From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #159 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Tuesday, 27 September 1994 Volume 05 : Number 159 In this issue: RE: RAF Mildenhall US Video Heads Up Re: High tec Argggggggh. Thursday, 29 Sep Pave Paws Getting off sub list and getting digests only? Pave Paws Re: Air International TR-3A Article Re: Senior Citizen - old Popular Science cover story Re: SENIOR programs Re: Glomar Explorer Re: Rampant Speculation USAF "Dirty 8" classified programs Tu-144 to be used by NASA!! Re: Pave Paws PAVE PAWS Woodpecker OTH-B Re: Pave Paws Pave Paws PAVE PAWS and Glomar Explorer 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: "Dave Hastings, OUCS" Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 13:37:09 +0100 Subject: RE: RAF Mildenhall > On another, possibly associated topic, I live close to RAF Mildenhall > home of the now disbanded Det.4 of the 9th SRW. There is a lot of building > work going on close to the two barns used by the SR-71's. As the USAF's role > in Europe has drastically reduced I am somewhat surprised by this. Also a > long mound of earth has been put down obstructing the view from the road > that runs alongside this area of the base. This may just be a convienient > place to dispose of excess soil generated by the construction work but > perhaps its been done for security > reasons. Any comments? > > Regards > > Adrian Thurlow Isn't this new construction to house the special operations aircraft & helos which are moving from RAF Alconbury? Dave - -- David Hastings | "Life's too short to waste time VAX Systems Programmer | chitchatting with machines for Oxford University Computing Services | no good reason" - JM daveh@vax.oxford.ac.uk | ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 08:41:36 EDT Subject: US Video Heads Up 10:00 PM ET, ABC (Others, consult local listings), Newsmagazine show with segment on spy sats: Millions ar spent Are the men who launch the US Spy Satellites out of control? (etc, highly colored promo...) Apologies to those out of the coverage of US media... regards dwp ------------------------------ From: "J. Pharabod" Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 14:41:57 MET Subject: Re: High tec >Speaking of nukes, and considering that this is the skunk-works digest - >does anyone know of any research that was done into making nukes stealthy? >We have MIRVs, and we have multiple decoys, but nukes seem in general to be >fairly un-stealthy - missile launches are easy to detect, and warheads >can be tracked. Did anyone do any work on making ballistic missile type >nukes stealthy, or did people just rely on sub-launched/air-dropped nukes for >the element of surprise? [Not that this is necessarily a good thing... >Anything that might tempt someone into launching a first strike is probably >best left alone.] >Kaishakunin (Thu, 22 Sep 1994 11:44:35 +0930 (CST)) Yes, there is at least research. France, which as everybody knows intends to nuke the rest of the world (and especially the USA), is doing that. There was a 16-page article "Materiaux pour la furtivite - radar absorbing materials" in _Chocs, Revue scientifique et technique de la Direction des applications militaires_ (Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique), December 1992. The authors described several kinds of materials: (in French) Materiaux monophases: - ferrites spinelles - ferrites hexagonaux (hexaferrites) Materiaux composites magnetiques Materiaux composites dielectriques They said that their research was for nuclear warheads, but could be used also for planes or conventional missiles. They did not say which kind of material they had chosen. They did not say if it it was already implemented or not. By the way, I was rather surprised to find this review in a completely free-access library. Otherwise I would never have heard of that. J. Pharabod ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 10:51:18 EDT Subject: Argggggggh. Thursday, 29 Sep >On what date is this going to be shown? >On Mon, 26 Sep 1994, I am the NRA wrote: >> 10:00 PM ET, ABC (Others, consult local listings), Newsmagazine show with >> segment on spy sats: > > Apologies to those out of the coverage of US media... Foo. It must be Monday. Scheduled for 29 Sep, Thursday. ========================================================================= Rampant Speculation alert: Why reactivate the SR71? (No need to repost all the theories. Here is a new one.) "We" had an agreement _with_ _the_ _USSR_ about not doing overflights. Now, the USSR does not exist. hmmmmmmm regards dwp ------------------------------ From: ron@habu.stortek.com (Ron Schweikert) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:40:17 MDT Subject: Pave Paws Andreas' excellent posting on names was very interesting (good job!) I noticed Pave Paws missing (maybe not in appropriate context), but it is a radar site at Beale AFB, CA (there's also one somewhere (?) on the east coast) that is an early warning missle detection system I believe. Ron ------------------------------ From: ANDREWBEAR@aol.