Documents / FOIA release

CIA/CSI/ History Staff Monograph, The Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance: The U-2 and Oxcart Programs, 16 July 2002.

Central Intelligence Agency · 406 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is a CIA History Staff monograph by Gregory W. Pedlow and Donald E. Welzenbach, written in 1992 and approved for release in 2011. It covers the CIA's manned overhead reconnaissance program from 1954 to 1974 and its two aircraft, the U-2 and the A-12 OXCART. It follows their development, the overflights of the Soviet Union, the downing of Francis Gary Powers in 1960, and later operations. One section is titled "U-2s, UFOs, and Operation BLUE BOOK."

  • p. 4 …Scientists and Overhead Reconnaissance 17 The BEACON HILL Report 17 Concern About the Danger of a…
  • p. 14 …view of the "other side of the hill." With the advent of dry film, it became…
  • p. 30 …of this new advisory body." The BEACON HILL Report In 1951 the Air Force sought even…
  • p. 31 …Their head- quarters was located over a secretarial school on Beacon Hill, which soon became the…
  • p. 32 …to implement the ideas of the BEACON HILL Report until the summer of 1953. By this…
  • p. 34 …Created in July 1953, the Intelligence Systems Panel (ISP) included several experts from the BEACON HILL…
  • p. 37 …reconnais- sance needs expressed in the BEACON HILL Report. Theoretically, he explained to the panel, any…
  • p. 41 …H. T. Friis R. Mettler A. G. Hill E. Purcell W. H. Radford E. H. Plesset…
  • p. 44 …6(dli1i>10<25Yrs since the BEACON HILL and Intelligence Systems Panel meetings. (Si James Baker…
  • p. 45 …Having participated in the BEACON HILL Study and the Intelligence Systems Panel, several Project Three members…
  • p. 344 …He headed the Beacon Hill Panel in 1952 and later became director of Lincoln Laboratories. PARANGOSKY…
  • p. 345 …of several advisory panels, including the BEACON HILL project. He helped Baker decide what cameras to…
  • p. 364 …BEACON HILL Report: Problems of Air Force Intelligence and Reconnaissance. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 15 June…
CO5653421 UNCLASSIFIED
Chapter 1
26
wingroot areas to withstand the high speeds and sharp turns man-
dated by the standard military airworthiness rules added too much
weight to the airframe, thereby negating the efficiency of the sail-
plane wing.
In short, it was possible to achieve altitudes in excess of 70, 000
feet, but only by making certain that all parts of the aeronautical
equation were in balance: thrust, lift, and weight. The only plane
meeting these requirements, Donovan insisted, was Kelly Johnson's
CL-282 because it was essentially a sailplane. In Donovan's view, the
CL-282 did not have to meet the specifications of a combat aircraft
because it could fly safely above Soviet fighters:"
Donovan's arguments convinced the Intelligence Systems Panel
of the merits of the CL-282 proposal, but this panel reported to the
Air Force, which had already rejected the CL-282. Thus, even though
the Lockheed CL-282 had several important sources of support by
September 1954—the members of the Intelligence Systems Panel and
high-ranking Air Force civilians such as Trevor Gardner—these back-
ers were all connected with the Air Force. They could not offer funds
to Lockheed to pursue the CL-282 concept because the Air Force was
already committed to the Martin RB-57 and the Bell X-16. Additional
support from outside the Air Force was needed to bring the CL-282
project to life, and this support would come from scientists serving on
high-level advisory committees.
The Technological Capabilities Panel
The Eisenhower administration was growing increasingly concerned
over the capability of the Soviet Union to launch a surprise attack on
the United States. Early in 1954, Trevor Gardner had become alarmed
by a RAND Corporation study warning that a Soviet surprise attack
might destroy 85 percent of the SAC bomber force. Gardner then met
with Dr. Lee DuBridge, President of the California Institute of
Technology and Chairman of the Office of Defense Mobilization's
Science Advisory Committee, and criticized the committee for not
dealing with such essential problems as the possibility of a surprise
attack. This criticism led DuBridge to invite Gardner to speak at the
Science Advisory Committee's next meeting. After listening to
" Donovan interview (S); Baker interview (S).
ret
UNCLASSIFIED

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 above. 406 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.