From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #161 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Monday, 3 October 1994 Volume 05 : Number 161 In this issue: Re: Gomar Explorer/Challenger Re: Gomar Explorer/Challenger Black Spot Reminder RAF Mildenhall, Woodbridge and Bentwaters Deuce crash Re: #1(3) Skunk Works Digest V5 #160 X-32 Groom Lake Re: X-32 PS Interview with Ben Rich Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich X-32 RE: X-32 (I) X-33, too Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich Cavitation... Incident at Boscombe Re: RAF Mildenhall, Woodbridge and Bentwaters 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: Bill Corea Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 09:34:58 -0800 Subject: Re: Gomar Explorer/Challenger John Regus said: > Gotta disagree that GE was a skunk project...it was a ship that > was originally designed to be part of the Project Mohole s > eismological survey. Cheers and I hope you are having a good > football season. No, the Glomar _Challenger_ was the Deep Sea Drilling Ship. It punched holes in the ocean floor all over the place. This project still continues, with another drillship. The cover story for the Glomar _Explorer_ was that is was going to mine manganese nodules from the deep ocean floor. Nobody could explain what the nodules could be used for (other than lots of stainless steel) but it was a widely-watched program among mining geologists. - ----------------------------------------------------------- I'm speaking for myself, not my company. Bill Corea Chevron Overseas Petroleum Inc hwcco@chevron.com San Ramon, California ------------------------------ From: John Regus Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 16:21:34 -0500 (CST) Subject: Re: Gomar Explorer/Challenger You are right, I knew that it was for some mining operation like mohole... I had a question from Frank Shiffel about how the skunk-works could have gotten mixed up in all this, and I got to thinking about Howard Hughes involvement with Lockheed...if I can find the book "Howard" by Noah Dietrich it outlines when HH owned TWA and purchased a portion of Lockheed, remember when TWA only flew Constellations, etc. and I think that is where the inbreeding came from...and I think that Hughes Aircraft was one of the biggest skunk subcontractors...anybody got any ideas on this? John F. Regus | (713) 960-0045 | SYS/370/390 SYSTEM SOFTWARE ENGINEERING WUI:REGUSHOU | On Fri, 30 Sep 1994, Bill Corea wrote: > John Regus said: > > Gotta disagree that GE was a skunk project...it was a ship that > > was originally designed to be part of the Project Mohole s > > eismological survey. Cheers and I hope you are having a good > > football season. > > No, the Glomar _Challenger_ was the Deep Sea Drilling Ship. It > punched holes in the ocean floor all over the place. This > project still continues, with another drillship. > > The cover story for the Glomar _Explorer_ was that is was going > to mine manganese nodules from the deep ocean floor. Nobody > could explain what the nodules could be used for (other than > lots of stainless steel) but it was a widely-watched program > among mining geologists. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > I'm speaking for myself, not my company. > > Bill Corea Chevron Overseas Petroleum Inc > hwcco@chevron.com San Ramon, California > > ------------------------------ From: "Richard J. Latshaw" Date: Fri, 30 Sep 1994 19:44:54 EST Subject: Black Spot >Project Black Spot: NC-123K, AC-123K > They became operational in 1968 and flew 28 operational missions >between 08/19/1968 and 10/23/1968 in the South Korean Sea, trying to stop >infiltration from North into South Korea by sea. But no bad guys were caught. You are correct. I was there at the time - Osan. The Black Spot folks shared some of our facilities - 314th Air Division Recon. They went out on a bunch of night missions but never found anything to speak of. About the same time, we were checking out a new TI ir system and flew one mission over the water. Scared the you know what out of what was probably an NK boat. At least, he took off in a Northerly direction as fast as he could go. Unfortunately, we didn't have anything to drop on him. (the NK boats used to join in with the fishing fleet and then run ashore to drop off or pick up agents) Dick L. former HawkEye ------------------------------ From: John Regus Date: Sat, 1 