From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #299 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Monday, 12 June 1995 Volume 05 : Number 299 In this issue: Re: This discussion group - UFO's or no UFO's? Mail Delivery Status Receipt: Skunk Works Digest V5 #296 Receipt: Skunk Works Digest V5 #295 Receipt: Skunk Works Digest V5 #298 Re: UFOs and Skunk Works Re: UFOs and Skunk Works Re: UFOs and Skunk Works US Code Names and Numbers for Foreign Military Equipment Re: UFOs and Skunk Works Re: Skunk Works Digest and UFO's 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: jburtens@bournemouth.ac.uk (John Burtenshaw) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 10:24:18 +0100 Subject: Re: This discussion group - UFO's or no UFO's? Illya Kuryakin wrote:- (Stuff Deleted) >+No where does it mention anything about UFO's (alien spacecraft etc.). >By definition a UFO is not automatically an alien spacecraft. >By definition anything that flies that the government has yet to reveal >(IE Black Prototypes or Operational Aircraft) are UFO's. Many years ago I saw what was to me a UFO in the true meaning of the word. It later transpired that it was the P1127 which went on to be the RAF/RN/USMC Harrier. What I saw was a *grey* flying object (grey because it was in bare metal as I later learned) which flew across the my line of sight and changed direction very quickly (presumably by using its thrust vectoring, a technique which Harrier pilots call VIFFing (vectoring in forward flight)). The P1127 prototypes were at the time (the early to mid-60's) one of Britain's closely guarded military projects as we were the only country to fly VTOL jets successfully and the general public were largely unaware of the shape of the airplane as it had never been publicly exhibited or photographed. The only picture that I recall seeing was of the engine test rig nicknamed the flying bedstead which did not look like an aircraft anyway as it was a ground tethered *skeleton* of steel tubing etc. So what I'm saying is that anything that it is not identifiable has to be unidentified and if it is a flying object it must ba UFO in literal sense. And just because it is a UFO does not mean that it is piloted by little green men from AMrs or wherever. So please lets drop the subjetc and let us get back to more skunk/black subjects. Otherwise this list will go the way of so many others and fall apart at the seams. Cheers John =========================================================================== John Burtenshaw Systems Administrator, The Computer Centre, Bournemouth University - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postal Address: Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow, POOLE, Dorset, BH12 5BB U.K. Internet: jburtens@bournemouth.ac.uk Phone: 01202 595089 Fax: 01202 513293 AX.25: g1hok@gb7bnm.#45.gbr.eu. AMPRnet: g1hok.ampr.org. (44.131.17.82) CompuServe: 100336,3113 =========================================================================== ------------------------------ From: "Central Postmaster" Date: 12 Jun 1995 05:53:05 GMT Subject: Mail Delivery Status ***** Error in Mail Delivery ***** SNADS TEMPORARY SERVER ERROR Recipients: NOTES.WHO@A50VM1.TRG.NYNEX.COM ------------------------------ From: anonymous NFS user 12-Jun-1995 0921 <"bword::nobody"@xanadu.enet.dec.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 95 09:19:41 EDT Subject: Receipt: Skunk Works Digest V5 #296 This is a receipt notification for a message you submitted previously. The message <9506100833.AA07994@bword.zko.dec.com> was delivered to . The message was read and acknowledged by the recipient at Mon Jun 12 09:21:20 1995 Supplementary information: Subj: Skunk Works Digest V5 #296. ------------------------------ From: anonymous NFS user 12-Jun-1995 0920 <"bword::nobody"@xanadu.enet.dec.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 95 09:19:10 EDT Subject: Receipt: Skunk Works Digest V5 #295 This is a receipt notification for a message you submitted previously. The message <9506090848.AA07622@bword.zko.dec.com> was delivered to . The message was read and acknowledged by the recipient at Mon Jun 12 09:20:40 1995 Supplementary information: Subj: Skunk Works Digest V5 #295. ------------------------------ From: anonymous NFS user 12-Jun-1995 0942 <"bword::nobody"@xanadu.enet.dec.com> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 95 09:41:29 EDT Subject: Receipt: Skunk Works Digest V5 #298 This is a receipt notification for a message you submitted previously. The message <9506121335.AA08423@bword.zko.dec.com> was delivered to . The message was read and acknowledged by the recipient at Mon Jun 12 09:42:51 1995 Supplementary information: Subj: Skunk Works Digest V5 #298. ------------------------------ From: Mary Shafer Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 10:58:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: UFOs and Skunk Works I'll leave the list if it turns into a UFO list. Not because I'm intolerant, but because I'm not interested. I am interested in the Skunk Works and that's why I'm subscribed. Mary Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/People/Shafer/mary.html 