From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #134 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Thursday, 14 July 1994 Volume 05 : Number 134 In this issue: SR-71 personal experiences resend last b Resending problems RE: Skunk Works Digest V5 #128 NIGHTHAWK! Was Blackhorse [2] - Parts 1-4 of 4 Received? 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: shafer@ferhino.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 14:55:22 PDT Subject: SR-71 personal experiences resend last b >To: ron@eatdust.uswest.com >Subject: Re: SR-71 Personal Experiences, Inst. 6, VERY LONG >Once again, I've been enjoying your postings immensely. A simple question: >what kind of ear protectors did you use? (Tied to that, any idea how much >hearing loss has been sustained by people who work on the bird?) I just >can't *imagine* the acoustic environment you describe working in ... >Thanks again for all this stuff! I'm not sure what they were. Standard issue from the hospital, nothing fancy. Soft rubber, insert in ear. Could get used to them fairly easily. If the engines were running, also added normal 'earphone' ear protectors. The reason I used them so religiously was that many of the people who had been in the service for any number of years (not just at Beale, but on any flightline) had lost a significant portion of their high-freq. hearing. >To: ron@eatdust.uswest.COM >Subject: Personal experiences with the SR-71 >I'd like to thank you very much for sharing your personal experiences >with the rest of us on the Net. They made for interesting and enjoyable >reading. >Do you have a complete copy of your postings? I missed a couple of >them and would like to read through a complete set. If it is possible >to send it to me via e-mail (compressed and uuencoded would probably >be the best way), I'd appreciate it very much. >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the comments. I heard many like this and appreciate them. It does bring up a question. I've had lots of queries for reposting, sorry I haven't been able (due to mailers etc.) to respond to them all. I would repost in the future (I've saved all the postings). Should I uuencode and compress them or what? What's the most efficient way? >To: ron@eatdust.uswest.COM >Subject: SR71 > Ron, >I have really enjoyed reading your SR71 postings. Thank You. >I have read installments 3, 5, 6. Due to problems with an upstream >machine, our notes files have not been updated regularly. If you have >the other installments on disk (1, 2 and 4) could you e-mail them? >Questions: If you can talk about the yaw damping system I would be very >much interested. What happens when one engine quits burnin. Flys like a champ according to the pilot's. I've seen them make many simulated approaches etc. with one engine idling. The yaw daming system is great. Very fast response. Perhaps we'd lose less twin pilots if a system that sensitive were installed in light twins (wait, no flames, I know it'd be expensive. I have my MEI so I know that proficient, CURRENT pilots can handle it without additional government intervention!!!) >Does the SR71 have a Vmc? (speed of which must be maintained for >control) Yes, although I don't know what it is. >Last question: Roughly where is the center of gravity? Yikes, you got me. As I recall (from doing the fuel sheets) it was a couple of feet after of the leading edge of the wings (+- a few feet :-)). >I have about 15K bytes pulled off of the net about a year ago from >Ron Schweikert. Excellent stuff on engine theory. He references 3 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hey, I know this guy! >books. Two of which I purchased. >They are: Lockheed SR71 Blackbird (autumn 1986) > Aerofax Minigraph 1 Lockheed SR71 (1985) > Fundamentals of aerodynamics (1984) I may try to get hold of these books, sorry that I can't take credit for posting the references though. Must've been someone else, although I did post a lot of general and specific information on engines and inlet operation. >Posted-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 90 23:52:43 -0700 >To: cis.ohio-state.edu!ncar!boulder!uswat!eatdust!ron >Subject: Thanks, for the memories... ;^) > >Ron, > >I've greatly enjoyed reading your reminiscences on the Blackbird. It's >always been an aircraft of great interest to me from several perspectives: >First, it just plain looks *mean*! I agree! >Second, I've been hearing improbable stories about it for years, like the >one about how it leaked so much fuel that it had to climb out, hit a tanker, >top off the cells, then hit the A/Bs and go supersonic to warm the skin >enough to seal the tanks so that all the JP-7 wouldn't leak out. Or the tall >tale an engineer from the original design team once told me, about how it >was capable of mach 5... . Interesting to read that you've confirmed these >stories (to one degree or another). Well, it does hit a tanker immediately after takeoff, but not because it leaks so bad, but rather weight restrictions on takeoff, it can't handle a full fuel load on the ground (about 12,200 gallons). Yes, once it got 'hot' it would seal more (according to the engineers). As far as going mach 5, I believe it is capable of it *IF* the airframe could handle it, which I don't think it can. > >Third, my Mom went to high school with one of the SR-71 pilots. (Yeah, so I'm >a young punk... I can't help that! ;^) If you dealt with the pilots often >enough, maybe you know him: Buck something-or-other (can't recall his last >name...). I think all of their names were 'Buck' something. :-). Just kidding. As I recall, they all had some sort of nicknames. Didn't know but two of them well..they didn't like to hang around with us 'enlisted pukes'. ----------- That's all folks, have a good day! Ron ------------------------------ From: shafer@ferhino.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 94 14:57:37 PDT Subject: Resending problems As you've probably figured out by now, I've managed to sort out the difficulty with parts 3, 6, and 7. I divided them in half, posting them as 3a, 3b, 6a, 6b, last a, and last b. This worked, so I assume that the difficulty was their length. Regards, Mary Mary Shafer DoD #362 KotFR SR-71 Chief Engineer NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA shafer@ferhino.dfrf.nasa.gov Of course I don't speak for NASA "A MiG at your six is better than no MiG at all." Unknown US fighter pilot ------------------------------ From: john.r.strohm@BIX.com Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 23:14:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: RE: Skunk Works Digest V5 #128 EXCUSE ME. Texas Instruments, not Lockheed, developed the GBU-28 glide bomb for Desert Storm, using artillery-piece barrels for the main fuselage. A bunch of TIers worked some very hairy hours to make that thing come together. ------------------------------ From: dadams@netcom.com (Dean Adams) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 21:48:46 -0700 Subject: NIGHTHAWK! This just in... F-117 becomes 'Nighthawk': HOLLOMAN AFB, N.M. (AFNS) -- The F-117 stealth aircraft officially took the name "Nighthawk" June 24, according to Air Combat Command. The name was among the first group submitted when 12th Air Force officials began the process of naming the aircraft Oct. 4, 1990. Originally, the name was reserved by Sikorsky aircraft for HH-60D helicopters. * ------------------------------ From: Frank Markus Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 01:12:53 -0400 Subject: Was Blackhorse [2] - Parts 1-4 of 4 Received? Parts [1] and [3] of my Blackhorse repost seem to have been transmitted without difficulty. But I had trouble with the text section (Blackhorse [2]) which I eventually broke down into four parts (which I cleverly captioned parts 1-4 of 4.) Based on what was retransmitted to me by the Skunk_Works server, I think that all four sections of Blackhorse [2] were successfully transmitted but I would be grateful for confirmation. If not, I will try yet again. Rather than burdening everyone on the list with this business, please send me a note via E-mail. ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #134 ********************************* 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).