From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #625 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: Skunk Works Digest Friday, 23 February 1996 Volume 05 : Number 625 In this issue: Books on MiG Bureau Re: Books on MiG Bureau Re: Books on MiG Bureau Re: Project Yahudi, UK yehudi/cdl Re; New tech etc & Yehudi lights ... R/C article on the net by me (fwd) nonsense Only a test A-12/SR71 engine related characteristics NASA, McDonnell Douglas to Unveil X-36 (fwd) SR-71 Ops patents New Site from NIC Scount Report re: Daylight Stealth Using Floodlamps 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: David Lednicer Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 09:11:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Books on MiG Bureau I have both the Peter Butowski (sp?)/Jay Miller book and the Beleakov (sp?) book. The former has more operational history, has more pictures and is more enertaining, but if developmental history and raw, previously unknown facts are what you are after, the second book is better. The second book is also a little secretive, even in its openess. For example,the author gives details about a special version of the MiG-19, for intercepting U-2s, but gives no picture or drawing of it. I also just bought a copy of "Roads to Space; An Oral History of the Soviet Space Program". This book is an excellent, insider's history of this program, told by the people who actually participated in it. Besides the stories of hardship and accomplishments, it gives a perspective on the fears we (the US) aroused by having both Atomic weapons and most of the German rocket experts. It turns out that the Soviets were able to find very few V-2s in Germany - we got to them first - - and we also got most of the German rocket scientists. The book also has some good humorous stories. My only criticism is that the narratives overlap quite a bit and being narratives, they are a bit jumpy. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- David Lednicer | "Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics" Analytical Methods, Inc. | email: dave@amiwest.com 2133 152nd Ave NE | tel: (206) 643-9090 Redmond, WA 98052 USA | fax: (206) 746-1299 ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 04:16:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Books on MiG Bureau On Mon, 19 Feb 1996, David Lednicer wrote: > perspective on the fears we (the US) aroused by having both Atomic > weapons and most of the German rocket experts. It turns out that the > Soviets were able to find very few V-2s in Germany - we got to them first > - and we also got most of the German rocket scientists. The book also > has some good humorous stories. My only criticism is that the narratives > overlap quite a bit and being narratives, they are a bit jumpy. > We have the best German rocket experts that is true... but why in the early space race our rockets was blowing out and the Soviet was doing OK... The answer turns out again with the "theory of relativity" and space-time discontinuos... Before, we used to believe that the time is straight at a straight space... but our rockets was blowing out because this was wrong. Finally, we pay a Soviet spy to find the answer... The trajectory of our rockets must be parabolic, because Earth is moving, time and space is not straight anymore when you going up. A very interesting phenomeno is when the Astronauts up there in space have to shave less than when he is in Earth... Does this mean that his time is slower than the Earth time??? Or only a biophysical phenomenon.... May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 04:37:10 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Books on MiG Bureau On Tue, 20 Feb 1996, Wei-Jen Su wrote: > because this was wrong. Finally, we pay a Soviet spy to find the answer... ^^^^^^^^^^ I mean we pay a Soviet Eng. that work on the rocket technology. Sorry about the mistake, if you see the time that I wrote is (4:30 am) you will know that I am a little crazy... May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu ------------------------------ From: Paul Tennant Smith ITS95 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 11:20:21 +0000 Subject: Re: Project Yahudi, UK JOHN SZALAY wrote about the use of spotlights to reduce the visibility of aircraft and tanks. To the best of my knowledge the first attempts were British experiments in the 1930s on the use of bright spot lamps in tanks to dazzle enemy gunners at night. This idea led to the development of the Canal Defense Light (CDL) turret which was built on the Matilda and later M3 Grant chassis. The light beam was fitted with a device that caused it to flicker and supposedly increase the dazzle effect. How did it work in combat? It was considered so secret and potent that it was never used in its original role. During the Rhine Crossings in 1945 however it was used as a searchlight. PTS ptsmith@cs.strath.