From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #198 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Friday, 3 February 1995 Volume 05 : Number 198 In this issue: Re: stealth targeting stealthy/black ? Re: Air and Space Magazine Re: CLE ATC UFOs Re: Forward swept flying wings Re: Triangular Craft 2/2 [none] [none] [none] cammo, stealth NC-141 Triangular Craft aircraft to watch for Re: Air and Space Magazine 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: Christian Jacobsen Date: 2 Feb 1995 18:02:36 U Subject: Re: stealth targeting Subject: Time:5:55 PM OFFICE MEMO RE>stealth targeting Date:2/2/95 Frank Schiffel, Jr. wrote: "...there was an idea to paint some sort of pastel on the F-117 for better stealth capabilities." This actually came from Navy cammo testing. They found that a weird combination of pastel polka dots was an absolutely incredible camoflauge!!!! Obviously this did not go over well with the Big Brass, and the idea was unceramoniously dropped. - - Christian ------------------------------ From: JOHN Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 22:39:34 EST Subject: stealthy/black ? > One of the interesting questions way back when it was an unknown black > project was how (or if) the B-2 would be air refueled as that amount of > metal in the refueling UARRSI would really show up on RADAR. > > then there's the classified patio that was poured by the contractor in the > shape of the B-2. took a while for somebody to fly over it and figure out > that looked like the shape of a B-2 and had it fixed. Or at the roll-out when the AF took so much trouble to keep anyone from seeing the trailing edges, AW&ST flew over in a rented c-150 and took pictures of the whole thing, also if you look close at the "star" painted on the apron for the roll-out, the shape of the B-2 was the points of the "star". Just look for the small things ! John Szalay jpszalay@tacl.dnet.ge.com DISCLAIMER: GE knows I exist ? ------------------------------ From: mangan@kodak.com (Paul Mangan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 07:24:37 EST Subject: Re: Air and Space Magazine I have been having trouble getting through to Skunk Works but if this makes it: I noticed a brief message in A&S that talked about the X32a X32b and X33. Sounds like a lot of new Xplanes are out there. What is most interesting is the missing numbers. Does anyone have a partial list or better still a complete list?? Paul Mangan > From skunk-works-owner@gaia.ucs.orst.edu Wed Feb 1 06:55:13 1995 > To: skunk-works@gaia.ucs.orst.edu > Subject: Air and Space Magazine > Sender: skunk-works-owner@gaia.ucs.orst.edu > Content-Length: 470 > X-Lines: 10 > > I have not seen mention of Air & Space magazine in here and thought I > would bring it up. > > The latest issue talked about a couple guys who collect parts from > crashed planes in the early days of Mach 1+ programs. They also have > posters about skunk planes and many other interesting subjects. IMHO, > it is a magazine worth subscribing to, if you enjoy skunk material. > The magazine comes out of the Smithsonian Air & Space museum. > > - mark > ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 23:44:42 -0800 Subject: Re: CLE ATC UFOs I wrote: >>A pretty famous case where a US Army Reserve Huey with 3-4 crewmen, >>encountered an unknown, at very close range, over Mansfield Ohio at >>night. It was seen up close with details and all. There were even >>witnesses on the ground, to some of it. John responded: >This incident has been documented in all the "Check-out Counter Rags" for >years. I wouldn't know about that John. I don't get the information that I post on skunk-works from the check-out line. My information came from: "A Helicopter-UFO Encounter Over Ohio" by Jennie Zeidman Published by: Center For UFO Studies The 121 page report was pointed out to me by a scientist I know. Dr. Jay Allen Hynek himself investigated this case (he was a USAF Project Blue Book consultant and dealt with this subject for over 20 years) along with Jennie Zeidman. Definitely NOT a check-out counter rag though. >No concrete evidence has ever been provided, even after all this time. Fine. Some of us don't need physical proof to be interested in the cases where there is a very close look at