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.... On Sat, 10 Jun 1995, Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl wrote: > Even so I might get flammed for this -- contrary to Dean Adams and Jack > Gibbons (Lumber), I don't mind the _occasional_ UFO reference in the Skunk > Works List. > > Nobody expects anyone to believe -- and as Lumber wrote in response to > Rick Pavek (Illya Kuryakin): > > "The only way that we will learn anything from each other on this list is > if we look at mysterious objects from a scientific point of view,..." > > and > > "I [...] think that the purpose of this list is [...] to talk about what > we do know and to put together the facts to draw a feasible conclusion > that fits the facts [...]" > > All this is true, but impossible, if it would be forbidden to post the > facts, even if ones own [maybe stupid, wrong, etc.] conclusions are added. > > I am not afraid that anyone will leave the list, because of references to > UFOs. In fact, I doubt that anyone would. And if, then this shows only that > the person is too intolerant to respect the opinions [even stupid and wrong > ones] of other people. > > If someone reads in the Subject line: "UFO" -- just delete it and nobody > gets hurt. > > Just my opinion about Skunk Works and UFOs. > > -- Andreas > > --- --- > Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org > 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu > Flint, MI 48502-1239 > Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ > --- --- ------------------------------ From: jackg@holobyte.com (Jack Gibbons) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 08:56:36 -0700 Subject: Re: UFOs and Skunk Works My objection to the message was not that the ideas shouldn't be presented but that they shouldn't be presented here. What does alien technology have to do with the Skunk Works? All that we have to tie Lockheed to alien UFOs is innuendo I have never heard any direct comments by anyone of verifiable credibility that said anything about us using alien technology or seen any official documents relating to this. A lot of people a while back were objecting to the Aurora discussion on this list and that is a project that has been listed in official government reports. Now if that is questionably within this list, how do alien UFOs even come close? I would never endorse the suppression of ideas but if we don't have some order as to where those ideas are presented, the net will fall into chaos and none of us will learn a damn thing. As far as people leaving the list, I think that this is a very real possibility. We have a lot of people on this list that work in the aerospace field and I think that we depend greatly upon those people from time to time to give us facts or insights that would be unavailable or hard for the rest of us to attain. From talking with people in this field, it seems that most of them lose interest in the discussion when it turns to conjecture and assumption. I have seen many lists before fall into disuse because they got bogged down in off-topic messages so yes, I think that it is a real possibility with this list. Lumber >:-[ - "I've done it over and over.. You see, I kill breeders." - "God is dead." -Nietzche Here thar be monsters! - "Nietzche is dead." -God "Hey ho! Let's go!" ******************************************************************** * E-mail: lumber@zoom.com | lumber@dnai.com | jackg@holobyte.com * ******************************************************************** ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: UFOs and Skunk Works Author: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl at Internet Date: 06/10/95 6:32 Even so I might get flammed for this -- contrary to Dean Adams and Jack Gibbons (Lumber), I don't mind the _occasional_ UFO reference in the Skunk Works List. Nobody expects anyone to believe -- and as Lumber wrote in response to Rick Pavek (Illya Kuryakin): "The only way that we will learn anything from each other on this list is if we look at mysterious objects from a scientific point of view,..." and "I [...] think that the purpose of this list is [...] to talk about what we do know and to put together the facts to draw a feasible conclusion that fits the facts [...]" All this is true, but impossible, if it would be forbidden to post the facts, even if ones own [maybe stupid, wrong, etc.] conclusions are added. I am not afraid that anyone will leave the list, because of references to UFOs. In fact, I doubt that anyone would. And if, then this shows only that the person is too intolerant to respect the opinions [even stupid and wrong ones] of other people. If someone reads in the Subject line: "UFO" -- just delete it and nobody gets hurt. Just my opinion about Skunk Works and UFOs. - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ From: HACKETT@vilas.uwex.edu Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 11:41:57 CDT Subject: Re: UFOs and Skunk Works It would seem to me that any highly classified aircraft would by definition be "unidentified" to the general public.....If it were identified it would probably belong in some military aviation group instead. Art Hackett Madison, WI. BTW, some of my posts show up on this