From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #654 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: Skunk Works Digest Monday, 29 April 1996 Volume 05 : Number 654 In this issue: Chicken Guns Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 Re: AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - SR-71 Flights Suspended Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 Janet crash Re: Re- AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - Re: AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - SR-71 Flights Suspended Re: U2 and Cuba Re: LASRE Ron Brown's CT43 - not a "Janet" crash Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 Code One - April 1996 Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. SR-71 & LASRE Re: Ron Brown's CT43 - not a "Janet" crash Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. 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: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 12:05:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Chicken Guns > Can anyone tell me where to find footage of a 'chicken gun' in action >I would love to see some of this footage, sounds like a cool job to do! You can get the same effect by watching reruns of the old David Letterman show, before he switched networks. He used to regularly smash watermelons, throw paint bombs, etc. Alternatively, you can go buy a roasting chicken at Safeway and drop it from the top of a real tall building. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mary Shafer Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:18:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 I too aam surprised that binaries are acceptable. I'd like to propose that the rules be changed to make them unacceptable. I read this list at home, paying by the minute, and I certainly don't want to pay for binaries that I haven't requested and don't have the tools to view. They're just so much noise to me. First UFOs, now binaries. What next? Make Money Fast and Save Money on Magazines? 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 25 Apr 1996, Alun Whittaker wrote: > Subject: Time:10:01 > OFFICE MEMO Re- Darkstar movie part 4 Date:4/25/96 > > OK, now I've been straightened out by both the moderator > and the originator of the message. Since I don 't know how > much of this 3-way conversation has appeared on the list > itself, let me summarize what I've learned: > > * It _IS_ acceptable to include multiple unsolicited > binaries in messages to this discussion list. > > * It _IS_NOT_ acceptable to point out that the only > difference between a list digest loaded with > multiple unsolicited binaries and a mail bomb is > the intent of the sender. > > In my quaint, old-fashioned way, I'd believed it to be > discourteous to fill people's mailboxes with large > amounts of data they hadn't asked for and/or couldn't > use... > -------------------------------------------- > Is it a mail bomb? > > Is it spam? > > No, its the "285mb Quicktime movie of Darkstar > taking off. Courtesy Dept.of Defence" file > that you've always needed but never knew! > -------------------------------------------- > For years, people have regularly posted references on this > list to books, news groups, ftp sites, websites, or video > programs that other people _MAY_ want to check out to > find pictures and movies. To me, this has always seemed > to be a most economical and resource-considerate procedure > and one which needed no improvement. > > It seems I was wrong. Therefore, I make an earnest apology > to all concerned. > > ALUN W.... > > PS But the first time a GIF of little green (or gray) > men or a splattered frozen chicken appears in > my morning e-mail, I'm outa'here! > > > > ------------------------------ From: egunter@connecti.com Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:38:17 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - SR-71 Flights Suspended This is all so surprising to me!!! Bush & Reagan received such OUTSTANDING support and encouragement from Congress during their tenures. Maybe a function of our two party system is to have one party keep the other honest & allow for two views to be presented. But then again, maybe not. Hosanna to the King. No dissidents allowed. ( Does this mean that Viet Nam protesters were wrong to criticize the Commander in Chief at the time??) Now, if this is going to become a political forum, I'd like to have my name removed from the list. Thanks for your time. At 06:26 PM 4/25/96, you wrote: > >Alas, the day is saved. The "congressional majority," as yet, is >not claiming a loss and the budget has been agreed upon. >Strangely, in his press conference today, President Clinton could >not answer a reporters question, "Do you know what happened to >change their minds?" He said he did not, but that he would have >been happy with what they agreed on today, seven months ago. > >You inability to understand what I am driving at might best be >understood in an article from the NY Times, Wednesday, April 24, >1996, titled U.S. Defends Its Decision on Bosnia Arms