The Central Intelligence Agency and Overhead Reconnaissance; The U-2 and OXCART Programs, 1954-1974

Text

This text came with the file. It may have mistakes. When the text and the image disagree, the image is right.

273
Secret NOFORN
Chapter 6
characteristics, although the Lockheed design's specifications were
slightly better in each category. The Lockheed design was also prefer­
able in terms of overall cost. In the vital area of vulnerability to radar
detection, however, the Convair design was superior. Its smaller size
and internally mounted engines gave it a smaller radar cross section
than the Lockheed A-12. 15
Comparison of Lockheed and
Convair Designs
Lockheed A-12
Speed
Range (total)
Range (at altitude)
Cruising Altitude
Start
Midrange
End
Cost summary (for 12
aircraft without engines)
Mach 3.2
4,120 nm
3,800 nm
84,500 ft.
91.000 ft.
97,600 ft.
$96.6 million
Convair KINGFISH
Mach 3.2
3,400 nm
3,400 nm
85.000 ft.
88.000 ft.
94,000 ft.
$ I 21.6 million
Some of the CIA representatives initially favored the Convair
KINGFISH design because of its smaller radar cross section, but they
were eventually convinced to support the Lockheed design by the Air
Force members of the panel, who believed that Convair's cost over­
runs and production delays on the B-58 project might be repeated in
this new project. In contrast, Lockheed had produced the U-2 under
budget and on time. Another factor favoring the A-12 was security.
Lockheed had experience in running a highly secure facility (the
Skunk Works) in which all of the key employees were already cleared
by the Agency.
Despite its vote in favor of the Lockheed proposal, the selection
panel remained concerned about the A-12 's vulnerability to radar de­
tection and therefore required Lockheed to prove its concept for
reducing the A-l2's radar cross section by l January 1960. On 14
September 1959, the CIA awarded a four-month contract to Lockheed
" OSA History, chap. 20, pp. 18-19 (TS Codeword).
Secret