From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #655 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: Skunk Works Digest Thursday, 2 May 1996 Volume 05 : Number 655 In this issue: Re: Flying costs, Photo costs, etc. A/F-117X Funding Tacit Blue Re: Tacit Blue Aero Club of Texas re: Tacit Blue re: A/F-117X funding Re: TACIT BLUE Project Arrow Re: TACIT BLUE USA Today Tacit Rainbow Re: SHAMU Re: SHAMU Tacit Blue Re: SHAMU and TAVs Re: Groom & Nuclear Propulsion Projects (was Re: SHAMU and TAVs) Re: Tacit Blue Re: Groom & Nuclear Propulsion Projects (was Re: SHAMU and TAVs) SHAMU UNVEILED! 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: Wei-Jen Su Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 19:39:07 -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 I just got a confirmation from a USAF pilot in Alaska that Tu-95 flew many times inside of the USA airspace (Alaska) doing some reconn and intelligencia gathering (testing our reaction). Tu-95 were eventually escort out of USAF airspace by aircrafts like F-15. USAF pilots said that they fell funny during the interception because the Tu-95 tailgun was pointing and following at them... In exchange, we show Playboy magazine picture's to them :) 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: CULLY@svr81trw.kee.aetc.af.mil (CULLY, George Mr) Date: 30 Apr 96 14:13:43 EDT Subject: A/F-117X Funding The Spring 1996 issue of The Hook magazine reports that the FY96 Defense Authorization Bill contains $25M for A/F-117X Program definition, and that NAVAIRSYSCOM has appointed a program manger....Whether the program gets the $100M (minimum) it would need in FY97 for development start-up remains to be seen. According to the article, "Pentagon rumor says the CNO supports the program," but that OSD and OMB bean-counters are likely to ask hard questions. "Some senior active duty officers support the program privately, but are awaiting guidance from above...before giving an on-the-record opinion." All in favor of backbone transplants, say 'aye-aye.' ------------------------------ From: OnLine Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 22:00:32 Subject: Tacit Blue Interesting to see Tacit Blue 'Shamu' unveiled today. Built by Northrop..first flight 1982 to explore LO with curved surfaces, data used for B-2 ..135 flights in all until '85...cost $165m.. wingspan: 48.2 ft Length: 55.8 ft Weight: 30,000 lb Got to go but I thought you'd be intertested.. Best D ------------------------------ From: fmarkus@pipeline.com (Frank Markus) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 20:24:42 -0400 Subject: Re: Tacit Blue On Apr 30, 1996 22:00:32, 'OnLine ' wrote: >Interesting to see Tacit Blue 'Shamu' unveiled today. Built by >Northrop..first flight 1982 to explore LO with curved surfaces, data used >for B-2 ..135 flights in all until '85...cost $165m.. wingspan: 48.2 ft >Length: 55.8 ft >Weight: 30,000 lb > >Got to go but I thought you'd be intertested.. > >Best > >D > > The film I saw showed a rectangular body with a squarish cross-section, a dorsal air intake and sweptback low wings that did not appear to be very integrated with the fuselage. The cockpit and front were not very streamlined adding to the rectangularity of the body. (I hope that those with better eyes, memories and vocabularies will augment this description.) ------------------------------ From: habu@why.net (habu) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 20:30:46 -0700 Subject: Aero Club of Texas This month's guest speaker for the Aero Club of Texas will be Dr. John Paul Stapp of "Sonic Wind" fame. Dr. Stapp (for those of you who may not recognize the name) made his place in history by riding the rocket sleds down the tracks at Edwards and Holloman back in the '50s, decelerating from 632 mph in 1.4 seconds (~48 Gs), and yes - he's still alive (now in his 80s). Dr. Stapp was also a key player in the "Man High" manned balloon altitude experiments. It may not be very skunky, but it's sure to be interesting - if anyone out there is interested, let me know and I'll provide a summary of his presentation on the list. Greg Fieser Since I'm self-employed, the above views DO represent those of my employer... ------------------------------ From: TRADER@cup.portal.com Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 18:36:26 PDT Subject: re: Tacit Blue Since we don't want to post binaries on this newsgroup, those intererested in Tacit Blue can see the photos (and description) on the Web at: http://www.dtic.mil/airforcelink/announce/index.html Tacit Blue appears to have been of more research value than Northrop's highly classified (and ultimately doomed) missile program, Tacit Rainbow. Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com / PaulMcG@aol.com http://www.portal.com/~trader/secrecy.html ------------------------------ From: "Art Hanley" Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 22:10:16 +0700 Subject: re: A/F-117X funding With all respect to Cully, I don't think it's a lack of backbone that's holding those Navy officers back as much as trying to make sure they don't walk into a buzzsaw. When Lockheed first mooted the F-117N, there was virtually no interest by the Navy. This was because the A/FX was on track, and it would be a much, much better aircraft. At the time, the F-117N didn't really offer much capability over what was already in the inventory, except for stealth, and would cost a lot to develop. It's interesting how things change. First, the A/FX was abandoned, then the A-6 and F-14 are being forced out. Meanwhile, the version based on the F-117 (as I understand it, there's not that much common anymore with the F-117A) has been notably enhanced. The A/F-117X could significantly enhance what the Navy's strike capability could be relative to current plans and offers a Lot of capability relative to the F/A-18E/F. There's the rub. The Hornet E/F has backing at DoD even stronger than the F-22 enjoys at USAF. As a result, you've got to be Really sure that you won't get your head handed to you before you publicly champion a program that threatens some of the requirement for the E/F. Otherwise, you end up expending a lot of effort on something that had no chance of ever getting funded. Like that old cowboy saying I just invented goes, "Four aces in your hand don't beat six bullets in a poor sport's Colt". That doesn't mean you don't show your hand, just make sure your gun (and hopefully a buddy's as well) is already drawn. Art "Avoiding All Commentary from Work on Current DoD Policy" Hanley ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 01:41:42 -0700 Subject: Re: TACIT BLUE This is pretty funny! We've seen a fairly accurate drawing of TACIT BLUE before. Can anybody recall where? Some of us aren't going to like the answer. Larry ------------------------------ From: "JOHN F. REGUS" Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 17:59:21 -0600 Subject: Project Arrow Hello skonkz - First, let me say how glad I am to be back...even, if now I am in the sticks... Second... there was an interesting piece on the Arrow project yesterday in one of the newspapers.... Has anyone seen any other info published on how long it will be before Arrow is deployed? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + John F. Regus + SYS/370/390 SYSTEMS SOFTWARE, * DATA AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING + internet: wizard88@ix.netcom.com + internet: jregus@aol.com + voice : (301) 447 3030 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ From: Charles_E._Smith.wbst200@xerox.com Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 03:56:49 PDT Subject: Re: TACIT BLUE Larry, Thanks, I though I was going crazy(er). Chuck ------------------------------ From: George Allegrezza 01-May-1996 0908 Date: Wed, 1 May 96 09:12:33 EDT Subject: USA Today Today's edition of the abovementioned fishwrapper has a different Tacit Blue photo then the one available on the USAF web site. Gives a view of the inlet and nozzle combo, and the big-ass chine up front. (Is that a chine, exactly?) George George Allegrezza | Digital Equipment Corporation | "If you die, you lose a very Alta Vista | important part of your life." Littleton MA USA | allegrezza@ljsrv2.enet.dec.com | -- Brooke Shields ------------------------------ From: George Allegrezza 01-May-1996 0836 Date: Wed, 1 May 96 08:47:47 EDT Subject: Tacit Rainbow Chuck wrote: >Larry, >Thanks, I though I was going crazy(er). >Chuck Larry, Chuck, . . . clue some of us B-list types in, fellas. TB looks, in plan view, a lot like Tacit Rainbow A (including inlet and nozzle), as alluded to by Paul M., and very little like the B-2. One wonders is its purpose was R&D on the NV-144 all-plastic airframe that found its way onto the MGM-136. Clarence Robinson reported in Av Week in the early 1980s that there was a piloted version of NV-144. And that nose . . . looks like the kind of phony add-on used by car companies to cover features of new protos in test. It also is reminiscent of the CBS drawing of the "stealth airplane" used in David Martin's original story on stealth, back in (1980?). That story forced the DOD to hold the news conference announcing the program, with the central figure being . . . Bill Perry, now SecDef and then DDR&E. George George Allegrezza | Digital Equipment Corporation | "If you die, you lose a very Alta Vista | important part of your life." Littleton MA USA | allegrezza@ljsrv2.enet.dec.com | -- Brooke Shields ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 10:36:29 -0700 Subject: Re: SHAMU Well, now Chuck's got me wondering :). But anyway, the source I was referring to. There was a drawing published in a book in 1985, from information the author of the book credits to 1984. The drawing was labeled SHAMU and everything. The author even accurately