From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #423 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Monday, 18 September 1995 Volume 05 : Number 423 In this issue: Re: Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 Re: Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 UNSUBSRIBE Re: Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 Re: Olde bizniss 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: Andrew See Date: Sun, 17 Sep 1995 19:51:55 +1000 Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 >The morning paper said Italy refused permission >for F-117 deployment to Aviano. I guess this dispels the rumours that F-117's can operate covertly from carriers. ------------------------------ From: megazone@world.std.com (MegaZone) Date: Sun, 17 Sep 1995 07:07:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 Once upon a time Andrew See shaped the electrons to say... >I guess this dispels the rumours that F-117's can operate covertly from >carriers. Anyone who believed it could never saw it in person. No naval gear at all. - -- megazone@world.std.com 510-735-8583 MegaZone's Waste Of Time Moderator: anime fanfic archive, ftp.std.com /archives/anime-fan-works; rec.arts.anime.stories - Maintainer: Ani Difranco Mailing List - Mail to majordomo@world.std.com with 'subscribe ani-difranco' in the body. ------------------------------ From: RMUNCH3@aol.com Date: Sun, 17 Sep 1995 13:29:41 -0400 Subject: UNSUBSRIBE PLEASE UNSUBSRIBE R MUNCH3 ------------------------------ From: noordelo@pilot.msu.edu (David M. Noordeloos) Date: Sun, 17 Sep 1995 13:41:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 >Skunk Works Digest Sunday, 17 September 1995 Volume 05 : Number 422 > >In this issue: > > F-117 deployment > Re: Does a small space glider exist? > F-117's HF capability ? > >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: czbb062 >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 1995 10:23:17 -0500 (CDT) >Subject: F-117 deployment > >The morning paper said Italy refused permission >for F-117 deployment to Aviano. > >Michael Eisenstadt (czbb062@access.texas.gov) > >http://www.eden.com/~madelon (<-Madelon's Recent Paintings) > > >------------------------------ > >From: David Windle >Date: Sat, 16 Sep 1995 16:17:37 >Subject: Re: Does a small space glider exist? > > >>>I wrote: >>Larry wrote: > >>>As far as a small space glider already existing, my money's on No, because >>>this is an area which is being investigated, that would be redundant if >>>such a vehicle was already "rubber on the ramp." >> >>What better way to verify your predictions that to go fly? A classified >>testbed perhaps? > >Certainly in the Reagan days there would have been funding to support a >testbed...and all the CFD in the world won't give you data as good as >actually flying the thing...A glider would present far fewer problems than >an air breather and as Mary mentioned the HL-20 Lifting body from NASA >LARC. I thought I'd give a little background on it, as I'd guess there are >some here who won't know much about that concept. > >The HL-20 PLS (Personnel Launch System) concept was similar to the Boeing >X-20 Dyna-Soar of the 50s though naturally using updated technology and >carrying more crew. It was to be launched into orbit by a disposable >rocket. Designed as an alternative to the STS the PLS's niche was to >enable the US to get astronauts and small high value payloads into orbit >should the Shuttle be unavailable or too large for the job. Space Station >duties and Sat repair were also part of the mission profile. > >Two designs were considered, the other from JSC being a blunt conical shape >with a parachute landing system..I haven't seen a picture of this..but it >sounds like a conventional capsule. I have a shot of the full scale HL-20 >mock up built by the students and faculty of North Carolina State Univ. >and North Carolina A&T Univ sitting on what looks like a pathed plaza with >trees in the background..looks very pretty..a cross betwwen the HL-10 and >the Shuttle..though being on a plaza looks a little weird ! > >The HL-20 was 29.5'long compared to the STS at 121.5'and had a wingspan of >23.5' compared to the Shuttle's 78.1'. This means that with wings folded >it could fit into the Shuttle's cargo bay. Overall weight was to be >22,000 lb without crew compared to the Shuttle Orbiter's empty weight of >185,000 lb. > >Several models were made for different testing regimes, ranging from a >six foot version for low speed force and movement tests to a six inch >model for hypersonic testing. A thermographic phosphor technique was used >to study heat transfer characteristics in high speed wind tunnel >simulations..(for anyone who doesn't know this technique, it involves >coating the model in phosphor which then glows at varying intensities under >UV light.) > >LARC used a six-degree-freedom-of-movement trajectory analysis technique >along with mass, inertia and aerodynamic properties of the HL-20 to >investigate the re-entry and landing phase of the flight. Tests showed >that under normal conditions the vehicle would be controllable in >hypersonic entry using just 30 lbs of reaction control thruster or less >than 200 lbs of fuel in cases where the vehicle's C of G is offset and >upper atmospheric density and wind profiles are off-nominal. > >A Flight Sim was set up to study the landing phase from 15,000' > >I think that's quite enough from me. If anyone wants more details I'm >happy to post what I have. You can see that the HL-20 was far more than a >paper plane..but whether it, or something like it ever got built is an >open question..I still think niet Larry ! > >On a more mundane subject..does anyone know why I seem to post twice when >I post here..can't find Kean's address to ask > >Maybe it'll be OK this time..the power of +ve thinking and all that.... > >Best > >D > > > > > >------------------------------ > >From: "Dave Batcho, N5JHV" <74603.1052@compuserve.com> >Date: 17 Sep 95 00:21:33 EDT >Subject: F-117's HF capability ? > >Folks -- > >There's been a lot of discussion lately among military communications monitors >about whether or not the F-117's have hf radio capability in addition to normal >VHF/UHF gear. Some say HF antennas would be difficult on a stealth aircraft; >others say not so. I personally logged an HF radio check on HF from callsign >SPEAR 11 a few days ago on one of the Air Force Global Networks. SPEAR is >definitely a call used on UHF by the F-117's - I've heard it many times on UHF >comms out of Holloman. (BTW, I often hear the Brit who is F-117 qualified using >the SPEAR callsign.) > >Do any of you 'SKUNK'ers' know for sure if the F-117 has HF radio capability? > >Thanks, > >Dave B > > >------------------------------ > >End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #422 >********************************* > >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). ------------------------------ From: Michael G Schwern Date: Sat, 16 Sep 1995 19:07:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Olde bizniss Funny GPS should be brought up as the subject came up over dinner with a friend the other day... As far as I understand it, it works like this... Yes, there is only one GPS system, but this system has two levels of accuracy and security, military and civilian. The the civi GPS signal can be accessed by anyone with a GPS receiver and its accuracy is usually just as good as the mil GPS. The military GPS signal requires a key-code which a soldier in the field puts into his GPS reciever and gets the famed 'down-to-the-foot' accuracy of the GPS. During peace-time civ and mil GPS accuracy are nearly the same. Now, in a theater of war, such as the Iraq/Kwait area during the Gulf war, the accuracy of the civilian GPS signal will be degraded, anywhere from a few yards to a few kilometers (such as when the fighting began,) to prevent an enemy from using the civGPS. On a military GPS receiver there are, I believe, two or three knobs and a big "dump" button which the soldier is supposed to press if capture seems imminent. This erased the military pass-key, thus the receiver can't get the milGPS signal anymore. So our enemy soldier picks up the little box, thinking he's got a wonderful piece of yankee hardware, but without the pass-key he can only tune into the degraded civGPS signal so it tells him "Yep, you're in the desert." And should the soldier panic, hit the dump button and not get captured... well, he still has a piece of partically operational hardware which he can get re-encoded later... sure beats having to put a 9mm round into the thing to prevent capture. So, yeah, there's only one GPS system, but there's two flavors of signals. ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #423 ********************************* 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).