Vulcan: Ttyymmnn Bait

"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura) 01/28/2020 at 11:03 • Filed to: None

2

53

ttyymmnn > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 11:15

3

Nice, but being a(n) historian, I prefer my Vulcan in anti-flash white.

Svend > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 11:39

1

Quite a few of my family were in the ROC (Royal Observer Corps), many don’t know who or what they are, but if you’ve ever seen a second world war film with aircraft plotters pushing things back and forward over a map, these are the early day of them.

During WWII they tracked aircraft approaching U.K. airspace using either RADAR or actual observers watching the skies.

After WWII and the advent of the Cold War, they were tasked to no longer track aircraft but to measuring the fallout of a nuclear attack from regional HQs to tiny little bunkers in fields up and down the country.

At the call ‘ATTACK WARNING RED’, ROC groups up and down the U.K. would get on the tree, each contacting a set person to notify them and to get to ground or do their set task (certain food wholesalers would have vans loaded with food and supplies which would be picked up and driven away).

Once set they’d be in contact over a massive telecommunication web. The telecommunication system was secure and highly protected.

In my city, this was the regular telecommunications office (now a hotel),

Across the street is where the main infrastructure of the system is, it’s built to withstand bomb and terrorist attack.

It still houses the telecoms infrastructure but is much more condensed these days.  

Back to the ROC, their task was to track any attack and report any ground or air detonations, there, some would go above ground and measure it’s distance from them, the height of the cloud formation from the blast, the weather cloud type and wind direction, etc... other bunkers would do the same, with the distance and height known, they can estimate the yield of the bomb and track it’s fallout, allowing the government to focus resources where it was needed.

While the government did try to provide for the population post attack, it was esti mated how many bread and soup vans and water carriers were needed to feed them all, the number is quite exceptional and even by the end of the cold Ware, the U.K. only had a fifth of the resources it needed for an actual attack. 

user314 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 11:46

1

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 11:47

1

Well, sir, you have my full undivided attention. Makes me want to stage a beauty contest of “Most Gorgeous Supermodel that Can Deploy 5 Megatons of Hellfire” on your head.

BONE ?

VULCAN ?

HUSTLER ?

BLACKJACK ANYONE?

OR, MY SCAND I -NAMED FAVE WHO DIED SO YOUNG? VALKYRIE?

Svend > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 11:53

0

The interesting thing about Black Buck.

The Vulcans were coming out of service, the air refueling pods were blcked up and had to be undone, the pilots needed retaining on how to air to air refuel a Vulcan, then needed to be trained to drop ‘dumb’ bombs, asthe Vulcan was a nuclear bomber, to drop a nuclear bomb, you only needed to be quite near to the target for it to be effective. Plus the distance from Ascension to The Falkland Islands was such a large distance, a dozen Victors were needed to get the one bomber there, with refueling aircraft, refueling others, to refuel others to get the Vulcan to target.

The whole thing is amazing.

Edgyhal94 > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 01/28/2020 at 12:08

2

I’m probably horrifically biased, but the Vulcan just looks as beautiful as it is deadly. I’ve sat in the cockpit, it is surprisingly roomy and very analog to a massive extent, it has about a thousand little gauges to look at as well as manual everything. The Lancer gets the runner up prize because of ace combat. 

Svend > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 12:10

2

It’s nice but I always looked forward to seeing XJ823 at my city airport before the massive redevelopment.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Svend 01/28/2020 at 12:14

0

Did they scrap it?

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 01/28/2020 at 12:15

2

That’s a tough choice, but I’ll probably stick with the ugly-ass Buff.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Svend 01/28/2020 at 12:19

0

Amazing is one word for it. What a mess, the Falklands War.

Edgyhal94 > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 12:21

0

A solid and sensible choice, it is the only one of these which lasted. I’ve heard they expect them to fly till 2050. I suspect they will and they’ll still be just as lethal as they were back in the 1950s.

Edgyhal94 > Svend 01/28/2020 at 12:23

1

We have/had one at Coventry city airport, at the air museum. No idea if it’s still there, as apparently the museum was going to close and now isn’t, really confusing.

Svend > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 12:41

1

No, she’s still there.

They built a new larger airport. The old one was way past it’s use by date.

This was the old one

New one.

A- Old ATC and terminal

B- New ATC and terminal

C- apron

D- warehousing

Svend > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 01/28/2020 at 12:57

1

It’s something no one expected, our country was reviewing it’s forces, adjusting to changes in warfare and the cold war .

The Harriers were just coming into service, the Vulcans, etc... coming out of service. While the U.S. sold us some missiles to take out radar systems they and France had supplied some of the Argentine military , the U.S. was also siding with Argentina and for us to give up the Falkland Islands.

But now we have 4 Typhoons , 1 Voyager KC3 , 1 A400M and 2 Chinooks there along with a nuclear submarine (in the area) and a destroyer as well as the army and marines .

Svend > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 12:59

1

I don’t think ours will ever go. The airport (old terminal) has the Solway Air Museum next to it (it’s not a big or great one, it’s more enthusiasts trying to keep some toys around them). 

Edgyhal94 > Svend 01/28/2020 at 13:08

0

It had a blue steel missile (replica. I hope) next to it my dad scared me with a couple of times when I was little. He used to pretend to tap the nose, say that’s how it goes off . Scared the shit out of 7 year old me, but I’ve forgiven him and only got revenge a couple of times (faked out a blowout off-road just to make him sink knee deep into some mud) . Got to sit in it a couple of times. Made me want to become a bomber pilot.

Svend > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 13:21

1

Ye’, father’s can be dicks sometimes.

My father was the same. 

Edgyhal94 > Svend 01/28/2020 at 13:29

1

He now has a DB7, so theoretically I could do some prank, but then I might hurt an Aston and that is unacceptable . Also he lives 2 hours away from me and thus out of range of any of my planned pranks/tricks and also I’m not that vindictive.

Svend > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 13:45

1

True, hurting an Aston is simply a no no, or any car for that matter. 

Mine’s less than half an hour away from me and I don’t see him, don’t wish to. Lol.

Such is life.

Edgyhal94 > Svend 01/28/2020 at 13:50

1

Erm, bout that not hurting cars in general, any exceptions to the rule? I might of accidentally backed into a badly parked Peugeot that had blocked me in at my old work carpark. Also blew up the head gasket on my 300TDI Rangie. On second thoughts, maybe I shouldn’t be around cars...

Svend > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 13:54

0

Lol. Neither was intentional though, so it’s all good.

But I’m into detailing and I take the mythical Hippocratic oath to cars, first do no hard. So start gentle and work your way up, rather than go in heavy handed and do damage. The exception is wet sanding, wet sanding is done for a purpose though. 

ttyymmnn > Svend 01/28/2020 at 14:39

0

Judging by that tower and that runway layout, I would expect to see a B-17 or a Lancaster parked out front. 

ttyymmnn > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 14:40

3

When they mothball the B-1 and the B-2, the crews will fly back to base in a B-52. 

ttyymmnn > Svend 01/28/2020 at 14:42

0

the U.S. was also siding with Argentina and for us to give up the Falkland Islands.

I remember following the Falklands unpleasantries as a teenager, but I never heard this angle before. Why would the US want England out of the western hemisphere? Or did they want England out of the western hemisphere?

Edgyhal94 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 14:52

0

Ironic.

No, that wasn’t a prequel meme. Or was it?

Svend > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 14:54

0

I can’t recall why I exa ctly why but Reagan and the U.S. State Department didn’t want there to be a big issue and just let Argentina have it.

