From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #15 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Friday, 18 February 1994 Volume 05 : Number 015 In this issue: Re: Groom Lake RE: Skunk Works Digest V5 #14 'Deep Black' ... any updates? Re: Summary: March '94 PS Article on Groom Lake Re: the 'Hustler', what happened to them 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: dadams@netcom.com (Dean Adams) Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 00:32:04 -0800 Subject: Re: Groom Lake Paul Michael Keller says... >Payed a visit to a local bookstore yesterday to see if they had >the above. They did. Yea, I picked mine up yesterday... very interesting material. >It opens with a neat-looking time exposure of what they say is the >base at around midnight last spring with the lakebed flooded. >The base is lit up like a small city. That is a spectacular shot! >The article includes two aerial photos of the base, one a U. S. >Geological survey photo taken in 1968, and a Russian satellite >photo taken in 1988. I was particularly impressed with all the details they pointed out. >An unnamed arms-control analyst claims to have examined >a classified late-1991 Landsat image of Groom Lake which >shows three large white triangles about the size of 747s >whose shape reminded the analyst of the XB-70. >Now I have a question for the list about the credibility of >number 2 above. A 747 is about 200 feet long and has a wing >of about 180 feet. A little bit bigger than that, but not much. :) >Does anyone know what the resolution of the landsat images is? 30 meters is the standard Landsat resolution, but the later ones were supposed to have a 15m mode as well. I'm not sure if they ever got one of those up though... Landsat of course is far outclassed by SPOT and the Russian birds. SPOT has a 10m resolution, and the Russian KVR-1000 can give 2m. > This report seems to me to be just a bit too similar to the > August 24, 1992 Avleak report to be completely credible, given > what I understand is the poor resolution of the landsat satellites. Well, it might be barely possible to make out a "white triangle" if it was really that big... perhaps with help from the right image enhancement software. ------------------------------ From: THOMSONAL@CPVA.SAIC.COM Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 4:21:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: RE: Skunk Works Digest V5 #14 Landsat resolution is around 30 meters (100 ft), SPOT panchromatic mode is 10 meters (30+ ft), and the best declassified Russian film pictures I've seen are a little under 2 meters (6 ft). I'd be skeptical of Landsat as the source of images in which the shape of objects around 200 ft in overall size was resoved. SPOT is a better possibility. ------------------------------ From: Rich Thomson Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 10:26:07 MST Subject: 'Deep Black' ... any updates? I have a copy of the relatively old (1988?) paperback "Deep Black". What other public print sources are there for black projects, besides the recent book published on the skunk works? -- Rich - -- Between stimulus and response is the will to choose. ------------------------------------------------------------------ IRC: _Rich_ Rich Thomson Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com Fractal Freak ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 10:43:09 -0800 Subject: Re: Summary: March '94 PS Article on Groom Lake Paul Michael Keller writes: >> This report seems to me to be just a bit too similar to the >> August 24, 1992 Avleak report to be completely credible, given >> what I understand is the poor resolution of the landsat satellites. Dean responds: >30 meters is the standard Landsat resolution, ... > ... >Well, it might be barely possible to make out a "white triangle" >if it was really that big... perhaps with help from the right >image enhancement software. THOMSONAL responds: >Landsat resolution is around 30 meters (100 ft), SPOT panchromatic mode >is 10 meters (30+ ft), and the best declassified Russian film pictures >I've seen are a little under 2 meters (6 ft). I'd be skeptical of >Landsat as the source of images in which the shape of objects around >200 ft in overall size was resoved. SPOT is a better possibility. Stu Brown told me that he knows that the resolution of Landsat is 30m, and indeed the source indicated this as well, but the source stated that the image had been post processed to 20m resolution. What he said he saw on the enhanced images was "triangles with a snout", according to Stu. This is just feasible given that the image could be contained in a rectangular box of pixels that is roughly 3 pixels long by 2 pixels wide or 60m X 40m (post processed). I had wondered if the picture showed 3 objects under 'Scoot N Hides'. Jim Goodall didn't think so. Evidently Scoot N Hides are constructed specially for each program and should be square in shape. Evidently there are methods used to foil IR sensors attempting to look thru the Scoot N Hides as well. I had wondered if black aircraft would be visible even to U.S. Sats. Goodall claimed that from what he's heard, they don't cover up for U.S. Sats. That instead they control access to images in each applicable Sat. office. Actually, this would be a rather interesting thing to check out. As always, remember, the information on all this continually evolves, and one should always expect disinformation. Larry ------------------------------ From: "Paul Rak" Date: Thu, 17 Feb 1994 22:01:20 -0600 (CST) Subject: Re: the 'Hustler', what happened to them Here's a listing of Hustler's I found while looking through Michael Morlan's _Kitty_Hawk_To_NASA_, a very interesting guide to aviation museums and exhibits around the country. The book is dated 1991, and obviously displays, phone numbers, etc. may have changed. I've also included some Lockheed aircraft to increase the S/N (Skunk-to-Noise) ratio... (Ok, and one more favorite of mine, the British Vulcan...) Pima Air Museum, Tucson, AZ (602) 574-9658: Convair B-58A Hustler Castle Air Museum, Atwater, CA (209) 723-2178: Hawker Sidd MkII Vulcan Edward Beale Museum, Beale AFB, CA (916) 634-2038: Lockheed U-2 March Field Museum, March AFB, CA (714) 655-3725: Lockheed SR-71 March Field Museum, March AFB, CA (714) 655-3725: Lockheed U-2 National Air & Space Museum, Wash, DC (202) 357-2700: Lockheed U-2C USAF Armament Museum, Eglin AFB, FL (904) 882-4062: Lockheed SR-71 Museum of Aviation, Warner Robins, GA (912) 923-6600: Lockheed SR-71A Museum of Aviation, Warner Robins, GA (912) 923-6600: Lockheed U-2C *Chanute Display Center, Chanute AFB, IL (?): Convair XRB-58A Hustler Heritage Museum, Grissom AFB, IN (?): General Dynamics TB-58A Hustler 8th AF Museum, Barksdale, LA (318) 456-3067: Hawker Sidd MkII Vulcan SAC Museum, Bellevue, NE (402) 292-2001: Convair B-58A Hustler SAC Museum, Bellevue, NE (402) 292-2001: Lockheed SR-71 SAC Museum, Bellevue, NE (402) 292-2001: Lockheed U-2C SAC Museum, Bellevue, NE (402) 292-2001: Hawker Siddeley MkII Vulcan USAF Museum, Wright-Pat AFB, OH (513) 255-3286: Convair B-58A Hustler USAF Museum, Wright-Pat AFB, OH (513) 255-3286: Lockheed U-2A USAF Museum, Wright-Pat AFB, OH (513) 255-3286: Lockheed YF-12A History Museum, Lackland AFB, TX (512) 671-3444: Lockheed SR-71 *SW Aerospace Museum, TX (817) 735-4143: Convair TB-58A Hustler *Chanute was supposed to close in September, 1993. I don't know the current status of the aircraft collection. *SW Aerospace Museum is listed to reopen in 1994 at Addison Airport near the town of Addison, TX, north of Dallas, TX. Anyone else up for a "pilgrimage" to the SAC Museum in Nebraska? :) Enjoy! pjr ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #15 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@mail.orst.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@mail.orst.edu" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "prm@mail.orst.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 mail.orst.edu, in /pub/skunk-works/digest/vNN.nMMM (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number).