Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pretty interesting. Its like the air traffic computers just couldn't comprehend the altitude the ship was flying at and it just had a nervous breakdown. Lol. I wonder if a passing SR 71 would do the same thing? It can fly even higher and WAY faster. This poor computer might never recover.
Maybe we just learned that drones can't be flown near airports either without screwing things up?
I'm sure the U2's radar cross section is on par with that of the Global Hawk drones that have taken it's place.
Was this a test with an easily explainable aircraft (U2) to see what would happen if a drone was deployed for surveillance purposes over L.A. at 60- 70,000ft?
Drone's over L.A. would fail according to this test with the U2, rest easy for now Cali. But we may have just discovered a way to screw with other countries air traffic control systems if the need to ever arose.
But you'd think air traffic control at one of the busiest airports in the world would've been notified prior to a flyover if it was "on the up and up" don't you?. Unless no one was supposed to know that the U2 was ever there in the 1st place.
Last edited by Astro Art; 05-05-2014 at 12:00 AM..
Maybe we just learned that drones can't be flown near airports either without screwing things up?
I'm sure the U2's radar cross section is on par with that of the Global Hawk drones that have taken it's place.
Was this a test with an easily explainable aircraft (U2) to see what would happen if a drone was deployed for surveillance purposes over L.A. at 60- 70,000ft?
Drone's over L.A. would fail according to this test with the U2, rest easy for now Cali. But we may have just discovered a way to screw with other countries air traffic control systems if the need to ever arose.
But you'd think air traffic control at one of the busiest airports in the world would've been notified prior to a flyover if it was "on the up and up" don't you?. Unless no one was supposed to know that the U2 was ever there in the 1st place.
Location: 3.5 sq mile island ant nest next to Canada
3,036 posts, read 5,888,747 times
Reputation: 2171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garthur
If any of you think that a spy plane from the 60's managed to "fry" the ATC computers, I have a bridge to sell you.
There is a lot more to this then meets the eye. ATC computers were "shut down" on May 3rd at London for some strange reason, also.
Good point. It's not as if this was the first time the U-2 had flown over LA. I would imagine that this would have occurred a lot more had it been the U-2 that was the cause.
Location: 3.5 sq mile island ant nest next to Canada
3,036 posts, read 5,888,747 times
Reputation: 2171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astro Art
Maybe we just learned that drones can't be flown near airports either without screwing things up?
I'm sure the U2's radar cross section is on par with that of the Global Hawk drones that have taken it's place.
Was this a test with an easily explainable aircraft (U2) to see what would happen if a drone was deployed for surveillance purposes over L.A. at 60- 70,000ft?
Drone's over L.A. would fail according to this test with the U2, rest easy for now Cali. But we may have just discovered a way to screw with other countries air traffic control systems if the need to ever arose.
But you'd think air traffic control at one of the busiest airports in the world would've been notified prior to a flyover if it was "on the up and up" don't you?. Unless no one was supposed to know that the U2 was ever there in the 1st place.
It would be cheaper to just use a drone instead of configuring an aircraft to act like a drone plus flt crew, grnd crew, fuel, etc, etc. More likely that those in charge would have just used a drone for any tests.
This could be something as simple as a software glitch on the part of the air traffic control system.
My neighbor is a controller, I'll ask him next time we are shooting the bull.
The only really good take-away here is that the news media continues to slide down the tubes with garbage speculation and a report early, correct later mantra.
I'm finding it hard to believe the U2 was responsible for this...
They have improved the platform over the years. Todays U2 is @ 40% larger then the one flown by Gary Powers, however I'm not sure if they have the payload to carry enough equipment that I think would be needed to do what was done. It is after all a surveillance aircraft it relied on speed and altitude to escape detection not radar jamming etc, When I was stationed at Moffett Field we would watch taking off on drug interdiction flights up the coast.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
