From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #19 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Tuesday, 21 September 1993 Volume 04 : Number 019 In this issue: Re: USAF Special mission markings Why SR's and U2's are black Re: Why SR's and U2's are black RE: Why SR's and U2's are black colors,paints black... Re: Why SR's and U2's are black Re: USAF Special mission markings Black paint means "Deep Black" Re: Why SR's and U2's are black black paint Re: USAF Plant 42 -- trip report Re: Reno Air Races report Re: USAF Special mission markings Re: Why SR's and U2's are black black... Re: M-12 Black and SMOF D-21A status colors,paints Black Paint Re: Reno Air Races report reason for black pain -- deniability 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: Ian Woodrow Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 08:10:40 BST Subject: Re: USAF Special mission markings tim@umcc.umich.edu (Tim Tyler) said:- > Using black helos just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, if you're > trying to be clandestine during the day, or blend in with the regular > troops. There is much to be said for the psychological factor though for > certain missions. I would just paint my helo in a civilian scheme if I wanted to be clandestine in day time. Folk are gonna see it anyway so does it matter how bright it is ? woody ------------------------------ From: ron@habu.stortek.com (Ron Schweikert) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 07:51:19 MDT Subject: Why SR's and U2's are black Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org asked: > I wonder why the SR-71s & U-2Rs are flat black (OK, deep blue for >you purists...), instead of a bluish-grey underside and a greenish-grey or >even woodland camo topside? Understanding why they are/were basically >flat-black might help us make educated guesses as to why helos operating >during the daytime would also be black. If no one else has responded to this I'll throw in my two cents. The SR-71's were painted black for heat disspipation purposes -- at least that's what we were told. I think that's the official story line. They don't really need camoflouge for their operating environment. Another thing we were told is that the property of heat dissipation was in the paint, not based upon its color. Who knows which is correct. I was always curious about it. Generally dark colors attract and retain heat, but I guess it has something to do with the fact that the skin temperature is so hot at speed and altitude and . . . well, anyone out there know the technical reasons? Anyway, the black was "cool." Can't imagine the "SR-71 Whitebird" :-) Ron ------------------------------ From: "Philip R. Moyer" Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 09:05:20 EST Subject: Re: Why SR's and U2's are black The U-2s and Blackbirds have different paint. The Blackbirds are painted with Lockheed Product C-144, according to my source within the LADC Materials Research and Development Department. This is a very special paint that must be cured at high temperature; rather than build an oven large enough to cook an entire blackbird, they were cured in flight after painting. For this reason, any museum bird that needs to be repainted cannot be repainted with "real" blackbird paint, unless the museum can afford to fly it around for a couple of hours at speed. Someone mentioned that the Blackbirds are really dark blue; this is not true. C-144 can be closely matched by Gunship Black #37038; this comes straight out of the Skunk Works. C-144 is faded by exposure to sunlight. Therefore, any display planes that need to be touched up must be stripped and completely repainted with a different paint, or the touch-ups will be obvious because of the color mismatch. Philip R. Moyer ECN Software Staff Engineering Computer Network Voice: 317-494-3648 prm@ecn.purdue.edu Fax: 317-494-6440 ------------------------------ From: Ian Woodrow Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 15:36:42 BST Subject: RE: Why SR's and U2's are black Ron said > The SR-71's were painted black for heat disspipation purposes -- at > least that's what we were told. Not just what you were told - it's a fact! Notice that they are still black in NASA service when all their other planes are white. woody ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 08:06:17 PDT Subject: colors,paints >From: US3RMC::"ron@habu.stortek.com" "Ron Schweikert" 21-SEP-1993 10:48:31.97 >>Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org asked: >> I wonder why the SR-71s & U-2Rs are flat black (OK, deep blue for >>you purists...), instead of a bluish-grey Bluish grey is nice IF you are a low altitude a/c, with blue sky above. With dark black/dark blue sky above, at altitude... >> underside and a