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 13:07:54 EDT Subject: Getting off sub list and getting digests only? I'm getting too much skunk-works mail for my taste and would like to switch to receiving a digest if there is one. Any suggestions on how to do it? Thanks. Andy Miller ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 13:05:51 EDT Subject: Pave Paws >Andreas' excellent posting on names was very interesting (good job!) indeed. >I noticed Pave Paws missing (maybe not in appropriate context), but it >is a radar site at Beale AFB, CA (there's also one somewhere (?) on the >east coast) Someplace out on Cape Cod. 400 odd MHz Phased Array radar. > that is an early warning missle detection system I believe. SOMETIMES the second part of these names is acronymical. PAWS Might be Phased Array Warning System. Or it might not. The human mind is REAL good at assigning meaning to random patterns... regards dwp ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 11:33:27 -0700 Subject: Re: Air International TR-3A Article >The British magazine Air International is running a series of two articles >over the September and October issues titled 'Wizard Wars & Air Power in the >21st Century'. Writen by a Dr. David Baker Yes I've gotten a chance to read it. Baker does something that I HATE, he gives NO indication of where he gets his stuff. I realize that if one has sources that need to remain secret, you can't give their names, but at least he could do what AW&ST does in that case - which is to say "an industry source", or "a source familiar with testing in Nevada ...", something, ANYTHING, would help! Of course it needs to be true! As it is, some of his stuff looks like it came from AW&ST and other parts of it look like it came from AIAA papers, and yet some of it is new. But I don't believe stuff that comes out of the blue with no references, you shouldn't either! Who is this Baker guy anyway? > Part 1 ends by stating that Part 2 will include an illustration of the TR-3. >Two questons. This article states that the TR-3 is in service, is this so - >beyond all doubt? If Baker is convinced, he certainly didn't convince me in his piece! Larry ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 11:47:16 -0700 Subject: Re: Senior Citizen - old Popular Science cover story >Senior Citizen.... Hmmmmm..... > >A possible Lockheed project. Classified transport aircraft. "Senior" >designation. Probably a modification of an existing aircraft. > >This may sound like a crazy guess, but could this be a sort of Aurora >air launch platform? In a Popular Science article which speculated on >Aurora a few years ago, Yes, November 1988 Popular Science - cover story, by T.A. Heppenheimer. > the mission profile was given as being >launched out of the back of a C-130, using tow cables of some sort, >and recovering the craft via the same method. > >This would certainly hide launch and landing of Aurora. > >Comments? Flames? More speculation? Yes. Although the actual design proposed by TA was very outlandish, some of the threads of that story seem to be making the rounds again. The piece was a very good piece however on hypersonic cruising technology. One of the subjects that TA has always specialized on was hypersonics. Since he is rather knowledgeable about this field (as a popular writer) I was quite curious about possible hidden messages in his piece, since on the surface, the design was very outlandish. Maybe we should read it backwards or something! :) Larry ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 16:43:48 -0700 Subject: Re: SENIOR programs How about another one: SENIOR SMART: A SIGINT system. Reference: Defense News, 7/29/91, pg. 11 The patch or mug logo shows an Eagle's head, staring at you with a ruby-red eye (the eagle's right eye if I recall). Reference: I saw one down in the Edward's area sitting on a friends book shelf, on a coffee mug. Larry ------------------------------ From: hoar@agdis01.newark.af.mil (GM-13 Stephen Hoar) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 20:39:26 -0400 Subject: Re: Glomar Explorer In your message of 24 Sep 1994 at 1511 EDT, you write: > > Could Someone please re-explain the significance of the Glomar > Explorer.... It sounds VERY fimmiliar, but I cant think of it off