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: "I am the NRA." Date: Tue, 20 Feb 96 10:02:35 EST Subject: yehudi/cdl [this is close enough to edge of charter, i fell a tad nervous, but it WAS black (and may still be, in part, so...] > JOHN SZALAY wrote about the use of spotlights to >reduce the visibility of aircraft and tanks. To the best of my knowledge the >first attempts were British experiments in the 1930s on the use of bright spot >lamps in tanks to dazzle enemy gunners at night. This idea led to the >development of the Canal Defense Light (CDL) turret which was built on the >Matilda and later M3 Grant chassis. The light beam was fitted with a device >that caused it to flicker and supposedly increase the dazzle effect. ummmmmm. Near as i have been able to undestand there are two distinct things: Yehudi, to match object 'darkness' to background lightness and 'CDL' effect. (for lack of a better name. The version i heard on CDL was that the flicker was matched to brainwave rates. [strict_rules_of_science folk, stay your hands, please.] This was tested against a/c and, reportedly almost caused loss of some a/c when pilots were disoriented. Considering the _documented_ effects of certain flash rates on epileptics the idea is not totally implausible. It would be REAL interesting to find out if the CDL/brain wave link was real, and if so, whether any further work was possible, or if it was just 'psychobabble' and never really worked. ['lost inventions' are legendary, and many rightly so. However consider that the TV guided bomb was LIVE AND IN ACTION at the end of WWII, only to be (seemingly) 'forgotten', until resurrected with great hoorah ca VN.] regards dwp ------------------------------ From: BROWN A <92913938@mmu.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 15:52:41 GMT Subject: Re; New tech etc & Yehudi lights I know it's off charted, but a little more info on the BM-21 rockets as used in the laser test. Yep, they're 122mm, and have a max range of about 30km. They come in two versions, standard and extended range, and have HE, smoke and chemical warheads. BM-21 is the industrial designation, the troops always call them "Grad" rockets, as it avoids confusion between them and 122mm guns (Read "Inside The Soviet Army" by Viktor Suvurov if you want the full story) Yes they were used in 'Nam, fired from lengths of pipe tied to a basic wooden tripod, although the standard launcher is a 40-tube truck-mount. A lightweight truck-mount also exists for the paras, which has about 16-20 tubes. I thought you might like to hear about an interesting story concerning the RAF sub-hunters, which goes to show how a little individual initiative can cause chaos for an opponant. At one point, not long after the RAF switched from metric to centimetric radar for sub-hunting, one of the planes was shot down by a U-boat which decided to fight it out on the surface. The U-boat picked up the crew, and took them back to base. When they were being interrogated, they were asked how they had found the U-boat. The Germans already had a detector, Naxos, for the metric radar, but several U-boats had reported attacks when no metric signals had been detected. The interrogators said to one of the crew "We know you used to use radar to find us, as we have a detector for it, but how do you find us now?" Not wanting to compromise the secret of centimetric radar, said crew member replied "Yes we know about your detector, in fact thats how we find you. It emmits a signal we can home in on." The Germans went away and examined a Naxos device and, sure enough, found a faint radiated signal! As a result, they spent about six months desperately trying to find a way of eliminating this signal, not realising the real reason was really a switch in frequency of the radars. They only found out the truth when bombers started being shot down carrying H2S, and realised that the RAF now had centimetric radar. I don't know if he ever did get anything, but if it was up to me, that guy would have got a medal for initiative. Adrian Brown (92913938@mmu.ac.uk) F-16 Bumper sticker; Hi-ho, hi-ho, oh ****, BINGO! ------------------------------ From: Mr.Echevarria@tube3.com Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 15:54:57 -0800 Subject: ... "The Deadly Game of Mine Roulette" - World Press Review/March 1996 [...] Last October, representatives of 84 nations met in Geneva to review the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, an anodyne description for such gems of military technology as all-plastic, undetectable land mines and laser weapons that cause instant blindness. After three weeks, the conference was suspended without any definitive agreement having been reached on land mines. [However,] the conference did adopt a protocol banning the use of weapons "specifically designed to blind." Such lasers are not part of the world's armories, but there are an estimated 100 million land mines scattered around the world. [...] The conference will reconvene in April. ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 02:18:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: R/C article on the net by me (fwd) AIAA chapter in Polytechnic University (NYC) is trying to put together R/C airshow. Everyone is invited. You can come as spectator (date and place will be posted later) or bring your model and participate in the show. Right now we have only a few people signed up to participate, so we are looking for more. Any kind of R/C flying model is welcome (helis, ducted fans, props, etc). For participants we will be providing lunch. We will rent an airfield and we will take care of traffic and frequency control. As it stands now we can not provide fuel, as we don't have money in the budget. We are trying to raise some money, so if we can we will ether provide fuel or divide whatever money we have left between participants. If you are interested send your name, email, phone number, address and model type to: igor@robo2.poly.edu We are also looking for sponsors, if your company or you are interested, please let me know at the above email. If you have any pointers on hosting such event please don't hesitate to respond. We are doing this to promote aeronautics among people. We expect to have some media coverage, if we can gather group big enough. P.S. I apologize for the previous post, which got messed up. =============================== <<<<>>> =============================== Fight to fly. Fly to fight. Fight to win. \ / -=< Igor "WildCat" Cherepinsky >=- \/ \/ igor@robo2.poly.edu __________/_\ /_\_________ " DC-10 ? Sure I can fly it, it has wings doesn't it ?! " =============================================================================== ------------------------------ From: Charles_E._Smith.wbst200@xerox.com Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 05:26:34 PST Subject: nonsense One of my fellow pilot/engineer buddies was asking about my latest toy. This was my reply. Maybe some of you will like it....... The Ranger 492 Cherokee has, by my calculations, an aspect ratio of about 0.34- but even so, it will stay up with a minimum of pilot intervention for indefinite periods without power. It is a Kevlar and glass construction with foam coring in certain areas. The 200 horse engine turns a 3-blade, 17 inch propeller (pusher). The top airspeed (measured with a pitot -really!) is 76 mph (TAS). ( One intersting aside is that the exhaust gasses from the combustion chambers are expelled through the propeller hub. This has three benefits. First, the thrust is increased. Second, the acoustic and infrared signiatures are masked, and last, special ports on the propeller hub allow exhaust gasses to to be expelled as a jet over the blades- providing boundary layer control for the blades. These are refered to as "acceleration slots.") The Thrust Specific Fuel Consumption is less than outstanding. At high-speed cruise the 492 consumes about 1 gallon of 92 octane fuel per mile. The TSFC can be increased greatly when it is combined with the trailer/tow vehicle. The 492 can also be operated in "stealth mode". The 200 Hp airbreathing powerplant can be shut down. A 54 lb thrust electric motor/propeller system can be employed( tractor config). BOTH powerplants feature vectored-thrust , used as the primary control system for the 492. The electric powerplant uses its thrust-vectoring capability as part of an open-loop control system that uses a 12 satellite Global Positioning System receiver. The technology of the "weapons system" is a side scanning "acoustic radar" which gives the pilot not only the traditional "look-down, shoot-down" capability, but the ability to see sideways. This system can be used for both navigation and target identification. All other details are classifed. Chuck ------------------------------ From: David Lednicer Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 11:03:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Only a test This is a test of the of this group's listserve system, at the owner's request. If you too have been experiencing listserve wierdness, please let Skunk-Works-Digest-Owner@mail.orst.edu know about it. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- David Lednicer | "Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics" Analytical Methods, Inc. | email: dave@amiwest.com 2133 152nd Ave NE | tel: (206) 643-9090 Redmond, WA 98052 USA | fax: (206) 746-1299 ------------------------------ From: Michael Chappell Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 10:59:00 +-1100 Subject: A-12/SR71 engine related characteristics Hi everyone! I have just added myself to this mailing list as I am interested in the = 'skunk-works' particularly the A-12/SR71 blackbird. I would like some information concerning the way in which high speed = thrust is produced by the SR71 engines. I have read that at high mach = values only about 20% of total output is produced by the J58 engine = itself. The bulk of the thrust is produced by the intake and exhaust. = Does anyone know how this works? Also what are the current topics being discussed? Thanks in anticipation, Michael - mickyc@ozemail.com.au ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 01:03:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: NASA, McDonnell Douglas to Unveil X-36 (fwd) - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 16:16:46 -0500 From: NASA HQ Public Affairs Office To: press-release-edu2@mercury.hq.nasa.gov Subject: NASA, McDonnell Douglas to Unveil X-36 Don Nolan-Proxmire Headquarters, Washington, DC February 22, 1996 (Phone: 202/358-1983) Michael Marlaire Ames Research Center, Mountain View, CA (Phone: 415/604-4190) RELEASE: 96-36 NASA, MCDONNELL DOUGLAS TO UNVEIL X-36 NASA and the McDonnell Douglas Corporation (MDC) have announced a joint research program for a subscale vehicle, designated the X-36, that will demonstrate breakthrough technologies for future tailless fighters. The upcoming flight tests of the X-36, a remotely piloted tailless research aircraft, will demonstrate the feasibility for future tailless fighters that can achieve agility levels superior to today's fighters. The X-36 aircraft will be unveiled to the public for the first time in a joint NASA/MDC roll out ceremony to be held at MDC facilities in St. Louis, MO on March 19. Following this ceremony, the aircraft will be shipped to NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA, to prepare for its first flight this summer. "NASA's mission in aeronautics is to work together with U.S. industry, the Department of Defense, and universities to continually produce the breakthroughs in technology that must be achieved if we are to maintain our world leadership in civil and military aviation," said NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin. "This cooperative program between NASA and the McDonnell Douglas Corporation is an excellent example of the new way in which NASA is striving for a 'better, cheaper, faster' approach to fulfilling its mission," Goldin said. "NASA research in aerodynamics, flight controls and propulsion continues to provide design options and tools for designers of future fighter aircraft," said NASAUs X-36 Program Manager, Dr. Larry Birckelbaw of NASA's Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. "The X-36 technologies, which allow the reduction or removal of vertical tails, will reduce the weight, increase the range and improve the survivability of tomorrow's fighters," Birckelbaw said. The X-36 flight test program will establish the confidence to incorporate these technologies in future piloted vehicles. Coordinated research has been underway within each of the four NASA aeronautics centers and DOD labs since the 1980s to evaluate the ability to direct the engine thrust in multiple directions. Recent flight tests conducted using NASA's F-18 High Angle of Attack Research Vehicle (HARV), the United States Air Force Multi-Axis Thrust Vectoring F-16 and the DOD/German Ministry of Defense X-31 research aircraft have all demonstrated that thrust vectoring can provide significant improvements in both the agility and control of fighter aircraft. McDonnell Douglas Corporation, St. Louis, MO, is responsible for the detailed design and fabrication of the two X-36 aircraft. "The X-36 program is an entirely new, more efficient approach to maturing advanced technologies," said John Capellupo, President, McDonnell Douglas Aerospace. "We wanted to team with NASA to demonstrate our new Phantom Works capability for developing new products in less time and at significantly lower costs. We were able to incorporate breakthroughs in fabrication, tooling, and assembly to achieve these savings," Capellupo said. MDC has been working in partnership with Ames Research Center since 1989 and first proposed the concept of using a subscale aircraft to demonstrate the feasibility for a future tailless fighter in early 1993. "Affordability was a key issue in selecting a subscale vehicle. At 28 percent scale we will be able to demonstrate all of the key controls integration technologies at a fraction of the cost of a full scale, piloted aircraft," said MDC X-36 Program Manager Dave Manley. NASA and MDC agreed to a roughly 50/50 cost share arrangement in early 1994 to design, build and flight test the two X-36 research aircraft. Under this arrangement, Ames is responsible for the continued development of the critical technologies and the flight test activities and MDC is responsible for the fabrication. The combined program cost for the development, fabrication and flight testing of the two aircraft is approximately $17 million. Imagery of the new research vehicle will be available on the day of roll out. - end- In the previous forward message from NASA they mention about Phantom Works from McDonald Douglas. Does anyone have any information about it? This is like a team similar to Skunk Works? May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu ------------------------------ From: tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com (Tom Robison) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 10:20:19 +0500 Subject: SR-71 Ops In a previous lifetime, I spent about a year and a half on Guam, at Andersen AFB, which of course was North Field during WWII. The other WWII base, Northwest Field, was allegedly "abandoned". But there was obviously some activity going on there, even in the 1970's, as we could see lights on the horizon obviously coming from that area. We drove up there once, but could see nothing but dense jungle through an obviously new and well kept chain link fence. I was told that the base was sometimes used to recover and/or launch SR-71's, to/from where? Does anyone know the facts of this? Was this "abandoned" bomber base used for SR-71 ops? Tom in Indiana tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com or TCRobi0648@aol.com ' (oo) - -------oOOO-()-OOOo-------- ------------------------------ From: "I am the NRA." Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 13:11:44 EST Subject: patents ...welcome to America... As noted, similar rules apply in OTHER countries. ...Cold War is Over.... Yeah. Suggest reviewing the list of Saddam Hussein like folk who might be interested in new tech. As others have noted there are valid reasons for at least some of these restrictions. >Lets face it, the microprocessor is the most important technology >to be developed in many years, but the gov doesn`t regulate them. I deg to biffer. Took 'a certain well known 'puter co' quite a while to get their uP cleared for export. There is (last i looked) a performance threshold. >Usually when a technology is "dark" its because it really doesn`t >work (see stealth!) and someone`s got a juicy contract. Last i knew, stealth works. (B1-mumble crossection is not real relavant as that was a 'band aid' job on an existing design. AND, tactically a low 'incoming' high 'leaving' crosssection is not a bad tradeoff esp for B1, as once its unloaded, its 'wings back, burners on and catch_me_who_can.) regards dwp ------------------------------ From: fmarkus@pipeline.com (Frank Markus) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 20:10:35 -0500 Subject: New Site from NIC Scount Report Loyola College (Baltimore) Department of Political Science offers the Strategic Intelligence page on the Web. This page consists of pointers to U.S. intelligence community sites, military intelligence sites, organizational sites related to strategic intelligence, recent documents related to strategic intelligence, and a selected list of intelligence related journals, articles, and papers. Included are connections to the CIA, FBI, Treasury Department, ATF, Secret Service, selected declassified intelligence satellite photographs (CORONA), IntelWeb, and selected articles from issues of Covert Action Quarterly, among others. http://www.loyola.edu/dept/politics/intel.html ------------------------------ From: Wyatt Earp Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 20:31:44 -0800 Subject: re: Daylight Stealth Using Floodlamps At 03:09 AM 2/19/96 -0800, John Burtenshaw >>Subj: re: Daylight Stealth Using Floodlamps >> >>>This was first pioneered by the Germans in WWII. >> hmmmmmm. The ONLY refs i have seen (including a rather curious >> translation from the German on 'secret weapons') describe this as >> a UK development, code named 'project yehudi' (spelling optional...) >> They found that asw ac were being spotted by eye because they were >> dark against a daylight sky. By ADDING light the contrast diapeared, >> (I have had a chance to play with summat similar, on a lab scale, the >> effect is VERY striking.... > >Yep it was British. The RAF fitted high-powered lamps on the nose and >leading edge of their U-Boat hunters (Sunderland flying boats etc). During >an attack one of the crew would control the brightness of the lamps so that >the aircraft would blend in with the sky. It appears that the US copied the >idea for their sub hunters in the Pacific, but I've got little info on that. How did they decide on the proper brightness setting for the lamps? Did they use a feedback system, or rely on the skill and experience of the lamp operator? If I were to set up such a stealth system, (as an experiment) I would think it would be fairly easy to get such a system working if I had an observer posted near the intended party from you wish to hide. If said person was in radio contact he could give feedback on the brightness of your lamps. If one were to need a system that would 'fly blind', with no observer to provide feedback, it would require extensive training one the part of the lamp operator. (BTW what is the 'lamp operators' real title?) This training would most likely involve many exercises involving a feedback situation with an observer. Sounds like a lot of work too me, but the military has a tradition a being good at hard work! >Another aspect of the RAF's UP-Boat killers were their microwave radars. I >recently attended a conference on radar at which a real old-timer spoke >about how he developed a system so that the microwave radar fitted on the >RAF sub hunters would give the appearance of the aircraft going in the >opposite direction. The UP-Boat would sit on the surface recharging its >batteries in the safe knowledge that it had not been seen, then -POW!!- the >RAF would bomb it. Fascinating stuff. Yes, very fascinating! Does anyone have any references where I can read more about this? Thanks, Wyatt ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #625 ********************************* 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).