greenish-grey or even woodland camo topside? Woodland Camo is for if someones above you, at low level, you look like a tree. Neither U2 nor SR71 is likely to be looked down on. 8)>> (Or, if parked, say like a Harrier, U2 & SR71 tend to have nice hangars to live in...) Surface finish is a trade off between maintainance, environment (blue palnes show up against yellow/pink desert) and detection method. If they hunt by ey, you camo against visible, if the hunt by IR, you camo against IR, if the hunt by radar... If they do all the above you by a F117. >The SR-71's were painted black for heat disspipation purposes -- at >least that's what we were told. I think that's the official story >line. They don't really need camoflouge for their operating environment. >Generally dark colors attract and retain heat, but I guess it has something to >do with the fact that the skin temperature is so hot at speed and altitude and >. . . well, anyone out there know the technical reasons? "Dark" colors absorb incoming radiant IR (and visible, and so feel warm. dark colors ALSO reradiate best, and so, if hot, cool well. They also will _appear_ to hold heat, since thy absobed more. With SR71 receiving more het from air friction, painting it dark helps cool it by radiation. (above ASSumes equal skin roughness and finish types...) >Another thing we were told is that the property of heat dissipation was >in the paint, not based upon its color. Another aspect is that the "color" of a surface at IR is NOT the same as at visible. two "black" (visible) surfaces may have very different characteristics in the IR, one being a different emissivity. (The SR71 is fast enought that visible (deep red) characteristics do start to be important. Also, some (all?) painting is said to be done with "iron ball", which is said to have some RAM properties. I suspect this is a ferrite composition, many of which are grey/black. It would be "interesting" to know if the "iron ball" is sued anywhere else. (one would suspect that in the intervening decades something "else" has been developed. regards dwp ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 08:12:20 PDT Subject: black... >From: US3RMC::"tim@umcc.umich.edu" "Tim Tyler" 21-SEP-1993 11:04:02.55 > If you study special operations forces, one of the few qualities that >they all seem to have in common is that they operate quickly & quietly in small >cells or teams. It doesn't matter how nice thir equipment is, or how well >trained they are. If they don't have good operational security, they lose one >of their most important force-multipliers. Those guys & girls will do just >about anything, as long as they know they have the element of suprise. > Using black helos just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, if you're >trying to be clandestine during the day, or blend in with the regular >troops. There is much to be said for the psychological factor though for >certain missions. Black (visible black), is however, good against the "mark I Eyeball", or is that Eyeball, Mark 1, human. For a sneaky insertion, probably after dark, at low level (under radar, no sophisticated IR threat) b;ack is likely a good 'un. Protects against the individual with the "golden BB". For low and slow, for night time work... regards dwp ------------------------------ From: cepe@taskon.no Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 18:00:23 -0000 Subject: Re: Why SR's and U2's are black Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org asked: > I wonder why the SR-71s & U-2Rs are flat black (OK, deep blue for [struff deleted] Another thing we were told is that the property of heat dissipation was in the paint, not based upon its color. Who knows which is correct. I was always curious about it. Generally dark colors attract and retain heat, but I guess it has something to do with the fact that the skin temperature is so hot at speed and altitude and . . . well, anyone out there know the technical reasons? Anyway, the black was "cool." Can't imagine the "SR-71 Whitebird" :-) Ron How about the XB-70 Valkyrie. I seem to remember it as beeing painted all white to be able to withstand the effects of a nuclear flash. I'll consider it a candidate for the name "Whitebird". Flying high and fast :-) :-) Carl - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl P. Swensson internet: cepe@taskon.no Taskon AS x400: /c=no/admd=telemax/prmd=taskon/s=swensson Gaustadalleen 21 Tel: +47-22 95 86 21 N-0371 Oslo, Norway Fax: +47-22 60 44 27 - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: rakoczynskij%postoffice.agcs.com@agcs.com (Jurek Rakoczynski) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 09:27:26 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: USAF Special mission markings tim@umcc.umich.edu (Tim Tyler) writes: > > I wonder why the SR-71s & U-2Rs are flat black (OK, deep blue for > you purists...), instead of a bluish-grey underside and a greenish-grey or > even woodland camo topside? Understanding why they are/were basically > flat-black might help us make educated guesses as to why helos operating > during the daytime would also be black. I call up my contact about U2's. He work on them in the 60's. And the answer is: They were flat black, not deep blue or green. It was one of the first use of radar absorbing paint. They used specially shaped carbon granules in the paint. - -- Jurek Rakoczynski, AG Communication Systems, POB 52179, Phoenix, AZ. 85072-2179 Inet: rakoczynskij@agcs.com Voice: +1 602 581 4867 Inet: JUREK.RAKOCZYNSKI@gte.sprint.com Fax: +1 602 581 4022 ------------------------------ From: TOM PETRISKO <0004343121@mcimail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 15:59 GMT Subject: Black paint means "Deep Black" You guys are missing the point. They were all painted black for deniability purposes. Remember that the CIA owned the U-2 and A-12. Go all the way back to the Raven's of the 1950's. Black means unknown country of origin. Remember that line from "Mission Impossible". " The secretary will disavow any knowledge of your existence". Tom ------------------------------ From: rakoczynskij%postoffice.agcs.com@agcs.com (Jurek Rakoczynski) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 09:42:47 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: Why SR's and U2's are black "Philip R. Moyer" writes: > > The U-2s and Blackbirds have different paint. The Blackbirds are painted with > Lockheed Product C-144, according to my source within the LADC Materials Research > and Development Department. This is a very special paint that must be cured at > high temperature; rather than build an oven large enough to cook an entire > blackbird, they were cured in flight after painting. For this reason, any museum bird > that needs to be repainted cannot be repainted with "real" blackbird paint, unless the > museum can afford to fly it around for a couple of hours at speed. For the current NASA blackbirds, i was wondering if the (current?) C-144 is the original "ironball" paint, or were the radar absorbing properties removed? You would think that some verification would have been done if the paint was modified, or expect some paint change just to eliminate some of the "security" paper work, unless the cost for a change too much. - -- Jurek Rakoczynski, AG Communication Systems, POB 52179, Phoenix, AZ. 85072-2179 Inet: rakoczynskij@agcs.com Voice: +1 602 581 4867 Inet: JUREK.RAKOCZYNSKI@gte.sprint.com Fax: +1 602 581 4022 ------------------------------ From: Rick Pavek Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 10:29:26 -0700 Subject: black paint When I was a sprout, I asked my dad why the B-52's at Amarillo AFB (they were D models being readied for VietNam) were painted black. He indicated that he thought it was because when the aircraft is at altitude, the black reflects very little light, in comparision to light blue or white, so it is harder to see. I suspect that's why the U2 is painted black, since heat dissipation isn't necessary. :-) SR-75/XR-7 _|_*O*_|_ | Rick Pavek \ __|__ / | HA!! kuryakin@halcyon.com \_______/_(O)_\_______/ | Ruby - \___/ \___/ | Galactic Gumshoe ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 13:44:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: USAF Plant 42 -- trip report Palmdale Regional Airport carries the scheduled airline traffic in the area. There are commuter/express flight in and out of there. Remember the accident at LAX a couple of years ago, when an airplane landed on top of a cummuter already on the runway? That commuter airplane was on its way to Palmdale and Inyokern. (A NASA secretary was on it, by the way.) They've been flying there for _years_. I'm pretty sure they use the Plant 42 runways. At least, that's what it looks like. Since the prevailing wind is pretty constantly 220/40 degrees (EDW main runway is 22/04) I consider it highly unlikely that they'd have two non-parallel runways in operation. If anything is constant here in the Antelope Valley, it's the wind. This isn't a high-traffic situation. Think about it. Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com On Mon, 20 Sep 1993 Jeffrey_Lo@ccm11.sc.intel.com wrote: > > >You will see 2 runways -- the closest one (which runs > >roughly SW-to-NE) belongs to Palmdale Regional Airport, and the further one > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >(which runs roughly W-to-E) is part of Plant 42. > > Hmm, I wasn't aware there was any non-military related activity at the airport > -- I don't recall having seen Palmdale listed in any of my general aviation > airport guide or the NOAA Airport/Facilities Directory. I just assumed all of > the non-military aviation in the area was based at nearby Fox Field in Lancaster > or farther north at Mojave. I'll have to go home and check again. Maybe I'll > land there and check out Blackbird airpark the next time I fly to So. CA if it's > possible. > > >Judging from my map,Plant 42's > >runway appears to be about 13000 feet (4000 m) long. > > Pretty close, the Los Angeles sectional chart lists it at 12,000 feet. ------------------------------ From: ceferino@ingres.com Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 11:13:02 +28416 Subject: Re: Reno Air Races report >From: Jeffrey_Lo@ccm11.sc.intel.com >Date: Mon, 20 Sep 93 14:12:34 PST >Subject: Reno Air Races > >I spent last weekend in Reno for the annual National Championship Air >Races out at the old Stead AFB. Normally, this wouldn't be skunk-works >material except for the F-117A and U-2 fly-bys that were scheduled. >Unfortunately, they never showed. The one very unexpected part of the >show was during the F-16 flight demonstration in between a couple of >races on Saturday. The Air Force Captain was making his high speed >pass, and I thought, "Wow, this guy is really cooking!". We were about >as close as you could get, probably a few hundred yards, when the pilot >leaned a bit harder on the throttle tnan he should have, and ... "BOOM! >BOOM!". First sonic boom I've heard in years, and the only one I ever >heard outside of the Mojave desert. I wonder if he got in trouble for >that ... he didn't do it the next day. I was also in attendance on Saturday at the Reno Air Races when Captain Whoozit broke the sound barrier in an F-16. The crowd came to its feet in a heartbeat with enthusiastic applause. The pilot was given 3 more rounds of standing ovations after he landed. I can only assume that many air show fans enjoyed that extremely rare sonic boom. I had heard only one other recently; March 1993, Saline Valley, CA. Unfortunately, the FAA was also keen to speak with the pilot as soon as he landed. Watching from 300m with binoculars, it appeared that the FAA and the pilot talked for about 5 minutes. Military personnel in my party are of the opinion that this particular pilot is no doubt in deep doodoo. If anyone has further information as to any disciplinary action, or lack thereof, please let us know. Hopefully he won't get whacked hard. Another interesting observation we made at Reno was an F-16, marked Testing Division, which was equipped with a tailhook. We had never seen an F-16 with tailhook before. Indeed they do not presently deploy F-16s from carriers, but it would appear that this could change soon. - -Ceferino Lamb - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 186,000 miles per second...it's not just a good idea; it's the law. | | ceferino@ingres.com Monkeys read Neitzsche but don't understand it. | ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 13:59:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: USAF Special mission markings On Tue, 21 Sep 1993, Tim Tyler wrote: > I wonder why the SR-71s & U-2Rs are flat black (OK, deep blue for > you purists...), instead of a bluish-grey underside and a greenish-grey or > even woodland camo topside? Understanding why they are/were basically > flat-black might help us make educated guesses as to why helos operating > during the daytime would also be black. This is kind of a silly question--if you're flying at 85,000 ft you don't have to hope that someone won't see you when they look down at the top of your airplane. Or that they won't notice you against the sky if they look up. As to why the SR-71 is black--how about that that particular paint is heat-resistant, like stove paint? Or they did it for black-body radiation? I am absolutely certain that the color choice has nothing to do with a reduced visual signal. Mary Shafer ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 14:23:01 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Why SR's and U2's are black We haven't repainted them, except to redo the tails and get rid of the star and bars. There's no real visible difference, either. I saw them in mid change. Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com On Tue, 21 Sep 1993, Jurek Rakoczynski wrote: > "Philip R. Moyer" writes: > > > > The U-2s and Blackbirds have different paint. The Blackbirds are painted with > > Lockheed Product C-144, according to my source within the LADC Materials Research > > and Development Department. This is a very special paint that must be cured at > > high temperature; rather than build an oven large enough to cook an entire > > blackbird, they were cured in flight after painting. For this reason, any museum bird > > that needs to be repainted cannot be repainted with "real" blackbird paint, unless the > > museum can afford to fly it around for a couple of hours at speed. > > For the current NASA blackbirds, i was wondering if the (current?) C-144 > is the original "ironball" paint, or were the radar absorbing properties > removed? You would think that some verification would have been done if > the paint was modified, or expect some paint change just to eliminate > some of the "security" paper work, unless the cost for a change too > much. > > -- > Jurek Rakoczynski, AG Communication Systems, POB 52179, Phoenix, AZ. 85072-2179 > Inet: rakoczynskij@agcs.com Voice: +1 602 581 4867 > Inet: JUREK.RAKOCZYNSKI@gte.sprint.com Fax: +1 602 581 4022 > ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 08:12:20 PDT Subject: black... >From: US3RMC::"tim@umcc.umich.edu" "Tim Tyler" 21-SEP-1993 11:04:02.55 > If you study special operations forces, one of the few qualities that >they all seem to have in common is that they operate quickly & quietly in small >cells or teams. It doesn't matter how nice thir equipment is, or how well >trained they are. If they don't have good operational security, they lose one >of their most important force-multipliers. Those guys & girls will do just >about anything, as long as they know they have the element of suprise. > Using black helos just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, if you're >trying to be clandestine during the day, or blend in with the regular >troops. There is much to be said for the psychological factor though for >certain missions. Black (visible black), is however, good against the "mark I Eyeball", or is that Eyeball, Mark 1, human. For a sneaky insertion, probably after dark, at low level (under radar, no sophisticated IR threat) b;ack is likely a good 'un. Protects against the individual with the "golden BB". For low and slow, for night time work... regards dwp ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 11:56:30 -0700 Subject: Re: M-12 Black and SMOF D-21A status Hello, All this discussion of black reminds me of when I stripped the black paint off of A-12 #940 at SMOF. I didn't really notice any iron balls in the paint at all. I still have much of it on my old tennis shoes that I use for grungy work around the house. It's definitely black, and sort of flat. I used to wonder if 940 was just coated in any old black paint by the USAF at one point, but now that we've seen the black M-12 (s?) flying in "Kelly's Way", I'm not so sure of that any more. They actually flew black M-12 (s?). That reminds me. I also tried to check out the leading edges of the chines for pyro-ceram inserts but if there is any pyro-ceram in there it's hidden behind titanium plates. Now for new stuff. The SMOF D-21A is supposed to be arriving within the next month or so. There is a rumor that the USAF museum already has theirs. The drone that is being shipped to SMOF for mounting on the back of 940 is a drone that actually flew on 940 at one point. It was a drone used strictly in a captive flight test, it wasn't launched (because the drones were destroyed at the end of the test). SMOF is busy making a pylon to mount this drone on as we speak. When the drone arrives and its restoration commences, I'll let you all know and keep you all informed. Larry ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 08:06:17 PDT Subject: colors,paints >From: US3RMC::"ron@habu.stortek.com" "Ron Schweikert" 21-SEP-1993 10:48:31.97 >>Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org asked: >> I wonder why the SR-71s & U-2Rs are flat black (OK, deep blue for >>you purists...), instead of a bluish-grey Bluish grey is nice IF you are a low altitude a/c, with blue sky above. With dark black/dark blue sky above, at altitude... >> underside and a greenish-grey or even woodland camo topside? Woodland Camo is for if someones above you, at low level, you look like a tree. Neither U2 nor SR71 is likely to be looked down on. 8)>> (Or, if parked, say like a Harrier, U2 & SR71 tend to have nice hangars to live in...) Surface finish is a trade off between maintainance, environment (blue palnes show up against yellow/pink desert) and detection method. If they hunt by ey, you camo against visible, if the hunt by IR, you camo against IR, if the hunt by radar... If they do all the above you by a F117. >The SR-71's were painted black for heat disspipation purposes -- at >least that's what we were told. I think that's the official story >line. They don't really need camoflouge for their operating environment. >Generally dark colors attract and retain heat, but I guess it has something to >do with the fact that the skin temperature is so hot at speed and altitude and >. . . well, anyone out there know the technical reasons? "Dark" colors absorb