From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #441 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Skunk Works Digest Sunday, 1 October 1995 Volume 05 : Number 441 In this issue: Chickens and Cannons Revoke the 1st Amendment: It's Off-Topic stealth and paint... Re: Terry's FWDs 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: dsm@iti-oh.com (dsm@iti-oh.com) Date: Sat, 30 Sep 1995 07:30:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Chickens and Cannons >> From: "Terry Colvin" >> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 95 18:15:56 EST >> Subject: chickens and cannons >> >> ______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________ >> Subject: chickens and cannons >> Author: Steve Nasypany at smtp-fhu >> Date: 25/9/1995 8:52 PM >> >> When I was studying Aero engineering in the mid-80's, the >> AF flight director for F-16 AMRAAM tests visited our >> campus. One of his films was the canopy testing for the >> 16, in which live (although drugged) chickens or turkeys in >> sacks where shot by a cannon into the windscreen. >> Yup, I think what got us onto the chickens, was if they were FROZEN. Which I have since discovered that the FAA specs as well as the MIL specs dictate that UNFROZEN be used. And for the most part, the seven herbs and spices are not important either. Makes sense since most FOD is usually alive at the time of engine in(di)gestion. Of course drugging them is better than the pre-cannon days when live fowl were tunred loose in the test cell only to "work" their way towards the inlet. At least drugging them or scooping them freshly from the pavement (or dashboard) is a bit more human. Lastly on the canopy tests, I was told by a test engineer formerly of GenDyn that the birds were put in a plastic bag then targeted at the bubbles. "debris" wasn't important in those tests. Unlike engine tests. Have a good lunch! Dan ------------------------------ From: wizard@friday.houston.net Date: Sat, 30 Sep 1995 08:07:19 -0600 Subject: Revoke the 1st Amendment: It's Off-Topic I think it is wrong to want to censor someone else's opinions and expressions, if they are not obscene, or soliciting magazine subscriptions, etc. You, Kean, have a duty and responsibility to keep that type of material out of this group. However, when the topics go somewhere other than the perpetual "I saw doughnuts on a rope," or "Aurora To Be Shown During SuperBowl Halftime," I don't mind and why should anyone else, provided the topics stay within the confines of of topical advanced engineering concepts. I do not think what is topical and what is not is something for one person to decide. I think everyone would let someone who posted last weeks sports scores know that they were wasting bandwidth. If others, do not want to read what Terry Colvin posts, then, they can by-pass what he has written. I feel sorry for those who would want to censor someone else's thoughts and words (unless of course it falls inside the range of Title 18, USC, Sec. 241). ------------------------------ From: "I am the NRA." Date: Sat, 30 Sep 95 10:38:39 PDT Subject: stealth and paint... >>Forwarded from the SPACE TECH list: >>On the Blackbird, the paint had to be black not only for "stealthy" >>reasons, but also because black is the most efficient color for radiating >>heat. uhmmmmmm. Given: The entire A/c is just below red heat, with bits of it above, It Ain't Stealthy on the IR. It may be stealthy in the visible, it may be stealthy in the microwave. But it will stand out like a sore thumb on an IR scan. ANY a/c at high mach will. regards dwp ------------------------------ From: Pionusman@aol.com Date: Sat, 30 Sep 1995 23:21:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Terry's FWDs I'm not sure what I think about Terry's FWDs, because I never bother to look at who wrote it. If you don't want to read his FWDs, just skip them. It may be interesting to some people, so let him FWD. My opinion. ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #441 ********************************* 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).