It's one of only a few times, like Vietnam, where the U.S. and U.K. didn't agree on or nearly came to blows about. 

ttyymmnn > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 14:59

2

For more than 15 years, I played in the Abilene Philharmonic Orchestra. Abilene (TX) is home to Dyess AFB, home to the 7th Bomb Wing (7 BW) assigned to the Global Strike Command Eighth Air Force . I would spend the majority of my off hours at a public park just off the north end of the runway, smoke cigars, and photograph the aircraft. Lots and lots of Bones, obviously, also lots of C-130s belonging to the 317th Airlift Group. But also quite a few surprises.

https://tshaff.smugmug.com/Aviation/Dyess-Air-Force-Base/

Svend > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:02

1

There are other aircraft up near the Vulcan at the Subway Air Museum, a Phantom, a Whirlwind, etc...

Prior to redevelopment pretty much only the North South runway was used, the West South West-East North East runway used by large aircraft such as British and foreign Hercules taking part in exercises over RAF Saddam (had 12 Hercs parked up at point, I took the day off school to watch them all take off).

Now it's only the latter that is used, the North South used to Taxi to the maintenance sheds and flying school. 

user314 > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 01/28/2020 at 15:04

1

Poor Handley Page Victor, forgotten and unloved....

ttyymmnn > Svend 01/28/2020 at 15:10

0

From Wiki:

The United States was concerned that a protracted conflict could draw the Soviet Union on Argentina’s side, and initially tried to mediate an end to the conflict through “shuttle diplomacy”. However, when Argentina refused the U.S. peace overtures, U.S. Secretary of State Alexander Haig announced that the United States would prohibit arms sales to Argentina and provide material support for British operations. Both houses of the U.S. Congress passed resolutions supporting the U.S. action siding with the United Kingdom.

There is a link in the article, though, that goes to a WSJ article about how Haig wanted the US to side with Argentina. Unfortunately, I can’t read the article because paywall. Another article I found says that Haig had to be stopped from betraying UK military plans to Argentina. It seems that he was trying to broker a peace deal between the UK and Argentina which would see a peacekeeping force oversee an Argentine withdrawal , and he was also concerned that American might lose standing with other South American countries if they supported Britain. Al Haig was a dipshit. 

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > user314 01/28/2020 at 15:16

1

You make a compelling case..

Suppose Boeing are kicking themselves for “not putting the 737 engines in the wing root” back in 1967?

I, for one, always like the “cleaner look” of a/c with the engine embedded right into the wing.  Of course, I always liked the 727's rear “S-Duct” too...

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 15:17

1

Is the Lady Godiva statue still in the city centre?  used to be a landmark for me in my mis-spent youth in the Midlands.

Edgyhal94 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:17

1

Those are some great photos. My dad lives near RAF Midlenhall, so I’ve seen a good deal of USAF hardware. I’ve seen  F15s ( I think) doing some aerobatic stuff, I think they were training. Love the look of the F-15.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:18

1

Awesome!

Edgyhal94 > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 01/28/2020 at 15:18

0

Yes it is. I’m glad you’ve not been over exposed to Coventry. It’s the most depressing place in the U.K.

ttyymmnn > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 15:23

1

Thanks. Along with aviation history, aviation photography is my big hobby. You can see more of my commercial and air show stuff here . I’ve been to busy to go shooting for a long time. I need to get back to the airpot.

The Eagle has been one of my favorites since I was a kid (I was 6 when the Eagle took its maiden flight in 1972! ). But for all the time I spent at Dyess, I never saw one. And I’ve only seen a handful of Strike Eagles at air shows. Keep your eyes open for the upcoming F-15X. The Air Force finally realized that stealth isn’t the answer to every problem.

ttyymmnn > user314 01/28/2020 at 15:23

0

A face only a mother could love....

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 15:30

1

I must respectfully disagree. According to a drunk bloke I ran into years ago , inside a pub near Ledbury, that honor falls to Wolverhampton. This gentleman seemed quite offended that the Pasty American knew where Stratford was, but was blissfully unaware of Wolverhampton’s former glories and decidedly post-industrial decay. So, my answer is “Wolverhampton”. “Final Answer”.

In fairness, the barman did apologize for the “regular’s” challenge, but it did put me on edge as to the Ups and Downs of The Midlands.

