U2 to be retired
Discussion
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/the-us-air-...
Phase out pencilled in for 2026. Replaced by a combination of satellites, drones and vaguely described 'next-generation systems'.
Phase out pencilled in for 2026. Replaced by a combination of satellites, drones and vaguely described 'next-generation systems'.
When I was stationed out at Aki, I used to love sitting on the block balcony with a brew in the morning as the sun was coming up and watch them launch.
Even had a ride in the chase car on a landing (Subaru Impreza) about 20 years ago.
Must admit with SAR, satellite and UAVs why would you risk someone flying deep over enemy territory to take pictures.
Most countries must have missiles capable of shooting it down by now so unless your fighting some malitia or rag tag bunch of desert dwellers then I can’t really see the point of them any more.
Shame as they’re a beautiful aircraft.
Even had a ride in the chase car on a landing (Subaru Impreza) about 20 years ago.
Must admit with SAR, satellite and UAVs why would you risk someone flying deep over enemy territory to take pictures.
Most countries must have missiles capable of shooting it down by now so unless your fighting some malitia or rag tag bunch of desert dwellers then I can’t really see the point of them any more.
Shame as they’re a beautiful aircraft.
I think the value of then still is in the quality of images they provide and other things, obviously a lot of what they do is secret.
I know that even when retired the Canberra was still capable of taking outstanding images and this old thing is equally good.
Like the 71, Concorde, B52, Herc a real quality aircraft and a credit to its designers
I know that even when retired the Canberra was still capable of taking outstanding images and this old thing is equally good.
Like the 71, Concorde, B52, Herc a real quality aircraft and a credit to its designers
MB140 said:
why would you risk someone flying deep over enemy territory to take pictures.
If you are high enough you don't necessarily need to be overhead your target. You can see a long way with oblique imaging, so depending on the specifics it is possible to stay in international airspace and peek over the fence.bergclimber34 said:
I think the value of then still is in the quality of images they provide and other things, obviously a lot of what they do is secret.
I know that even when retired the Canberra was still capable of taking outstanding images and this old thing is equally good.
Like the 71, Concorde, B52, Herc a real quality aircraft and a credit to its designers
I believe NASA still have three 'Canberras', Martin B-57 F versions with Pratt & Whitney turbofan engines I know that even when retired the Canberra was still capable of taking outstanding images and this old thing is equally good.
Like the 71, Concorde, B52, Herc a real quality aircraft and a credit to its designers
Austin Prefect said:
Replaced by a combination of satellites, drones and vaguely described 'next-generation systems'.
Well satellites have been around for decades, and while they'll have inevitably got better the physical constraints on imaging aren't changing.Drones and next generation systems is just as likely to mean 'wishful thinking based on vague promises from disruptive new suppliers' as anything else, so hopefully 2026 is based on something that actually exists and won't result in a capability gap.
No idea what the current extent of U2 operations is now but it's often tempting to cull something older with high program costs long before anything else is actually ready to take over the job; they haven't kept them on for decades for nothing. A mistake repeated many many times.
I'm sure there is a constant programme of upgrades etc. The USAF has had the capability of real time imaging from satellites and U2s for decades. In fact, one of the reasons why the SR-71s were retired were because the necessary upgrades needed to give the SR-71 real time imaging capability were too difficult and expensive to carry out.
I would highly recommend Rowland White's book "Into the Black" which covers the early years of digital imaging from satellites and any of the Paul Crickmore books on the SR-71/A-12.
I would highly recommend Rowland White's book "Into the Black" which covers the early years of digital imaging from satellites and any of the Paul Crickmore books on the SR-71/A-12.
LotusOmega375D said:
During the Fairford U2 display, the pilot commentator made a point of saying that all of the systems/sensors had been upgraded with the latest digital technology for real time imaging. Of course that upgrade might have been a while ago
He also mentioned it is used for "weather research" 
JoshSm said:
Well satellites have been around for decades, and while they'll have inevitably got better the physical constraints on imaging aren't changing.
Drones and next generation systems is just as likely to mean 'wishful thinking based on vague promises from disruptive new suppliers' as anything else, so hopefully 2026 is based on something that actually exists and won't result in a capability gap.
No idea what the current extent of U2 operations is now but it's often tempting to cull something older with high program costs long before anything else is actually ready to take over the job; they haven't kept them on for decades for nothing. A mistake repeated many many times.
Part of the problem with satellites is that the technology has to be agreed years in advance of its launch, and with the speed of technology chnages this means even relatively new satellites have tech nowhere near as good as what's available now. Drones and next generation systems is just as likely to mean 'wishful thinking based on vague promises from disruptive new suppliers' as anything else, so hopefully 2026 is based on something that actually exists and won't result in a capability gap.
No idea what the current extent of U2 operations is now but it's often tempting to cull something older with high program costs long before anything else is actually ready to take over the job; they haven't kept them on for decades for nothing. A mistake repeated many many times.
With an aircraft, updating the lens, filter etc is obviously easier Come to think of it, so is changing the film...
williamp said:
JoshSm said:
Well satellites have been around for decades, and while they'll have inevitably got better the physical constraints on imaging aren't changing.
Drones and next generation systems is just as likely to mean 'wishful thinking based on vague promises from disruptive new suppliers' as anything else, so hopefully 2026 is based on something that actually exists and won't result in a capability gap.
No idea what the current extent of U2 operations is now but it's often tempting to cull something older with high program costs long before anything else is actually ready to take over the job; they haven't kept them on for decades for nothing. A mistake repeated many many times.
Part of the problem with satellites is that the technology has to be agreed years in advance of its launch, and with the speed of technology chnages this means even relatively new satellites have tech nowhere near as good as what's available now. Drones and next generation systems is just as likely to mean 'wishful thinking based on vague promises from disruptive new suppliers' as anything else, so hopefully 2026 is based on something that actually exists and won't result in a capability gap.
No idea what the current extent of U2 operations is now but it's often tempting to cull something older with high program costs long before anything else is actually ready to take over the job; they haven't kept them on for decades for nothing. A mistake repeated many many times.
With an aircraft, updating the lens, filter etc is obviously easier Come to think of it, so is changing the film...
bergclimber34 said:
Stable, able to fly very high, but now they must be expensive to look after and some of those airframes must be extremely old
Stable is not a word I've heard mention for flying a U-2.....at 70k they have a very small flight window between flying and falling out of the sky....they are very challenging to fly.Most of the airframes still in USAF service were built in the 1980's, so they are not extremely old, although a few of them still active were built in the late 60's. They are getting ever more difficult and expensive to maintain though, which is why they are being retired earlier than planned.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff