From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #8 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, 9 September 1993 Volume 04 : Number 008 In this issue: Re: reply Re: A rebuttal about an old posting. Aerofax Stories Re: A rebuttal about an old posting. Re: A rebuttal about an old posting. about boeing 747 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: dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 03:09:13 MDT Subject: Re: reply Steve Douglass says... >I was talking to a subscriber the other day and he had an interesting thought. >He said an AWACs aircraft would be a logical platform to recieve >real time data from a recon platform Probably not Aurora. Any "real time" work they do would likely be done via transponders on FLTSATCOM or DSCS series satellites. Also, another very important advantage is that a signal coming from a phased-array directional satellite antenna on the top of an Aurora is vastly more stealth-friendly than one pointed DOWN to another aircraft. >Since AWACs platforms can receive and send real-time data from TR-1s and >the like, Not necessarily RECON data though. But we also still may have the TR-3A out there somewhere, which is supposed to be an especially "real time" oriented platform. Who knows what it might be using. >Especially if the pulser is an unmanned platform . In that case they would probably want to use satellites even more, for the wider and more reliable coverage that is available. >An AWACS could be used to not only track the aircraft I'd hope it would be more stealthy than that. :-) >but to recieve its data dump (sounds gross) as the recon craft nears. Its certainly possible... but there are a lot of other aircraft or even ground stations that would seem better for the job. >Much like one of our expendable (short use) spy sats. Well, the old KH-9s used to periodically eject film capsules. >i actually heard one once dump a film cannister as it passed >close to Cannon AFB. Heard one WHAT? Those satellites normally ejected film capsules over the ocean (if the chute failed, they would be like incoming "missiles"). Also, those type of satellites have been out of service for a while. The last KH-9 in our inventory was unfortunatley blown up during launch in 1986. The last operational member of that series launched in 6/84, with a normal life of about a year and a half. ... >In any event, I do monitor AWACS from Tinker AFB on NORAD exercises >occasionaly and they do pass data on single UHF frequencies. Sometimes they >pass it back to NORAD at Cheyenne Mountain (Ringmaster) via AFSATCOM nodes >on FLTSATCOM birds. A fairly standard AFSATCOM terminal is the ASC-19, which is data-only (FSK). >If anyone is interested, I can post the known frequency allocations >for the FLTSATCOMs. Sure! I already have a couple, but perhaps yours is newer. >The Kettering Group in England has figured out most of >the positions on the birds. FLTSATs are pretty easy, since they are sitting right up there in a GEO orbit. >A couple have failed in the last few months- Well... the first successor to FLTSAT, UHF Follow-on F1 was recently stranded in a useless orbit due to a problem with its Atlas booster. BUT the good news is the UHF F/O F2 spacecraft just had a successful launch and should be going into service fairly soon... - -dean ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 10:30:40 -0700 Subject: Re: A rebuttal about an old posting. Posted for Steve Douglass (steve1957@aol.com) Date: Wed, 08 Sep 93 00:37:18 EDT Larry, Here is a response to Mr. Tyler. Grand Funk Railroad via SATCOM : I assumed when they mentioned SATCOM that they (those talking) were refering to AFSATCOM. Actuallly it could be FLTSATCOM or MARISAT or LEASAT. In reality there is no AFSATCOM. AFSATCOM refers to USAF communications nodes via FLTSATCOM ( U.S. Navy). In any event the voices on the radio said SATCOM which is a general term meaning satellite comunications. If he doesn't believe me I guess I could send him the tape. Regarding 288.000 MHZ being a AFSATCOM freq: I beg to differ with Mr. Tyler, but it has and is being used as a SATCOM frequency. Most recent intercepted communications (including those heard during the pulser sighting) were conducted in NBFM mode ( used only with AFSATCOM and FLTSATCOM communications). . In Hunterdon Aero Publishers "Directory of North American Military Aviation Communications". 288.000 is listed as a FLTSATCOM frequency and as a Have Quick frequency. It is not listed as a NORAD frequency. I think Mr. Tyler needs to re-read the article in AVWK. It says " After the vehicle passed Amarilo, Douglass detected digitally encrypted speech on 288. 000 MHz , a narrow-band military frequency used as a downlink by USAF communications satellites... Two NORAD frequencies (260.800 and 364.200 MHZ) also were active at the time. The primary NORAD frequency (260.800 MHz) is the airborne intercept command channel for the Southwest U.S. region. Air to Air communications on that channel were between an AWACs aircraft callsign Dragnet 51" from tinker AFB, Oklahoma and an two unknown aircraft using the call signs Darkstar November and Darkstar Mike. Messages consisted of phoenetically transmitted alphanumerics. It is not known whether the radio traffic had any association with the pulser that had just flown over Amarillo." Recently, when I spent a week down in Roswell monitoring and observing "Operation Roving Sands 93" , I had the unique oportunity to observe and monitor