And, to give Coventry its due, the cit y did actually receive a lot of a  mad Austrian’s errant hardware between 1940 and 1944. Left a lot of scars— many still visible today. Plus, I still have friends in Coventry... so it has a soft spot in my heart.

SBA Thanks You For All The Fish > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 15:32

1

I’d go for “more lethal”...  those stand-off weapons are pretty unstoppable and there’s scores-and-scores inside the bays of The Flying Dump Truck.  

Edgyhal94 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:36

0

I’ve been a fan of it since I played the Ace Combat series of games. It’s the first plane I unlock. Love the way it looks, I’m glad the F-15 isn’t going away anytime soon. It’s truly one of the best fighters built, period.

Edgyhal94 > SBA Thanks You For All The Fish 01/28/2020 at 15:43

0

Coventry was the heart of the british car industry, now it’s only Jaguar and Land Rover still standing. Everyone else moved or died, triumph and Austin have roads named after them and basically nothing else, I live in browns lane. The Jaguar plant is gone. It’s now a shitty housing estate that makes me feel slightly depressed every time I drive past it to work. It’s like there’s a constant overcast of gloom over Coventry, even when it’s sunny. 

user314 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:44

0

YMMV of course, but I personally love the look of the Victor the most out of the V Bombers. The Victor is like the S103 and Saab Dra ken: looks like it’s from the future, though it was designed in the past.

ttyymmnn > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 15:45

2

Back in the day, my friend and I argued over which was better, the F-14 or the F-15. Living in Norfolk, VA, we saw Tomcats overhead just about every day, while a trip to the VA peninsula near Langley AFB afforded a chance to see Eagles now and then. At the time, I didn’t understand much about the specific missions of each aircraft, we just thought they were cool. But as for which is better? Well, which one is still flying? :D And not just the new Strike Eagles. You can still find a few of the old C model dogfighters out there.

ttyymmnn > user314 01/28/2020 at 15:48

0

Was it you and I who were just having this discussion the other day? Or was that facw? Honestly, the 50s and 60s is my favorite era of aviation. Virtually unlimited budgets paired with limited technology meant that guys would come up with these wild ideas and then see if it worked by flying it. None of the this namby- pamby computer modeling.

Edgyhal94 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:48

0

I like the Tomcat still. Awesome looking thing, I blame topgun for me liking it.

ttyymmnn > Edgyhal94 01/28/2020 at 15:51

1

Then you would have LOVED the Super Tomcat . Too bad they never built it.

user314 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:52

1

F-15X...

And they can swap out the drop tanks for different pylons to carry four AIM-120s each, for 16 total. Because fuck you and your whole squadron, that’s why.

user314 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:53

0

Musta be en facw, though I’ve echoed those thoughts from time to time. 

Edgyhal94 > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 15:54

1

Wow. I want one now... great, and even if I win the lottery like five times, I can’t even have one. I’m fake sad now.

ttyymmnn > user314 01/28/2020 at 15:59

1

World’s most badass f**king bomb truck. Meanwhile, the Marines say, “Ooh, can we play?” This is “only” 12 though (ten AIM-120 and two AIM-9X).

ttyymmnn > user314 01/28/2020 at 15:59

1

Yeah, you’ve both got a knack for having opinions.... ;)

ranwhenparked > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 16:43

1

There was also the fact that the really terrible military dictatorship in Argentina was at least hard line anti-Communist, and that was usually plenty to convince us to support a horrible regime in that era.

Svend > ttyymmnn 01/28/2020 at 20:31

0

It was a crazy time.

I can’t find at this time but found others I knew about.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/world/europe/falklands-war-caused-rare-friction-for-thatcher-and-reagan.html

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

By John F. Burns

Dec. 28, 2012

LONDON — The bond between Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and President Ronald Reagan, both in office in the 1980s, has become a kind of gold standard, showing what the “special relationship” between Britain and the United States can be when their leaders share a political creed.

