U-2 Landings

[AaronLS]

These U-2 landings look very much like some of my landings in KSP:

 

Edited April 28, 2016 by AaronLS

[insert_name]

from what ive heard, in order to steer the U2 during taxi they have to have 2 guys shuffle on the wing, not surprised to see these things tip over.

[Vanamonde]

The thing looks GIGANTIC with the cars in the frame! 

[DDE]

Except in KSP, this whole thing would have exploded long ago.

[Green Baron]

I was laughing out loud when that one dropped a wing-wheel, like: "Bah, useless anyway !". That guy at the end made it right: "f...orget the wheel, belly landing's safer".

Is the U2 that difficult to land ?

They are in good company:

 

Never mind the german voice, the guy talks like an "instructor" trying to explain the mishaps. But we all see what's going on.

 

[Phineas Freak]

U-2 (in other words one of the most difficult airplanes in handling ever made): you cannot go too fast or too slow, you can land only in a windless day with only two center wheels (the outer wing wheels fall off after takeoff) and you have to pretty much stall it to do so. Also, you cannot see the runway from inside the cockpit and instead you have to rely on callouts by external observators (the cars). Yep, sounds like an easy thing to do...

Edited June 11, 2016 by Phineas Freak

[Wjolcz]

I still don't know why doesn't it have a normal tri-cycle undercarriage. Because of weight?

Also, what the heck? Why did police search the pilot by the end? Is it some sort of prank, or did they actually arrest him?

[DDE]

3 hours ago, Veeltch said:

I still don't know why doesn't it have a normal tri-cycle undercarriage. Because of weight?

Yep, and because of how little space is in the wings. Its Soviet cousin has less than half the range, but it's not such a crazy ride on the landing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myasishchev_M-55

[YNM]

Great video, although maybe I'm a bit affected by /colinfurze for the music XD

Never saw those landings that goes donuts before ! The official videos always show how precise it is and it lands very nicely. They certainly made this aircraft not to land, but to stay flying... It hates the ground !

Crazy aircraft and pilots ! Kinda hoped they're going to space with all that suit

[WellItExplodedAgain]

6 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Also, what the heck? Why did police search the pilot by the end? Is it some sort of prank, or did they actually arrest him?

Its probably for confidential reasons.

[cubinator]

18 hours ago, Veeltch said:

Also, what the heck? Why did police search the pilot by the end? Is it some sort of prank, or did they actually arrest him?

The police heard that he stole all the snacks out of the snack compartment, so they had to check it out.

[kerbiloid]

On 11.06.2016 at 11:48 AM, Phineas Freak said:

U-2 (in other words one of the most difficult airplanes in handling ever made): you cannot go too fast or too slow, you can land only in a windless day with only two center wheels (the outer wing wheels fall off after takeoff) and you have to pretty much stall it to do so. Also, you cannot see the runway from inside the cockpit and instead you have to rely on callouts by external observators (the cars). Yep, sounds like an easy thing to do...

What a meditative plane...

Spoiler

 

On 11.06.2016 at 0:30 PM, Veeltch said:

I still don't know why doesn't it have a normal tri-cycle undercarriage. Because of weight?

Probably because with its wingspan and clearance, there is no difference between tricycle and bicycle. It anyway will scratch the land with its wings.

The same thing:
 

Spoiler

 

[insert_name]

On 6/11/2016 at 6:41 AM, YNM said:

Great video, although maybe I'm a bit affected by /colinfurze for the music XD

Never saw those landings that goes donuts before ! The official videos always show how precise it is and it lands very nicely. They certainly made this aircraft not to land, but to stay flying... It hates the ground !

Crazy aircraft and pilots ! Kinda hoped they're going to space with all that suit

They say they can go above 70k feet, anything more specific is classified 

[YNM]

On 06/15/2016 at 0:41 AM, insert_name said:

They say they can go above 70k feet, anything more specific is classified 

It's around right though. It's not very classified as some of the recon images are available publicly.

One other thing that's crazy about the plane : if they went too fast, it'll RUD. If they went too slow on the other hand, it'll fall to the ground like a rock (and probably some RUD in between). The margin ? Less than 10 knots. And they have to do it for hours, continuosly, repetitively.

