From: skunk-works-digest-owner@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu To: skunk-works-digest@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V4 #114 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, 11 January 1994 Volume 04 : Number 114 In this issue: Recent silliness Re: booms, F-117 Re: booms Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility Re: booms Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility Re: Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility Edwards/Dryden Tour Re: YF-23A's at NASA Major Aeronautical Programs Re: booms, F-117 Re: booms Re: booms strange things in hte USAF '94 budget 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: S.Dray@ste0402.wins.icl.co.uk Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 11:19:47 +0000 Subject: Recent silliness Well someone really screwed up this time ,After all the Junk on Groom Lake ( Not really on topic was it ) Someone has managed to upset Mary Schafer who if you lot are blind is one of the largest most informative contributors to this list. I think I speak for many Either Apologies to Mary Or I and Many others will unsubscribe. Why should we suffer for ones Paranoia. ------------------------------ From: mangan@Kodak.COM (Paul Mangan) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 07:54:12 EST Subject: Re: booms, F-117 > No, you've got it backward--we used sonic booms to test the array. We > didn't even get any data; it all went to the seismologists. > > In addition, they were interested in getting boom signatures to improve > their data analysis. This will help them differentiate between booms and > temblers. > > Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com > > I find it interesting that there was a set of earthquakes so soon after these tests. I guess they happen all the time in California. But, I am curious as to how the sensors worked now that they have been tested. Also, I was wondering about the way they were described on this mornings radio. A lady was interviewed and said that the one she felt was " a single shock wave with no rolling or after shocks". Isn't this a little unusual? I have only been in a couple of minor earthquakes but they were not as she described and although they only lasted a few seconds they were certainly not a single shock wave. However I have experienced a lot of sonic booms and would desribe them as a single shock wave. Most of these were heard but a few were felt as well as heard. (Woops, I just remembered a few did have a double shock too them) This ALMOST leads me to wonder if there is such a thing as a noisless or low noise sonic boom. In other words can the shape of a sonic boom's cone be made to change to reduce the noise signature and imitate an earthquake. What does a sonic boom register on the open ended scale that measures earthquakes? For example, does anyone know what the seismologists pick up when the Space Shuttle returns from orbit. I hope I don't sound too suspicious, I really am just curious. Paul Mangan ------------------------------ From: rschnapp@metaflow.com (Russ Schnapp) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 08:48:02 PST Subject: Re: booms johnbl@ifi.uio.no writes: > I see, so you actually have a soundwave traveling faster than the speed > of sound (???) in air? Okey I see the point, something like "virtual > soundspeed". Yeah. The wave propagates at the speed of sound, but it is being generated along a track that moves faster than the speed of sound, so the apparent velocity of the wavefront is faster than the propagation speed. > It should be possible to correlate this with angular movement (if the object > moves slover than mach 1 to get the distance between the array and some > soundproducing object. Getting subsonic velocity from audio pickups doesn't seem as simple to me. Supersonic vehicles create a wavefront that ought to be detectable with a 1-bit resolution pickup, given suitable thresholding for a typical boom overpressure. I don't think it's as easy for a subsonic vehicle. Can you elaborate? Are you talking about directional pickups and waveform analysis? ...Russ ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 09:45:35 PST Subject: Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility >This is off-charter, so I'll keep it short. Are there any list >participants that have sufficient pull to get me into the fabled Annex >to the National Air and Space Museum on 1-22 or 1-23? And feel like >doing so? If ther eference is to the Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility, call 202-357-2700 9:30-2:30, EST, M-F and make reservations. Tours are at 10:00AM daily, with a second at 1:00PM Sat & Sun. Resrvations are REQUIRED and FREE. (This a general public tour, it does no go look in all the corners, but thats still a number to start with,,,) enjoy dwp ------------------------------ From: Brent L. Bates ViGYAN AAD/TAB Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 13:03:51 -0500 Subject: Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility I went with an AIAA group there and it was kind of interesting. They could have turned on a few more lights so I could see things better, :-). (I don't have a flash for my camera.) We saw them working on the restoration of several different aircraft. One of which was the Enola Gay. There was so much to see we ran out of time. But then part of the problem was that our guide (all of whom are volunteers) was a little slow, at least for me. If you are going to be in the neighborhood and have the time, go see it. And as the other person said, you HAVE to have reservations. 