From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #83 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Wednesday, 11 May 1994 Volume 05 : Number 083 In this issue: how to decode DOD spending codes Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded humor attempts in SWD Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded total speculation... Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded [none] Re: total speculation... speculation.... Re: your mail Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded Re: your mail Re: your mail D-21 at Dover AFB 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: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Tue, 10 May 94 00:34:50 PDT Subject: how to decode DOD spending codes In case there is anyone out there doing research on military spending, here's a list of suffixes used in budget documents to identify the Department of Defense component responsible for the program. Generally, all the DOD components are listed together in the same part of the RDT&E budget in Congressional budget documents, without naming the specific agency. For example, using the chart below, you can identify Program Element (PE) 0303123G, "global grid communications" as a National Security Agency program. This list was pieced together from several sources. The uniformed services, such as the Air Force, have separate sections in the DOD budget documents for their requests, so you can identify where their money goes. Suffix DOD component - ------ ------------- B Defense Mapping Agency C Strategic Defense Initiative Organization [someone at DOD listed it this way, even though it should be Ballistic Missile Defense Organization] D Office of the Secretary of Defense [NRO "Special Activities" are funded by OSD] E Advanced Research Projects Agency G National Security Agency H Defense Nuclear Agency I Defense Support Project Office [DSPO builds and operates satellites used to detect missile launches] J Joint Chiefs of Staff K Defense Information Systems Agency L Defense Intelligence Agency S Defense Logistics Agency W Uniformed Services University BB Special Operations Command LC Central Imagery Office [according to a Feb. 1994 CIA report, "The DCI and the Secretary of Defense established the CIO to be a centrally managed agency to serve as a focal point for imagery activities".] Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: John Regus Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 08:07:32 -0500 (CST) Subject: Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded I am looking for an article that appeared 12-18 mos. ago that speculated that the B-2 program would be transformed from a strategic bomber to a replacement for the AWACS. The major treatise was because of the stealth capability, a much deeper penetration of air combant c&c would be possible in air combat theatre. ------------------------------ From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Tue, 10 May 94 08:55:19 PDT Subject: humor attempts in SWD Based on several letters I've received, I guess I should notify people in advance when I'm trying to be humorous, so they don't take some posts seriously. For example, I was being sarcastic in a recent post about the Air Force slot machine program -- no, I don't believe they use that to really fund Groom Lake. I guess I will have to insert a disclaimer in some of my messages similar to: [The following piece is a weak attempt at humor and should not be taken seriously.] Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ From: rakoczynskij@agcs.com (Jurek Rakoczynski) Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 09:28:59 -0700 (MST) Subject: Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded John Regus wrote: > I am looking for an article that appeared 12-18 mos. ago that speculated > that the B-2 program would be transformed from a strategic bomber to a > replacement for the AWACS. The major treatise was because of the stealth > capability, a much deeper penetration of air combant c&c would be possible > in air combat theatre. I'm not a military strategist (and I don't play the part) but: AWACS in it's current application is an active transmitter saying "HI! I'M HERE! WHERE ARE YOU!". To use the stealth capability would require a complete change in stategy. I'd speculate that developing a new AWACS platform would use a conformable antenna array rather than the big dish (Does the B2 have the correct surface area for this? and what about any RAM coating?). The danger of sending a high $ platform in a high risk zone when you can approach that capability by linking attack aircraft sensors with an existing AWACS platform sitting is a safe zone. it's just not worth the risk. Maybe someone is looking for a REAL (TM) job for the B2 that's not mission critical! :-) :-) :-) (For the humor impaired.) Passive AWACS? Let's think about this! All the attack aircraft link their passive sensors to the AWACS. The AWACS, being a larger platform. could can some unique sensors not possible in the smaller attack aircraft. Add some active/passive realtime satellite sensor data. Bi-static radar receivers in all the aircraft. Everything link via narrow beam transmitters through satellites. Maybe there is something to this? But in the era of budget cuts? - -- Jerzy (Jurek) Rakoczynski Voice: +1 602 581 4867 Fax: +1 602 581 4022 AG Communication Systems Internet: rakoczynskij@agcs.com POB 52179 Internet: jurek.rakoczynski@gte.sprint.com Phoenix AZ 85072-2179 GTEMail: j.rakoczynski ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 10 May 94 11:25:15 PDT Subject: total speculation... >AWACS in it's current application is an active transmitter saying >"HI! I'M HERE! WHERE ARE YOU!". and also: COME KILL ME! > To use the stealth capability would require a complete change in stategy. >I'd speculate that developing a new AWACS platform would use a conformable >antenna array rather than the big dish (Does the B2 have the correct surface >area for this? and what about any RAM