From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V2 #29 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Monday, 14 December 1992 Volume 02 : Number 029 In this issue: B-1B Re: B-1B Re: article See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the skunk-works or skunk-works-digest mailing lists and on how to retrieve back issues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 20:07:36 PST Subject: B-1B Oh yeah. I remember that one, CNN had it on the news live... didn't it? Naw, the Excalibur I'm referring to is supposedly the real name for the spy plane, and that Aurora is what they used to hide additional B2 funding. Could the reason the Air Force is denying they have a new supersecret spy plane because, like the A-12, it belongs to the CIA, not the USAF? Or the Navy? Both of these alternatives would let the Air Force say with a straight face "We don't have such a thing." Also, talked to my source today and he alluded to the Ex Mac/GD A-12 Stealth Attack still being actively developed. It is apparently, still being built. And supposedly, if you believe reports of delts (delta) shapes seen, it's already flying. I maintain that he's in a position to know. Rick ------------------------------ From: dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 06:38:42 MST Subject: Re: B-1B kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek) writes: >I remember that one, CNN had it on the news live... didn't it? Yea, I also remember was watching (and taping) it from somewhere. It was pretty interesting. The guy did a nice job putting it down. >Naw, the Excalibur I'm referring to is supposedly the real name for the >spy plane, and that Aurora is what they used to hide additional B2 funding. That's a strange twist. Interesting. Has that been reported anywhere? >Could the reason the Air Force is denying they have a new supersecret spy >plane because, like the A-12, it belongs to the CIA, not the USAF? I would think that CIA got out of the airframe business back with the A-12. Considering all the politics involved, could they really run such a thing? >Or the Navy? But why would it go to the Navy? The mission has USAF written all over it. >Both of these alternatives would let the Air Force say >with a straight face "We don't have such a thing." They have never needed any reason other than it being "black" before. :-) After all, they denied that the F-117 existed for many, many years. >Also, talked to my source today and he alluded to the Ex Mac/GD A-12 >Stealth Attack still being actively developed. It is apparently, >still being built. And supposedly, if you believe reports of delts >(delta) shapes seen, it's already flying. Hmmm... Any chance that the "development" could be the AX, and the "flying delts" could be the TR-3A? >I maintain that he's in a position to know. OK. If he "knows" anything else, please pass it along. :-) - -dean ------------------------------ From: dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 06:44:51 MST Subject: Re: article rbarton@who.cc.trincoll.edu (Ran Barton, III) writes: >The last time someone posted an article, a great deal of discussion ensued >as to the legality of forwarding copyrighted information. I do not recall >any final outcome of that discussion, I think we all decided it was wrong to publish copyrighted material without the permission of the originator. IMHO at least, this mailing list does not constitute a "publication"... :-> >so I will apologise know if the following Washington Post article >is out of line. I certainly don't think so. Thanks! That was great stuff. More for the archives. So has anyone seen the JANES (JDW) article yet? >I am including it here, apart from its obvious interest to this list, >to atone for my atrocius typos of late. Aww, we don't care bout no steekin typos... (just good info :) ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V2 #29 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "listserv@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-skunk-works": subscribe skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "skunk-works-digest" in the commands above with "skunk-works". Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from harbor.ecn.purdue.edu, in /pub/skunk-works/digest/vNN.nMMM (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number).