Shipments, pg >4 "...their (Republicans) accusations represent partisan politics >at its worst." And, what was objected to, "Congress is told little >about how the policy was decided." Not all was forthcoming. > >As for "life threatening consequences," use your imagination. >Maybe you've read something about the U2 and Cuba? What does that >have to do with today? Hot spots that could seriously erupt without >warning include: Pakistan/India, Bosnia, China/Taiwan, >Russia/Checken, Libia with bio/chem weapons, Irael/Lebanon-Syria, >and Iraq to mention a few. > >Despite the upcoming election, the world continues to turn and it >might be nice if the guy in charge could get a little support. > >Byron > > >> >>I'm not really sure what you're driving at here. The 1996 defense budget did >>become law in December (although it passed into law unsigned by the >>president). "Executive privilege, " has not been invoked in the case of the >>Iranian arms shipments to the Bosnian Muslims. In fact, the administration >>has been surprisingly forthcoming about the details, which some members of >>Congress (including Sen. Bob Dole) have been aware of it since January >>1995. The only new revelations are that certain State officials may have >>been more actively intervening with Croatia than previously believed. >> >>Most agree that it was the "congressional majority" that were the losers in >>the budget fight of 1996, and are actively looking for ways to regroup. The >>budget conference has adopted a new, low-key approach. It would be unlikely >>Congressional Republicans would want to call attention to the five >>appropriations bills which have not been signed, since a number of polls >>(Republican and Democrat) indicate Americans blame Republicans for the >>stalemate. >> >>The only "life-threatening" circumstances I can recall in recent memory that >>could possibly relate to all this is Sen. Jesse Helms' remarks that Clinton >>had better not venture down to North Carolina, because there are a lot of >>pissed off service members there. Yeeehawwww! >> >> --Duncan Murrell >> ---------- >>From: skunk-works-owner >>To: skunk-works >>Subject: Re: AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - SR-71 Flights Suspended >>Date: Tuesday, April 23, 1996 7:30PM >> >> >>Hate to suggest this, but seems any chance the congressional >>majority gets to ding their upcoming presidential opponent, and >>remind the public the budget has not been signed, they take it. This >>seems especially true when they can usurp his executive role as >>commander-in-chief, ordinarily out of reach, and more so with his >>recent "executive privilege" decision which was >>vehemently criticized regarding the details of Iranian arms >>shipments to Bosnia. It amounts to nothing more than political >>infighting, comparable to, "oh yea, well then that take this!" Hope >>like hell it doesnt have life threatening consequences down the >>road. >> >>Byron >> >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------ From: freeman@netcom.com (Jay Reynolds Freeman) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 13:27:16 -0700 Subject: Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 > I'd like to propose that the rules be changed to make [binaries] > unacceptable. [...] They're just so much noise to me. I agree. -- Jay Freeman ------------------------------ From: kelleher@consilium.com (John Kelleher) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 14:54:27 -0700 Subject: Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 Mary Shafer wrote: >I too aam surprised that binaries are acceptable. I'd like to propose >that the rules be changed to make them unacceptable. Agreed. In the days before web pages and generally accessible ftp sites this might have been okay. Today, however, it would be better to set a standard by which people give a brief description of the image and the respective URL. John Kelleher ------------------------------ From: ConsLaw@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 18:50:14 -0400 Subject: Janet crash I am surprised no one else posted this to the list first. Newsweek this week says that the 737 carrying Ron Brown was one of the "Janet" planes that ferry the workers to and from Groom Lake. Steve Hofer Conslaw@aol.com ------------------------------ From: chosa@chosa.win.net (Byron Weber) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 18:53:11 Subject: Re: Re- AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - >From: chosa@chosa.win.net (Byron Weber) >>> Hate to suggest this, but seems any chance the congressional >>> majority gets to ding their upcoming presidential opponent, and >>> remind the public the budget has not been signed, they take it. > >Looks more like the airforce taking advantage of a congressional >SNAFU to shutdown a program it never wanted. >ALUN WHITTAKER >alun@ia-us.com > > The answer could be just that simple. It's no long state of the art and some even speculate it's a cover. They had to be coaxed by Lockheed to bring it back, cost cutting promises and the like. So, the SR71 may no longer