Oct 1994 00:16:01 -0500 (CST) Subject: Reminder Area 51 will be discussed on Larry King Live at 2000 CDT 3/1/94. John F. Regus | (713) 960-0045 | SYS/370/390 SYSTEM SOFTWARE ENGINEERING WUI:REGUSHOU | ------------------------------ From: Adrian Thurlow Date: Sat, 1 Oct 94 14:32:15 +0100 Subject: RAF Mildenhall, Woodbridge and Bentwaters Alistair M Henderson writes in reply to Adrian Thurlow' s article. Date: Wed, 28 Sep 94 17:28:56 BST Subject:Re: RAF Mildenhall >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. >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? >>You may also notice that a new hangar is slowly taking shape close to those which currently house the KC-135s. All this work is connected with the moving in of the 69th SOG comprising the MC-130Hs of 7th SOS, HC-130N/Ps of 67th SOS and MH-53Js of 21st SOS. The a/c are being moved from RAF Alconbury near Cambridge which is closing. Apparently, the crews are not too happy with this new arrangement, they were much happier at RAF Woodbridge where it was far more difficult for prying eyes to see what they were up to. Mildenhall isn't exactly the most secretive of bases!<< >>Ali Henderson. Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh ceeamh@caledonia.hw.ac.uk<< Hi skunkers, Yes Woodbridge is fairly isolated with woodland surrounding the airfield but you can walk around the perimeter fence as I have done on many occasions. You could get good views of the A10's when they were there, really only a matter of a few yards away. Also there is a plane spotters car park at one end of the runway. The domestic site is being used at the moment but the airfield has been very quiet with no discernable activity, I go and have a look every so often as although RAF Bentwaters is up for sale no mention has been made as to the longterm future of Woodbridge. This I feel indicates that there may be activity there in the future. Bentwaters has in fact been used for the past two weeks for a large exercise involving all the RAF squadrons flying the Harrier GR5/7. This is apparently the first time that all the squadrons have flown together. The RAF is withdrawing from the bases used by the Harrier squadrons in Germany, perhaps Woodbridge is their future home. Regarding Mildenhall. Is it likely that the U-2's will fly from there when the USAF withdraws from Alconbury? Alconbury has (I think) unique hardened aircraft shelters for the U-2's. These do not exist at Mildenhall at this moment in time. Regards 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 not necessarily those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Sat, 1 Oct 1994 18:44:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Deuce crash Here's an update on the U-2 crash at Osan AFB a few weeks ago, from our newest test pilot, who flew U-2s just before he came to us a month ago. It was a night landing in _terrible_ weather. Landed hard, went off the runway. The pilot was pulled from the wreckage and is in good enough condition to return to flight status after recuperation. Dana characterized this as an accident waiting to happen. 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.... ------------------------------ From: ConsLaw@aol.com Date: Sun, 02 Oct 94 00:23:56 EDT Subject: Re: #1(3) Skunk Works Digest V5 #160 BLACK (Intelligence gathering projects ?): > - ------------------------------------------ > Black Crow ==> Equipment to detect the ignition systems of > piston engines. Fitted to AC-130 gunships. >This was used to find Russian built (or designed and North >Vietnamese built) >trucks during Vietnam. For what, you ask? For locating >convoys running at (night) The Allies in World War Two operationally tested an airborne sniffer technology that detected U-Boats by sniffing for diesel exhaust. The technology was supposedly abandoned when an increase in diesel merchant shipping sent the sub-hunters on too many wild goose chases. (I read this in a book called Naval Weapons Systems, since I checked it out of the library, I don't have the full author/publisher information) I can't remember the name of the system. ------------------------------ From: shooter@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Shooter) Date: Sun, 2 Oct 94 9:53:09 EST Subject: X-32 Hello, all! I've subscribed to the Skunk Works mailing list for quite awhile now, but have never really posted because I had no real experience with the black world... until