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: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 12:02:17 -0800 Subject: Re: booms Paul Mangan writes: >This ALMOST leads me to wonder if there is such a thing as a noisless >or low noise sonic boom. In other words can the shape of a sonic >boom's cone be made to change to reduce the noise signature >and imitate an earthquake. > >What does a sonic boom register on the open ended scale that measures >earthquakes? For example, does anyone know what the seismologists >pick up when the Space Shuttle returns from orbit. > >I hope I don't sound too suspicious, I really am just curious. As the altitude of the aircraft that produces the shock system increases, the delta-P of the boom caused by that shock system decays, and the duration of the boom wave increases. I call your attention to the following sources: 1. OXCART History lpn 18 "Neither on this nor on other flights was there much trouble from sonic boom. To be sure, the inhabitants of a small village some 30 miles from the site were troubled as the aircraft broke through the sound barrier while gaining altitude. A change of course remedied this. At altitude OXCART produced no more than an ominous rumble on the ground and since the plane was invisible to the naked eye no one associated this sound with its actual source." 2. NASP Sonic Boom presentation foil: Human response to boom overpressures: .7 lb/ft**2 - None annoyed 1.0 lb/ft**2 - 10% annoyed 3.0 lb/ft**2 - All annoyed The typical ascent profile of NASP portrayed on this chart shows the following (numbers are approximate from reading them off the curve): Mach Alt Boom Overpressure -------------------------------- 1.3 30K 5.0 lb/ft**2 2.0 50K 3.0 lb/ft**2 3.0 68K 2.0 lb/ft**2 6.0 95K 1.0 lb/ft**2 9.0 118K 0.7 lb/ft**2 Since part of the reason that Mary ran the periscope tests on the F-104 was for NASP, I assumed (was hoping) that the usage of the USGS sensors might also be to do some confirmation testing of NASP boom issues using NASA's SR-71. One can see the legitimacy of perhaps doing that in the above chart. Yes, airplane designs can be optimized to reduce sonic boom effects. Far-field N-wave theory seems to be quite good in certain cases. I've seen theoretical vs. actual N-waves for a whole host of different size aircraft that match quite well, including the XB-70 and the B-58. As far as the USGS sensors are concerned, you'll have to ask. I don't think they get an N-wave directly however. This sonic boom stuff is all part of the science of aeroacoustics. There are many references available on this in technical college libraries. Larry ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 09:45:35 PST Subject: Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility >This is off-charter, so I'll keep it short. Are there any list >participants that have sufficient pull to get me into the fabled Annex >to the National Air and Space Museum on 1-22 or 1-23? And feel like >doing so? If ther eference is to the Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility, call 202-357-2700 9:30-2:30, EST, M-F and make reservations. Tours are at 10:00AM daily, with a second at 1:00PM Sat & Sun. Resrvations are REQUIRED and FREE. (This a general public tour, it does no go look in all the corners, but thats still a number to start with,,,) enjoy dwp ------------------------------ From: tim@umcc.umich.edu (Tim Tyler) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 16:03:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Silver Hill/Paule E Garber Restoration Facility > There was so much to see we ran out of time. But then part of the problem > was that our guide (all of whom are volunteers) was a little slow, at least > for me. If you are going to be in the neighborhood and have the time, go The pronlem I had is that our guide was fascinated more with aircraft engines than aircraft in generel, so we spent a lot of time stopped, staring at engines while he droned (pun!) on & on about them. > see it. And as the other person said, you HAVE to have reservations. I was there last June, showed up one afternoon, & asked the guards about tours/reservations, & they told me to "just show up tomorrow at __AM." I did, & the tour was great, except I felt uncomfortable about wandering about 50 or 100' away from the group to look at something *I* wanted to see, while everyone else followed the guide to what *he* wanted to show us (usually engines!). > Brent L. Bates Phone:(804) 864-2854 > E-mail: blbates@aero36.larc.nasa.gov or B.L.BATES@larc.nasa.gov - -- Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org Packet: KA8VIR @WB8ZPN.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA P.O. Box 443 C$erve:72571,1005 GEnie:Sneaker AOL:Hooligan MCI: 442-5735 Ypsilanti MI "I'm just an innocent little frog, trying to 48197 hop my way across the Information Superhighway" ------------------------------ From: MP%MPA15C@MPA15AB.mv-oc.Unisys.COM Date: 10 JAN 94 14:17 Subject: Edwards/Dryden Tour Much thanks to Mary Shaffer for suggesting that I and some of my co-workers come up and tour Edwards AFB and the Dryden Flight Research Center. Equally much thanks to Mary for taking care of the reservations and even more equally thanks for coming out and talking to us about what she is working on these days. ObSemiSkunky: The highlight of the tour was seeing a B-2 make a review pass down the flight line and then bank around for a landing. What a sight! If only I had been allowed to take some pictures! It was interesting to find out that the YF-23s have been given to NASA. Hey, Mary. Whatcha folks gonna do with 'em? ObSkunk: The Air Force SSgt made the comment that the three NASA Blackbirds were "about" the last ones in operation. Slip of the tongue? Poor choice of words? Deliberate misdirection? You make the call! ________________________________________________________________________ Mark Perew (714) 380-5484 | My New Year's resolution is not to make mp@mpa15c.mv-oc.unisys.com | any New Year's resolutions. cb103@cleveland.freenet.edu | ============== "All opinions are mine," sayeth the poster ============== ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 14:26:55 -0800 Subject: Re: YF-23A's at NASA >It was interesting to find out that the YF-23s have been given to NASA. Yes. There was a short blurb about this 1-2 weeks or so ago in AW&ST, including a photo of the two birds sitting there. The -23s have been stripped of engines and avionics, according to AW&ST. If I recall, one of them was to be used in some kind of structures testing, since the -23s both represent state of the art in advanced structures. I can't recall the nature of the testing that was to be done, or what kind of shape the selected -23 would be in after the test. Larry ------------------------------ From: "Thomas J. Klotzbach" <0003751365@mcimail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 19:38 EST Subject: Major