hand...... > Thanks.... > > > _______________________________ > | Jason T. Duncan | WHY ASK WHY?. . . . > |_____________________________| ===||=== || // //===\\ > | jduncan@indy.net | /||\ || // || || Indiana > | jtduncan@indyunix.iupui.edu | <<||>> ||<< ||<===>|| Chi Rho > | Purdue School of | \||/ || \\ || || Chapter > | Computer Science | ===||=== || \\ \\===// > |_____________________________| . . . It Starts With Phi! > Wasn't the Glomar Explorer a ship built by Howard Hughes for the CIA. The cover story was that it was supposed to recover ore nodules from the deep ocean floor. In fact it was built to recover a sunken Russian Submarine. The Submarine broke up while being raised so the mission was only partly successful. After Its cover was blown I don't know what happened to it. hoar@agdis01.newark.af.mil ------------------------------ From: jkbacon@pacifier.com (Kirk Bacon) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 23:01:02 -0700 Subject: Re: Rampant Speculation I am the NRA writes: >Why reactivate the SR71? >(No need to repost all the theories. Here is a new one.) > >"We" had an agreement _with_ _the_ _USSR_ about not doing overflights. > >Now, the USSR does not exist. > >hmmmmmmm Gee, I wonder where they put all those "deactivated" aircraft. I don't think you'll find them out on the lot at DM. There's one on an aircraft carrier on the Hudson River, but that one's not even a "production" model. Anecdotal story to follow ... A few years ago I was talking to someone who worked out in the desert. The Blackbird was on the list of things he hadn't seen flying out there, along with a dozen or so ATF's and an airplane that seemed to make more noise on takeoff (as in runway, not as in air launch) than any other aircraft made. Too bad, it would have been really neat if they had seen those things. ------------------------------ From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 23:20:17 PDT Subject: USAF "Dirty 8" classified programs A number of people have seen my recent posting listing classified military programs in the Fiscal Year 1995 Department of Defense budget. There are other programs that don't show up in Congressional budget documents, but have Program Element numbers assigned to them, apparently so that the Pentagon's accountants have some idea where funds are being spent. The Air Force has 8 programs in this category. All of these programs have been active within the last 5 years, according to documents that I have. I tried to obtain information on these programs under the Freedom of Information Act, but got a hostile denial from the Air Force. Obviously, I will be filing an appeal on this matter. I could not find these programs in the budgets approved by Congress for the last few years. These programs are funded by money provided by people like the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Office of the Secretary of Defense, instead of through proper Congressional funding. I have named these programs the "Dirty 8", because the Air Force is trying to hide them from the Congress. Program Element Description / Notes ________ ___________________ 0207242F "special program applications" / (possibly the new Tier 2/3 reconnaissance UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle). In the 020724xF category are several programs for remotely piloted vehicles (RPVs or "drones") used for reconnaissance. No details are available - program is highly classified) 0207587F "specialized reconnaissance systems" (PACER COIN) / (Air Force intelligence gathering C-130 aircraft) 0208007F "tactical deception" / (quoting from a document that I have, "This program element provides manpower and specialized equipment to mislead hostile intelligence agencies regarding the disposition of USAF tactical forces.") 0208040F "Project ELEGANT LADY" / (classified tactical program) [deleted] [deleted] / (this program involves the Air Force's collection of intelligence under diplomatic cover. Since I don't want to embarass the U.S. government with other countries, I won't reveal any details of this program) 0301318F "HUMINT (controlled)" (covert Air Force intelligence agents. The material I have indicates that this program "Excludes counterintelligence and overt HUMINT collection activities.") 0603223F "new surveillance aircraft" (no details are available - highly classified. Judging by the PE number, this program is/was in the advanced demonstration or demonstration/validation phase. My guess is that this item is our friend "Aurora"...) 