Friday. I attended a reception at Purdue University for Dr. Paul Bevilaqua of Lockheed's Skunk Works. Bevilaqua is working on the X-32, a next-generation lightweight fighter designed for USAF, USN and USMC use. The latter two will have a STOVL version with a lift fan, while the AF's model will carry a fuel tank in place of the lift fan. The plane, which is having a wind tunnel full scale model built as we speak, shares much with the F-22 and is intended to fly in 1996 or 98. I was not even aware that such a program existed until I attended the reception. Even more interesting were the comments he made in answering questions from our small group of about 30 students and faculty. To the inquiry about an SR-71 replacement, he said "I can't tell you about that one..." We shared a knowing chuckle over that. Were the lot of you aware of the X-32 project? I can post more details if there is interest. Thanks! Mark W. ------------------------------ From: Michael Hawthorne Date: Sun, 2 Oct 1994 13:58:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Groom Lake While watching the Larry Kind deally last night, i had a thought (well, I had been thinking this before, but thought more about it last night). And please feel free to dissagree with me. Now, everybody know about the existence of the Groom Lake base. The goverment surely know that everybody else knows about it, they watch TV too, and surely monitor these discusions. I would think that very little is still going on at that base. If I were trying to keep a project secret, I certanly wouldn't put it in a spot everybody knows about. There has to be at least one more secret base out there. If they were able to keep this one secret for any period of time, they can do it again. I don't believe that alien ships are being tested there, that's crazy talk. But, definatly secret black projects were tested there. But, in my opinion, I wouldn't think much is still going on there. Unless the goverment is dumber than I thought... - ------------------------------------- Michael Hawthorne hawthorn@cap.gwu.edu ------------------------------ From: shooter@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Shooter) Date: Sun, 2 Oct 94 15:52:57 EST Subject: Re: X-32 > > Would like to hear more about the X-32!! > > The X-32 may be one of the demonstrators in the JAST program, though Dr. Bevilaqua didn't expressly say that. It is (or will be) a single-seat, single-engine multirole aircraft with FBW controls. Configuration is a delta wing with close-coupled canards (see Rafale, EF2000, Gripen). Thrust-vectoring in the pitch axis will be featured. The plane will be produced by Lockheed in two variants. The AF plane will be CTOL, while the USN/USMC variety will sport a lift fan behind the cockpit and will have V/STOL capability for carrier ops. In place of the fan, the AF plane will carry an additional fuel tank. The X-32 will have a good degree of stealth built in, as it borrows many components and structures from the F-22. Weapons will be carried internally, and sensors will be fitted flush in the wing leading edge and elsewhere. Engine to be fitted initially is a modified PW F100, and the plane will feature "supersonic persistance," or longer range with equal weapons load at supersonic speed than current fighters. I believe he said 3-5x that of an F-18, but I'm not sure. Supercruise will be in minimum AB, not unlike the SR-71. The plane is built to slip in stealthily, then egress at a good clip. It is not known if an internal gun will be fitted, or what kind of dogfighting capacity the X-32 will have. A full-scale wind-tunnel model is being built right now, and first flight of the CTOL version is expected in about 1998. Bevilaqua suggests that a few dozen of the aircraft might be built, to give each service a test and eval. squadron before full-scale production begins. UK (BAE?) is putting up about 1/3 of the money for the initial venture, and so gets some say in design changes. Plane was made smaller to fit aboard UK carriers... Mark W. ------------------------------ From: wizard@sccsi.com (Stratacom Worldnet) Date: Sun, 2 Oct 94 21:40 CDT Subject: PS Interview with Ben Rich I have just read some of Ben Rich's book excerpts in the 10/94 issue of PS... all I can say is "Thank God for the Air Force." The cromagnon thinking of the Navy probably has hyperinflated their budget by their "big ship - big crew" mentality, which translates to more senior