Huey, read the posts. My post was clearly a reference to ftroop and his picture of an imint payload.

As for the rest of my post, you missed the days on end part. The U-2 has great sensors, but not the persistence that the commanders need in today's counter-insurgency limited boots on the ground conflict. Virtual presence beats no presence. Simultaneous, persistent, re-taskable near real-time SAR, IMINT, and SIGINT can be invaluable to a COCOM.

I am not a fan of the GH, it is a mis-managed under-performing asset. However, if BAMS can do what they intend to, most of those limitations will be eliminated. Regardless, my posts have never been a my plane vs your plane argument; it's effects and deliverables. Given time, engineers can make an RPA that approaches U-2 fidelity with RPA endurance and range. They will nevet make a U-2 approach RPA endurance or range. That's not advocacy, it's realism.