the unknown that is gotten by multiple independent witnesses. And since I'm interested in aircraft, especially high performance ones, and since they got a good look at this one, I personally find the case quite interesting. I agree nothing is proven. But I can't ignore good evidence of something interesting and unusual to me, even though the evidence isn't conclusive. >I do know this...we work about 8,000 IFR flights every day of the year.. >and NEVER have I heard of a pilot claiming a "close encounter". That's valid and EXCELLENT input! And I appreciate it! I think these things, the ones that are the most interesting, happen a lot less frequently than most people think! In fact, there is partial corroboration for what you claim in the following, in what an airline pilot says about not experiencing this before in 18 years of flying. There is a reference to Cleveland Center in here, but that wasn't why I included it. In the above book reference I quoted, there is a photocopy of a letter Dr. Hynek got from an American Airlines B747 first officer (4 years after the incident) regarding another incident, involving possibly the same unknown (United, TWA and Delta reported the traffic as well), near Rosewood Ohio, on the same night, about 3.5 hours before the Army Huey's experience, I'll just reproduce parts of the letter: " ... I was the First officer on an American Airlines flight 21, a Boeing 747, enroute from New York Kennedy to Los Angeles Int'l, on October 18, 1973. We departed Kennedy at 1800 EST. At a point on the airway approximately in the vicinity of Rosewood, Ohio, at approximately 1930 EST an air carrier aircraft (either United or TWA) eastbound at 35,000 feet called Cleveland Center to inquire of the traffic directly ahead of him. Cleveland responded they had no traffic in that area nor were painting any on their radar. Another Air carrier (again I can't remember the sequence of calls, except that United, TWA & Delta were involved in the transmissions) who I remember gave his flight level at 37,000 ft and was westbound also reported sighting traffic in the same area ahead and below his flight level. Another Air Carrier called in and also verified traffic in the same area. It was dark on the ground but at our flight level (33,000) it was still fairly light. I turned to my right and looked to the rear (northeast) and sighted an object which I can only describe as concave in shape which illuminated a bluish green light, enough so as to mask the actual shape of the object. The best way I could descrive it is like looking at a black light where all edge definition falls off. My actual sighting was very brief as the object slid out of vision behind the cockpit rear window. Whether it was out forward movement or its [sic]. ... I have never filed a UFO sighting before but in 18 years of flying aircraft, this is the strangest thing I have ever seen. ... " >I think I'm sorry I injected my thoughts. I'm glad you did actually! Regards, Larry ------------------------------ From: Bryan.L.Allen@jpl.nasa.gov (Bryan L. Allen) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 13:53:00 PDT Subject: Re: Forward swept flying wings Preparing to re-lurk, but I couldn't let this one pass by... >> Has the concept of a foward swept flying wing ever been proposed or >> investigated ? > >I think that conventional flying wings, with sweep-back, rely on the >sweep for lateral stability; yaw to the right (e.g.) increases the >projected area of the left wing along the flight path, and also its >moment about the c.g., and conversely for the right wing, thus >producing a restoring torque. By this reasoning a swept-forward pure >flying wing would be statically unstable in yaw, and would likely spin >like a buckthorn seed... > -- Jay Freeman A friend of mine has built several large swept-forward flying-wing radio-controlled models. They work just fine; in fact in some ways they work better than swept-aft flying wings (better glide, turns towards lift rather than away from it.) Structural stiffness is much more critical with forward-swept wings, since for proper stall behavior and better directional stability a forward-swept wing has washin (relative angle of attack INCREASES from wing root to wing tip) rather than washout as in an aft-swept wing. Also, there have been numerous zero-sweep flying wings built and flown, both models and human-bearing. The friend mentioned above is Vern Oldershaw of Bakersfield, Calif. He has designed and flown several competition sailplanes and was the structural engineer on the Gossamer Condor human-powered airplane. I speak for myself, not Telos or JPL. - -- Bryan L. Allen bryan@jpl-devvax.jpl.nasa.gov Telos Corp./JPL (818) 306-6425 Altadena, Calif. USA ------------------------------ From: "J. Pharabod" Date: Fri, 03 Feb 95 11:57:14 MET Subject: Re: Triangular Craft 2/2 >OK, time for another de-lurk. This "triangle-shaped craft" thread >has a very plausible explanation as to what the craft(s) really are. >Folks have been speculating about alien UFOs, giant airships (Aereon >Corp. in New Jersey has been for all practical purposes moribund >for many years), and "black" military projects. No one has men- >tioned the simplest explanation - powered and unpowered flex-wing >hang gliders, flown by pilots deliberately "trolling" for UFO >coverage! >Bryan L. Allen (Thu, 2 Feb 95 13:36:42 PDT) In the Belgian case, this was one of the first explanations put forward. Problem is, the object could hover in any position (vertically for example), exactly like the "big wing" quoted in "America's New Secret Aircraft", Popular Mechanics, December 1991. It generally hovered horizontally though (when it was not slowly moving, which was the most frequent situation). There are other elements against the hang glider hypothesis. J. Pharabod ------------------------------ From: skunk-works-owner Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 07:57:13 -0800 Subject: [none] ------------------------------ From: skunk-works-owner Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 08:03:16 -0800 Subject: [none] ------------------------------ From: skunk-works-owner Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 08:04:13 -0800 Subject: [none] ------------------------------ From: I am the NRA Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 13:05:56 EST Subject: cammo, stealth >>"...there was an idea to paint some sort of pastel on the F-117 for better >>stealth capabilities." >This actually came from Navy cammo testing. They found that a weird >combination of pastel polka dots was an absolutely incredible camoflauge!!!! Also dates as far back as WWI when a variety of modern camo techniques originated. I believe there are documetned cases of multicolor hexagons on German A/C. (Yes the Anti Stealth Red Baron schemes were from the same war. Different driver...) Stealth Refueling K-B2 (Thats Joke, son, ahh say a JOKE...) More seriously, put a trap door, with gasketing over it. No prob, except during actual fueling, and then, I assume the KB-10 (or whotever) is a lot more "seeable". Stealth Patio: Dr ????, chief B2 "stealth designer" mentioned in a publix speech that at one point when B2 details were still dark, Boeing left the "molds" (not the right term: "cooking fixtures" for the composite airframe) out in plain sight in one of the Seattle plants. VERY distinctive and informative shape and quite visible from "straight down". regards dwp ------------------------------ From: Dave.Bonorden@amd.com (Dave Bonorden) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 15:22:15 CST Subject: NC-141 > >Hi >Can anyone on the list tell me for what purpose NC-141A 61-2779 has had its >nose modified. It looks like it has grown a fighter aircraft pointed nosecone. >It was photographed at Edwards open day on October 22. > >John >============================================================================= >John Burtenshaw BOURNEMOUTH >System Administrator, The Computer Centre UNIVERSITY The Advanced Radar Testbed is used to conduct flight tests of fighter radars. It has a full-up radar with the appropriate radome and massive amounts of instrumentation and data recorders in the cargo bay. I've only seen it configured as an F-15C (APG-63) radar, but I'm pretty sure the configuration can be can be changed, although it would be alot of work. This plane is a tradeoff between instrumentation and test mission efficiency vs flight profile realism. The endurance of the -141 allows many more test conditions per test mission and the