be the standard, but it gave me the opportunity to ferret out a weasel. Byron ------------------------------ From: chosa@chosa.win.net (Byron Weber) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 19:12:28 Subject: Re: AW&ST 4/18/96 (p.18) - SR-71 Flights Suspended >This is all so surprising to me!!! Bush & Reagan received such OUTSTANDING >support and encouragement from Congress during their tenures. Maybe a >function of our two party system is to have one party keep the other honest >& allow for two views to be presented. But then again, maybe not. Hosanna >to the King. No dissidents allowed. ( Does this mean that Viet Nam >protesters were wrong to criticize the Commander in Chief at the time??) >Now, if this is going to become a political forum, I'd like to have my name >removed from the list. Thanks for your time. > >At 06:26 PM 4/25/96, you wrote: >> >> >>Despite the upcoming election, the world continues to turn and it >>might be nice if the guy in charge could get a little support. >> >>Byron >> >> Maybe I should have made it clearer, Emphasis: a LITTLE support. Byron ------------------------------ From: chosa@chosa.win.net (Byron Weber) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 19:04:12 Subject: Re: U2 and Cuba >Byron (not Lord) writes: >As for "life threatening consequences," use your imagination. >Maybe you've read something about the U2 and Cuba? What does that >have to do with today? > >End Quote > >Intersting choice. >Question. Why did the Soviet Union put missles in Cuba? >And, wasn`t the real resolution to the crisis Kennedy`s >decision to remove the US missles from Turkey? >People with a cause sometimes twist the facts, don`t >you think? > >Chuck > Yes, about as twisted as this: the real resolution to the crisis, sadly, was Kennedy's assassination. All depends on one's perspective, no? Byron ------------------------------ From: quellish@shore.intercom.net (Dan Zinngrabe) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 02:02:18 -0500 Subject: Re: LASRE - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: OnLine Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 18:57:32 Subject: Re: LASRE Larry writes: >From what I understand, there were linear engines proposed for the Shuttle engine as well. Yes, according to David M.Urie-Director-High Speed/Space Systems at LM in his 'Affordable Access to Space' paper, the aerospike was indeed a 'candidate propulsion system for the Space Shuttle.' >Or are you really pointing at the risk and therefore trying to conclude that >something must have flown already because the risk in your mind is excessive? > >Well, I can make the same point for airbreathers. Maybe we should mix the >two! As is often the case, I'm not sure what I'm saying ! Although because of the lead time to develop new engines, compared to airframes, I'd be pretty surprised if there were no advanced engine test beds flying as we 'speak'. BTW I hope the DarkStar crash won't give more leverage to those who maintain that advanced defense projects should all be 'black.' Also, thanks to those who responded to my initial question. Best David Actually, NASA has recently issued quite a few contracts concerning a "mixed mode" or "combined cycle" propulsion scheme using the (infamous) pulse detonation wave engine. If you are a little familiar with PDWEs, it's easy to see how they could be switched from an air-breathing PDWE mode to a rocket mode- close off your intake with some doors, then add oxidizer and run at a constant fuel rate instead of "pulsing". The NASA contracts, incidentally, don't focus on the basic principles of PDWEs at all, but more advanced concepts involing "evolved" PDWEs, impling that there has been some extensive work already done in this area. ****************************************************************************** Strategic Consultant, 21's Picks- Macintosh Artist, Misery Loves Co. Independant Author of Front Line Assembly Fiction and Nonfiction Gravity Kills ______________________________________________________________________________ Closed systems are destined to fail by their own nature. ****************************************************************************** /; ;\ __ \\____// /{_\_/ \`'\_/__ \___ (o\ /o } _____________________________/ :--' MOOO DARNIT! ,-,'`@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@ \_ `__\ ;:( @@@@@@@@@ @@@ \___(o'o) :: ) @@@@ @@@@@@ ,'@@( `====' :: : @@@@@: @@@@ `@@@: :: \ @@@@@: @@@@@@@) ( '@@@' ;; /\ /`, @@@@@@@@@\ :@@@@@) ::/ ) {_----------------: :~`,~~; ;;'`; : ) : / `; ; ;;;; : : ; : ; ; : `'`' / : : : : : : )_ \__; :_ ; \_\ :__\ \ \ \ : \ `^' `^' `-^-' Mad Cow diease- xenobiological nightmare or sociopathic bovine disorder? __________________________ONLY THE COWS KNOW__________________________________ **************************************************************************** ** ------------------------------ From: Michael Crutch <100651.3721@compuserve.com> Date: 27 Apr 96 06:27:48 EDT Subject: Ron Brown's CT43 - not a "Janet" crash Hi all The aircraft involved was CT-43A 73-1149, assigned to the 