From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #70 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Friday, 22 April 1994 Volume 05 : Number 070 In this issue: Air and Space article Re: Hudson Valley Sightings So I can't read...... Hudson Valley Sightings Re: So I can't read...... Successor of the SR71 Re: Successor of the SR71 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: Rick Lafford Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 07:44:42 EDT Subject: Air and Space article Smithsonian Air and Space also has an excellent article on the Skunk Works this month. Nice color pull-out included. Rick - ------------------------- Rick Lafford Eastman Kodak Co. lafford@clpd.kodak.com ========================= ------------------------------ From: "J. Pharabod" Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 14:25:38 SET Subject: Re: Hudson Valley Sightings (Sorry for this UFO-like story, but remember the real subject is the Aereon airships). >>1) the Hudson Valley UFOs sightings (1983-1984) > > some of these (perhaps all) were fairly specifically accounted for > by localprivate pilots playing an elaborate practical joke, by flying > in close formation, at low altitude, with nonstandard lighting. This > has been documented, tho i do not have detailed reference information. > regards >dwp (Fri, 15 Apr 94 15:50:19 PDT) Maybe this hypothesis is the good one, but I have read that a number of times the so-called Hudson Valley UFOs were hovering. I really don't know: even when a case is debunked, you often find some believers who say "but there was also this phenomenon, which you can't explain...". Maybe there was a combination of small planes and airships? Here are two postings coming from the SKEPTIC discussion group (I have masked the name and address of my correspondent, who seems to be an "open skeptic", because I don't know if he would like that I repost his mails in another discussion group). J. Pharabod ._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Date: Fri, 22 Oct 93 14:11:17 MET From: PHARABOD@FRCPN11 Subject: Re: Signals and noise To: SKEPTIC@JHUVM >I don't have any idea what most of the Hudson Valley sightings were, but >it is known that some small planes flew at night in formation around >that time in a hoax attempt to mimic the UFO people were reporting. The >witnesses had no problem recognizing the formation as planes, and they >were photographed. (There are some allegations that the planes flew out >of an airport used by the CIA, but I can't confirm that.) >Xxxx Yyyy (Thu, 21 Oct 1993 13:39:42 -0500) The only information I have about this Hudson Valley story comes from a book about the Belgian sightings, written by the SOBEPS (an association of Belgian ufologists). If what they say is true, the Hudson Valley sightings (1983-1984) looked very much like the Belgian sightings (1989- 1991), and the hypothesis of small planes flying in formation can be excluded in the Belgian case (the quasi-triangular object has often been seen hovering, with no noise or very low noise). Maybe the Hudson Valley case and the Belgian case were hoaxes in which pranksters used airships? Could it be that the same team played both hoaxes ? (However, I must say that several detections by radar in Belgium seem incompatible with the airship hypothesis). J. Pharabod ._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1993 09:20:50 -0500 From: "Yyyy,Xxxx" Subject: Re: Signals and noise To: Multiple recipients of list SKEPTIC > Maybe the Hudson Valley > case and the Belgian case were hoaxes in which pranksters used airships? > Could it be that the same team played both hoaxes ? (However, I must say > that several detections by radar in Belgium seem incompatible with the > airship hypothesis). Much of the Hudson Valley testimony is inconsistent with airships as well, including reports of very steady motion in high winds. I suppose if you threw out about 20-40% of the reports, you could get something fairly consistent with an elaborate hoax. I'm not willing to discount this altogether. Xxxx Yyyy ------------------------------ From: tpoole@psi.wilmer.com (Poole, Timothy) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 11:44:22 EST Subject: So I can't read...... Once again, seems I've put the ole size 9 in the mouth. Thanks for the corrections everyone, yes it was Air and Space, not Aviation Week and Space technology that ran the article. My mistake. One question though: Why would a traditionally aircraft oriented company such as the Skunk Works decide to plan and build a sea going vessel like the Sea Shadow? ------------------------------ From: Tom Petrisko <0004343121@mcimail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 11:14 EST Subject: Hudson Valley Sightings I was living in the area during these sightings. Most of us believed the planes in formation scenario, as it was rumored most often. It was pretty much confirmed-rumor that they were flying out of Stormville Airport near Fishkill, N.Y. This was a very small community airport and made it all the more plausible because there was not a military airport within 150 miles. It is a very populated area, so we knew it was not anything the military could have been testing. The UFO chasers went crazy over these sightings and I believe it was the main reason the planes-in-formation stopped flying. I think they knew that with all disturbances they were causing, it was going to get them arrested by the FAA. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Petrisko | The next technological revolution will | will be fought by all the people who | can't figure out how to work their | VCR's, camcorders and microwaves. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: Geoff.Miller@corp.sun.com (Geoff Miller) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 10:06:43 +0800 Subject: Re: So I can't read...... >Why would a traditionally aircraft oriented company such as >the Skunk Works decide to plan and build a sea going vessel >like the Sea Shadow? It's not without precedent. Lockheed built a manned deep-submergence vessel for the Navy in the late 1960s called DeepQuest -- sort of a larger, more ambitious version of Jacques Cousteau's Diving Saucers. I guess it makes sense to think of ADP not as an airplane company, but as a technology company. - --Geoff ------------------------------ From: Jean Noel Relier Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 14:20:14 PDT Subject: Successor of the SR71 Dear Skunk-Works subscribers, Since the SR71 is no longer in development nor production, I am interested in finding out about current status of any R&D project for hypersonic planes building on the SR71 experiment. Thank you for the help! ------------------------------ From: BaDge Date: Thu, 21 Apr 1994 20:17:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Successor of the SR71 On Thu, 21 Apr 1994, Jean Noel Relier wrote: > interested in finding out about current status of any R&D project for > hypersonic planes building on the SR71 experiment. > Here is an abbreviated journal search that should get you started. ------------------------------------------------------------- AUTHOR Kandebo, Stanley W. TITLE Redirected NASP program to focus on technology. SOURCE Aviation Week & Space Technology 140:29 Jan 10 '94 SUBJECT TERMS Hypersonics. Spaceplane. ABSTRACT Limited by a $60 million fiscal 1994 budget, officials in charge of the National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) have developed a plan to close out work on the X-30 and transform the project from one aimed at developing a scramjet-powered, single-stage-to-orbit, manned vehicle to one that will develop generic hypersonic flight technologies. NASP officials hope to complete the transition by the end of the fiscal year. ------------------------------------------------------------- AUTHOR Kandebo, Stanley W. TITLE Waverider tests boost credibility. SOURCE Aviation Week & Space Technology 139:61+ Sep 13 '93 FEATURES il. SUBJECT TERMS McDonnell Douglas Corp--Product development. Hypersonic airplanes--Testing. Wind tunnels. ------------------------------------------------------------- AUTHOR Kandebo, Stanley W. TITLE Waverider tests boost credibility. SOURCE Aviation Week & Space Technology 139:61+ Sep 13 '93 FEATURES il. SUBJECT TERMS McDonnell Douglas Corp. Waverider aircraft--Testing. Hypersonics. Wind tunnels. ABSTRACT Hypersonic waverider aircraft may gain increased acceptance as a result of recent tests conducted in a hypersonic wind tunnel operated by the U.S. Navy. According to McDonnell Douglas officials, test results of a 39 X 16 X 7-in. waverider model with increased-drag and blunt leading edges indicate that such vehicles can operate efficiently over a range of speeds and altitudes. Dave Burnett, manager of the Aero Thermal Systems in the advanced program and technology division at McDonnell Douglas Aerospace, notes that the performance data contradict long-held opinions about this type of vehicle. ------------------------------------------------------------- TITLE HYPR to test core engine. SOURCE Aviation Week & Space Technology 138:67 Jun 21 '93 SUBJECT TERMS Engineering Research Association for Supersonic\Hypersonic Transport Propulsion System (Japan). Hypersonics. Airplane engines, Jet--Testing. ABSTRACT Next year, Japan's Engineering Research Association for Supersonic/Hypersonic Transport Propulsion Systems (HYPR), which is working with U.S. and European firms, will test a core engine aimed at providing Japan's aerospace industry with expertise in third-generation supersonic/hypersonic engine technology. HYPR consists of IHI, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, and Kawasaki Heavy Industries. Program participants include Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, Rolls-Royce, and Snecma. ------------------------------------------------------------- AUTHOR Kandebo, Stanley W. TITLE Brown calls for NASP demonstrator. SOURCE Aviation Week & Space Technology 139:69 Jul 5 '93 FEATURES il por. SUBJECT TERMS Brown, George E--Jr. Hypersonics. Spaceplane--Costs. ABSTRACT Rep. George Brown, Jr., (D.-California), has introduced a bill that hopes to refocus the X-30 program on the construction of a hypersonic, manned, single-stage-to-orbit demonstrator that could make its first flight by 2000. Entitled the Hypersonic Research Airplane Authorization Act of 1993, the bill calls for the secretary of the Air Force and NASA's administrator to develop and implement a plan to design, develop, and build a manned hypersonic spacecraft within a 5-year period at a cost of no more than $5 billion. The bill reflects mounting Congressional disgust with the direction of the National Aero-Space Plane program, which was forced to stop all work toward building a demonstrator after the Defense Science Board found that insufficient technological progress had been made to warrant the demonstrator's construction. Hearings on the bill, which may be included in the Fiscal 1995 budget, could begin this fall. - ------------------------------------------------------------- AUTHOR Casamayou, Jean-Pierre. Taverna, Mike. TITLE Tupolev's hypersonic project. SOURCE Interavia/Aerospace World 48:29 Mar '93 FEATURES il. SUBJECT TERMS Tupolev Design Bureau (Russia). Hypersonic airplanes. --------------------------------------------------------------- AUTHOR Kandebo, Stanley W. TITLE NASP cancelled, program redirected. SOURCE Aviation Week & Space Technology 138:32+ Jun 14 '93 FEATURES il. SUBJECT TERMS Spaceplane--Testing. Spaceplane--Costs. Hypersonics. ABSTRACT The U.S. Air Force and NASA have canceled plans to develop a scramjet-powered, single-stage-to-orbit (SSTO) demonstrator under the X-30 National Aero-Space Plane (NASP) program and are restructuring the project to address some of the NASP's more difficult technological issues. While some observers are viewing the reorientation of the program away from manned, hypersonic flight as a victory for NASA administrator Daniel S. Goldin, who opposes a full-scale, manned X-30, elimination of the manned SSTO goal from the program will probably eliminate any support in Congress for the reoriented X-30 project. The reoriented X-30 program calls for a dual-track, 6-year-long effort costing about $2 billion. ------------------------------------------------------------- Also check out these Journals: Journal of Aerospace Engineering Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics Aerospace America AIAA Journal A key point is that often if you know where to look before cutting edge research becomes classified, you can stay abreast of some topics. - -hope this helps - -B ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #70 ******************************** 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).