instrumentation allows less dependence on ground facilities compared to similar tests conducted with real fighters. For many radar flight tests (such as clutter evaluation, multiple-target tests, and ECM), the speed, altitude and attitude capabilites of the -141 are adequate. Radar tests are some of the most boring flight tests imaginable for test pilots and engineers (but not for the analysts). Dave Bonorden ------------------------------ From: James Easton Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 17:42 BST Subject: Triangular Craft Regarding... >From: Bryan.L.Allen@jpl.nasa.gov (Bryan L. Allen) >Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 13:36:42 PDT >Subject: Triangular Craft 2/2 >OK, time for another de-lurk. This "triangle-shaped craft" thread >has a very plausible explanation as to what the craft(s) really are. >Folks have been speculating about alien UFOs, giant airships (Aereon >Corp. in New Jersey has been for all practical purposes moribund >for many years), and "black" military projects. No one has men- >tioned the simplest explanation - powered and unpowered flex-wing >hang gliders, flown by pilots deliberately "trolling" for UFO >coverage! Hi Bryan, Like yourself, I thought I was on to something with either this hypothesis or similarly, a hot air balloon (there is one in the U.K. which deliberately mimics a brilliantly lit "flying saucer" and is remarkably convincing, even from a short distance). Unfortunately, whilst this is unquestionably consistent with some of the reported sightings, it is equally inconsistent with others. If you consider the first few reports mentioned from September 1993 in England, aside from the fact that the object(s) is/are described as a "huge" black triangle, the characteristics, as you point out, are entirely consistent with a microlite craft. Where this theory falls down is when we hear, in November 1992, that the object is described as a "massive" (1.5 times the size of a soccer field) triangular object". That would be the mother of all microlites. Additionally, this particular object is described as having a "a line of red lights at the back" and it is noted that "a number of dark "indentations" could be seen on the underside of the object including a large black circle at the centre." As mentioned, an additional sighting that same month and close to the location of the aforementioned report describes "another _large_ black triangle" which again had a "a series of red lights along the back edge." If this is the same craft, then our microlite theory collapses if we are to believe that this craft "suddenly "took off like a rocket", but no flame." Furthermore, this configuration of a series of red lights along the rear of the craft and a _large_, circle, located centrally on the underside of the craft, is identical to reports and drawings (I have some of these drawings by way of a comparison) from elsewhere, specifically Belgium. Obviously, we can not be certain we are discussing one and the same craft, but it seems credible to suggest that, in this instance, we may be. I have previously included an extract from the Belgian Defence Department's report which supports this contention. Whilst it seems unlikely we can entirely resolve this mystery, the _large_, circle, located centrally on the underside of the craft, could be a clue to unravelling part of it. For those who may not have seen drawings of the hovering craft sighted in Belgium, the lights at each corner and the central light seem _much_ larger than we might expect and this central light in particular is often described as "pulsating". I'm not sure if we can take this topic much further without running out of credible suggestions for every aspect of it. A covert development which seems intent on attracting attention simply doesn't add up. Period. However, one last attempt at maybe stimulating someone's recognition of what these triangular shaped craft/platforms with their "brilliant" lights may represent or what they may be attempting to achieve: Defence Department report, Belgium: "On some occasions they described the phenomena as a triangle-shaped platform up to 200 feet wide with 3 downward beaming projectors, hovering at +- 100 m above the ground and making only a very light