coating?). >Passive AWACS? Let's think about this! All the attack aircraft link >their passive sensors to the AWACS. The AWACS, being a larger platform. >could can some unique sensors not possible in the smaller attack >aircraft. Add some active/passive realtime satellite sensor data. >Bi-static radar receivers in all the aircraft. Everything link via >narrow beam transmitters through satellites. Maybe there is something >to this? But in the era of budget cuts? This is one i have wondered about. The "ultimate passive": (requires insane amounts of 'pute power): receive only radar. receive the opposition's pulse. receive the scatter from all the targets. Crunch LOTSA numbers. display pretty plot. With care, a receive antenna _can_ be stealthy. Of course, why send an a/c. Sat link it back to (say) grand forks, crunch numbers, sat link it back. Encrypt to suit. regards dwp ------------------------------ From: murr Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 15:21:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded On Tue, 10 May 1994, John Regus wrote: > I am looking for an article that appeared 12-18 mos. ago that speculated > that the B-2 program would be transformed from a strategic bomber to a > replacement for the AWACS. The major treatise was because of the stealth > capability, a much deeper penetration of air combant c&c would be possible > in air combat theatre. Seems like an AWACS with only passive detectors would be extremely limited. If it added and active radar set, the B2 would not be stealthy. Short version: I don't think you can get there from here. murr@vnet.net ------------------------------ From: Dave Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 16:44:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [none] I may be slow or something but will someone please explain this recieve only concept to me as it deals with radar. While a passive sonar recieves sound that is emitted from submarines, I am still trying to grasp what exactly a passive radar is supposed to listen for. While it is true that a carrier battle group might emit an extremely large electronic signature, I don't know what a solitary attack aircraft with it's radars OFF would emit besides a lot of noise and some heat. So if this is true, a recieve only radar could be fooled by turning off radar. To me that would seem pretty easy to beat, eh? Thanks a lot in advance. Beat Army! ------------------------------ From: Rich Thomson Date: Tue, 10 May 94 15:02:54 MDT Subject: Re: total speculation... In article <9405101820.AA24393@us3rmc.bb.dec.com> I am the NRA writes: > This is one i have wondered about. The "ultimate passive": > (requires insane amounts of 'pute power): > > receive only radar. > receive the opposition's pulse. > receive the scatter from all the targets. > Crunch LOTSA numbers. > display pretty plot. > > With care, a receive antenna _can_ be stealthy. Of course, a totally passive AWACS plane would be useless because it wouldn't be able to transmit its information to the other planes (thus revealing its location.) I thought the whole point of AWACS planes was that they stayed relatively distant from the action, or out of the reach of enemy fire. The Navy had the same problem with observation blimps, except that th AWACS is much more maneuverable. -- Rich - --- Between stimulus and response is the will to choose. Internet: thomson@jensen.cs.utah.edu Rich Thomson IRC: _Rich_ Fractal Freak! I am available for employment beginning Summer 1994 -- resume upon request ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 10 May 94 15:46:23 PDT Subject: speculation.... >...will someone please explain this recieve only concept to me as it deals with >radar. While a passive sonar recieves sound that is emitted from submarines, I >am still trying to grasp what exactly a passive radar is supposed to listen >for. While it is true that a carrier battle group might emit an extremely large >electronic signature, I don't know what a solitary attack aircraft with it's >radars OFF would emit besides a lot of noise and some heat. In my case, i was proposing using the pulse that the _oppostion_ emitted. Not necessarily from the target radar, but from ANY radar thay had. Identfy the Tx pulse, then identify the scattered (not reflected) energy. To drop back to the old "hand clap" analogy. If someone else claps their hands, i can hear _their_ clap AND its reflection to find out whats around. No need to clap myself. It takes a LOT of processor power. Or toss (balloon, shell, missle, rpv) an (expennable) transmitter. then listen (think bistatic) for its Tx and the echoes. "non stealthy comms": I DID say satlink up, satlink down in the next para. They can hit the satellite, but not easily.... 8)>> regards dwp ------------------------------ From: John Regus Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 18:56:21 -0500 (CST) Subject: Re: your mail MAD is a passive concept and it works pretty well. I would imagine the same technology used to detect submarines magnetic anomalies could be transposed and used in the air as well. ------------------------------ From: megazone@world.std.com (MegaZone) Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 21:16:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: RAF Machrihanish downgraded Once upon a time John Regus shaped the electrons to say... >that the B-2 program would be transformed from a strategic bomber to a >replacement for the AWACS. The major treatise was because of the stealth What? That would be moronic. An AWACS uses incredibly high-powered ACTIVE radar to do its job. You might as well put wings on Cleveland. Using stealth technology on an active emitter is just plain dumb. And it it has the radar shut down to go stealthy, then it can't see any thing that the fighters can see anyway. - -- megazone@wpi.wpi.edu megazone@world.std.com megazone@hotblack.schunix.dmc.com "I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think!" Moderator: WPI anime FTP site, 130.215.24.1 /anime, the anime FanFic archive; rec.arts.anime.stories, questions to anime-dojinshi-request@wpi.wpi.edu GTW d-- -p+ c++(++++) l u+ e+ m+(*)@ s++/+ !n h- f+ !g w+ t+@ r+@ y+(*) ------------------------------ From: megazone@world.std.com (MegaZone) Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 22:09:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: your mail Once upon a time John Regus shaped the electrons to say... >MAD is a passive concept and it works pretty well. I would imagine the >same technology used to detect submarines magnetic anomalies could be >transposed and used in the air as well. Not really: 1. Subs are BIG... no, make that HUGE! They cause a large disturbance. Aircraft are relatively small, and have a lower percentage of iron. Titanium and aluminum don't make as big a disturbance as steel. 