officer billets to fill, as opposed to having a small crew stealth ship that has deadly firepower, and is cost effective. I'm suprised the Navy brass didn't ask for sails! I am glad the article has taken a branch into one of my favorite areas of stealth...submarines. And as a test of your knowledge of sea stealth, I have a quiz question for you... In the early '80s, the U.S. became beaucoup po'd with Toshiba for selling a milling machine to the Russians...now skunks the quiz question is why the hoopla over the sale of that milling machine to the Soviets? (If anyone on the board from the Annapolis School of Boating gets this answer wrong, I will send a note to your ASW instructor and tell him that you need a remedial class!) Cheers, ******************************************************************** * John F. Regus | Stratacom Worldnet * * WUI:REGUSHOU | SYS/370/390 SYSTEM SOFTWARE ENGINEERING * ******************************************************************** ------------------------------ From: megazone@world.std.com (MegaZone) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 1994 00:28:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich Once upon a time Stratacom Worldnet shaped the electrons to say... >have a quiz question for you... In the early '80s, the U.S. became beaucoup >po'd with Toshiba for selling a milling machine to the Russians...now skunks >the quiz question is why the hoopla over the sale of that milling machine to >the Soviets? Simple... They are used to precision mill the screws. Screw noise is a major factor in sub detection, and the Sovs were behind in the milling tech. The sale of the machines gave them a big boost, making it harder for the US to track their subs. On a different note, is the list maintainer out there? I've sent two unsubscribe requests for my old WPI address (megazone@wpi.wpi.edu) and neither has worked, both were bounced for approval. So now I'm getting two of everything. Please send the unsub through. - -- megazone@world.std.com megazone@hotblack.gweep.net (508) 752-2164 "I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think!" Moderator: anime fanfic archive, ftp.std.com /archives/anime-fan-works; rec.arts.anime.stories Geek Code 2.1: GTW/H d-- H+>++ s++:++ !g p? au+ a23 w+@ v+@>++ C++(++++) UU+>UL++++ P+ L>++ 3 E N+++ K+++ W-- M-- V-- -po+ Y+>++ t+@ 5@ j@ R@ G' tv@ b++(+++) D+>++ B--- e++ u** h- f+ r++ n+(----) y+(*) ------------------------------ From: shooter@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Shooter) Date: Sun, 2 Oct 94 23:57:08 EST Subject: X-32 Oh - one more thing. For a better idea of what the X-32 looks like, take a peek at the plane on the cover of Stephen Coonts' "Minotaur." That's almost exactly it. MW ------------------------------ From: George Allegrezza 03-Oct-1994 0723 Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 07:27:46 EDT Subject: RE: X-32 The X-32 is the newly assigned designation for the DARPA V/STOL strike fighter demonstration program. Aerospace people in this country have been talking about supersonic V/STOL for years, and finally the DoD has bellied up to the bar with the necessary funding to make it happen, with UK participation as well. Congress is complicating matters by trying to merge this program with JAST, which is a long-range R&D program to develop a CTOL/VTOL F-18 class fighter for the 2005 time period. The X-32, in the X-plane tradition, is designed to get practical experience with the technology in the shortest possible time, while JAST is a (to my mind) catch-all program for a number of advanced technologies, with only a nebulous "deadline" for a technology maturity decision. This isn't to sat that JAST will never generate any useful results. George George Allegrezza | Digital Equipment Corporation | "Because I'm your father and I said Littleton MA USA | so, that's why." allegrezza@tnpubs.enet.dec.com | -- me ------------------------------ From: George Allegrezza 03-Oct-1994 0734 Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 07:31:11 EDT Subject: (I) X-33, too I understand the DARPA/USAF SSTO demonstrator, formerly the SX-2, has been assigned the X-33 designation. George George Allegrezza | Digital Equipment Corporation | "Because I'm your father and I said Littleton MA USA | so, that's why." allegrezza@tnpubs.enet.dec.com | -- me ------------------------------ From: Rick Lafford Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 