humming noise...On two occasions the BAF scrambled 2 F16's during the evening hours...On the second occasion, pilots could identify a laser-beam projector on the ground...A total of 9 interception attempts have been made. On 6 occasions the pilots could establish a lock-on with their air interception radar. Lock-on distances varied between 5 and 8 NM. On all occasions targets varied speed and altitude very quickly and break-locks occurred after 10 to 60 seconds. Speeds varied between 150 and 1010 kts. At 3 occasions both F16's registered simultaneous lock-ons with the same parameters. England: "...a number of dark "indentations" could be seen on the underside of the object including a large black circle at the centre." "...a huge black triangle flying low overhead. "It was lit up like a Christmas tree...It had a very bright light at each corner, so bright that it illuminated the ground below." Sacramento, CA.: "They also appear to have a fairly large, hemispherical "bubble" in the middle of the triangular surface, which sometimes glows, getting extremely bright for short periods." Gympie, Australia: "All the sightings were the same. The object was triangular with a central red-to-orange pulsating light. One farmer said it came down to within 500m(etres) of his property and lit up a ridge with its light." Sagaken, Japan: "The light at the front was red and flashed regularly, the other two lights were white...the lights descended. For a moment he saw a triangle-shaped black object, then the inside of the car was flooded with light "as strong as a searchlight."...As the car sped off, he could see the light beaming down and shining on the road ahead..." The feedback on this topic has been greatly appreciated and has at least indicated what these sightings are not likely to be. Realistically, given their nature, that is perhaps the most I hoped to achieve and is a positive development. However, if anyone still believes they know what these sightings represent, I'll be listening. Cheers, James. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: TEXJE@VAXB.HW.AC.UK Internet: JAMES.EASTON@STAIRWAY.CO.UK - ------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 22:46:08 PST Subject: aircraft to watch for While we've been focused on low-observable ("stealth") and hypersonic aircraft, I think we should be aware of an aircraft technology that is getting ready for initial testing on aircraft in flight. I have seen references to this in several military documents, and a former aerospace worker confirmed to me (when asked) that development had been under way for years and was nearing completion. That technology is digital conformal phased array radar, and is apparently on schedule. While that phrase may not mean much, consider what DoD document AD-A234 900, "Critical Technologies Plan for the Committee on Armed Services - United States Congress", May 1991, had to say about the subject: Digital beam-forming techniques are the primary method to control conformal arrays which are contoured to the shape of an aircraft's skin or a ship's hull. These arrays reduce radar cross section and aerodynamic drag. The development of an airborne conformal arrary radar using digital beam steering control techniques is scheduled to begin in FY 1991. A demonstration of conformal array digital beam- forming will occur in FY 1994. This conformal array radar will be flight tested in the beginning of FY 1996 to determine its ability to detect and track low-observable targets in a jamming environment. I found the following information on the Joint Advanced Strike Technology WWW server (http://www.jast.mil/), andit is interesting to consider that if the DoD timetable is correct, sometime around the end of 1995 (FY 1996 starts October 1, 1995), an airplane will be flying whose skin acts as a digital radar. _________________________________________________________________ STRUCTURALLY EMBEDDED RECONFIGURABLE ANTENNA TECHNOLOGY (SERAT) _________________________________________________________________ Technical Area: Avionics JAST POC: Dutterer, Mr. Bob Technical POC: Caposell, Mr. Chuck Phone No: DSN 222-2510 Organization: AIR-546TD/ADPO-48 Other Technical POCs: Pirrung, Mr. Gerald T., NAWCADWAR Program Manager DSN 441-2285 Tobin, Mr. Harvey, Rome