Documents / FOIA release

The Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance; the U-2 and Oxcart Programs, 1954-1974

Central Intelligence Agency · 1900-01-01 · 406 pages · text by OCR

This is a 1992 CIA History Staff monograph by Gregory W. Pedlow and Donald E. Welzenbach, originally classified Secret NOFORN and approved for release in 2013. It covers the CIA's manned overhead reconnaissance program from 1954 to 1974 and the two aircraft it developed, the U-2 and the A-12 OXCART. The history covers the U-2 overflights of the Soviet Union, the 1960 downing of Francis Gary Powers and later operations in Asia and Latin America. It also includes a section on U-2s, UFOs and Operation BLUE BOOK.

  • p. 16 …An RB-29 lost in the Sea of Japan on 13 June 1952 was probably also…
  • p. 38 …off to about 6 percent of its sea-level thrust. Finally, low structural load factors, like…
  • p. 75 …3 0 0 ^{\circ} \mathrm{F} $ at sea level. Manufacturing this special fuel required petroleum byproducts…
  • p. 80 …276 pounds heavier and delivered only 10,200 pounds of thrust at sea level; the resulting
  • p. 89 …that they could not be flown at sea level faster than 190 knots in smooth air…
  • p. 98 …southern Europe and then across the Black Sea and the desert areas of China. These balloons…
  • p. 139 …Soviet border from the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea and on to Afghanistan. The System…
  • p. 146 …On 31 July, the same aircraft made a run over the Black Sea. There were a…
  • p. 148 …space launch facility east of the Aral Sea in Kazakhstan. None of the mission planners was…
  • p. 153 …of Soviet naval maneuvers in the Barents Sea. The final overflight of Detachment A. mission 2040…
  • p. 157 Secret NOFORN Chapter 3 144 U-2s flying well within international airspace above the Black Sea…
  • p. 158 …it turned abruptly upward over the Bering Sea just west of Alaska, climbed to 110,000…
  • p. 166 …the Soviet border and over the Black Sea without entering Soviet airspace. In late August, as…
  • p. 185 …Because the Bodo airfield was involved in NATO maneuvers taking place in the Barents Sea area…
  • p. 225 …forces were conducting an all-out air-sea-land drive against the rebel-held areas in…
  • p. 257 …The use of peripheral missions prevented any further losses, although one aircraft crashed into the sea…
  • p. 316 …Shortly before Leningrad, the A-12 would head west-southwest down the Baltic Sea, skirting the…
  • p. 317 …2 would be flying farther out to sea, safely beyond the range of all Soviet SAMs…
  • p. 350 …B B Afghanistan, Tashkent, Tyuratam, Kazalinsk, Aral Sea 11 August 1957 4039 McMurray Lahore B B…
  • p. 351 …A-2 Dushanbe, Tashkent, Tyuratam, Kazalinsk, Aral Sea 10 September 1957 4059 Hall Adana B A…
  • p. 369 …AQUILINE 304, 339-343 Arabs 256 Aral Sea 135 Arbenz, Jacobo 16 "Archangel-1" 262 "Archangel…
  • p. 371 ## Secret NOFORN Index 358 Baltic Sea 3, 303 Baltic states 104 Baltimore; Maryland 6, 9 Barents…
  • p. 373 …186, 201, 205, 208-209, 299, 327 Caspian Sea 126 catheterized 64 cathode-ray tube 267…
  • p. 382 …23-24, 109, 139, 143, 164 Kara Sea 142 Kazakh language 135 Kazakhstan 135 Kazan', Soviet…
  • p. 385 …301 mechanical fuel totalizer/counters 68 Mediterranean Sea 114, 116, 121, 140, 142, 153 medium-range…
  • p. 393 …7 Scranton-Wilkes-Barre Airport, Pennsylvania 222 Sea of Japan 3 Seaberg, John 8-9, 12…
## APPENDIX C

## Electronic Devices Carried by the U-2

From the beginning the U-2 was envisioned as more than a camera platform. In fact, the U-2 would ultimately carry only five types of photographic equipment but more than 20 different types of electronic devices, some for collecting electronic intelligence (ELINT), others ("ferret" equipment) for gathering intelligence on foreign radars, and a few for self-protection—electronic countermeasures to defeat enemy missile-control radars.

The various electronic, countermeasures and intelligence-gathering systems designed for the U-2 received designations using Roman numerals—Systems I through XXII. The first seven devices were built by the Ramo-Wooldridge firm, now part of the TRW Corporation. System-I used S- and X-band ELINT receivers to collect ground-controlled intercept and air defense signals. Weighing only 7.7 kilograms, this system was aboard all U-2s from 1955 through 1959. System-II, a communications and navigation system, never worked properly and was canceled. System-III, a 16-kilogram VHF recorder for communications intelligence (COMINT), was never used and was transferred to the Navy in 1958. System-IV, a ferret device that recorded electromagnetic energy in the 150- to 4,000-MHz range was used on 16 missions between 1957 and 1959, when it was given to the Air Force. System-V was similar to System-I but covered nine wave bands. The device was so heavy that U-2s using it could not carry a camera system. System-V was used on only three missions and was replaced by the lighter weight System-VI that covered the P-, L-, S-, and X-band frequencies and could be used with either the A or B camera. System-VI was used from 1959 through 1966.

The growing need for data on Soviet missile development led to a contract with the firm of Haller-Raymond-Brown (HRB) to build a missile-telemetry intercept system as quickly as possible. The resulting device (System-VII) could record up to 12 minutes of data from six simultaneous frequencies. This unit first saw service on 9 June 1959 and was used on another 22 missions during the next year. Following modifications to make System-VII suitable for use by the Navy, the designation was changed to System-VIII.

System-IX was an electronic-countermeasures (ECM) device for generating false-angle information in response to X-band radar pulses from surface-to-air missile radars. Also known as the Mark-30, the

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. The text was read from the page images by an OCR model; expect the odd misread word. 406 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.