From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #30 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Thursday, 10 March 1994 Volume 05 : Number 030 In this issue: 'Pard' Hoover Down Under Re: Flying tie tacks, a clarification Re: SR-71 Rear Cockpit Re: What If.... Re: Ram tubes/scramjet design Yikes! Flying Disks! Re: What If.... Re: ram tubes/scramjets Re: Skunk Works Digest V4 #85 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: legion@werple.apana.org.au (John Stepkowski) Date: 10 Mar 1994 04:05:26 +1000 Subject: 'Pard' Hoover Down Under Hi all.. This might just squeeze in as being on-topic for this list... I was watching a local current affairs program a few days ago which was ostensibly about "the oldest flying pilot in Australia". Fair enough, I thought, but when the presenter mentioned the pilot's name was Bob Hoover, I just had to watch the story to make sure it wasn't _the_ Bob Hoover...and it was! Over the weekend of March 5th-6th, some aircraft enthusiasts in Tasmania held a race meet which included pylon races. The story was essentially a "colour" piece about Mr Hoover so we didn't get to see many planes in the story, but I did manage to see what looked like an FT-28 and a Wirraway... The basic thrust of the story was that Bob Hoover had been grounded in the US for being "too old" but that he was still able to qualify as a pilot in the rest of the world. The story showed parts of Hoover's by-now famous unpowered flight demonstration and it was great stuff to see. The final word came from Mr Hoover when he was asked how he was feeling after his flight. He said "I feel like I'm 72 going on 23." :-) Thanks, John ==================================== >>> legion@werple.apana.org.au <<< ==================================== ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 13:14:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Flying tie tacks, a clarification One more clarification--I will be happy to do multiple items, within reason, for you. I just handed Marta a plastic bag full of things and whe rolled it up and put it in her pocket. I did work on the premise that all gift-shop items were fungible--I just threw a handful of key rings into the bag with no attempt to differentiate them. If you send me an item, I'll tag it and you'll get it back, even if it does look just like all the rest. The packet I gave Marta was about 4 in. long and about 1-1/2 in. in diameter, just to give you an idea of the volume we're discussing. If it gets too large for her pocket, they'll stash it in one of the bays. I still don't want to push my luck, though, so let's limit ourselves to small items. In reply to someone's question (I inadvertantly deleted their message) my SR-71 earrings are just charms from our gift shop with French ear wires. At the time it was about 2 dollars for each charm and about 10 dollars for the gold ear wires. Not, perhaps, an economical idea, but a neat one all the same. The prices given below _include_ postage and a mailer--don't add extra. I'm not trying to make money on this. I look at this as a part of my job and feel that it would be deeply wrong to enrich myself doing it. I'll donate any extra money to our fitness center, I think. Regards, Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com Some days it don't come easy/And some days it don't come hard Some days it don't come at all/And these are the days that never end.... On Tue, 8 Mar 1994, Mary Shafer wrote: > It appears that there's some rampant confusion going on about getting > trinkets flown on the SR-71. > > Here's how it works: > > 1. You have a small item that you want flown. You send it and a stamped, > self-addressed mailer to me. I get it flown and send it back to you. If > you're not in the US, send the item and a self-addressed mailer to me, > with either IRCs or some small item of roughly the same value as the > postage. In particular, I like patches. Do not send expensive or > irreplacable items, either to be flown or to exchange for postage; I don't > want to be responsible. > > 2. You don't have a small item that you want flown. I'll buy something > at our gift shop and get it flown. You'll send me a check for the item > plus the mailer and postage. > > The possibilities are: diamond-shaped Mach 3+ patch for $3.50, SR-71 tie > tack for $4.00, pewter SR-71 keyring for $5.00. Charms are the same price > as the tie tacks. > > 3. You don't have a small item but none of these above thrill you. Call > the Dryden Gift Shop at (805) 258-3954 and ask them to send you their > pricelist. > > I am limited in the size of the packet that I ask them to fly for me, so > please don't send a lot of things or anything big. They're doing me a > favor and I won't risk the relationship by inconveniencing them. Also > remember that I'm doing this for you as a favor and that it may take a > while to get things sent out, etc. I will send a slip of paper with the > flight number, crew, aircraft, maximum Mach, and maximum altitude for you. > This will not be suitable for framing. > > My address is: > Ms Mary Shafer > P O Box 4230 > Lancaster, CA 93539-4230 > > The next flight will be sometime in April, probably toward the end. You > will have to get everything to me by about 15 April, as I'm going on a > 17-day cruise on the 21st. > > Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com > > Some days it don't come easy/And some days it don't come hard > Some days it don't come at all/And these are the days that never end.... > > ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 13:37:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: SR-71 Rear Cockpit The thing about it, Geoff, is that the person sitting in the back of the front-seat simulator isn't the RSO, it's an IP or sim tech. The RSO sits in another cab, off to the side, hooked up on intercom. Only the front-seat cab moves, by the way. That IP has a panel on the starboard side that can be used to enter various failures and emergencies, too. As you've observed, the two crew members sit at the same height in the aircraft. They sit at the same height in the sim cabs, too, just not in the same cabs. Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com Some days it don't come easy/And some days it don't come hard Some days it don't come at all/And these are the days that never end.... On Tue, 8 Mar 1994, Geoff Miller wrote: > > > I was looking at a book about the SR-71 at a bookstore last night > (don't recall the title, but I believe it was published by Motorbooks > International). The book featured a couple of color photographs of > the simulator. > > The guy occupying the aft cockpit portion of the sim appeared to be > seated very low -- the top of his head looked to be a good two feet > below the bottom edges of the windows. Is the actual airplane > configured that way? It seems to me that in all the pictures I've > seen of the SR-71 with the canopies open, the RSO was seated at the > same level as the pilot -- high enough to rest his arms on the sills. > In fact, the fuselage doesn't seem to be deep enough for there to be > any other possibility. > > Was this just a quirk of the photograph? Is the simulator set up > this way for some reason, while the actual airplane is not? > > > > --Geoff > ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 11:47:27 -0800 Subject: Re: What If.... dwp writes: >Its been quiet. Is it just me? There are a lot of lurkers out there I think. You know who you are. >The thought struck me: > > What if, one put an orbital payload on an "sr71" in place of the > MD21? > > Different motors, or pure rocket "boosters" for the payload. > >I suppose this is an old hat idea.... Yes. I can think of two past references that were in this area: 1. The previously posted text from: Lockheed SR-71 Supersonic / Hypersonic Research Facility Researcher's Handbook Volume I Executive Summary On pg. 38 there is a photo of a SR-71 model in black with a white Hypersonic Research Vehicle mounted D-21A style on the SR-71. The Hypersonic Research Vehicle wears a NASA stripe. On pg. 39 it indicates that the SR-71 can be configured for Top Or Bottom Deployment of a launch vehicle. The page has two SR-71 line-drawings, one above the other: The top line drawing shows a SR-71 head-on with a D-21 in traditional position. The bottom line drawing shows a SR-71 head-on with a small lifting-body like vehicle UNDER it. The lifting body vehicle looks like it has a rocket booster attached to the back-end of it. It says "Boost-Glide Vehicle" under the drawing. 2. The previously published information on NASA Dryden's HALO (Hypersonic Air Launch Option) (similar idea to pg 38 above). Pictures of this concept were published in the 50th Anniv. Skunk Works book and Popular Science. Some technical issues are: Getting the mother to launch speed with the payload in place? Will the launched vehicle have to climb through the mother's shock after launch? What to fuel the launched vehicle with and does that match the logistics of the mother and the operational plan? Can the mother land with the launch vehicle in place? Larry ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 12:05:22 -0800 Subject: Re: Ram tubes/scramjet design Tom Gauldin writes: >Discovery magazine had an interesting article this