https://hyperstition.al/u2-james-black/
he actually mentions a bit about the difficulty of landing:
> The most difficult part of flying the U-2 was to make a good landing. It was a tail-dragger and in order to make a decent landing, you had to come across the threshold at three to five feet and ten knots above the stall speed. And the threshold speed was based on the amount of fuel on board. The aircraft attitude at the threshold had the tail higher than when parked. The residual (idle) RPM was 65% and during the check-outs, only 15% of flaps were used. The trick was to fly down the runway, holding the main wheel one-to-three feet off the runway, while the airspeed dissipated and the attitude of the aircraft rotated from that slightly-tail-high to the parked attitude, without letting the main gear touch the runway. For if the main gear touched too early, you got a bounce and that was a go-around. The same thing is true in a J-3 (40 HP) cub. In other words, you do not make “wheels” landings – placing the main gear on the ground first. It is said, that you can never recover from a bounce. For you will always be 180 degrees out of synchronization. Years later, as a reconnaissance staff officer at the 15th AF Headquarters, March AFB, Calif., I worked for a lieutenant colonel who had been in the RB-47 program at Farber AFB, Kansas for many years and the RB-47 was also a “tail-dragger” and the same was true about it and the bounce. (But it didn’t have a high-aspect wing, such as used on gliders, and the -47 had six engines, so when all six were in idle it settled down very smoothly.)
the whole site is fantastic, check out his other adventures.
They used to use Pontiac GTOs (aka Holdens), then switched to Camaros. Not sure what they're using now.
Also you're not going "long periods of sustained acceleration" here.
The real issue would be Tesla's slow acceleration at high speeds. It has a very very good 0-60 mph, but it's 0-100 mph is more average.
Saw a U-2 at an airshow and somehow I expected more. It had really badly damaged paint and just looked like some neglected museum exhibit that had been left outside too long.
1: https://jalopnik.com/the-140-mph-chase-cars-of-the-u-s-air-f...
What helps is that due to procedures nobody flies manually at such altitudes. So it's up to the autopilot to maintain a specific airspeed.
A similar effect exists at very heavy weight on takeoff, the gap between the stall speed and the maximum speed for the flaps can be as little as 20kt in a fully loaded 777. That requires good concentration and constant monitoring in the climb to not get a stall warning or a flap overspeed. This part is often flown manually.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_corner_(aerodynamics)#/...
From NASA's book on the U-2,
> The U-2 has always been a difficult airplane to fly, challenging even the best pilots. Lightweight construction and long, thin wings give it terrific soaring ability but also make it hard to land. As the airplane approaches the ground, it floats on a cushion of air—known as ground effect—that causes the U-2 to remain airborne even at idle. The pilot almost has to force it down using spoilers to extinguish any remaining lift. A safe touchdown is further complicated by the unusual landing gear configuration. Near or on the ground, the U-2 appears to be a clumsy beast. The mysterious Dragon Lady seems at ease only when soaring to altitude or cruising through the stratosphere. Even there, danger lurks within the thin margin between Mach buffet and stall speed, the dreaded “coffin corner” of the flight envelope. Technological improvements have eased such problems as high-altitude engine flameouts and balky autopilots, but only a select few can hope to admire Earth’s curvature from more than 12 miles above the surface in what has been dubbed the Near-Space Plane.
- https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/unlimit...
It is an extreme craft made for an extreme time.