know.

Hmmm, the US hasn't acknowledged a manned spyplane program since the SR-71 (A-12 1962).

In the following 42 years, it is possible that the US has come up with something different. Sinister/hidden type different.

Risk vs Advantage?

Overflights of NK with a U-2 (1955) are contraindicated.

[Kilgor]

what missles took down powers craft and the one over cuba ?

wouldnt korea have at that technology today ?

[garyfanclub]

Was it an SA-2? I heard that NK's AA system not only relied on technology but also on the sheer volume of projectiles hurled at the aircraft. Remember, the Vietnamese were known to have shot over 100 missles to down one American plane.

[BusterHyman]

I believe at least 2 planes are kept "in mothballs" which means they are inactive, but can be made operational in a day or so... and frankly, id be surprised if they werent in use. They were officially retired from USAF service in 90...but they put them back into service for the Persian Gulf war, retired them in 91, used them again in 96-98 over Kosovo...so chances are they are still being used...we just dont here about it or see it.

And the picture on the U-2's MFD in that photo is indeed Southern California- the AF birds fly out of Beale AFB.

NASA flies out of Edwards.[/quote]

No, all SR-71s have been retired, including the 3 NASA flew. They have been displaced to museums. Not a good way to keep a plane in mothballs. They will never fly again. Do a google search.

[Royal]

used them again in 96-98 over Kosovo...

Why???

There was no VJ or MUP action against the UCK until very late in '98. Ops in '99 I can believe, but 96-98 I very much doubt.

[Pooga]

Francis Gary Powers (US Pilot shot down over Sverdlosk) was flying at 67,000 feet. The Soviets launched fourteen SA-2 Guidelines (old ones max. altitude 59,000 feet) at the U-2. The shockwaves of the missiles supposedly "disintigrated" his aircraft (although he punched out).

You better believe DPRK has the ability to launch missiles as high as a U-2 operates. The U-2S flies at a maximum of 90,000 feet at 500 mph. A dinky SA-4 Ganef has a max altitude of 88,000 feet. I think they'd be able to reach a U-2 that is probably not flying at his max altitude. And you can't dodge a missile since the air is so thin up there, with an aircraft that already has lame maneouvering capabilities.

Where's that Aurora when you need it?