U2 Spy Plane Fries Air Traffic Control Computers, Shuts Down LAX
nbcnews.com
nbcnews.com
This headline says the plane "fries" the computers, (1) leaving out any indication that the reports are unconfirmed, (2) suggesting permanent computer damage, and (3) implying some sort of active jamming. Interesting -- if it is true.
The article is a bit more cautious -- it doesn't use the word "fries" -- instead saying it "appears to have triggered a software glitch at a major air traffic control center in California".
IMO, truly frying a computer only happens when you blast it with a heavy dose of radiation (like putting it in the microwave!).
Oh! This is nice. SSO was in 2004, and the ERAM system they mention is newer than that, so my observation doesn't actually mean anything. Even better, the prime contractor for ERAM? Lockheed Martin. Manufacturer of the U-2? Lockheed Martin.
I also find it difficult to imagine a SR-71 didn't mosey on by its radars, especially since the Skunk Works were in Burbank during the Cold War.
Quoting from the link: "As a result, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had to stop accepting flights into airspace managed by the L.A. Center, issuing a nationwide ground stop..." including a stop at LAX.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Air_Route_Traffic_C... - "the Los Angeles ARTCC controls en route air traffic over southern and central California, southern Nevada, southwestern Utah, and western Arizona with the exception of military airspace and lower-level airspace controlled by local airport towers and TRACONs." This includes Vandenberg.
The last SR-71 flight was in 1999, which is well before the ERAM computer system which failed here was turned on.
Yes, there have been some launches from Vandenberg. What I don't know is if rockets are required to have a transponder. I did only a brief search, and what I found suggests a "no" answer, at least in 2007:
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/as...
It notes that commercial Mode C transponders have/had "cannot currently report an altitude greater than 62,000 feet."
That's suspiciously close to the 60,000 feet reported in the link.
Within 100 miles of it are major military installations in ridgecrest, ca (China Lake Naval Air Station etc).
It would be very interesting (if unfortunate) if a recent SW upgrade could not handle things flying in and out of that part of the world.
While that did involve the SR71, the US maintains several airframes capable of 65K ceiling including the f15
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/history/mdc/eagle.page
This is a famous story, and almost surely was LA RTC.
"Los Angeles Center, Aspen 20, can you give us a ground speed check?" There was no hesitation, and the replay came as if was an everyday request. "Aspen 20, I show you at one thousand eight hundred and forty-two knots, across the ground."
I think it was the forty-two knots that I liked the best, so accurate and proud was Center to deliver that information without hesitation, and you just knew he was smiling. But the precise point at which I knew that Walt and I were going to be really good friends for a long time was when he keyed the mic once again to say, in his most fighter-pilot-like voice: "Ah, Center, much thanks, we're showing closer to nineteen hundred on the money."
http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/favorite-sr-71-story-107912...
I'm curious though to know how often aircraft go above 62,000 feet. While the F-15 reached over 100,000 ft., the same page lists a service ceiling of 65,000 feet. And while the SR-71 easily flew at higher altitudes, it stopped flying before the affected computer system started running.
I can easily think of other problems; perhaps there was a problem with the U-2's transponder, or perhaps it's a combination of altitude and speed, ... or I'm sure you can conjecture scenarios as well as I.