WI: No U-2 Incident

[Emperor Norton I]

The U-2 incident undermined a growing spirit of diplomacy and detente between the United States and Soviet Union, and set the stage for the intensities of the 1960s (the Berlin Crisis and Cuban Missile Crisis being among them). It also provided the Soviets with our technology; the U-2 spy plane was the premier espionage aircraft in the world.

What if the U-2 incident had never taken place?

 

[marathag]

What if the U-2 incident had never taken place?

Cuba will still go down, and that will ruin relations. Khrushchev will still test JFK.

Little change.

 

[ennobee]

The U-2 incident was not that the US and in lesser extent the UK were flying spyplanes over the USSR. It was that the USSR shot down one of those planes, captured the Pilot and paraded him around like a war trophy. Although this did sour the east-west relationship tremendously, they were already strained ny the fact that the US was flying spyplanes over the USSR, and the USSR was cruising spy-subs all along the US coast. So in order to keep mutual relations from souring, you have to abolish the U-2 program wholesale and also butterfly away the English spy-flights with the BAC Canberra bomber and the continuing submarine games of all parties.

 

[MattII]

Interesting to note that the Soviets only gave the aircraft any recognition once they'd actually brought one down, nothing had come out of the USSR about it in the previous four years.

 

[usertron2020]

The USAF doesn't cancel the XB-70 Valkyrie program, and a large number are built and put into service before Vietnam shows how Soviet-style SAM and air defenses have the potential to make the B-70 obsolete. This, combined with its small bomb load and relatively weak ability to adapt to changing technologies (it flew like a ruptured duck below 1500 feet) means that the B-1A program will have to go forward eventually anyway. Though whether Carter still cancels the B-1A IDK. ITTL it probably won't be past the prototype stage until Reagan gets in. It may then be "To B-1A or To B1B?" Stealth is unaffected.

 

[Shaby]

Interesting to note that the Soviets only gave the aircraft any recognition once they'd actually brought one down, nothing had come out of the USSR about it in the previous four years.

Well, it would be embarrassing for them to admit to the fact that US was able to fly airplanes over their country at will with them unable to do anything to shoot them down.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

This is all off the top of my head but isnt it

A: Understood that the pilot (Powers?) fell asleep and the aircraft decended to an altitude where it could be engaged by the then current stock of SAMs

B: The above was not appreciated at the time and this drove the need for the SR-71 Blackbird

So if the U2 is not shot down (and if the above is correct) then we might not be seeing an SR71 Blackbird brought into service.

 

[BlueTrousers]

So if the U2 is not shot down (and if the above is correct) then we might not be seeing an SR71 Blackbird brought into service.

The A-12 and SR-71 were well advanced by the time of the Powers shootdown, and were a response to a recognition of increased vulnerability. The U-2 was brought down at or close to its' normal operating altitude, though a lightened Su-9 interceptor was needed to do it; the US claimed that Powers had descended following a flameout, but this appears to have been a misidentification of a MiG-19.

In fact, SR-71 and A-12 overflights were planned to follow the U-2 program, but after the 1960 crisis all overflights were prohibited and the Blackbirds never got to perform their designed mission.

 

[Simon]

Well the world would be saved from a lot of dodgy musi... Oh, the other U-2. Right, sorry.

Interesting to note that the Soviets only gave the aircraft any recognition once they'd actually brought one down, nothing had come out of the USSR about it in the previous four years.

Well what else could they do? Any complaints they make simply highlight how they're unable to stop a foreign country freely overflying them, something which is rather embarrassing for a superpower to admit.

 

[Tovarich]

This is all off the top of my head but isnt it

A: Understood that the pilot (Powers?) fell asleep and the aircraft decended to an altitude where it could be engaged by the then current stock of SAMs

B: The above was not appreciated at the time and this drove the need for the SR-71 Blackbird

So if the U2 is not shot down (and if the above is correct) then we might not be seeing an SR71 Blackbird brought into service.

First time I've ever heard that one.
Sounds like a bit of post-Cold War revisionist bollocks of the type that won't admit anything produced by Soviet design bureaus could touch something from the (so called) 'Free Market' US manufacturers.
And of course, Powers hasn't been around to confirm/deny since 1977.