But even though the two shared a belief in the virtues of the free market and the need to face down the Soviet Union over Afghanistan and other cold war issues, the Thatcher-Reagan embrace had its thorny passages — perhaps never more so than during the 1982 Falklands war in the South Atlantic.

Just how thorny was revealed on Friday by the publication of British government papers covering the period, under a rule that mandates the release of hitherto secret documents after 30 years. The papers, including records of the Thatcher cabinet and her occasional prickliness toward Reagan, have added spice to what was previously known about rocky patches in their relationship.

A memo written by one Thatcher aide chronicled a midnight telephone call Reagan made to Mrs. Thatcher on May 31, 1982, when British troops were closing in on Port Stanley, capital of the British-ruled Falkland Islands, off the coast of Argentina, and the site of the last undefeated Argentine garrison.

Reagan, yielding to advisers who regarded Britain’s insistence on retaining sovereignty over the sparsely populated islands as a colonial anachronism, urged the prime minister to show magnanimity rather than force the invading Argentine troops to surrender, and to reach a cease-fire deal providing for a shared Argentine-British role in the islands’ future and a joint American-Brazilian peacekeeping force.

“The best chance for peace was before complete Argentine humiliation,” the memo recorded Reagan as saying. “As the U.K. now had the upper hand, it should strike a deal now,” rather than act in a way that further hardened Argentine feelings.

But the memo said Mrs. Thatcher rejected the president’s appeal for talks three times, becoming more emphatic each time. “Britain had not lost precious lives in battle and sent an enormous task force to hand over the queen’s islands to a contact group,” Mrs. Thatcher told him, adding a brusque reminder that Britain had been forced to “act alone, with no outside help,” in recovering the islands, an oblique reference to the American refusal to be drawn directly into the conflict on the British side.

Speaking before the final toll had been tallied — 255 British and 649 Argentine military personnel dead — the prime minister “asked the president to put himself in her position,” the memo said. “She was sure the president would act in the same way if Alaska had similarly been threatened.” The memo said the call ended with Mrs. Thatcher saying that the only acceptable outcome was for the Argentines to agree to withdraw without negotiation, which happened a few weeks later.

.

.

.

But then again there was a weird turn around with :-

https://news.usni.org/2012/06/27/reagan-readied-us-warship-82-falklands-war-0

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

By: Sam LaGrone

June 27, 2012 4:00 AM • Updated: February 5, 2013 1:37 PM

While publicly claiming neutrality between Argentina and the U.K. during the 1982 Falklands War, President Ronald Reagan’s administration had developed plans to loan a ship to the Royal Navy if it lost one of its aircraft carriers in the war, former U.S. Secretary of the Navy, John Lehman, told the U.S. Naval Institute on June 26.

Lehman and then Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger agreed to support U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher with the loan of the amphibious warship USS Iwo Jima , he said.

“We agreed that [Weinberger] would tell the President that we planned to handle all these requests routinely without going outside existing Navy channels,” Lehman said in a speech provided to the U.S. Naval Institute he made in Portsmouth, U.K. “We would ‘leave the State Department, except for [Secretary of State Al] Haig, out of it.’”

Reagan approved the request without hesitation and his instructions to Weinberger had been simple, “Give Maggie everything she needs to get on with it,” Lehman said in the speech.

At the time, the Royal Navy had deployed HMS Invincible and HMS Hermes to the Falklands. Each carrier fielded five vertical takeoff Sea Harriers armed with American Sidewinder missiles — all major components of the U.K.’s air war in the Falklands.
The contingency plan to provide a replacement carrier was developed at the Royal Navy’s request.
“As in most of the requests from the Brits at the time, it was an informal request on a ‘what if’ basis, Navy to Navy,” Lehman said.

Retired U.S. Navy Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, commander of the U.S. Second Fleet at the time of the conflict, helped develop the plan to supply the Royal Navy with Iwo Jima if the Hermes or Invincible were lost. Though primarily a helicopter carrier, at least one Iwo Jima-class ship was qualified to operate the American version of the Sea Harrier, according to the 1982 edition of Combat Fleets of the World.