07:45:02 EDT Subject: Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich ... and we can give bonus points for anyone who knows what company provided Toshiba with the technology that allowed them to build the machine that they then sold to the Russians. (Hint - they headquarter in Rochester, NY) Rick - ----------------------------------------- Rick Lafford Clinical Diagnostics Eastman Kodak Co. lafford@clpd.kodak.com ========================================= ------------------------------ From: dougt@u011.oh.vp.com (Doug Tiffany) Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 8:27:14 EDT Subject: Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich > > > ... and we can give bonus points for anyone who knows what company provided > Toshiba with the technology that allowed them to build the machine that they > then sold to the Russians. > > (Hint - they headquarter in Rochester, NY) > > Rick Ummm.....French's Mustard? > > ----------------------------------------- > Rick Lafford > Clinical Diagnostics > Eastman Kodak Co. > lafford@clpd.kodak.com > ========================================= > > ------------------------------ From: George Allegrezza 03-Oct-1994 0838 Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 08:36:03 EDT Subject: Re: PS Interview with Ben Rich Ummmm . . . . . Rochester Telephone? :-) George George Allegrezza | Digital Equipment Corporation | "Because I'm your father and I said Littleton MA USA | so, that's why." allegrezza@tnpubs.enet.dec.com | -- me ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Mon, 3 Oct 94 09:25:48 EDT Subject: Cavitation... About those Milling Machines... Spoilers hoooooooo (for the befit of anyone playing....) Toshiba shipped CNC machines that, it was felt, would allow the USSR to nake quieter sub propellors. The exact, sophisticated shaping is critical to quietness, amongst other things, supprissing cavitaion, the formation of micro bubbles due to localized pressure reduction. Speculation on: The CNC machine is just a tool. WOnder where the Russians got the design techniques? Internally developed? Speculation II: Was it decreased noise, per se, or the fact that the screws would be more similar, reduing the differences used to tell one USSR sub from another??? regards dwp ------------------------------ From: Alistair M Henderson Date: Mon, 03 Oct 94 11:45:53 BST Subject: Incident at Boscombe Something I heard over the weekend: Last week (possibly Friday) someone was passing A&AEE Boscombe Down when they saw what appeared to be an aircraft sitting on the runway. It had obviously had an accident and was covered with a black tarpaulin and surrounded by crash vehicles. Hours later, a C-5 arrived and carted this thing off to Palmdale. Something strange being tested at Boscombe?? If it was American then why would they want to bring it to the UK for tests?, do we have some facilities that they don't have? Ali Henderson. Heriot-Watt Uni, Edinburgh ceeamh@cee.hw.ac.uk ceeamh@caledonia.hw.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: Alistair M Henderson Date: Mon, 03 Oct 94 11:38:53 BST Subject: Re: RAF Mildenhall, Woodbridge and Bentwaters >The RAF is withdrawing from the bases used by the Harrier squadrons in >Germany, perhaps Woodbridge is their future home. I don't think that this is likely. When the USAF moved out, a lot of the equipment such as runway lighting and electronic gear was removed by the RAF for use elsewhere. This is why that exercise was held there, to give the squadrons experience in operating from a 'bare base'. It would probably be too expensive to re-equip the place with all the necessary gear. > Regarding Mildenhall. Is it likely that the U-2's will fly from there >when the USAF withdraws from Alconbury? Alconbury has (I think) unique >hardened aircraft shelters for the U-2's. These do not exist at Mildenhall >at this moment in time. When the decision to close Alconbury was made, I think that the USAF envisaged ceasing European U-2 operations entirely. They got part of the way there with the de-activation of the 17th RW but the situation in Bosnia has necessitated keeping them on. I don't know what they'll do with the U-2s when the place closes. Ali Henderson. Heriot-Watt Uni, Edinburgh. ceeamh@cee.hw.ac.uk ceeamh@caledonia.hw.ac.uk ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #161 ********************************* 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).