From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #107 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, 4 January 1994 Volume 04 : Number 107 In this issue: Re: action plan for '94 Scram-jet engine display NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #104 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #103 NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #103 Classified schmassified mailer running amok? Re: Was anyone in Chandler on 22 December? Re: Was Anyone in Chandler on 22 December? Re: Was Anyone in Chandler on 22 December? Re: Write to BLM and Pestering the govt. 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: Brent L. Bates ViGYAN AAD/TAB Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 07:48:55 -0500 Subject: Re: action plan for '94 I'd have to tend to agree with Mary Shafer. Only, my complain is more practical, I get enough `JUNK' email as it is. I don't need any more. So if you want to send `secure' JUNK email, just don't send it to the list and only to those who don't mind. Brent L. Bates Phone:(804) 864-2854 M.S. 361 FAX:(804) 864-8469 NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 E-mail: blbates@aero36.larc.nasa.gov or B.L.BATES@larc.nasa.gov ------------------------------ From: dougt@u011.oh.vp.com (Doug Tiffany) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 8:06:19 EST Subject: Scram-jet engine display I went to the Air Force Museum last Wednesday to view the scram-jet engine display. In my opinion, it wasn't all that spectacular. They had several wind tunnel engines and air frame models on display. They just looked like a mass of wires and steel tubes. The intake ducts were sealed so I couldn't look inside. They had several from different era's (60's, 70's etc...), The newest was from 1990 and was tested to mach 20. They has a pretty good looking model of the NASP. It was about 9 ft. long, and there was some very interesting reading. I did take several pictures of the display along with more photos of the SR and the F-117 trainer. Hopefully, these will turn out better than the last set of pics I took. Something I found to be rather humorous was in the gift shop. They have several models of various aircraft. They also have models of the sr-75 & Aurora (with "Top Secret" written all over them). One thing I didn't see was the model with the Russian photo of Groom Lake. - -- ------======******======------ Douglas J. Tiffany Varco-Pruden Buildings 1202 Industrial Dr. Van Wert, OH 45891 (419) 238-9533 (419) 238-2267 (Fax) dougt@u011.oh.vp.com ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:30:11 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:30:00 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:49 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:38 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:28 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #106 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:24 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #105 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:20 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #104 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:13 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #103 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: SMTP2_ADMIN@CL_63SMTP_GW2.chinalake.navy.mil Date: Mon, 03 Jan 1994 07:29:08 PST Subject: NDN:Skunk Works Digest V4 #103 PostalUnion-QM(tm) 'Non-Delivery Notice'! Your mail through the QuickMail 'CL_63SMTP_GW2' Gateway could not be delivered! *** Unresolved To: Hal CorneliusERA Some addressees appeared valid and the message has been sent to those. ------------------------------ From: George Allegrezza 03-Jan-1994 1050 Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 10:51:42 EST Subject: Classified schmassified Count me among the folks heading for the door if the subject matter for this list devolves from fast aerospacecraft and associated sneaky stuff to Civil Disobedience 101. I'm a little uncomfortable with the Groom Lake land grab stuff but that's a personal issue and ultimately it's Phil's call, not mine. Bunt any concerted effort to break Federal cojones using this list as a hammer is, IMHO, so far off the mark of what we are trying to do in this list, aside from being just a bit silly, that it should be curtailed. And that's my two cents. George George Allegrezza | "There's nothing wrong with him that can't be Digital Equipment Corporation | fixed with some Prozac and a polo mallet." Littleton MA USA | -- Woody Allen, "Manhattan allegrezza@tnpubs.enet.dec.com | Murder Mystery" ------------------------------ From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 09:42:06 PST Subject: mailer running amok? Today, I received 4 copies of Skunk Works Digest, including repeated copies of older messages. (I'm talking about the digest form which contains messages from multiple people). So, is the mailer running amok? Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: rakoczynskij@agcs.com (Jurek Rakoczynski) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 1994 10:42:19 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: Was anyone in Chandler on 22 December? Mary Shafer wrote: > The SR-71 is carrying an experiment called LEOEX (pronounced leo-x) which > stands for Low Earth Orbit EXperiment. It's a receiver/transmitter > package and we're simulating a low-earth-orbit satellite. We overfly > Motorola's facility in Chandler eastward-bound, turn over New Mexico > (Farmington is sort of the top of the turn), and then overfly them > westward. We flew our first flights on Wednesday, the 22nd of December. It's testing for their Iridium system (for those of you who don't know, simply put, it's cellular phone via satelite). I think they were testing the effects of Doppler shift on transmission quality. MARY. A former coworker had described a typical turn radius over the SW part of the US being about 50% greater. This is from the RADAR tracks, during his software work. Can you provide some detail on the flight profile or at least how fast it was flying during the turn? > Was anyone here in a position to hear it? We did boom Chandler and a > number of other places--we got 25 complaints and one damage claim. I live about 25 miles NW of their Chandler plant and don't recall hereing anything. I also checked with a coworker who lives near there and he didn't here anything either. > Speaking (writing?) of Kelly's aircraft, my F-104 with the periscope is > coming right along. What's the test for? > Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com Hope you stay on the list! - -- 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: bentzr@agcs.com (Richard S. Bentz) Date: Mon, 3 Jan 94 13:30:07 MST Subject: Re: Was Anyone in Chandler on 22 December? Mary Shafer wrote: > Was anyone here in a position to hear it? We did boom Chandler and a > number of other places--we got 25 complaints and one damage claim. I live about 20 miles north of Chandler. Therefore, the SR-71's closest approach was probably somewhere between 25 and 30 miles. I heard a couple of mild but definite sonic booms that week. I thought maybe it was just my over-active imagination... My office is about ten miles west of my house. Let me (us) know when the next run is scheduled and I'll listen for them. Rick - -- Richard S. Bentz VOICE: +1 602 582 7090 AG Communication Systems FAX: +1 602 581 4022 POBox 52179, Phoenix AZ INET: bentzr@agcs.com 85072-2179 ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Mon, 3 Jan 1994 16:18:27 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Was Anyone in Chandler on 22 December? We should be back by on Wednesday or Thursday of next week. We did fly a few miles north of Motorola, so it would have been closer to you. You should have heard four sets of double booms, or so the Motorola guys told me (I was on a direct line into their ops room, so I got their comments in real time). Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com On Mon, 3 Jan 1994, Richard S. Bentz wrote: > Mary Shafer wrote: > > Was anyone here in a position to hear it? We did boom Chandler and a > > number of other places--we got 25 complaints and one damage claim. > > I live about 20 miles north of Chandler. Therefore, the SR-71's closest > approach was probably somewhere between 25 and 30 miles. I heard a > couple of mild but definite sonic booms that week. I thought maybe it > was just my over-active imagination... > > My office is about ten miles west of my house. Let me (us) know when > the next run is scheduled and I'll listen for them. > > Rick > -- > Richard S. Bentz VOICE: +1 602 582 7090 AG Communication Systems > FAX: +1 602 581 4022 POBox 52179, Phoenix AZ > INET: bentzr@agcs.com 85072-2179 > ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Mon, 3 Jan 1994 17:35:51 -0800 Subject: Re: Write to BLM and Pestering the govt. Paul writes: >In a previous message, Glenn Campbell (psychspy@aol.com) mentioned >the hearing the BLM will hold about the Air Force seizing the land >around ... (the secret Groom Lake facility). [The hearing] will be >in Caliente, NV on Jan. 31, 1994. > I received a notice in the mail today from the BLM >about the hearing. The bad part is that it listed 6, count them 6, >people who sent letters to the BLM about this blatant land grab to >prevent people from seeing the aircraft billions of "black" dollars >have been spent on. > So, why haven't more people written in opposition to this >land grab?? Because, at least as far as I'm concerned, I am not convinced the government doesn't have the right to develop secret systems in secret! Also there's a two-edged sword here named "excessive oversight". With too much oversight you end up strangling new concepts with red tape. We all know there have been/are abuses of classification systems, but it is not clear to me that any program at Groom is at fault in this regard. In fact, one could point at the history of the programs that have been based at that facility (at least the ones we know about now) and conclude that they were MODEL programs conducted in a manner to greatly benefit the public. Also, just about ALL of the 'sighting' evidence that points to something unusual flying has come from places SEPERATE from the Groom Lake facility. So beyond the historical precedent, what evidence is there currently that 'AURORA' is even there? With all the people watching the Groom area now for over a year, you'd think there would be some evidence. It doesn't sound like the new land grab will really make a difference! I also might add that this whole recent instantiation of this black aircraft watching hobby started with unusual sounding airplanes flying over public land, waking people up at 3AM. It didn't start with people attempting to pester the government. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't have anything to do with pestering the government. Larry ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #107 ********************************* 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).