76th Airlift Squadron of the 86th Wing based at Ramstein AB, Germany. The aircraft has NOT at any time been assigned to "special duties" in Nevada, howvere some of its sister aircraft (reg N5175U, N5176Y and N5177C) are all ex-USAF and operated from McCarran on flights to the Nevada Test Site (and other places of course!). Perhaps someone would like to tell Newsweek?!!! Rgds Mike Crutch Chairman, British Aviation Research Group London UK ------------------------------ From: BaDKaRmA Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 15:02:49 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: Re- Darkstar movie part 4 On Fri, 26 Apr 1996, Mary Shafer wrote: > First UFOs, now binaries. What next? Make Money Fast and Save Money on > Magazines? > > Mary > and then we will have the 'is it okay with god if i am gay' posts, nooooooo ______________________________________________________________________________ "Did ya, did ya really?" "He said.........maybe" "Damm fine walls" "Look, I'm really not sure about this" "WHERE did you leave it!" "Dai Taoloth" "I can't, I mustn't, please dont make me" "I can hear you staring at me!" "Once you die, you're dead, and thats all there is!" ______________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ From: habu@why.net (habu) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 22:11:36 -0700 Subject: Code One - April 1996 (the following message contains no binary images... :) After a long absence, I thought I would revive my summary of the latest issue of Code One, the LMTAS (Lockheed - Ft. Worth, TX) magazine... Let me know if this is still of interest to the list... Joint Strike Fighter Ten pages covering Lockheed's entry in the JAST competition, extensive descriptions of the differences (and commonalities) between the versions for each "customer" (USAF, USN, USMC, and Britian's Royal Navy). Discussed are the structural design aspects considered, including use of composites, integral wing box/fuselage, canopy, inlet ducts, etc. The engine variants (F119) are discussed, including the Rolls Royce/Allison shaft-driven lift fan for the USN/USMC version(s). This propulsion design has been patented by Dr. Paul Bevilaqua of the Skunk Works. RR/Allison also provides the three-bearing exhaust nozzle on the F119 core, which vectors thrust from horizontal to 110 degrees downward. Some interesting quotes: USAF version must match or better the performance characteristics of the F-16 (which version?). USMC version has twice the range of an AV-8B on internal fuel, and can carry a bigger (heavier?) payload. USN version has (almost) twice the range of an F/A-18C on internal fuel. All cockpits are designed to be completely night vision capable, the HUD has been replaced by a helmet mounted visor, and aural cues are provided via 'stereo' speakers in the helmet to provide spatial/direction cues for things like missile warning, etc. Lots of color artwork and photos of several wind tunnel tests. F-16 Recce Squadron 192 FG (Richmond, VA) takes up where RF-4s left off, with KS-87 cameras mounted on the centerline station, with the traditional film replaced by a four million pixel CCD focal plane array. The digital recorder is quoted as being the same as used by U-2s and SR-71s. Data must be downloaded after RTB, no mention of in-flight datalinks is made... The recce pod is connected to the F-16's data (MUX) bus, and accesses information from the INS and RALT. Ground speed, altitude and attitude are then used to set parameters like shutter speed (to reduce image blurring) and frame interval (to provide image overlap). GPS data is recorded with each image to aid in correlation. F-16 Airborne Forward Air Controllers (AFAC) F-16Ds equipped with LANTIRN targeting pods, ALQ-131 ECM pod, LAU-131 rocket pods filled with Mk-66 "WP" marker rockets, and a couple of AIM-120s thrown in for good measure. Lots of info about how the FAC duties were transferred from O-1s to OV-10s to OA-10s, mostly about how to do all the things FACs do and all the equipment FACs must carry in the small confines of an F-16 cockpit (like where do you put the binocs, and how do you fold/ unfold 1:50,000 maps?) VISTA/F-16 Supports F-22 Development The first block of flight control laws and selected aerodynamic data from the F-22 design have been loaded and flown on the VISTA NF-16D. Current tests include handling qualities in offset landing approaches, formation flying, and simulated air refueling with KC-135s, as well as "robustness of the control laws". Two excellent color photos of the aircraft, and a cockpit shot showing the center stick controller in the front cockpit. (I thought F-22 was going with the side stick - can anyone confirm that?) Other Stuff... Turkish Pilots Ferry F-16s From Fort Worth To Turkey (with Turkish KC-135 and C-130) (usually ferried by company and/or USAF pilots...) Aviono F-16s Field "Sure Strike" Capability (a targeting hand-off system) Block 40 F-16s Add Night Lights (photo shows electroluminescent strips mounted on nose, vertical tail, wingtips and bottom centerline) Miss America Flies In