From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V2 #72 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Friday, 5 February 1993 Volume 02 : Number 072 In this issue: Re: NRO, Shirt Sizes and other fun stuff Re: "What's an Aurora?" Aurora / YF22 etc. Pictures in the Skunk-works ftp site Re: T-Shirts !?! Re: "What's an Aurora?" More on Desert Storm and Tactical Recon Re: Strategic vs Tactical Recon (was Where's Aurora) Boeing Gift Catalog Boeing Gift Catalog 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: mangan@Kodak.COM (Paul Mangan) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 16:10:54 EST Subject: Re: NRO, Shirt Sizes and other fun stuff > > I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M > > Date: 04-Feb-1993 08:14am EDT > From: Loyd M. Enochs > LENOCHS > Has anyone been following the A&E "Our Century" series called > "Frontline Pilots"? I saw an intercept last night towards the end of > the show that didn't show anythin for 3.5 min, then showed pieces of an > aircraft drifting in and out. It wasn't gun footage, but I don't know > what it was. Any clues? > This was the shootdown of two Libyan Jets about 3-5 years ago. The reason there is no vision at first is that you are recieving the vision of a missile prior to arming it. As soon as it became armed you start seeing the aircraft. The source of this is the original unedited tape that I recorded when CNN played it. They had a "military type" analyse it the second time they played it. I called my son who was in the air force at the time and he confirmed their analysys. > ------------------------------ From: tom@gordian.com (Tom Ambrose) Date: Thu, 04 Feb 93 13:21:49 PST Subject: Re: "What's an Aurora?" from Bruce Henderson : > Rick Pavek writes: > ================ > Since Congress doesn't know about it, apparently, they must be playing > with funding and lying to our representatives as well... > > > Yes... That is what creeps me out the most about this whole thing. I was quite > sure there was this thing called the constitution that says that the military > is controlled by the congress, not themselves. The fact that one branch of our > military appears to be running around without accountability to the ones who > have to pay for it sounds dangerously close to violation of the principals that > this country was founded on. > > > That's why I hope this whole thing comes out of the black in a very ugly and > embarrassing way. Perhaps we will then see an end to the black program > nonsense. The only one they are keeping this stuff secret from is the > taxpayer... I think to avoid sticker shock. And that makes me pretty mad. > > Bruce Just because Congress, in general, doesn't know about a black project, doesn't mean that the Armed Services or Intelligence Commitee's don't know. The military is supposed to report spending/planning/operations to the Armed Services Commity and the DCI must report the same from the intelligence community. If requested (or required), the commitee members must not discuss these issues on the floor or with anyone for that matter. If a commitee member doesn't like a project and feels that is dangerous or he has been lied to in some way, he will often leak info to the press. Its all based on trust. The commitee must trust that they are being told everything and the DoD or DCI must trust that the information will not be leaked. This, of course, has put us into a few bad situations. For example: a member will leak something that blows the cover on a mission, so next time the DCI lies or misleads the commitee. Another example (more related to budgeting and black projects): the DoD asks for another $500 million for a plane that they've already spent $350 million to produce. They're over budget and the commitee doesn't really like the project anyways. The commitee cans the project. Next time the DoD doesn't ask for money for they're black project. They just divert funds from another account. A good reference of my first example is "Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA 1981-87" by Bob Woodward. For black project budgets, read "Blank Check: The Pentagon's Black Budget". - -tom ------------------------------ From: Dieder A. Bylsma Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 15:25:23 PST Subject: Aurora / YF22 etc. As a complete neophyte....I have some pretty simple questions when it comes to the Aurora. What is it, or supposed to be, what do we know about it? Same goes for the YF-22. I heard that the only flying prototype kinda crashed. Or is that at all true? What's known about these guys? Thanks... Dieder p.s. any suggestions as to other list/digests of this flavour? I kinda like this stuff...I want more! :-) ------------------------------ From: clark@acs.bu.edu (Jeff Clark) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 18:37:43 -0500 Subject: Pictures in the Skunk-works ftp site Hello, could someone please either re-post the descriptions of the new picture files at the skunk-works site, or (even better) update the ReadMe file there? Every once in a while I take a look and I never remember what they show (besides what airplane is in it). The current file is from 4/21/1992. And, also, whoever does this, could you give image sizes, like "521x638x256" or whatever? I'd like to convert some of them to Windows format for desktop backgrounds, and the ones closest to screen resolution work best. Thanks, Jeff (clark@acs.bu.edu) ------------------------------ From: Mark Ferraretto Date: Fri, 5 Feb 93 10:13:35 CST Subject: Re: T-Shirts !?! > > > > Wanted: A Lockheed Skunk Works tshirt. Size XL. Preferably (if there > > should happen to be more choices) in black. Will pay expenses and > > shipping. reply to kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com > > I'll certainly take one....Large. > > > if that approach works, I'd also be interested in tshirts or even > > baseball caps from Lockheed, Rockwell, Northrup, CIA, DIA, MIA, NRO, > > or whatever. I could offer, in the event of a trade, tshirts from > > the Boeing Developmental Center... No, only the white stuff. E-3, > > B-1 and B-2, F-22, Avenger, etc. > > I'd love an F-22 shirt! What do I need to do? > > -Michael I want to know too. - -- \ | / PA38.| Now | Name : Mark Ferraretto - -----O-----Gotta| Aero| Place : Department of Physics and Mathematical Physics | love |Rated| University of Adelaide --- it!! |-----| Email : mferrare@physics.adelaide.edu.au ------------------------------ From: Bruce Henderson Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 14:23:17 -0800 Subject: Re: "What's an Aurora?" Tom Ambrose writes: ================ Just because Congress, in general, doesn't know about a black project, doesn't mean that the Armed Services or Intelligence Commitee's don't know. The military is supposed to report spending/planning/operations to the Armed Services Commity and the DCI must report the same from the intelligence community. If requested (or required), the commitee members must not discuss these issues on the floor or with anyone for that matter. ================ That's the whole point, I think. The whole reason there is a congress is so that we elect people to represent us. We delegate our authority. So when a select few powerful individuals usurp that delegated authority, it just seems a little off to me. I thought the whole reason that all bills go before the entire house / senate is so that the authority of the entire american people is put to the test on any new law. And when Sam Nunn (who is not from California, and was not elected by me) decides by himself or with just a few other high ranking folks how to spend $1,000,000,000.00 of our money, it smacks of taxation without representation. I think this thread has gotten off the charter of the skunk works path. Rather than turn people off, I will be happy to discuss this matter through E-Mail with any and everyone. Try bruce@pages.com Thanks Bruce ------------------------------ From: Bruce Henderson Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 13:24:50 -0800 Subject: More on Desert Storm and Tactical Recon Here is a little story associated with some behind the scenes stuff before Desert Storm. I was part of a Photo-Recon squadron, a Marine unit designated VMFP-3. We flew RF-4B's They were very old birds, but did the job really well. Through the mid to late 80's it was one of the best tactical recon units in the armed services (we routinely won the inter-service contests at Fallon and such). Around about 1988 they decided to get rid of the RF-4's so that they could standardize the supply system around the E-6 and the F/A-18. So most of the folks in the unit were given incentives to not re-enlist. So then Saddam takes Kuwait. Two weeks afterwards, a MAG commander (MAG-11[Marine Air Group 11]) signs the order that disbands the squadron and sends the birds to the boneyard. A month later, the people who are planning the war say to themselves "Hmm, we are way short on tactical recon". They say "Hey get us P-3 over here". Needless to say there was no such thing, and the Colonel who gave the order to disband the unit wasn't MAG commander much after that. They tried like mad to re-constitute the squadron to a wartime operational level. But the parts had been scattered to the far winds. Originally, the squadron was to be transitioned to an RF-18D. But someone in the congress said "Hey, marines don't need photo-recon...." And so the plan was axed. A prime example of penny wise and pound foolish. With more tactical recon, you might not have heard someone (official) say on the first night that all of the SCUDs had been neutralized. Sorry if this bored anyone. I thought an inside perspective on the lack of tactical recon might be interesting. BTW, I have heard that the "all new" VMFP-3 with the recce F-18's will be coming on line in '94 Bruce ------------------------------ From: rbarton@who.cc.trincoll.edu (Ran Barton, III) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1993 19:17:07 -0500 Subject: Re: Strategic vs Tactical Recon (was Where's Aurora) Bruce's comments make me think of the words on a unit placard I once read at the Andrews AFB air show, next to a B-52 ALCM carrier. "What is the difference between tactical and strategic? Tactical is when they hit us, and strategic is when we hit them." Probably not original to this unit (forget the ###'s, but funny nonetheless. Ran ________________________________________________________ | | | | Ran Barton, III '93 | A year passes apace | | rbarton@who.trincoll.edu | and proves ever new; | | Trinity College | First things and final | | 300 Summit Street - Box 955 | conform but seldom. | | Hartford, CT 06106-3100 | -The Gawain Poet | | | | |_____________________________|________________________| ------------------------------ From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 16:41:06 PST Subject: Boeing Gift Catalog Hi, for those of you who would like to get a Boeing gift catalog, the number is 206 393-3124. The catalog is free. That's the good news. The bad news is it's a voicemenu system. You will have to push a few buttons. I double-checked with a real person, also, and they confirmed they like sending the catalogs out to anybody, including non-employee types. Rick Pavek Rick Pavek | Never ask a droid to outdo its program. kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com | Seattle, WA | It wastes your time | and annoys the droid. ------------------------------ From: Larry Setlow Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 18:24:54 -0800 Subject: Boeing Gift Catalog Date: Thu, 4 Feb 93 16:41:06 PST From: kuryakin@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Rick Pavek) Sender: skunk-works-owner@ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk Hi, for those of you who would like to get a Boeing gift catalog, the number is 206 393-3124. The catalog is free. That's the good news. The bad news is it's a voicemenu system. The other bad news is that the catalog prices are significantly higher than the prices in the actual store. Or so I hear. ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V2 #72 ******************************** 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 To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe skunk-works-digest in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to either "skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "prm@ecn.purdue.edu". 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).