discussed SHAMU being used as a physical testbed for B-2 stealth (I believe what he means by this is that SHAMU ALSO became the physical testbed for checking out the new 3-D stealth CAD software (versus the older 2D approach of HAVE BLUE)). He just wasn't completely shure of some of his analysis because he wasn't dealing with a known quantity, but after reading it again last night, I was, I admit, impressed with the work he and his artist did on it back then. It stands up in light of yesterdays disclosure. The answer? Curtis Peebles! The book? Dark Eagles Pub. Date: 1985 The wing is totally wrong, but the fuselage and tail are pretty darn close. The inlets are wrong too, but, it was an excellent stab at it from rumor. Most of us didn't like Curtis's book because it was very critical of us black aircraft watchers. Although I don't agree with Curtis on many things, that book did make some good points. He had SHAMU essentially correct too! Those of us who are armchair historians will be probably interested in revisiting the history of HAVE BLUE, and rereading Ben Rich's book on HAVE BLUE, in light of SHAMU! Some interesting questions would probably come up. Larry ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 14:06:41 -0700 Subject: Re: SHAMU >Unless I misread my copy, the book was published >in 1995, not 1985, DOH! :) Thanks, you are of course correct! 1995 not 1985. >devaluing somewhat the impressive nature of the >"scoop." Yes, I guess. I think it was still impressive however, even though I both enjoyed and disliked his book. >I trust that this won't seem too "nit-picky, Not at all! Thanks! >but if Peebles >correctly described TACIT BLUE in 1985, I would like to see his source >from 1985. Yes! You and many others I imagine! Thanks again! Larry ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 19:13:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Tacit Blue Download a video of the Tacit Blue plane in flight from ABC's New Releases library. Keyword ABCNews. Reuter WASHINGTON (April 30) - The Air Force Tuesday lifted a cloak of secrecy from the $165 million forerunner of the B-2 "stealth" bomber, a single slow aircraft that flew only 135 times between 1982 and 1985. Releasing a videotape and picture of "Project Tacit Blue", officials told a news conference that the 48-foot aircraft with rounded edges and a V-shaped tail demonstrated key radar-avoiding technologies now used in the batwing B-2. The aircraft was built by Northrop Corp., now Northrop Grumman Corp., under a program that began in 1978 under a tight wrap of secrecy. It flew test missions from Feb. 5, 1982, to Feb. 14, 1985, when it was retired. The aircraft is now being cleaned up at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, where it will go on display. "Tacit Blue was one of the most successful technology demonstrator programs in Air Force history, meeting all program objectives and most low-observable and sensor performance goals," the Air Force said. The plane, which tested radar-absorbing materials and shapes that send radar beams awry instead of bouncing them back to the enemy, was flown at several locations by both Air Force and contractor pilots. "The once highly-classified program was unveiled because technologies and capabilities are currently in operational use and knowledge of the programs no longer needs protection," the Air Force said. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu "Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night; God said, Let Newton be, and all was light." Unknown ------------------------------ From: chosa@chosa.win.net (Byron Weber) Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 19:02:21 Subject: Re: SHAMU and TAVs >>but if Peebles >>correctly described TACIT BLUE in 1985, I would like to see his source >>from 1985. > >Yes! You and many others I imagine! > >Thanks again! > >Larry > In 1985 Peebles didnt seem interested in aircraft. A book he published in the early 80's, the name of which escapes me now, was about satellites and arms in space. His switch over 15 years later, to black projects and Watch the Skies, ufo debunking, got me curious. Add to this Sagan's reference to Peebles in A Demon Haunted World (excellent recent publication) and the fact that Watch the Skies was initially published by Smithsonian, suggests to me this is some kind of soft propaganda. Could the TACIT BLUE guesswork in Dark Eagles be leaked info? I dont know, but its brought me full circle, to the possibility that at Groom Lake they are testing a nuclear propulsion TAV. This time I rephrased the question I asked a year ago, Who is in charge at Groom? with, If they are testing nuclear propulsion at Groom who would be in charge? The answer was not easy. Many hours of research found the following organizations would be involved in one way or another: DOE, DoD, Air Force, Navy, NRO, NASA, and JPL. Now this may seem like space/rocket