New York Times U-2 Article — Military Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

New York Times U-2 Article

474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 10
Posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3601 times:

Nice story in the New York times on the U-2:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/bu...iness/22plane.html?hp

size=-4>

[Edited 2010-03-21 21:06:05]

5 replies: All unread, jump to last

HaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2069 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3570 times:

Great story thanks for sharing. You can see insurgents footprints in the panaromic pictures taken from 13 miles up! Nice!

Here Here for Severe Clear!

Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7435 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (3 years 2 months 19 hours ago) and read 3161 times:

Quoting HaveBlue (Reply 1):
You can see insurgents footprints

Insurgents... wonderful. The U-2 is amazing if it can read the minds of Afghan people and judge their politics from 70,000 feet. From their footprints! We need that technology here in America.

Zeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 7725 posts, RR: 73
Reply 3, posted (3 years 2 months 10 hours ago) and read 2880 times:

Looks like the same article was reprinted in the SCMP in HKG, the credits for the graphics was attributed to the NYT.

We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar

CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2372 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 2):
Insurgents... wonderful. The U-2 is amazing if it can read the minds of Afghan people and judge their politics from 70,000 feet. From their footprints! We need that technology here in America.

Wondeful comment. Obviously, footprints do not determine politics but using photographs to determine foot traffic can go a long way towards determing high use passage ways that could potentially be used against our troops. I guess you somehow missed the sentences in the article that dealt with the U-2s sensors finding IEDs. Way to accentuate a semi incorrect sentence and lose sight that the U-2 is keeping Americans alive and helping us win the war.

The U-2 is still a viable platform that in my opinion can serve alongside the Global Hawk. Each platform providing us with the different but equal ways of gathering intelligence.

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower

prebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6016 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2140 times:

The article seems to assume that those U-2 birds have much in common with the U-2's of fifty years ago (U-2A, -B and -C). They share the basic shape, but they are much larger and very different.

They were built some 30 years ago as Lockheed TR-1A's, and later renamed U-2R.

Some 15 or 20 years ago they were quite extensively rebuilt with new and modern engines, and became known as U-2S.

Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm

Top Of Page

Forum Index

Reply To This Topic New York Times U-2 Article

Username:	No username? Sign up now!
Password:	Forgot Password? Be reminded. Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)

Military aviation related posts only!
Not military related? Use the other forums
No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
No hostile language or criticizing of others.
Do not post copyright protected material.
Use relevant and describing topics.
Check if your post already been discussed.
Check your spelling!
DETAILED RULES

Check Spelling

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)

Similar topics: