From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V3 #23 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Thursday, 22 April 1993 Volume 03 : Number 023 In this issue: Re: Latest Intercepts reports Kentucky Sighting (Intercepts article clarification) Kentucky Sighting 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: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 11:01:56 -0700 Subject: Re: Latest Intercepts reports Rick Pavek writes: >Black Manta sighting: > A Kentucky radio monitor: > comes a sighting that may be of one of the elusive >TR-3A Black Mantas. He writes... > >"On March 8th at 11:50 PM EST, ... 11:50 PM ... late night ... Strike 1. >I happened to look out the window of my radio room. I noticed two aircraft >approaching at a distance. ... >the shape of the aircraft which was very similar to the wingspread of a bat! I don't know of a delta-shaped bat ... Strike 2 ... . What you meant here needs clarification. >The second aircraft was identical in shape and size. As they flew over, I could hear >their jet engines which sounded like normal jet engines. > >Needless to say I was a little shook up and excited by what I saw. Interesting. >I quickly went back inside and began scanning the few military channels >(HF) that I had loaded into my scanner. ... Dean responds to me: >Heh... WRONG! Off by around 300 mhz, at least. I guess ... Strike 3 ... OK ... a foul ball. >I called Bluegrass Field and asked them if they knew what the aircraft I saw >were. > >They replied that there were no departures from the airport during that time >and they offered no explanation. Very Good! Extra credit. > I also called the Kentucky State Police >to find out if anyone had reported seeing these strange aircraft. Very Good! I assume they said nobody else had seen them? Extra Credit. >I must say that I do not believe they were F-117As. These aircraft seemed >much too large and I could see them well. > > It was a very bright night with >a full moon. The shape was somewhat similar in shape to the F-117A but >I would say that these aircraft were 2 to 3 times larger. Size is consistent with other 'possible sightings' from others over the past several years. Rick writes: >(My note, now... included in this report was a drawing of the beastie. >The object was drawn as a slightly stretched equilateral triangle, >that is to say stretched out slightly upwards. Gee, ... In other words, like the Bill Sweetman reported Chris Gibson delta shape seen over the North Sea in August 1989 ? I must admit gentlemen. I am intrigued by this for the following reason: Back in the first half of 1991 I saw a copy of a presentation foil (no security stamps on it at all) that contained some drawings of present and possibly future military vehicles. The present day aircraft had their line drawings filled-in and shaded. The possible 'future' aircraft had their shapes represented with white lines without any filled-in color. In other words the 'future' aircraft were portrayed with a kind of "not all there yet" or a 'ghostly' nature. There were "not all there yet" shapes representing four aircraft. The F-22 shape was one. A satellite shape was another. What may have been a high altitude propeller driven reconnaissance aircraft was a third (somewhat like a U-2R with a propeller - - not the Condor), and the forth was indeed a pure delta shaped, jet powered aircraft whose shape looked like it would very much be in agreement with the Gibson shape and the shape described by Rick from the current Intercepts. I will retain the details seen on the drawing for future 'incidents'. The filled in or 'real' aircraft represented on the foil were: the U-2R, the F-18, the Tornado, the F-16, the F-15E, and if I recall, what looked like a few high altitude drones were on there as well. There were also tracked and wheeled ground vehicles represented. One of the tracked vehicles was also represented as "not all there yet". Since the foil had no classification stamps we all know it just couldn't be real. However, since the Gibson sighting, I've had it at the back of my mind. > There >are five lights, three on each point of the triangle with the other two >forward of the midline forming a smaller triagle with the nose light. Very good. We now have another bit of detail to check out. Larry ------------------------------ From: Rick Pavek Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 13:28:43 -0700 Subject: Kentucky Sighting (Intercepts article clarification) Just to clarify, the shape in the article was a solid stretched triangle with rounded corners. I guess I could scan the article and put it up on the ftp site... There was no detail on the drawing other than the five lights (no ailerons, doors, panel lines, etc) Rick , ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 14:26:42 -0700 Subject: Kentucky Sighting Rick writes: >Just to clarify, the shape in the article was a solid stretched triangle >with rounded corners. Rounded, ... pointed, ... at this stage, does it matter? Anyway, thanks for the clarification. Perhaps you might want to scan it. Because I wonder how rounded, and is the nose also rounded? I still find the Gibson sighting interesting wrt the alleged Kentucky sighting. Larry ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V3 #23 ******************************** 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).