AFSATCOM communications in real time. The Air Force set up a large SATCOM dish at Roswell to support their B-1 operations. B-B1s from Dyess, McConnell and Ellsworth took place in the exercise. Since it was a civilian airport, I was able to park (with scanners searching the military bands) in sight of the SATCOM dish. In the week I was there I was able to monitor extensive use of the AFSATCOM links in real time, while parked only feet away from the communications center and the SATCOM dish itself. Many messages were monitored and the majority of them were voice . I was surprised that most of them were in the clear. Some weren't and were they same type of encrypted speech that I monitored during the pulser sighting. One thing that I was sure of was that one of the primary frequencies being used to communicate via AFSATCOM was 288.000 MHz. Since then this has proven to be a very interesting frequency to monitor. 288.000 is a downlink with the uplink still unknown. However, I still believe that almost any frequency on UHF,SHF and EHF can be programmed into a FLTSATCOM bird by the military satellite tasking controllers when needed. For example 305.550 Mhz is listed as an Have Quick frequency, but a couple of years ago when the Pres. visited Amarillo it became active as a SATCOM link to CROWN (White House Communications Agency) even though they had constant contact via NATIONWIDE on 407.850 and 415.700. MHz . On the frequency AF-1 made contact with AF-2 (who was a thousand miles away) via AFSATCOM. Voice traffic was passed as was data. No other SATCOM traffic has been heard (or reported to me) since then. Callsigns- One of the trickiest parts of military monitoring to get correct. Intercepts depends on input from military monitors. Military monitors are just like Mr. Tyler and make mistakes. unfortunatly Uncle Sam doesn't send me an updated callsign list every month so I have to depend on what my subscribers tell me. I can't call STRATCOM or ACC and ask them to confirm my listings. Twice a year there is a call for casllsigns from my readers and the oblige my request . I also ask them to point out any errors or changes they may have noticed. Every six months we update the callsign lists. Any errors or new callsigns in the last list will be corrected and changed in the next list. That's how it works. If Tim wants to go issue by issue and point out the errors, fine go for it. Let's see if Mr. Tyler's work would bear up to that close scrutiny. I dohave one thing to add though. I listen more to my subscribers than to those who don't. They pay for the newsletter and thus deserve more of a voice than those who don't. They are the one's that Intercepts serves and they are who the publication answers to. If they thought that the newsletter was flawed and full of "misinformation" then they wouldn't re-subscribe. Funny thing, my subscription list keeps growing and growing. I believe we do a good job, for what we have to work with. We are a small three man outfit publishing a monthly newsletter. I admit, sometimes there are a few errors that slip through and we regret them, but on a whole I think there is no other better public source on military monitoring information. - Don't take my word for it. See for yourself. I would gladly send anyone a copy of the newsletter for free. (just send me an SASE). Write: Intercepts Newsletter, 6303 Cornell Amarillo Texas 79109. If you can find a better military monitoring newsletter- subscribe to it! ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1993 12:14:59 -0700 Subject: Aerofax Stories Now for some of the stories I've heard about publishing AEROFAX's "Lockheed's Skunk Works, The First Fifty Years". This incredible piece of research was gotten by just calling the 800 number I posted yesterday, and talking to the friendly AEROFAX people who are just as nuts about airplanes as we are, and who also like to talk to people. Those of you who are of a like mind to call and gab, then please add anything new you find out to the following: Anyway. The requirement that Lockheed placed on Aerofax about not mentioning the words Groom Lake, Dreamland, Area 51, ... are true. The reason was - the place doesn't exist - so why would you write about a place that doesn't exist in a book of facts? The USAF censors didn't want the production figures on the U-2 published. This was rather mysterious, as lists of tail numbers have already been published. Hmmm ... . Now for the most interesting piece of information. F-117A enthusiasts will LOVE this one. It has to do with the photos that Aerofax wanted to use on the front and back of the book. But that's the end of the story. Let me start at the beginning. Many of us who have read a lot about the F-117A have read the story about the F-117A that had a U.S. flag painted on the underside. The story goes that this was done for a program review or briefing done for the then Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger (sp?) at the place that doesn't exist. The best that I can recall is that the story about this first appeared in Jim Goodall's Squadron Signal book on the F-117A. He even included a drawing of what it might have looked like on the naturally flat underside of the F-117A. Well, in the Skunk Works archives, Aerofax found the photo of this airplane. The story was true! They also found even more. It turns out there was an F-117A with the Lockheed Skunk on its underside as well! Mr. Goodall's drawing wasn't accurate, but it obviously