Lab Program Manager DSN 478-2059 _________________________________________________________________ Description The objective of the Structurally Embedded Recconfigurable Antenna Technology (SERAT) program is to perform exploratory research to demonstrate feasibility of contributing techniques to produce antenna arrays for aircraft platforms. The intention is that these antennas will ultimately be embedded in composite load bearing structureal panels. This concept has been included in technologies collectively known as "Smart Skins". In this configuration, they will have to be reconfigurable to meet the demands of multiple avionic transmit and receive functions across a multi-octave RF spectrum. Among the demands of these avionic functions will be the need for beam and null steering which requires an array implementation. Also, due to the permanence of the structural embedment, a means of self-healing must be employed to insure the reliability of the system. One method of reconfigurability may be that segments of radiating elements would be dimensionally adjusted through use of optically controlled switches (or variable impedances) to alter resonant frequency, bandwidth, and/or array configuration. While the ultimate implementation of this technology will produce a structure, this immediate effort shall concentrate of the electronic and electromagnetic aspects of the concept. This is designated as a Joint Service effort, with Rome Lab participating in requirements development and source selection. Additional monitoring of the effort has been provided by NCCOSC RDT&E Division, and NUWC New London Division, as well as Wright Lab (AF) and Army CBCOM. Significance The goal of this effort will be to demonstrate the feasibility of a reconfigurable airborne antenna array design concept through fabrication of laboratory prototypes and measurement of antenna radiation characteristics. Another goal is to achieve a design concept that can realistically be scaled in the RF spectrum so as to be applicable to a multitude of functions. While the baseline tasks herein are within the UHF and L Bands, this concept could have applications in the X-Band and also at EHF frequencies. Thus scalability will be a critical factor to be addressed in considering the feasibility of the concept. This program shall consist of two baseline tasks and up to four additional tasks that may be implemented, at the government's discretion, to enhance the exploratory development effort by advancing the technology toward potential end user needs. This reconfigurable antenna technology is envisioned to be applicable across the RF spectrum and be compatible with avionic systems that provide the CNI, Surveillance, and ESM functions. Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com / PaulMcG@aol.com ********************************************************************** Anonymous FTP access to files dealing with excessive military secrecy is available from Internet host ftp.shell.portal.com (IP address 156.151.3.4) in the /pub/trader directory. Read the 00readme files for descriptions of the files. Writings from Glenn Campbell, author of the "Area 51 Viewer's Guide" are available in /pub/trader/secrecy/psychospy. (Web users can use URL ftp://ftp.shell.portal.com/pub/trader/ ) ------------------------------ From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Date: Sat, 4 Feb 1995 01:46:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Air and Space Magazine Paul Mangan was asking for a list of X-Planes, and wondered about the missing designations. Here is a list (short form) and you will notice, no number was skipped, so far. The format is: X-n, Manufacturer (? = several bidder), Name, Purpose # Version, Serial (? = unknown or unsure), Remarks - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ X-1, Bell, super-sonic speed research 1 X-1, 46-0062, ex XS-1 1 X-1, 46-0063, ex XS-1, to X-1E 1 X-1, 46-0064, ex XS-1 1 X-1A, 48-1384 1 X-1B, 48-1385 1 X-1C, (48-1386 ?), canceled, mock-up only 1 X-1D, 48-1386 X-2, Bell, super-sonic speed research 2 X-2, 46-0674/0675, ex XS-2 X-3, Douglas, Stilleto, super-sonic speed research 1 X-3, 49-2892, ex XS-3 1 X-3, 49-2892, ex XS-3, canceled X-4, Northrop, Bantam, tailless aircraft research 2 X-4, 46-0676/0677 X-5, Bell, variable geometry (swing wing) research 2 X-5, 50-1838/1839 X-6, Convair, nuclear powered aircraft 2 X-6 canceled, (1 NB-36H used as NTA, 51-5712) X-7, Lockheed, ramjet test vehicle, unmanned 27 X-7A-1, 55-3167/3173 + 56-4045/4052 + 57-6295/6307 + ? ? X-7A-3, ? 