 

[usertron2020]

First time I've ever heard that one.
Sounds like a bit of post-Cold War revisionist bollocks of the type that won't admit anything produced by Soviet design bureaus could touch something from the (so called) 'Free Market' US manufacturers.
And of course, Powers hasn't been around to confirm/deny since 1977.

Agreed.

The Soviets were more than capable of developing their own designs. That said, the Soviet/Russian obsession with stealing Western designs for themselves have well earned them such contempt. Frex, look at some designs employed by the Red/Russian Frontal Aviation or Air Defense Forces and you will find that they look suspiciously like Western designs that were rejected in favor of another design. Like the Mig-29 compared to the XF-17. And can anyone forget the "Concordesky"? I vaguely recall a rejected American cargo aircraft design that has wound up in Russian service. A virtual copy. This seems to have been going on since the air pirated B-29/Tu-4, at the very least.

Its almost like there are a bunch of frustrated Western design engineers who, seeing their prized works tossed aside, want to "prove" that their governments made a mistake by not choosing to contract with them.

 

[Dayton Kitchens]

I vaguely recall a rejected American cargo aircraft design that has wound up in Russian service. A virtual copy.

The prototype YC-14 & YC-15. Both were prototype cargo planes flown by the U.S. that had a number of special high lift features with the engine placement.

I think it was their version of the YC-15 that the Soviets put in service for its obvious dirt strip capability.

Reportedly the Soviets when the Cold War began developed a very real sense of technological inferiority to the west and thus believed that copies of western designs, even inferior copies would be better (and quicker to deploy) than anything they designed on their own.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

First time I've ever heard that one.
Sounds like a bit of post-Cold War revisionist bollocks of the type that won't admit anything produced by Soviet design bureaus could touch something from the (so called) 'Free Market' US manufacturers.
And of course, Powers hasn't been around to confirm/deny since 1977.

I learned Aircraft engineering back in the early 90s and many of the instructors were retired ex Forces (RAF/FAA/AAC) types and would have been in the services in the 60s, 70s 80s etc

It was these Gentlemen or some of them at least who were of the opinion that Powers had fallen asleep and spiralled down.

This according to them was the understood "in service" reason / at the time.

Given my experiances of service Rumours there is probably not a shread of truth in it.

That the Russians were more than capable of developing the equipment necessary to shoot him down in 1960 is not in doubt as they managed to shoot down Multiple U2s and Canberra Recon planes during this period.

But there is still today a great deal of confusing and contradicting accounts among the Russians themselves as to the exact cause of the U2s destruction.

 

[BlueTrousers]

I learned Aircraft engineering back in the early 90s and many of the instructors were retired ex Forces (RAF/FAA/AAC) types and would have been in the services in the 60s, 70s 80s etc

It was these Gentlemen or some of them at least who were of the opinion that Powers had fallen asleep and spiralled down.

This according to them was the understood "in service" reason / at the time.

Given my experiances of service Rumours there is probably not a shread of truth in it.

The NSA misidentified a descending MiG-19 on radar as Powers' U-2, causing them to believe that he had descended from 65,000 feet to 34,000 feet. It was then politically convenient for the US to promote the belief that the U-2 was only successfully brought down because it was well below its' normal operating altitude.

 

[Tom Colton]

Bono and the Edge settle on some other name for "Feedback"?

 

[Orville_third]

The shootdowns of the RoC and Rudolf Anderson's U-2s still occur.

 

[Emperor Norton I]

The U-2 incident was right before the East-West summit, which was kind of a big deal, and was totally botched by the incident. Instead of being a chance at detente and improvement of relations in a major, historic way, it collapsed into tension and the Soviets blasting the United States. It lead to a deterioration in US-Soviet relations, which had been improving in the Eisenhower era ("peaceful coexistence"), and emboldened the anti-American faction in the Kremlin. The biggest thing is the dynamic of the Cold War in the aftermath.

 

[Questerr]

How has no one mentioned the fact that Powers's shoot down tanked the Paris Conference? We could have had SALT or START decades early.

I should have read the post right above mine.

 

[marathag]

Reportedly the Soviets when the Cold War began developed a very real sense of technological inferiority to the west and thus believed that copies of western designs, even inferior copies would be better (and quicker to deploy) than anything they designed on their own.

Mig 25

A-5 Vigilante

 

[arrowiv]

Also the incident also torpedoed a planned Soviet tour by Ike, which was well-planned and Khrushchev even made a little golf course just for Ike!