A very good videos. Hard to squeeze in so much information into such a short space of time. There is a lot more you can read online about the Gary Powers incident. Not is all as it seems. It was a real shame how he got treated. Just a military man doing his job.
Turkey is/was a NATO member state so I don't see how that is different than the Warsaw Pact countries having nuclear weapons from the Soviets in them. Cuba was not a Warsaw Pact member so it was a direct escalation past the norms of the time. It would be like if the US had put nuclear weapons in Finland or Sweden when neither are NATO members and they at the soviet border, direct escalation.
Important to note that JFK agreed to remove the missiles from Turkey if the USSR removed theirs from Cuba but the removal of missiles from Turkey was done quietly so Khrushchev, and the USSR, were seen as the losers of the situation publicly and was a reason for Khrushchev's downfall.
@@BlackHawkBallistic true, though the implications of the enemy having nuclear weapons directly on their border had equal political implications and complications.
In fact during post-Cuba crisis monitoring another two U-2C aircraft were lost due to pilot accidents as on 20 November 1963 pilot J.H. crashed in the East Gulf of Mexico. Remarkably, on 28 July 1966, pilot R. H. had a catastrophic physiological event, suffocated as his U2 aircraft flew on to crash 3500 kilometers further near La Paz in Bolivia !
@@tylerdurden4006 The Soviets put missiles in Cuba to counter U.S. missiles in Turkey. To end the quarantine JFK agreed to remove U.S. missiles from Turkey in exchange for the Soviets removing their missiles from Cuba.
Good summary. But height does not give you good quality photographs; you could argue the reverse is true. Height just gives you the ability to bring those photographs back! The SA-2 that got Powers did have unexpected reach due to an improved rocket motor. One of the reasons Soviet radars seemed more efficient at spotting a U-2 was that, although it had some early 'low-observable' features, it's stealth was optimised for the frequencies that current US radars used. Many Soviet systems, including those associated with the SA-2, were less advanced and used much lower frequencies. Ironically, this also made them more effective against stealthy aircraft, a fact that was illustrated again decades later over Serbia. Unlike most shoulder-launched missiles, which are actually 'hittiles', big radar-guided SAMs are not expected actually to hit their targets. However, they do have large shrapnel warheads that can kill a U-2, or an F-117, at 100m or more. I'd only perhaps have added some mention of Wynne and Penkovsky, one of the other behind-the-scenes dramas that allowed JFK an extra edge in facing down Khrushchev. But that episode probably deserves a whole video to itself so convoluted and filled with conflicting claims it has become!
8:45 You talk about USSR placing nuclear missiles in Cuba, yet you keep silent about the fact, that that was a Soviet retaliation to US placing nuclear missiles in Turkey, very close to USSR. Try to be less biased, please.
No, Castro was threatening to use those nukes against the USA. That is why JFK said any use of those missile from Cuba would mean a full retaliation strike against the USSR. Funny how the USSR/ Russia thinks arming Cuba, China, and North Korea with nukes would get them off the hook for a first strike by these proxies.
I believe that a plan for legal overflights by both sides was refused. If you don’t know what your enemy is doing, you assume that he is up to no good.
Quite sad that a British museum has to resort to tell the Powers U-2 story. What about the Capt Winkle U-2 story, or has that not been declassified yet?
It wasn't the U-2 flights that almost started a war, and saying that it is demonstrates that the author wasn't there, doesn't know what happened, and can't be trusted. We almost got into a war because two groups of people don't know how to handle disagreement, and that is the ONLY reason.
At first, the U2 flew too high for Russian/ USSR missiles. However, the Russians/ USSR quickly put booster rockets on their AA missiles to reach higher altitudes. The SR-71 was built to outrun the Russian/ Soviet missiles. Of course, the higher the aircraft flies, then the further it can see. This means observation aircraft can be in international airspace and still see into other countries airspace. Oddly enough, the USAF was flying U2 aircraft based out of the UK over Ukraine before the war, in order to see the Russian's troop build-ups.
The IWM content on RU-vid is *so* good and *so* insightful...if only the IWM London really matched it today? The Cold War section at the IWM London used to be brilliant, just like the rest of the galleries it was jam packed with interesting items from the era. Now it's reduced to very few objects in a lackluster way to display. Really dismaying honestly, I used to go often
Agreed. The ridiculously poor displays are a disgrace. They used to be displayed in an effective way in line with a traditional museum, the British Museum. Others agree looking on TripAdvisor. There should be a way to complain as a group. Maybe then some notice will be taken.
