From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #379 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Wednesday, 9 August 1995 Volume 05 : Number 379 In this issue: Re: Aera rule Av Week, Aug 7, ER-2 article B-2 QC Re: RPV as a Delivery System 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: Charles_E._Smith.wbst200@xerox.com Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 03:45:48 PDT Subject: Re: Aera rule The Area Rule was the brainchild of Richard Whitcomb. It simply states: The area of any cross section of an aircraft perpendicular to the relative wind should be constant along along the aircraft. This includes the wings, by the way. Since wings are thicker in the middle the fuselage must neck down to compensate- thus, the "Coke bottle" fuselage was born. The area rule was popular in the late 50`s and 60`s, but with the performance of fans, wich lend themselves to afterburning so well, the trick now is to use the intakes to control area. Notice how around 1957 jet intakes moved from the front to the sides of high speed aircraft. (Except for Soviet A/C, since they never really caught on!) Sorry to have been gone for a couple off weeks. I took a few days off and then was pulled out west for a while. Can`t say where I was, but it was LOUD! Chuck Smith "Aerospace Engineer to the Stars" ------------------------------ From: jstone@iglou.com (John Stone) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 07:34:13 -0500 Subject: Av Week, Aug 7, ER-2 article Hi, Just a quick question on the NASA ER-2 article that was in the current Av Week, is this similiar to the C-Span III U-2s that the USAF is flying? Does anyone have any info on the C-Span III U-2s? Thanks in advance. John Stone ------------------------------ From: "Terry Colvin" Date: Tue, 08 Aug 95 12:21:44 EST Subject: B-2 QC :REPORT GIVES B-2 CRITICS AMMO WASHINGTON -- B-2 Stealth bombers are coming off the assembly line late and with major flaws in radar-evading and low-flying technology, according to a new government report. A final version of the General Accounting Office report was circulated on Capitol Hill monday, weeks after leaked copies of a draft version of the report generated news reports about problems with the bat-winged bomber. Despite counter-arguments from the Pentagon, the final report cites significant problems with the plane: a radar-evading profile that fails to meet Air Force specifications, technologies for low-flying missions that can't distinguish rain from mountainsides and repeated late deliveries. "After nine years of producing and assembling aircraft, Northrop Grumman, the prime contractor, continues to experience difficulties in delivering B-2s that can meet Air Force operational requirements," wrote Louis J. Rodrigues, a GAO defense analyst. Production of 20 B-2s is estimated to cost $44.4 billion, including research and development. Reports of problems with the plane take on added importance this summer as Congress debates whether to invest in expanding the B-2 fleet beyond 20 planes. Both Northrop Grumman Corp., which builds the B-2 in Southern California, and the Pentagon dispute the thrust of the GAO report. They maintain that the problems will be ironed out in a forthcoming upgrade intended to lower the radar "signature" and enable the plane to conduct conventional attack missions with highly accurate weapons. The Air Force already has conducted tests indicating the improved B-2s will have a significantly better radar-evading characteristics, the Pentagon argued. With further testing and improvement, the terrain-following technology in the plane will enable B-2s to fly low-level missions in rainy conditions. Late deliveries, the Pentagon said, indicates the emphasis placed on assuring that the planes meet performance requirements. ------------------------------ From: fmarkus@pipeline.com (Frank Markus) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 20:56:40 -0400 Subject: Re: RPV as a Delivery System On Mon, 07 Aug 1995, 'RHOEFELM ' wrote: >Nasty, Nasty Idea: Take your long endurance, high altitude stealthy unmanned >platform and use it to deliver a biological weapon (Anthrax spores, a tailored >virus, etc). Now any 3rd world fanatic can deliver death and destruction >worldwide. I guess these RPVs will have to be controlled to prevent >proliferation, just like nukes and chemical weapons ... Dumb question but ... how far removed are RPVs from advanced model airplanes? I assume that there is relatively little magic in the airframe (assuming that one does not need full-blown stealth technology.) GPS->computer interfaces are readily available. I'm not sure how much gee-whiz is required for the engine in order to get useful altitude and range. - -- Frank Markus ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #379 ********************************* 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).