2. Even with subs, you have to fly almost directly overhead for MAD to register. How would you manage that with aircraft? 3. MAD works in a veritcal plane, not horizontal. So you woul have to be higher than the enemy AND over them. Therefore it isn't an option. Long range teleoptical, IIR, and LIDAR have potential... - -- megazone@wpi.wpi.edu megazone@world.std.com megazone@hotblack.schunix.dmc.com "I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think!" Moderator: WPI anime FTP site, 130.215.24.1 /anime, the anime FanFic archive; rec.arts.anime.stories, questions to anime-dojinshi-request@wpi.wpi.edu GTW d-- -p+ c++(++++) l u+ e+ m+(*)@ s++/+ !n h- f+ !g w+ t+@ r+@ y+(*) ------------------------------ From: John Regus Date: Tue, 10 May 1994 22:59:19 -0500 (CST) Subject: Re: your mail Okay let's take this thesis one step further. Passive identification? No IFF or transponder signals decoded and recognizable in an air theatre of ops makes all unidentified aircraft targets. Wait, what about the Vincennes (sp) fiasco with the Airbus. Ok, I'll now address that counter-point. If you have committed an air defense zone then what is not identified by IFF or possibly transponder makes that a target. And that, I beleive lends credence to my argument that the B-2 could be used as an AWACS replacement. (oh no I can hear the incoming now) On Tue, 10 May 1994, MegaZone wrote: > Once upon a time John Regus shaped the electrons to say... > >MAD is a passive concept and it works pretty well. I would imagine the > >same technology used to detect submarines magnetic anomalies could be > >transposed and used in the air as well. > > Not really: > > 1. Subs are BIG... no, make that HUGE! They cause a large disturbance. > Aircraft are relatively small, and have a lower percentage of iron. > Titanium and aluminum don't make as big a disturbance as steel. > 2. Even with subs, you have to fly almost directly overhead for MAD > to register. How would you manage that with aircraft? > 3. MAD works in a veritcal plane, not horizontal. So you woul have > to be higher than the enemy AND over them. > > Therefore it isn't an option. > > Long range teleoptical, IIR, and LIDAR have potential... > > -- > megazone@wpi.wpi.edu megazone@world.std.com megazone@hotblack.schunix.dmc.com > "I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think!" > Moderator: WPI anime FTP site, 130.215.24.1 /anime, the anime FanFic archive; > rec.arts.anime.stories, questions to anime-dojinshi-request@wpi.wpi.edu > GTW d-- -p+ c++(++++) l u+ e+ m+(*)@ s++/+ !n h- f+ !g w+ t+@ r+@ y+(*) ------------------------------ From: rb3@aol.com Date: Wed, 11 May 94 00:32:03 EDT Subject: D-21 at Dover AFB Greetings skunkers, This past Saturday I went down to the biannual airshow at Dover AFB (home to C-5s, normally). The last airshow there was July 1991, when I managed to get locked in a hangar with an F-117 during a windstorm. Since the guards were distracted by the other several hundred people, I took the chance to get a good feel of the plane, having heard conflicting reports of its surface texture. Fine sandpaper, on the nose, inlet, and leading edge areas, at least, top and bottom. Since that day's show was trashed by lousy weather, it was a great dissapointment to me that this year's was as well, though again the lousy weather (this time daylong downpours) allowed for close, unhurried inspection of the collected Combat Command aircraft (I miss TAC and SAC). On our way out of the base, I looked at the antique aircraft lineup and spotted an airframe that had been tucked in a far-off corner during the show, yet was right near the fence for the departing crowd. The slim, black shape could only be one thing, and I hopped out of the car and over a divider to see a D-21 casually spotted next to a Jenny and a Texan. Enough photographs of it are available that you don't need me to describe it to you, but I must say that it was smaller than I was expecting. Slick with rain, it looked as sleek and as exotic as any Skunk Works bird I've ever seen, and I considered the day well spent having the chance to see it. The placard under the dolley on which it rested said that it was an AF Musuem piece, in the process of being transferred to NASM. It looked in wonderful shape, and it bore no identifying marks that I could see. I looked all over, but it was totally devoid of any serial numbers or lettering. I am curious - what sort of performance figures are known and/or speculated about this thing? The sign stated Mach 4+ performance which surprised me; I thought the AF would be more vague. How many D-21/M-12 flights were made, and how many B-52 drops? Etc, etc. Inquiring minds want to know... Any pointers to D-21 reference works would be appreciated. I have already reread my Aerograph that covers it, and I would like to know more, if possible. Cheers (and sorry for the long post), Ran _______________________________________ Ran Barton, III - - - rb3@aol.com In the absence of belief, truth is whatever you want it to be. - J. Burke _______________________________________ ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #83 ******************************** 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).