was a good stab at it because the dramatic effect of such a thing was very evident, even in the Goodall drawing. It turns out that the real flag was even more artistically done. It was really done as emanating from the point on the F-117A's nose and spreading out from nose to tail and nose to wing tips. The blue background and stars were near the nose and the red and white bars spread out beyond that along the natural extreme sweep of the wing and also along the underside to the tail. I haven't seen it but it sounds quite striking, and for those of you who want to model it, Aerofax will describe it in more detail for you. Getting back to the story. Now I'm sure you all agree that a photo of such an airplane would be an excellent cover, especially since the whole F-117A story embodies what the Skunk Works is all about. Also, it would be excellent to portray Old Glory in such a setting. Such displays should be encouraged, actually, in my opinion. But, certain people (not in Lockheed) became concerned that such a display of patriotism might cause someone to ask how much such a thing cost (heck - I think it would be a great airshow airplane!). There would be questions asked by bean counters (maybe bean counters raised the issue!). Anyway, for that reason, Aerofax was not allowed to publish the photo. They wanted to put the drawing of the F-117A with the skunk on its underside on the back cover of the book. That photo was pulled for the same reason. Personally, I think such things are in keeping with patriotism and also as a legitimate advertising attaboy to a government contractor for a job well done! Larry ------------------------------ From: mangan@Kodak.COM (Paul Mangan) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 16:09:45 EDT Subject: Re: A rebuttal about an old posting. > > Posted for Steve Douglass (steve1957@aol.com) > Date: Wed, 08 Sep 93 00:37:18 EDT > > Larry, > Here is a response to Mr. Tyler. > > ere > active at the time. The primary NORAD frequency (260.800 MHz) is the airborne > intercept command channel for the Southwest U.S. region. Air to Air > communications on that channel were between an AWACs aircraft callsign > Dragnet 51" from tinker AFB, Oklahoma and an two unknown aircraft using the > call signs Darkstar November and Darkstar Mike. Messages consisted of > phoenetically transmitted alphanumerics. It is not known whether the radio > traffic had any association with the pulser that had just flown over > Amarillo." As I stated before, when this subject matter first came up, Darkstar was/is the call sign for one of AWACS out of Tinker. N (ovember) and M (ike) are just two of the 30 stations on board. Two years ago I met one of the crew at a wedding. This is really no big deal. AWACS often patrol for various reasons throughout the southwest. Alpha-numerics are used for trajectories as well as simply testing radio units. The most fun these guys have is to tell an F117 they can see them when they can't or pretend to be on a big mission when they are only testing radios. I could tell you alot of stories but why bore you. But there are a lot of Desert Storm pilots that say they are real lifesavers. Paul > > > ------------------------------ From: mangan@Kodak.COM (Paul Mangan) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 93 16:09:45 EDT Subject: Re: A rebuttal about an old posting. > > Posted for Steve Douglass (steve1957@aol.com) > Date: Wed, 08 Sep 93 00:37:18 EDT > > Larry, > Here is a response to Mr. Tyler. > > ere > active at the time. The primary NORAD frequency (260.800 MHz) is the airborne > intercept command channel for the Southwest U.S. region. Air to Air > communications on that channel were between an AWACs aircraft callsign > Dragnet 51" from tinker AFB, Oklahoma and an two unknown aircraft using the > call signs Darkstar November and Darkstar Mike. Messages consisted of > phoenetically transmitted alphanumerics. It is not known whether the radio > traffic had any association with the pulser that had just flown over > Amarillo." As I stated before, when this subject matter first came up, Darkstar was/is the call sign for one of AWACS out of Tinker. N (ovember) and M (ike) are just two of the 30 stations on board. Two years ago I met one of the crew at a wedding. This is really no big deal. AWACS often patrol for various reasons throughout the southwest. Alpha-numerics are used for trajectories as well as simply testing radio units. The most fun these guys have is to tell an F117 they can see them when they can't or pretend to be on a big mission when they are only testing radios. I could tell you alot of stories but why bore you. But there are a lot of Desert Storm pilots that say they are real lifesavers. Paul > > > ------------------------------ From: sp2stes1@gertrud.his.se (Stefan "Stetson" Skoglund) Date: Thu, 9 Sep 93 08:49:47 +0200 Subject: about boeing 747 I know that everything seattle-ish is a little out of charter. I wonder : What is the empty (no fuel no load) weight for the different Boeing 747 versions ? I want metric tones not US tones. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Stefan Skoglund I "Viggen | i tiden *)" sp2stes1@helga.his.se, I | University of Skoevde, Sweden I _____/0\_____ - --------------------------------I ____________O(.)O___________ I -+- O -+- I *) Viggen with two Rb04 ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #8 ******************************* 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).