5 X-7B, ? ? (XQ-5, ?, target drone, named Kingfisher) ---- 61 (or maybe more) X-8, Aerojet General, Aerobee, high altitude research rocket, unmanned 30 X-8, ?, ex RTV-A-1, (out of 68) 30 X-8A, 54-2972/2994 + ?, ex RTV-A-1a, (out of 34) 1 X-8B, ?, ex RTV-A-1b, 2 X-8C, ?, ex RTV-A-1c, (only one launched) 3 X-8D, ?, ex RTV-A-1d, (none launched) ---- 66 (out of 108 for USAF, at least 800 additional Aerobee rockets, designated RTV-N-10 by the USN, were built) X-9, Bell, Shrike, testbed for GAM-63 Rascal air-to-ground missile, unmanned 31 X-9, ?, (52-2166/2209 ?), ex RTV-A-4, 62 more were canceled X-10, North American, testbed for SM-64 Navaho missile, unmanned 13 X-10, (51-19307/19313 + 52-0001/0006 ?), ex RTV-A-5 X-11, Convair, Atlas A, testbed for XB-65 (XSM-65) Atlas, unmanned 8 X-11, ?, all launched X-12, Convair, Atlas B, testbed for B-65 (SM-65) Atlas, unmanned 5 X-12, ?, all launched X-13, Ryan, Vertijet, tail-sitting VTOL test 2 X-13, 54-1619/1620 X-14, Bell, VTOL research 1 X-14, 56-4022, to X-14A, to X-14B X-15, North American, very high speed/altitude research 1 X-15, 56-6670 1 X-15, 56-6671, to X-15A-2 1 X-15, 56-6672 X-16, Bell, high-altitude reconnaissance plane 28 X-16, 56-0552/0579, canceled X-17, Lockheed, re-entry-vehicle test rocket, unmanned 3 quarter-scale vehicles, ?, all launched 3 half-scale vehicles, ?, all launched 6 developmental/test vehicles, ?, all launched 26 X-17, ?, research vehicles, all launched, (up to 7 more may have been build for 'Project Argus') X-18, Hiller, tilt-wing VTOL research 1 X-18, 57-3078, (rebuilt YC-122C (49-2883)) X-19, Curtiss-Wright, tilt-propeller VTOL research 2 X-19, 62-12197/12198, Model X-200 (plus one proof-of-concept aircraft, Model X-100, registered N853) X-20, Boeing, Dyna-Soar, hypersonic and suborbital manned research flights 10 X-20, 61-2374/2383, canceled X-21, Northrop, boundary layer control research 1 X-21A, 55-0408, (rebuilt Douglas WB-66D) 1 X-21A, 55-0410, (rebuilt Douglas WB-66D), (originally Douglas WB-66D (55-0409) was planned as the 2nd X-21A) X-22, Bell, tandem ducted propeller VTOL research 2 X-22A, BuNo 151520/151521 X-23, Martin Marietta, maneuverable re-entry vehicle, unmanned 4 X-23A, ?, also known as SV-5D, (first two lost, 3rd recovered, the 4th was never flown) X-24, Martin Marietta, lifting body/re-entry vehicle research 1 X-24A, 66-13551, also known as SV-5P, to X-24B, (also 2 low-speed trainer were build, known as SV-5J) X-25, Bensen, gyroglider/gyrocopter 1 X-25, ?, also known as DDV 1 X-25A, 68-10771 1 X-25B, 68-10772 X-26, Schweizer / Lockheed, glider/quiet motor glider 4 X-26A, BuNo 157932/157933 + 158818 + 159670 (?), Schweizer SGS 2-32 1 X-26B, 67-15345, (registered N2471W), Lockheed QT-2PC, ex QT-2 1 X-26B, ?, (registered N2472W), Lockheed QT-2PC, ex QT-2 (related aircraft designs: 1 Lockheed Q-Star, registered N5713S; 14 Lockheed YO-3A, 69-18000/18013; 2 Schweizer RG-8A, 85-0047/0048, to USCG as 8101/8102, one to CIA ?) X-27, Lockheed, Lancer, fighter interceptor project 0 X-27, ?, canceled X-28, Pereira, Osprey I, single-pilot seaplane, home-built 1 X-28A, BuNo 158786, (registered N3337) X-29, Grumman, forward-swept wing research 1 X-29A, 82-0003, (rebuilt Northrop F-5A 63-8372) 1 X-29A, 82-0049, (rebuilt Northrop F-5A 65-10573, ex RNoAF) X-30, ?, hyper-sonic test vehicle for NASP 0, X-30A, ?, canceled X-31, Rockwell/DASA, high maneuverability, post-stall controlled flight 2 X-31A, BuNo 164584/164585 X-32, ?, ASTOVL/CALF and JAST projects 0 X-32A, ?, CTOL, (JAST) 0 X-32B, ?, STOVL, (ASTOVL/CALF) X-33, ?, RLV (SSTO) demonstrator project, unmanned 0 X-33A, ? X-34, ?, small RLV project, unmanned 0 X-34A, ? - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl Absolute Software 313 West Court St. #305 schnars@umcc.ais.org Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 - --- --- ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #198 ********************************* 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).