Hugely informative, but more on a political theme than how the aircraft itself was like to fly. I would love to know more of the nuances of the aircraft if at all possible
@@PhilbyFavourites I would have recommended Amy Shira Teitel's series of videos on the U-2 but she actually goes ridiculously deep into the politics and history aspect before talking about the physical handling characteristics of the U-2 so may not be what you're looking for... As for physical handling the damn thing was incredibly difficult to fly owing to the fact that it was almost constantly at stall. The speed envelope was maddening, something like there being 25 knots of gap between high altitude cruise and stall speed (I may be wrong on this figure). It's a large wingspan but really delicate so top speed is close to cruise speed and if you exceed that by a few knots the wings come off. It doesn't climb or dive as much as it slowly, carefully has to be given the suggestion to change altitude. They updated the film cameras in the 90s and now the thing can send images back in real time, a modification the SR-71 never got because of politics or it would still have been flying.
@@xmlthegreat TLDR flying U-2 is just like a power glider but with kickass jet engines strap on maneuver just like driving a full 18 wheeler w/o power steering yet U-2 is still the best spy plane for what it is
During any war each side is learning from the other about how to do worse next time. While demanding that peacemakers be conscribed too on a side instead of them calling for better than that same old thing. There must be more peacetime things to do instead.
It was the CIA that had the U2 built. It was also the CIA that had the SR-71 built. The U2 and SR-71 were never armed and were not military aircraft, so it was technically illegal to shoot those down. Those were simply aircraft doing an unscheduled and unauthorized flight without a flight plan. The USA knew the U2 was going to be seen by the USSR's radar, but the USA did not think the USSR's missiles could do anything due to the altitude. Similarly, the SR-71 was built to out run the missiles. The USSR/ Russians do a lot of incursions into other countries airspace too, and their military jets have never been shot down by the USA, just forced to leave US airspace.
Too much politics as always. Can we have more plane please? The invisible plane is invisible in its own documentary as you bang on about your side losing the cold war
So let me get this straight, the US flew a spy aircraft over a sovereign country without permission, while blockading that nation using their Navy, and all this is just shortly after supporting a clandestine invasion attempt that failed. And the Americans wanted to use the shoot down of their aircraft which had no moral or legal right to be where it was, as a pretext for full on war? Seems to be that the Americans are a bunch of dastardly provocative pricks. Only made worse by the fact that America was the one who placed Jupiter ballistic missiles in Turkey first. Every step of the way, the American government and military industrial complex had been attempting to provoke a war with the USSR. The Soviets acted with so much restraint. If the situations were reversed the Americans would have nuked the planet long before the naval blockade was established.
Not all Americans wanted to use the shooting down as a pretext for war, just some in the higher military echelon. Definitely a messed up time with both the USSR and USA imposing their values on other nations. I think just the year before the Cuban Missile Crisis Khrushchev had started the Berlin Wall to separate Berlin.
No, Castro was talking about nuking the USA regardless of the retaliatory strike against Cuba. That is why JFK said any nuke coming from Cuba would mean the USSR would get a full retaliatory strike too. The Russians/ USSR started to rethink their strategy in the face of Castro's illogical comments and the fact the USA already had the troops ready for the invasion of Cuba. Russia/ USSR likes to play games giving nukes to 3rd countries, like China, Cuba, and North Korea, as if those proxies would be the only ones hit with a retaliatory strike. BTW, the USA does not need to ask anyone for permission to defend ourselves, and the tyrants of the world should understand that. Countries like Russia and North Korea would be very wise not to threaten the USA. If we ever believe them, then it leaves us no choice but to act in self-defense.
JUST GIGH VAS NOT ENOUGH AND SPEED NEEDED SR71 Good Answer - and USSR GET RAM with plane without missile and arnament - SA2 shoot down SU7 = no need any Peace Treaty USSR have no NUKES and ICBM until late 70s
Not only were the missiles taken out of Turkey, immigrants from Turkey were allowed to enter Germany with the goal of being educated and then return to Turkey. 60 years later and Germany has the largest amount of Turks living in a foreign country.
President Obama had recently mounted nuclear missiles in Romania, as with the Cuban missile crisis, Putin asked them to be removed. They are still there today. What would America do if Russia mounted nuclear missiles in Mexico?
In 2021, it is estimated that there are 100 U.S.-owned nuclear weapons stored in five NATO member states across six bases: Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Büchel Air Base in Germany, Aviano and Ghedi Air Bases in Italy, Volkel Air Base in the Netherlands, and Incirlik in Turkey. So nyet in Romania. And btw, Obama has been out of power for 6 years so how could he have done anything "recently"? Obsessed eh?
im amazed by how good the camera is , same with the sr71. even new mirrorless cameras cant do that. imagine what they're like these days without public knowledge
This does seem to skip over the US nucks in the med before the russian ones in Cuba. and arguably the Cuba missiles were a reaction to the US moves in the med.