F-16, and Bruce Willis Flies In F-16 (not together!!!) A neat photo of an F-16C from Iowa ANG painted completey in metallic gold. (this next one's my favorite!) Dutch Three-Seater Takes To The Skies In flight photo shows a 3-place F-16 from Royal Netherlands Air Force, called the F-16AV. I quote: "The first Dutch F-16AV squadron becomes operational on 1 April." Finally, the inside back cover announces "Code One On Line" at: www.lmtas.com Well, not yet, I'm afraid - I checked out this URL and only got what looks like a directory listing at an ftp site. Access was denied to all but the "jast" area, which did have lots of neat stuff. Eric Hehs (the editor) tells me the Code One stuff is ready, but the site is not (right Eric?), so stay tuned... Greg Fieser since I'm self employed, the above views DO represent those of my employer... ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:55:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. On Thu, 25 Apr 1996, Hank Lapa wrote: > "costs" $78,000 and every drive-thru hamburger at Micky D's > is $20+/-. > > $1M per photo? I can "prove" it's more like $20M, and I > wouldn't necessarily be "lying," just misleading. > > When your real intent is to get people to listen, you might > say just about anything! Do you thing Blackbird is expensive??? Try ignorance. Without blackbird we will never know what the enemy is doing and their military arsenal. We might spend more money in our militarty arsenal because we don't know what we are facing. (that's why it was so important to build the U-2 during the Cold War, because we didn't know what type of military arsenal we were facing to the Soviet Union). We might be spending so much money in the military budget and crash in bankrupte (like URSS did it). May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Albert Einstein ------------------------------ From: habu@why.net (habu) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 13:51:50 -0700 Subject: SR-71 & LASRE This should be of interest to some of you - this URL points to a jpeg of the Linear Areospike SR Experiment (LASRE) being mated to SR airframe NASA #844. Enjoy, and remember - you didn't see it *here* first!!! http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/PhotoServer/SR-71-LASRE/Small/EC96-43419-21.jpg Greg Fieser Since I'm self-employed, the above opinions DO reflect those of my employer... ------------------------------ From: kelleher@consilium.com (John Kelleher) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 96 13:18:13 -0700 Subject: Re: Ron Brown's CT43 - not a "Janet" crash Michael Crutch mentioned: >>The aircraft involved was CT-43A 73-1149...[and]... has NOT at any time been >>assigned to "special duties" in Nevada... As a matter of fact, in its previous life this aircraft was, ironically, a USAF navigator training aircraft. My current boss used to fly in it rather regularly when he was a nav instructor at Mather AFB near Sacramento. John ------------------------------ From: BaDKaRmA Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 17:43:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. On Thu, 25 Apr 1996, Wei-Jen Su wrote: > Do you thing Blackbird is expensive??? Try ignorance. > Without blackbird we will never know what the enemy is doing and > their military arsenal. We might spend more money in our militarty > arsenal because we don't know what we are facing. (that's why it was so > important to build the U-2 during the Cold War, because we didn't know > what type of military arsenal we were facing to the Soviet Union). We > might be spending so much money in the military budget and crash in > bankrupte (like URSS did it). did the 'russians' produce any recon aircraft of their own? perhaps 'we' never found out about their version of the U2? BaDKaRmA ______________________________________________________________________________ "Did ya, did ya really?" "He said.........maybe" "Damm fine walls" "Look, I'm really not sure about this" "WHERE did you leave it!" "Dai Taoloth" "I can't, I mustn't, please dont make me" "I can hear you staring at me!" "Once you die, you're dead, and thats all there is!" ______________________________________________________________________________ ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 19:20:39 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, BaDKaRmA wrote: > > did the 'russians' produce any recon aircraft of their own? > perhaps 'we' never found out about their version of the U2? > > BaDKaRmA Mig-25 and Tu-95 were known aircraft that was used in recon missions. The new Myasishchev M-55 'Mystic-B' still hopes to obtain a military order for the type as a high-altitude reconnaissance platform. The fuselage and the long wing of M-55 looks very similar to the U-2, the difference are: it has two engines and the tail look like a Bronco (OV-10?) aircraft (double tail). May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Albert Einstein ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #654 ********************************* 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).