AviationBanter - View Single Post

**Vince**

Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 2:15 pm, Vince wrote:
Jack Linthicum wrote:
On May 3, 11:35 am, Vince wrote:

TMO
http://www.p-38online.com/recon.html
A quick and logical explanation for the death of the P-38, P-4 and P-5
was the birth of the U-2. Hardly likely that two such systems,
especially with the U-2's superior altitude performance, would co-
exist.
not really
The U2 was not suited for battlefield reconnaissance. USAF tried the
Canberra but it was a failure and then the RB-66 derived from the
skywarrior which was a success
Vince
They were used for that purpose in Cuba, one got shot down.
By October 19 the U-2 flights (then almost continuous) showed four
sites were operational.
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_U-2
Cuba was not a "battlefield"

Vince

Tell that to the guys who flew over it.

President Kennedy's favorite photograph of all those taken during the
Cuban crisis was shot with the camera displayed at the museum on Nov.
10, 1962 (from less than 500 feet altitude at a speed of 713 mph).
Clearly shown are Soviet-built SA-2 surface-to-air missiles in place
at launch sites. These defensive missiles protected offensive weapons
sites and posed a serious threat to U.S. reconnaissance aircraft. A
copy of this portion of the strip photo was mounted in the President's
office. Viewed with a stereoscopic projector, the features have a
three-dimensional effect. The pattern of dots surrounding several
launch sites are actually camouflage nets which were intended to
conceal the equipment positioned beneath them, but the strip camera
rendered them ineffective.
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...et.asp?id=1876

Spies get shot at all the time
Doesn't make it a "battlefield"
they were CIA flights

Vince