incoming radiant IR (and visible, and so feel warm. dark colors ALSO reradiate best, and so, if hot, cool well. They also will _appear_ to hold heat, since thy absobed more. With SR71 receiving more het from air friction, painting it dark helps cool it by radiation. (above ASSumes equal skin roughness and finish types...) >Another thing we were told is that the property of heat dissipation was >in the paint, not based upon its color. Another aspect is that the "color" of a surface at IR is NOT the same as at visible. two "black" (visible) surfaces may have very different characteristics in the IR, one being a different emissivity. (The SR71 is fast enought that visible (deep red) characteristics do start to be important. Also, some (all?) painting is said to be done with "iron ball", which is said to have some RAM properties. I suspect this is a ferrite composition, many of which are grey/black. It would be "interesting" to know if the "iron ball" is sued anywhere else. (one would suspect that in the intervening decades something "else" has been developed. regards dwp ------------------------------ From: Rick Pavek Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 12:48:50 -0700 Subject: Black Paint I'd tend to dismiss the concept of 'flying at 85,000' and looking down at the top of your airplane. The idea is that light would not get transmitted down to a ground-based or lower-altitude aircraft observer. Think about this: White paint reflects all the visible spectrum. Black paint absorbs it then radiates it back in the infrared. The less visible light being reflected back at the observer, the less likely it is that the observer will see the vehicle. Of course, a good reason to have the SR-71/A-12 black is for black body radiation. Never any contention there. But what of the others? The B-52, the RB-57D and F, the AC47/119/130, the U2/TR1, the B-29 in Korea, the P-61, the F-82, the McDonnel Moonbat, and the P-70 (did I miss any?). Tell me, with a straight face, that these benefit from black-body radiation and I'll drop the thread... Of course, many of the above are night-fighters. Many are not. The recon aircraft aren't painted black just because somebody 'likes' black paint because it's sexy and evokes visions of spys and secrets. And except for the one exception of the SR-71, the reason isn't thermal dissipation. I am absolutely certain that you are right for that one exception. Rick "Not a curmudgeon" Pavek SR-75/XR-7 _|_*O*_|_ | Rick Pavek \ __|__ / | HA!! kuryakin@halcyon.com \_______/_(O)_\_______/ | Ruby - \___/ \___/ | Galactic Gumshoe ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1993 16:22:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Reno Air Races report Many Air Force aircraft have tailhooks. They're NOT for carrier landings, they're for arrested landings down at the far end of the runway. Don't expect any Falcons at the boat. Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com On Tue, 21 Sep 1993 ceferino@ingres.com wrote: > > Another interesting observation we made at Reno was an F-16, marked > Testing Division, which was equipped with a tailhook. We had never seen > an F-16 with tailhook before. Indeed they do not presently deploy F-16s > from carriers, but it would appear that this could change soon. > > -Ceferino Lamb > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 186,000 miles per second...it's not just a good idea; it's the law. | > | > ceferino@ingres.com Monkeys read Neitzsche but don't understand it. | > ------------------------------ From: ron@habu.stortek.com (Ron Schweikert) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 14:40:54 MDT Subject: reason for black pain -- deniability >From: TOM PETRISKO <0004343121@mcimail.com> >Subject: Black paint means "Deep Black" > > You guys are missing the point. They were all painted black for >deniability purposes. Remember that the CIA owned the U-2 and A-12. >Go all the way back to the Raven's of the 1950's. Black means >unknown country of origin. > Remember that line from "Mission Impossible". >" The secretary will disavow any knowledge of your existence". >Tom Well, maybe that's part of it, but they sure wouldn't be hard to track on the basis of their lack of a specific paint job. Perhaps the paint jobs changed, but the SR's I worked on, and all the old pictures I saw had the USAF insignia on it plus "United States Air Force" etc. The markings were clear. I don't think the black paint confused anyone as to origin! "Hmm comrade, here's an SR-71, but wait, it's painted black. Where could it be from?" :-) (Just kidding Tom!) I may have missed something in your posting. Ron ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #19 ******************************** 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).