Aeronautical Programs Hi! Just got the latest issue of Air Force magazine (January, '94) and it had the following possible programs of interest at the Air Force's Major Program Offices and the Aeronautical Systems Center and Wright Laboratory, WPAFB, Ohio. BTW. These are three out of approximately 125+. Aircraft Program Systems Office F-117 Avionics Modernization Program Development and production of major modifications to F-117 avionics, including an upgrade to the forward-looking infrared (FLIR) and improvements to the navigation system, including a ring-laser gyro and a Global Positioning System receiver. Contractor: Lockheed. Status: Development. Wright Laboratory/Aeropropulsion and Power Directorate Combustion Program to provide experimental data and advanced design codes for turbine engine and ramjet combustors. Extensive application of optical diagnostic techniques and computer modeling. Contractors: SRL, U. of Dayton Research Institute (UDRI). Status: In-house research, exploratory development. High-Speed Propulsion Program to develop an Air Force capability for manned and unmanned flight at very high speeds using combined-cycle air-breathing engines and logistically supportable hydrocarbon fuels. Contractors: UTRC, CSD, others. Status: Research, exploratory development. ****************************************************************************** Thomas J. Klotzbach MCI Mail: 375-1365 Genesee Community College Internet: 3751365@mcimail.com Batavia, NY 14020 klotzbtj@snybufva.cs.snybuf.edu Work: (716) 343-0055 x6358 ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 23:01:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: booms, F-117 Er, we flew those flights in November. Not exactly what I'd call right after. Furtermore, we overflew Goldstone, up in the Owens Valley. The quakes were in Santa Monica. Hundreds of miles apart. It's like doing something in Maine and expecting a result in Maryland. (OK, I guessed at the distance on the East coast, but I liked the alliteration.) Anyway, little quakes are as common as dirt. We had one Friday morning that no one mentioned. Having a 3-something quake is only slightly less unusual than having the sun come up. In other words, no there's no connection. Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com On Mon, 10 Jan 1994, Paul Mangan wrote: > > > No, you've got it backward--we used sonic booms to test the array. We > > didn't even get any data; it all went to the seismologists. > > > > In addition, they were interested in getting boom signatures to improve > > their data analysis. This will help them differentiate between booms and > > temblers. > > > > Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com > > > > > I find it interesting that there was a set of earthquakes so soon > after these tests. I guess they happen all the time in California. > > But, I am curious as to how the sensors worked now that they have > been tested. Also, I was wondering about the way they were described > on this mornings radio. A lady was interviewed and said that the one > she felt was " a single shock wave with no rolling or after shocks". > > Isn't this a little unusual? I have only been in a couple of minor > earthquakes but they were not as she described and although they > only lasted a few seconds they were certainly not a single shock > wave. However I have experienced a lot of sonic booms and would > desribe them as a single shock wave. Most of these were heard but > a few were felt as well as heard. (Woops, I just remembered a few > did have a double shock too them) > > This ALMOST leads me to wonder if there is such a thing as a noisless > or low noise sonic boom. In other words can the shape of a sonic > boom's cone be made to change to reduce the noise signature > and imitate an earthquake. > > What does a sonic boom register on the open ended scale that measures > earthquakes? For example, does anyone know what the seismologists > pick up when the Space Shuttle returns from orbit. > > I hope I don't sound too suspicious, I really am just curious. > > Paul Mangan > > > > ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 23:17:13 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: booms We frequently get sonic rumbles here--sometimes the only way to tell whether it's a quake or a boom is to look at the seimic indicator (the hanging lamp in our family room). If it's not moving, it was a degenerate boom. If it is moving, we start speculating about foreshocks and the Big One. (There's alway some face of nature to discuss in SoCal.) Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1994 23:17:13 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: booms We frequently get sonic rumbles here--sometimes the only way to tell whether it's a quake or a boom is to look at the seimic indicator (the hanging lamp in our family room). If it's not moving, it was a degenerate boom. If it is moving, we start speculating about foreshocks and the Big One. (There's alway some face of nature to discuss in SoCal.) Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com ------------------------------ From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Mon, 10 Jan 94 23:31:07 PST Subject: strange things in hte USAF '94 budget I'm currently doing some analysis of the US Air Force budget for fiscal year '94 (which started in October '93) and found several anomalies that readers here might be able to shed some light on: - - no funding for Program Element (PE) 0207217F described as "Follow-on tactical reconnaissance system". - - numerous changes to hide code-names or other information. Here's a list of FY '93 descriptions and their '94 equivalents: PE '93 description '94 description - ---------- -------------------------------- --------------------------- 0207248F special tactical unit detachments special evaluation program 0207424F "COPPER COAST" evaluation & analysis program 0207433F tactical improvement program advanced program technology 0207591F "OMEGA" advanced program evaluation 0305142F "CENTENNIAL" applied tech. & integration - - no funding for the "SENIOR CITIZEN" aircraft (PE 0401316F) Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V4 #114 ********************************* 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).