month on a sort-of >cannon. > ... Thanks for the tip, I'll have to look for this. There are aspects of many different existing designs referenced below. >The reaction began with compressed air ... >compressing the gas between it and the projectile. The resulting heat >caused the gas to explode ... . The projectile moved forward >and ... the gas mixture ... >around it [was] ... compressed. As the compressed mixture reached >the flame front ... at the rear, it too was ignited and >... [drove] the projectile forward. >... > [eventually] ... the shock wave >of the passing projectile creating ... [temperature] sufficiently high >as to ignite the compressed gas mixture ... . >... sort of "inside out diesel >engine" and created a continuous combustion. In terms of existing designs, the above seems to have elements of a PDE (Pulsed Detonation Engine), a regular ramjet, and a detonation wave ramjet, depending on what the speed of the projectile is. >I wonder if the good folks at the skunk works have taken this design >further Propulsion is all about researching/implementing thermodynamic cycles that produce work. This is one of the things they've done well in the past. > ... some kind of plane flying that relies on the shock wave >of the craft to confine an explosion to propel a craft? A PDE does something similar where the detonation shock acts as a valve and obtains the same results as constant volume combustion, which provides a big pressure rise versus specific volume rises obtained in constant pressure (traditional continuous combustion) engines. > The earlier >design would probably rely on pulses (probably ignited by a laser) to >drive the craft forward. Possibly. There have been successful tests of laser induced ignition in turbine engines which use non-detonative combustion (deflagration). To achieve detonation one needs to add more energy more quickly. > Later designs might be able to use dual shock >waves to obtain continuous combustion through compression. Having shocks strong enough to cause temperature increases above the combustion point of the air+fuel mixture is an aspect of many high mach airbreathing engine designs. >Wouldn't it be fun to think that the "doughnuts on a string" could be a >prototype grandchild of the diesel trucks moving across the landscape? A PDE works very similar to a traditional auto engine, only a planar shock wave takes the place of the piston. The early PDE's even used automobile ignition systems. Researchers are also talking of isolating PDE vibration using essentially automobile engine mount technology. Larry ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 14:03:11 -0800 Subject: Yikes! Flying Disks! For those of you who don't believe in flying disks, I'd like to point you at the cover of this week's AW&ST!! Believe it or not! Check it out! Larry ------------------------------ From: Joe.Lurker@corp.sun.com (Joe Lurker - STE) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 14:37:56 +0800 Subject: Re: What If.... {}From skunk-works-owner@gaia.ucs.orst.edu Wed Mar 9 12:19 PST 1994 {}From: larry@ichips.intel.com {}To: skunk-works@gaia.ucs.orst.edu {}Subject: Re: What If.... {}Sender: skunk-works-owner@gaia.ucs.orst.edu {}Precedence: bulk {}Content-Type: text {}Content-Length: 1921 {}X-Lines: 67 {} {} {} {}dwp writes: {}>Its been quiet. Is it just me? {} {}There are a lot of lurkers out there I think. {} {}You know who you are. {} Actually Larry, I think there is just me, and I do in fact know who I am. =8^) ------------------------------ From: morgan daniel adis Date: Wed, 09 Mar 1994 18:08:45 +0000 Subject: Re: ram tubes/scramjets In response to Tom Gauldin's posting about ram tubes, I remember reading about an airplane using the "external combustion" (that's what they called it) propulsion system that Tom speculated about. It was an article from a few years back in Popular Mechanics, I don't remember what issue. They said it was a possible top secret aircraft operating out of Groom Lake. I think they refered to it as "Pumpkin Seed" but I may be wrong. Although the idea of such a plane is obviously speed above all else I can't help but wonder about how to design a directional control system for such a craft, and the heat signature it would have! You could probibly pick up that thing from halfway across the Pacific Ocean! --Morgan Adis ------------------------------ From: ICJTS@asuvm.inre.asu.edu Date: Wed, 09 Mar 1994 21:23:31 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest V4 #85 ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #30 ******************************** 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).