list with a header but no text. What's going on? My mail software (pegasus) seems to work fine with other groups. ------------------------------ From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 13:25:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: US Code Names and Numbers for Foreign Military Equipment I added to my home page another list, which is available under: 3. My own stuff: Lists * Codes and Codewords, of the USAF, CIA, NATO etc., including Operations, Projects and much more. 4. Foreign Military Equipment code names and numbers or directly at: "http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/texte/fore-cod.htm" I have included here a part of this file together with some questions. I hope this topic is not too much off charter (it concerns intelligence gathering and secret or unknown -- even though ex-Soviet -- aircraft, and how to classify them). Some of this data might have come from Skunk Works aircraft or satellites. I believe there might be some people on this list, who could give me additional information. The file deals only with designations, not with technical data or descriptions. At the end of this list are four questions/requests. ==== Begin File: Foreign Codes ==== The USAAF used during World War II code names to identify Japanese aircraft, and the USAF used later code numbers to identify Soviet military aircraft and missiles, mainly because the original indigenous names or designations were unknown. Even after the USA, as a NATO member, adopted the NATO nomenclature to identify Soviet aircraft, missiles and other equipment, separate systems for the identification of RD&T (Research, Development and Testing) aircraft and RD&T and operational missiles and rockets were used. INDEX 1. Japanese W.W.II aircraft 2. Type series for early Soviet post W.W.II aircraft 3. Soviet RD&T aircraft + Ram series (observed at the Ramenskoye Airfield) + Tag series (observed at the Taganrog Airfield) 4. Soviet RD&T missiles + BL series (observed at the Barnaul Test Range) + EM series (observed at the Emba Test Range) + KY series (observed at the Kapustin Yar Test Range) + NE series (observed at the Nenoska Test Range) + PL series (observed at the Plesetsk Test Range) + SH series (observed at Sary Shagan Test Range) 5. Soviet operational missiles and rockets + AA series (Air-to-Air) + ABM series (Anti-Ballistic-Missile) + AS series (Air-to-Surface) + AT series (Anti-Tank) + SA series (Surface-to-Air) + SA-N series (Surface-to-Air (Naval)) + SS series (Surface-to-Surface) + SSC series (Surface-to-Surface (Coastal)) + SS-N series (Surface-to-Surface (Naval)) + SUW-N series (Surface-to-Under-Water (Naval)) + FRAS series (Free Rocket Anti-Submarine) + FROG series (Free Rocket Over Ground) + SL series (Space Launch vehicles) [...] TYPE SERIES FOR EARLY SOVIET POST W.W.II AIRCRAFT ================================================= After World War II, starting 1947, and until the NATO reporting names were introduced in 1954, the USAAF and the USAF used a numerical, sequential Type series to identify different aircraft used by the USSR. The list included many prototypes, several helicopter, a missile, and one unidentified aircraft. Type 1 - Mikoyan-Gurevich prototype I-300; developed as Product F; service designation MiG-9; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Fargo' was assigned; first seen 05/01/1947 May Day Parade, Moscow; Type 2 - Yakovlev Yak-15; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Feather' was assigned (same as for Yak-17); first seen 05/01/1947 May Day Parade, Moscow; Type 3 - Lavotshkin prototype La-150; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 4 - Lavotshkin prototype La-152; modified La-150; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 5 - Lavotshkin prototype La-156; modified La-150; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 6 - Lavotshkin prototype La-160; developed as Project 'Strela'; swept wing test aircraft and fighter prototype; based on La-152; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 7 - Yakovlev prototype Yak-19; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 8 - Suchoi prototype Su-9; developed as Product K; early Me 262 copy; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 9 - Tupolev prototype Tu-77; service designation Tu-12; experimental bomber; sometimes also reported as 'Tu-4' or 'Tu-8'; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 10 - Ilyushin Il-22; jet bomber prototype; sometimes also reported as 'Il-16'; first seen 08/03/1947 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 11 - Mikoyan-Gurevich prototype I-270; developed as Product Zh; rocket engine test aircraft; first seen at Ramenskoye; Type 12 - Tupolev prototype Tu-73; sometimes also reported as Tu-72; first seen 1948 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 13 - unidentified or not used (?); first seen 1948 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino (?); Type 14 - Mikoyan-Gurevich prototype I-310; developed as Product S; service designation MiG-15; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Falcon' was assigned, which was then changed to 'Fagot'; first seen 1948 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 15 - Lavotshkin prototype La-168; first seen 1948 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 16 - Yakovlev Yak-17 (service designation); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Feather' was assigned (same as for Yak-15); first seen 1948 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 17 - Suchoi prototype Su-11; developed as Product LK; modified Su-9; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 18 - Suchoi prototype Su-15; developed as Product P; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 19 - Mikoyan-Gurevich KS-1; developed as Project 'Sopka'; service designation KS-1 'Komet III'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Kennel' and the US missile code designation AS-1 were assigned; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 20 - Mikoyan-Gurevich prototype I-330; developed as Product SI; service designation MiG-17; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Fresco' was assigned; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 21 - Lavotshkin prototype La-174D; service designation La-15; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Fantail' was assigned; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 22 - Tupolev prototype ANT-64; service designation Tu-6; sometimes also reported as Tu-2R; first seen 1946; Type 23 - Suchoi prototype Su-12; developed as Product RK; piston powered observation aircraft; first seen 1948 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 24 - Yakovlev Yak-14 (service designation); cargo glider; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Mare' was assigned; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 25 - Tsybin Ts-25 (service designation); cargo glider; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Mist' was assigned; sometimes also reported as 'KZ-20'; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 26 - Yakovlev prototype Yak-17V; service designation UTI Yak-17 (or Yak-17UTI); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Magnet' was assigned; first seen 1949 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 27 - Ilyushin Il-28 (service designation); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Butcher' was assigned, which was then changed to 'Beagle'; first seen 1950 May Day Parade, Moscow; Type 28 - Yakovlev Yak-23 (service designation); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Flora' was assigned; first seen ?; Type 29 - Mikoyan-Gurevich prototype I-312; developed as Product ST; service designation UTI MiG-15 (or MiG-15UTI); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Midget' was assigned; first seen ?; Type 30 - Ilyushin Il-28U (service designation); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Mascot' was assigned; (sometimes also reported as 'Tupolev' design); first seen 1951 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 31 - Tupolev prototype Tu-85; heavy bomber; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Barge' was assigned; sometimes also reported as 'Myasishchev M-13'; first seen 1951 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 32 - Mil prototype GM-1; service designation Mi-1; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Hare' was assigned; first seen 1951 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 33 - Beriev Be-8 (service designation); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Mole' was assigned; sometimes reported to have the name 'Mail' assigned (which was the Be-12) and being a jet-engined version of the Be-6 'Madge' (possibly referring to the R-1); first seen 1951 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 34 - Beriev prototype LL-143; service designation Be-6; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Madge' was assigned; first seen 1951 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 35 - Tupolev prototype Tu-81; service designation Tu-14; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Bosun' was assigned; sometimes also reported as Tu-89; first seen 1952 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 36 - Mil Mi-4 (service designation); later the NATO Reporting Name 'Hound' was assigned; first seen 1953 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 37 - Myasishchev prototype 201-M; service designation M-4 (or Mya-4) 'Molot'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Bison' was assigned; sometimes also reported as 'Ilyushin Il-38'; first seen 1954 May Day, Moscow; Type 38 - Yakovlev Yak-24; Product LV; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Horse' was assigned; first seen 1955 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; Type 39 - Tupolev prototype Tu-88; Product N; service designation Tu-16; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Badger' was assigned; first seen 1954 May Day, Moscow; Type 40 - Tupolev prototype Tu-95; service designation Tu-20; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Bear' was assigned; first seen 1955 Soviet Aviation Day, Tushino; SOVIET RD&T AIRCRAFT ==================== When the US military or intelligence community identifies a new aircraft type by means of satellite photography or other sources, the aircraft is