[StevieC]

the U-2 is notorious for being difficult to fly, for those precise reasons. At the altitude it routinely cruises, the air is so thin that the stall-speed and critical-mach (the speed above which at least some of the airflow will be supersonic) are only a few knots apart. And as the engineers improved the U2's performance, those two absolute "must-stay-in-between" speeds have actually gotten closer together. As for trying to land the thing? Yeah. Good luck, with that. In order to make it capable of staying airborne at 70,000+ feet high, its wing generates so much lift at ground-level that ground-effect lift actually hinders the aircraft from landing unless the entire span of the wing is made to fully stall, and since the pilot can't see the runway from the cramped cockpit with its meager visibility, that's why a chase-car is needed (and as a rule, by necessity, it's a muscle-car that can routinely go at the sort of speeds required to stay alongside a jet airplane on a runway).

[Ten Key]

On 6/17/2016 at 0:14 AM, YNM said:

One other thing that's crazy about the plane : if they went too fast, it'll RUD. If they went too slow on the other hand, it'll fall to the ground like a rock (and probably some RUD in between). The margin ? Less than 10 knots. And they have to do it for hours, continuosly, repetitively.

And, occasionally, they have to do it while flying laps above a category 5 hurricane.

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-046-DFRC.html

[StevieC]

The most interesting missions that the U-2 has flown, imho, were missions flown for the US Department of Agriculture, to monitor the spread of crop-blight across farmland in the midwest.

[Van Disaster]

Now try it on a carrier.

IIRC it has to land nose-down, but it can't catch a wire like that. Good fun.

Edited June 22, 2016 by Van Disaster

[YNM]

On 6/22/2016 at 9:54 AM, Van Disaster said:

Now try it on a carrier.

IIRC it has to land nose-down, but it can't catch a wire like that. Good fun.

Why there's some soot from the engine when the plane takes off ?

[Van Disaster]

22 hours ago, YNM said:

Why there's some soot from the engine when the plane takes off ?

Water injection, I think. It doesn't directly cause smoke but it does lower temps leading to partial fuel combustion, which *does* cause smoke.

Edited June 25, 2016 by Van Disaster

[Camacha]

On 24/06/2016 at 8:42 AM, YNM said:

Why there's some soot from the engine when the plane takes off ?

Jet engines burn massive amounts of fuel. Have anything but optimal combustion and you end up with lots of smoke. In the era this aircraft was built, even passenger jet engines tended to produce quite a bit of smoke, and military craft are even less optimized when it comes to emissions. I can imagine that this specific U-2 engine was optimized for something different altogether than low altitude full power ascents - quite the opposite, I gather.

 

When taking off the smoke is clearly visible:

 

[Norcalplanner]

On 6/21/2016 at 1:59 PM, StevieC said:

the U-2 is notorious for being difficult to fly, for those precise reasons. At the altitude it routinely cruises, the air is so thin that the stall-speed and critical-mach (the speed above which at least some of the airflow will be supersonic) are only a few knots apart. And as the engineers improved the U2's performance, those two absolute "must-stay-in-between" speeds have actually gotten closer together. As for trying to land the thing? Yeah. Good luck, with that. In order to make it capable of staying airborne at 70,000+ feet high, its wing generates so much lift at ground-level that ground-effect lift actually hinders the aircraft from landing unless the entire span of the wing is made to fully stall, and since the pilot can't see the runway from the cramped cockpit with its meager visibility, that's why a chase-car is needed (and as a rule, by necessity, it's a muscle-car that can routinely go at the sort of speeds required to stay alongside a jet airplane on a runway).

In the book "Skunk Works", Ben Rich (who headed up Lockheed's Skunk Works after Kelly Johnson retired) gives a really specific example - in a turn at altitude, it's possible for the outer wingtip to be in a mach buffet, while the inner wingtip is in a stall buffet. Crazy!

[Tex_NL]

I re-watched the OP video and found something that most likely explains all those near crash landings.
In all excepts two or three landings it is not the regular U-2 Dragonlady. It is two seater trainer version with a second canopy. (Top left in the image below is the regular U-2. Below that is the two canopy trainer) Those pilots were most likely still inexperienced.

[StevieC]

What's that pod on top of the fuselage of the 4th plane?

[Nibb31]

On 03/07/2016 at 4:00 PM, StevieC said:

What's that pod on top of the fuselage of the 4th plane?

Radar