“We decided that the USS Iwo Jima would be the ship that would be the easiest for the British to operate and would make for a smooth transfer,” Lyons told the U.S. Naval Institute on June 26. “We also identified ‘contract advisors’ who would be on board to help the British with some of the systems.”

The contract advisors needed to help operate the USS Iwo Jima would have likely been retired sailors with knowledge of the ship’s systems, said current Combat Fleets editor, Eric Wertheim on June 26.

“The arrangement would have probably been a similar operation to The Flying Tigers, when the U.S. sent surplus aircraft to China and then recruited former pilots to fly the planes,” Wertheim said.
“Once the British took over the ship, the crew would have likely been supplemented by privately contracted Americans familiar with the systems.”

Iwo Jima would have functioned well as a replacement for the Invincible as both ships were close in size and function. “Even though the Hermes was a larger ship with more capabilities, Iwo Jima could have filled the gap,” Wertheim said.

.

.

.

Reading papers and documents later after the fact often opens the eyes to a lot of what happened we didn’t know about, nor should we really.

Though we’ve had some fractions over the years, the U.K. and U.S. have a way of coming through for each other.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2396001/The-RAFs-secret-spies-Declassified-CIA-documents-reveal-British-pilots-flew-U2-missions-Soviet-Union-Cold-War.html

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

British pilots were involved in the U-2 flights in 1959 and 1960

They were used in sensitive missions after an agreement between the CIA and the head of MI6, who saw intelligence benefits for Britain

RAF officers flew spying missions over the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War, it was revealed yesterday.

After decades of secrecy, the CIA declassified documents that show British pilots were involved in the U-2 flights in 1959 and 1960.

They gathered vital intelligence which the head of the American agency said he regarded as worth ‘a million dollars’ .

Until now the Ministry of Defence has neither confirmed nor denied the participation of the RAF in the controversial missions, a position it will no longer be able to maintain.

The first U-2 flights over the Soviet Union started in July 1956, but despite the valuable information gathered, President Dwight Eisenhower was concerned about the ramifications of such a flagrant breach of Russian air space if they were discovered.

Unfortunately for the Americans, even though the hi-tech U-2s flew at more than 70,000ft, the Russians were able to track the planes.

The Soviets sent a strongly-worded protest to Eisenhower, who developed cold feet about the missions and suspended such flights in December 1956.

However, the CIA was very keen for the spying missions to continue and looked for ways, in the words of the newly released document, ‘to increase the possibility of plausible denial’.

The solution was to use British pilots for the sensitive missions. During the spring of 1957, negotiations took place between the CIA and the chief of MI6, Sir Dick White, who saw the obvious intelligence benefits for Britain.

By the summer of 1958, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan had given his authorisation, and four RAF officers, Squadron Leader Christopher Walker and Flight Lieutenants Michael Bradley, John MacArthur and David Dowling – all of whom were in their twenties and single – were sent to train in Texas.

But flying the U-2s was not without risk, and on July 8, 1958, Walker was killed when his plane crashed. The cause was never definitively established, but it is thought the aircraft disintegrated at high altitude.

He was immediately replaced by Wing Commander Robert ‘Robbie’ Robinson. By January 1959 all four men had finished their training and were sent to a secret air base in Turkey, from where they would launch their flights over the Soviet Union and the Middle East.

In order to emphasise American denials of the operation, the U-2 planes were formally transferred on paper to the British government. Eisenhower wrote a top-secret letter to Macmillan stating: ‘British missions are carried out on your authority and are your responsibility. ’

And the flights remained a secret in Britain, too.

The pilots were no longer paid by the RAF, but by MI6, and the public was told the men were engaging in ‘high-altitude weather-sampling missions’.

The first mission was flown by Robbie Robinson on December 6, 1959, over the Kapustin Yar missile test range and a squadron of long-range bombers in the Ukraine.