assigned a temporary code name, based on the location of the observation, and a sequence letter (from A through Z). Ram series (observed at the Ramenskoye Airfield) - ------------------------------------------------ Air Force and other land based aircraft are often tested and sighted at the Ramenskoye Airfield, south of Moscow (coordinates: 55 33'N and 038 10'E). Ram-A - ? Ram-B - ? Ram-C - ? Ram-D - ? Ram-E - ? Ram-F - ? Ram-G - ? Ram-H - Suchoi T-4 supersonic bomber prototype; service designation Su-100; (or maybe a modified Tupolev Tu-144 supersonic transport); Ram-I - ? Ram-J - Suchoi T-8-1 ground attack aircraft prototype; service designation Su-25; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Frogfoot' was assigned; Ram-K - Suchoi T-10 supersonic fighter prototype; service designation Su-27; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Flanker' was assigned; Ram-L - Mikoyan Product 9 supersonic fighter prototype; service designation MiG-29; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Fulcrum' was assigned; Ram-M - Myasishchev Mya-17 high altitude balloon interceptor; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Mystic' was assigned; Ram-N - ? Ram-O - ? Ram-P - Tupolev Tu-160 supersonic bomber prototype first observed 11/25/1981; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Blackjack' was assigned; Ram-Q - ? Ram-R - Buran space shuttle orbiter prototype; Ram-R1 - Buran prototype in glider configuration; Ram-R2 - Buran prototype with 4 jet engines for atmospheric flight tests; Ram-S - ? Ram-T - Yakovlev Yak-141 supersonic naval VTOL fighter; first reported as 'Yak-41'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Freestyle' was assigned; Other Ram coded aircraft may include specially modified test, training, and electronic warfare versions of series aircraft like the AEW version of the Il-76 ('A-50' 'Mainstay') or the Myasishchev 'VM-T' transporter, and other experimental or prototype aircraft like the Ilyushin Il-102 ground attack prototypes, the Tsybin 'NM-1' strategic reconnaissance plane prototype, and the Mikoyan experimental orbiter 'Spiral' prototype MiG Product 105-11. Tag series (observed at Taganrog) - --------------------------------- Navy and maritime aircraft like amphibians and flying boats are often observed at Taganrog (coordinates: 47 12'N and 038 56'E), where the Beriev OKB is located. Tag-A - ? Tag-B - ? Tag-C - ? Tag-D - Beriev Be-42 'Albatross' amphibian; first reported as 'Be-40'; service designation A-40; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Mermaid' was assigned; Other aircraft, which might have been 'Tag' coded, include several different WIG (Wing-In-Ground-effect) craft like the Bartini (Beriev) VVA-14 (also known as Product M or '14 MIP'), the so called 'Caspian Sea Monster', and the 'Orlan' WIG (also known as 'CASP-B'). SOVIET RD&T MISSILES ==================== When the US military or intelligence community identifies a new missile type by means of satellite photography or other sources, the missile is assigned a temporary code designation, based on the location of the observation, and a sequence number. BL series (observed at the Barnaul Test Range) - ---------------------------------------------- Only one out of at least 10 missiles tested and observed at the Barnaul Test Range (coordinates: 53 13'N to 53 46'N and 083 57'E to 084 40'E), which was also an SS-20 base, is known to me. BL-1 - ? BL-2 - ? BL-3 - ? BL-4 - ? BL-5 - ? BL-6 - ? BL-7 - ? BL-8 - ? BL-9 - ? BL-10 - supersonic ALCM; redesignated 'AS-X-19'; maybe a NATO Reporting Name starting with 'K' was later assigned; EM series (observed at the Emba Test Range) - ------------------------------------------- Neither the location of the Emba Test Range nor the identity of any of the tactical SAMs which are apparently tested there are known to me. EM-1 - ? KY series (observed at the Kapustin Yar Test Range) - --------------------------------------------------- Only two out of at least 12 surface-to-surface missiles tested and observed at the Kapustin Yar Test Range (coordinates: 48 34'N to 48 46'N and 045 59'E to 046 18'E), which was also an SS-20 training center and elimination facility, are known to me. KY-1 - ? KY-2 - ? KY-3 - tactical ballistic missile (SRBM); redesignated 'SS-1_' or maybe 'SS-1 mod x'; it is possible that the NATO Reporting Name 'Improved Scud' was later assigned; KY-4 - ? KY-5 - ? KY-6 - ? KY-7 - ? KY-8 - ? KY-9 - ? KY-10 - ? KY-11 - ? KY-12 - tactical ballistic missile (SRBM); service designation OTR-23 (?); redesignated SS-23; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Spider' was assigned; NE series (observed at the Nenoska Test Range) - ---------------------------------------------- Only one out of at least 4 submarine launched ballistic missiles tested and observed at the Nenoska Test Range (coordinates for the Naval base at the city Nenoska: 64 38'N and 039 11'E), is known to me. NE-01 - ? NE-02 - ? NE-03 - ? NE-04 - strategic nuclear submarine launched ballistic missile; service designation RSM-52 (?); redesignated 'SS-NX-20' and later SS-N-20; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Sturgeon' was assigned; PL series (observed at the