0605809F "DYCOMS" / (new and very secret radar cross section facility in New Mexico, that some have referred to as "Baby Groom") Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com / PaulMcG@aol.com ------------------------------ From: Adrian Thurlow Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 11:43:11 +0100 Subject: Tu-144 to be used by NASA!! Hi skunkers, Reading rec.aviation.military I came across the following: >> I just read in the 8/29 issue of AWST that beginning next summer >> NASA is going to use a Russion TU-144 for high-speed testing. >Yes, it is true. >> Cool !!! Will it be done at Edwards ??? I wonder if Mary knows >> anything about this ??? >No, not at Edwards, but in Russia. And Mary knows quite a bit about it, >because her boss is the Chief Engineer of that project. >> The article mentions that the aircraft that will be used was >> built in 1982 and only has 87 hours. >Would you think it so cool if you knew that the money was coming out of the >SR-71 budget? And that it really smells like work-fare for Russians? Or >that the aircraft has never been flown to that flight condition, but with >major mods and upgrades (which we are paying for) it might be able to >achieve the technical objectives laid out for it. Now I don't know what the technical objectives are but it seems to me that there is a good chance that NASA needs to find an alternative to the SR-71 because that aircraft, especially the SR-71B, will soon no longer be available to them due to the much published return to service of the SR. The TU-144 however has a significantly lower maximum airspeed and altitude then the SR-71 although the maximum payload will be much greater. I wonder if NASA approached British Airways or Air France because I believe that not all the Concordes are in use? Perhaps the US passenger aircraft manufacturers see Russia as a possible partner in some future SST and Europe as the competition? Regards Adrian Adrian Thurlow Technology Integration BT Labs Martlesham Heath Ipswich Suffolk U.K. Tel. +44 1473 644880 Fax. +44 1473 646534 e-mail. Adrian.Thurlow@bt-sys.bt.co.uk The views expressed above are purely my own. ------------------------------ From: "Clarence Dent" Date: 27 Sep 1994 08:16:31 -0800 Subject: Re: Pave Paws Subject:RE>Pave Paws I believe it is in Maine. I read about it several years ago. There is also something similar in N. Dakota. I also believe they are/were used for detection of ICBM launches but have been stood down due to cost and perceived threat reduction. - -Clarence - -------------------------------------- Date: 9/26/94 10:09 AM To: Clarence Dent From: Ron Schweikert Andreas' excellent posting on names was very interesting (good job!) I noticed Pave Paws missing (maybe not in appropriate context), but it is a radar site at Beale AFB, CA (there's also one somewhere (?) on the east coast) that is an early warning missle detection system I believe. Ron ------------------------------ From: Operhal@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 11:46:43 CDT Subject: PAVE PAWS There were (are) four Pave Paw sites. They are located at Beale AFB CA, El Dorado AFS TX, Cape Cod AFS MA, and one other site which eludes me at this moment. My father had a relative who worked at the site in Texas. The site in Maine, at Bangor, is an OTH-B (Over the Horizon Backscanner Radar) site if my memory is correct. RICHARD OPERHALL operhal@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 12:48:03 EDT Subject: Woodpecker [I assume this is close enuf to charter....] >Subject:RE>Pave Paws >I believe it is in Maine. I read about it several years ago. The "odd" radar in Maine is the OTH-B (Over The Horizon-Backscatter) installation. Tx in Moscow, Rx in , control point in Bangor. (Been there, toured that, in part) The USSR version was called the woodpecker from the takka takka nature of the pulsing (slow, to allow for range). "ours" was said to be more chainsaw like (faster). >There is also something similar in N. Dakota. Dunno. The rest of the OTH-Bs were to be coastal, i think. Only the one in Oregon/Washington went on line, sort of. >I also believe they are/were used for detection of ICBM launches The OTH-B was supposed to be looking for crusie missle carriers and cruise missles over the Ocean, >but have been stood down due to cost and perceived threat reduction. That fits with the OTH-B situation. In any case it never _really_ came on line,as the AF was never convinced that it would do 24 hour duty, not due to reliabilty, but to the flaky nature of the ionosphere. (I may be force fitting the OTH-B to what is being described, but i know that Pave Paws is on Cape Cod.) regards dwp ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 14:05:18 EDT Subject: OTH-B From: US4RMC::"Operhal@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu" "MAIL-11 Daemon" 27-SEP-1994 14:01:33.50 To: skunk-works@gaia.ucs.orst.edu CC: Subj: PAVE PAWS There were (are) four Pave Paw sites. They are located at Beale AFB CA, El Dorado AFS TX, Cape Cod AFS MA, and one other site which eludes me at this moment. My father had a relative who worked at the site in Texas. The site in Maine, at Bangor, is an OTH-B (Over the Horizon Backscanner Radar) site if my memory is correct. RICHARD OPERHALL operhal@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu % ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ====== % Received: from inet-gw-3.pa.dec.com by us4rmc.pko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA18597; Tue, 27 Sep 94 14:03:20 -040 % Received: from gaia.UCS.ORST.EDU by inet-gw-3.pa.dec.com (5.65/10Aug94) id AA23919; Tue, 27 Sep 94 10:55:25 -070 % Received: (from daemon@localhost) by gaia.ucs.orst.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) id JAA28500 for skunk-works-outgoing; Tue, 27 Sep 1994 09:51:15 -0700 % Received: from osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu (mmdf@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu [139.78.100.11]) by gaia.ucs.orst.edu (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id JAA28486 for ; Tue, 27 Sep 1994 09:51:12 -0700 % Message-Id: <199409271651.JAA28486@gaia.ucs.orst.edu> % Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 11:46:43 CDT % From: Operhal@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu % To: skunk-works@gaia.ucs.orst.edu % Subject: PAVE PAWS % Sender: skunk-works-owner@gaia.ucs.orst.edu % Precedence: bulk ------------------------------ From: John Regus Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 13:31:40 -0500 (CST) Subject: Re: Pave Paws Could Paws be an acronymn for airborne warning system? John F. Regus | (713) 960-0045 | SYS/370/390 SYSTEM SOFTWARE ENGINEERING WUI:REGUSHOU | On 27 Sep 1994, Clarence Dent wrote: > Subject:RE>Pave Paws > I believe it is in Maine. I read about it several years ago. There is also > something similar in N. Dakota. I also believe they are/were used for > detection of ICBM launches but have been stood down due to cost and perceived > threat reduction. > > -Clarence > -------------------------------------- > Date: 9/26/94 10:09 AM > To: Clarence Dent > From: Ron Schweikert > > Andreas' excellent posting on names was very interesting (good job!) > > I noticed Pave Paws missing (maybe not in appropriate context), but it > is a radar site at Beale AFB, CA (there's also one somewhere (?) on the > east coast) that is an early warning missle detection system I believe. > > Ron > > > ------------------------------ From: Mark Rogers Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 11:21:03 PAC Subject: Pave Paws Hello! Forgive such a silly question, but what are Pave Paws ?? For that matter, what is the difference of the entire PAVE xxx line of bombs ?? I have heard of Pave Tack and others, but I was never up on that type of ordenance Thanks... Mark Rogers ------------------------------ From: "Frank Schiffel, Jr." Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 12:15:19 CDT Subject: PAVE PAWS and Glomar Explorer Well, they both were collection systems. 1. I think PAVE PAWS and other BMEWS systems are still hooked up to NORAD as part of their SPADATS system for just regular space track. Otherwise, there would be gaps in coverage. 2. Glomar Explorer was designed and built by the skunk works. Don't know exactly how much. There was a book or 2 on it in the 70s when the cover was blown. Best was The Jennifer Project which is out of print. There have also been some references in the espionage literature that a defected Soviet was involved in some of the retrieval and helped CIA in determining what they had. 3. Seems sort of strange to think of TU-144 and Concorde to be used by US. Both were not economical to run. Not that the SR-71 was cheap, but for a man-rated system that could go anywhere and change sensor systems out, it was still a lot better than satellites. Especially if the KH-13 did really exist and it really was cancelled by Reagan, giving no real ability to move, get lots of real time and have other great state of the art increases. Anybody know of other than 3 SR-71s that are availalbe to be flown? I heard 50s as production level and this was depleted down to 3 or so. NASA got them. Heard that there are lots and lots of spare parts and systems. I've heard no losses to hostile fire, but maybe we just flew the hell out of the airframe. May be interesting to know when and why some aircraft were taken out of service. regards, frank ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #159 ********************************* 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).