stuff, but it turns out all the above organizations (the DOE was previously known as AEC), were involved and continued to be involved in nuclear rocket and aircraft propulsion. At the top, the group that contracts EG&G services would be the Department of Energy,(see the Atomic Energy Acts of 1946 and 1954) not the Air Force. Paul M might look at nuclear defense spending The general feeling seems to be we are going away from nuclear. That, is not true, and the evidence can be found in the following publications; Engine and Innovation, Lewis Laboratory and American Propulsion Technology 1991, Virgina P. Dawson, NASA SP-4306 Lazar Fusion-Lawrence Livermore in Physic Today, v47 pg17-19, Sept 1994, B.G. Kevi January 15, 1992, US Air Force Space Technology Test Center at Kirkland AFB, NM, formally proposed using Timberwind as a system to make a six month Mars Mission reality in the 21st century. July 1991,NASA Nuclear Propulsion Systems Office, Stanley Browski told internation conference on Emerging Nuclear Energy Systems NTRs are more efficient and cost effective than chemical rockets. 1989-90, National Research Council Study statement, "..the nations foremost technical need is for a new propulsion system, including nuclear space power systems and electric propulsion for flights to Mars and more distant planets." from NASA SP-4306. There has been, over the past 50 years, a close relationship between space projects and recon platforms. As William Burrows says in Deep Black, pg 306, "But it is the military mission that drives the spaceplane, which, in view of DARPA and the Air Force, will have ....greater mission flexibility." This is a reference to the Skunk Works purported TAV, And, considering the events that have transpired over the last few years at Groom, nuclear propulsion seems to me, to be the best explanation. Last quote from NASA SP-4306, "Lewis Research Center in the 1990's is poised on the edge of a new era." Sorry for the length. Byron. ------------------------------ From: keller@eos.ncsu.edu Date: Thu, 02 May 96 10:09:24 EDT Subject: Re: Groom & Nuclear Propulsion Projects (was Re: SHAMU and TAVs) With all due respects, I'll have to disagree with the possibility of there being much of any substantial nuclear propulsion projects going on at Groom. Although my own research is in the ground-based commercial end of the nuclear power sector, I do stay abreast of what's going on in the space applications end of the business, and, right now, that's very little. Yes, there is (or was quite recently) some work going on at Kirkland AFB, where they brought in a Russian/former Soviet Topaz reactor, I think unfueled, for research & various studies a few years ago. There was also a brief flurry of activity in the area in the early nineties, when then-President Bush's space exploration initiative (SEI) was announced. This was also soon after the Federation of American Scientists(FAS), I believe, broke the news about SDIO's Timberwind project. Naturally, there were proposals to use Timberwind's rocket for deep space applications. Most of your references come from this time period, and appear to be directly related to this. Most of the proposals from this period seem to have died along with SEI. Finally, I have to give an acknowledgement to Mary Shafer on something she posted here several years ago, in her comment that people in the field are much more in a position to be aware of classified goings in that field, simply from the hiring & subsequent disappearance of people into classified projects. I was in a position to have guessed at the existence of Project Timberwind several months before FAS broke the news about that project, and the evidence wasn't even very subtle: Brookhaven National Laboratory and what was then Babcock & Wilcox's nuclear division were both looking to hire people for space nuclear propulsion projects. Prior to that period, all the way back to the end of NASA's Apollo-era nuclear power projects in the early 70s, the situation in space nuclear propulsion was so moribund that even university faculty couldn't get much research funding to work in the area. Right now, it seems that that's nearly the situation we're back to. While there is, and probably always will be, small scale research still going on, I don't see that there could be much of anything substantive going on in the field at Groom. Paul Keller keller@eos.ncsu.edu My opinions, not my employers. ------------------------------ From: habu@why.net (habu) Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 13:54:58 -0700 Subject: Re: Tacit Blue TRADER@cup.portal.com wrote: > > Since we don't want to post binaries on this newsgroup, those intererested > in Tacit Blue can see the photos (and description) on the Web at: > > http://www.dtic.mil/airforcelink/announce/index.html > > Tacit Blue appears to have been of more research value than Northrop's > highly classified (and ultimately doomed) missile program, Tacit Rainbow. > > Paul McGinnis / TRADER@cup.portal.com / PaulMcG@aol.com > http://www.portal.com/~trader/secrecy.html Pasted from the URL provided by Paul: TACIT BLUE is undergoing final preparations to include painting, de-arming the ejection seat and canopy, purging all fuels, oils and lubricants as well as the hydraulic system, etc., that must be completed before public viewing and access at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. It is scheduled to be unveiled at the United States Air Force Museum on May 22, 1996, where it will remain on permanent display. If this craft last flew in 1985, are we to believe they are just now getting around to de-arming, purging, etc. ??? Or did they *fly* it in to WPAFB ??? Greg Fieser Since I'm self-employed, the above views DO reflect those of my employer... ------------------------------ From: chosa@chosa.win.net (Byron Weber) Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 20:02:15 Subject: Re: Groom & Nuclear Propulsion Projects (was Re: SHAMU and TAVs) > >With all due respects, I'll have to disagree with the possibility of >there being much of any substantial nuclear propulsion projects going >on at Groom. etc. >Paul Keller >keller@eos.ncsu.edu >My opinions, not my employers. Your argument against a nuclear propulsion project at Groom assumes evidence of such a project would be apparent to those within the industry, as it did for you with Timberwind, and to those engaged in related activities, such as Mary. I accept some responsibility for your response since, as you pointed out, my references were not all that great or current. But,the demise of nuclear propulsion in the early 70's was attributed to sheilding and a new awareness of environmental considerations. Great advances have be made in nuclear technology since the 70's and I cant imagine the sheilding problem hasnt been resolved, at least to some degree. But, this "awareness" has stuck with us. So, how does one go forward and effectively deal with the inevitable and important development of nuclear propulsion, go black, deeper, much deeper than before. So, I dont believe your educated guess would necessarily hold up. You are precisely the kind of guy who might leak the story. It is so secret at Groom, I found there was insufficient information to formulate a conclusion as to their activity, I tried a different approach. The real basis for my assumption (admittedly pure guess work) is rather more abstract then that and hardly so discursive. I tallied up more than thirty significant events at Groom or related to Groom in the last three years. Then I listed all involved parties, some of whom I had researched to determine their previous affiliations. Lastly, I identified key concepts based on the function of groups and individuals.. Figuratively, I layed them out on a big table and pasted arrows from the events and individuals to the concepts. For the most part, they pointed in the same direction, a nuclear propulsion TAV. Then I researched the nuclear stuff and found, what I believe to be, a reasonable basis for my assumption. Not thesis material, but it is my best guess. Byron ------------------------------ From: quellish@shore.intercom.net (Dan Zinngrabe) Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 23:43:46 -0500 Subject: SHAMU UNVEILED! Yup, it's been declassified, and will be on display at the USAF museum yhis summer. The codename was TACIT BLUE, ran ru=ight after the HAVE BLUE series and up to 1985, in support of the B-2 "and other platforms" Here's the website- http://www.dtic.mil/airforcelink/announce/index.html ****************************************************************************** Strategic Consultant, 21's Picks- Macintosh Artist, Misery Loves Co. Independant Author of Korn Fiction and Nonfiction Penal Colony ______________________________________________________________________________ Closed systems are destined to fail by their own nature. ****************************************************************************** _______________________________Windoze95(tm)(R)_______________________________ - ---------------------------The Ultimate Sleep Aid----------------------------- - -----------------------From The Makers of Office(tm)(R)----------------------- Simply insert floppy disks, run the installer, and in seconds your insomnia is cured! *WARNING!* Do NOT install Microsoft(R) products while operating heavy machinery, running Microsoft(R) or other applications or extensions, eating, debugging, "surfing" the internet, or living in the continental United States. ______________________________________________________________________________ **************************************************************************** ** ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #655 ********************************* 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).