Plesetsk Test Range) - ----------------------------------------------- Only two out of at least 5 intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) tested and observed at the Plesetsk Test Range (coordinates for the missile launch center: 62 22'N and 040 28'E), are known to me. PL-1 - ? PL-2 - ? PL-3 - ? PL-4 - mobile nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM); service designation RS-22 (?); redesignated 'SS-24'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Scalpel' was assigned; PL-5 - mobile nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM); service designation RS-12M (?); redesignated 'SS-25'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Sickle' was assigned; SH series (observed at Sary Shagan Test Range) - ---------------------------------------------- Only three out of at least 11 anti-ballistic-missile missiles (ABMs) tested and observed at the Sary Shagan Test Range in Central Asia are known to me. SH-01 - ? SH-02 - ? SH-03 - ? SH-04 - Anti-ballistic-missile missile (ABM); redesignated 'ABM-1b'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Galosh mod 2' was assigned; SH-05 - ? SH-06 - ? SH-07 - ? SH-08 - Anti-ballistic-missile missile (ABM); redesignated 'ABM-3'; later the NATO Reporting Name 'Gazelle' was assigned; SH-09 - ? SH-10 - ? SH-11 - Anti-ballistic-missile missile (ABM); redesignated 'ABM-4' (?); maybe a NATO Reporting Name starting with 'G' was later assigned; [...] SL series (Space Launch vehicles) - --------------------------------- Soviet Space Launch vehicles or systems (including all stages of a rocket, attached booster and a specific payload or upper stage), were given SL designations and a sequence number. SL-1 - ? SL-2 - ? SL-3 - Vostok; (SS-6 'Sapwood' version ?); SL-4 - Soyuz; (SS-6 'Sapwood' version ?); SL-5 - ? SL-6 - Molniya; SL-7 - ? SL-8 - Cosmos; SL-9 - Proton; SL-10 - ? SL-11 - Tsyklon; (2 stages, from Baikonur); ('SS-9 mod. 5' 'Scarp' ?); SL-12 - Proton; (4 stages); SL-13 - Proton; (3 stages, Salyut launcher); SL-14 - Tsyklon; (3 stages, from Plesetsk); ('SS-9 mod. 3' 'Scarp' ?); SL-15 - ? SL-16 - Zenit; SL-17 - Energia; SL-18 - ? Other soviet launch vehicles which may have been SL-x coded include the Voshod (SS-6 'Sapwood' version ?), the N-1 (or G-1 booster) moon rocket, Burlak, Shetal, Volna, Buran and others. Separately from the complete launch system, each stage and booster was also coded with a single capital letter (depicting the basic launcher) followed by a digit (depicting the stage) and sometimes with a mission letter: 'e' for 'escape velocity', 'm' for 'maneuverable' and 'r' for 'reentry'. Examples are the A-1, A-2, and A-3 booster, part of the SS-6 family of missiles. This system was introduced in 1969 by Dr. Charles S. Sheldon. ==== End of File Foreign Codes ==== I have the following questions/requests: 1) Can anyone please verify those designations, or point out errors? 2) Can anyone fill in some of the missing letters in the Ram, Tag, BL, EM, KY, NE, PL, SH, and SL series? 3) Are those series still in use, or were they abandoned when the ex-Soviet Union became more open? I know that the SL-series is still used (in AW&ST etc.) for identification, but are there still new entries added? 4) Are there any good reference books or other materials available? Thank you very much, - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ From: freeman@netcom.com (Jay Reynolds Freeman) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 10:47:01 -0700 Subject: Re: UFOs and Skunk Works Let's compromise: When Lockheed subcontracts with Mars to build components for advanced aerospace vehicles, then UFOs are OK on the list. Right? :-) ------------------------------ From: Lambright Christian P Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 14:34:57 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest and UFO's I do appreciate anyone who takes a moment to express a conscientious opinion about UFOs pro or con. I subscribed to this Digest specifically because I hope it will keep me informed about what aircraft have been built, and give me a place to ask questions. But what generated my initial interest in intelligence work, black projects, etc.. was an interest in UFOs and a realization that as technology improves it's getting harder and harder to know what may constitute the difference between some advanced man-made technology, and what makes a 'genuine' UFO, presuming there is such a thing. I agree that there are some true 'nut-cases' in the ufo field, and damned if they don't bring disrepute to something that I feel strongly about, and I also agree that their type of information has no place here. On the other hand I'd hate to think I couldn't post a message that might deal in some way with UFOs for fear of getting lambasted. I appreciate that most folks realize this isn't the place for such posts, as do I, and have the common sense to know the limits. - --Chris -=>*<=-=->*<=-=>*<=-=>*< chrisl@jove.acs.unt.edu >*<=-=>*<=-=>*<=-=>*<=- Compuserve 71712,472 _________________________ -=-=> *<>* <=-=- ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #299 ********************************* 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).