From: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Subject: Skunk Works Digest V5 #697 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@mail.orst.edu Precedence: Skunk Works Digest Friday, 23 August 1996 Volume 05 : Number 697 In this issue: Mir - Thanks Re: X-37 Announced (Proposed) Re: X-37 Announced (proposed) re:Mir re:Mir Recent Publications USAF Museum Lecture Series X-35 Re: X-35 Compartmented Information Re: X-35 Difference between western jets and eastern jets. Waverider in BusinessWeek magazine Re: X-35 Re: Difference between western jets and eastern jets. Konkordski Compartmented Information Re: Compartmentalization..... Corona Re: X-35 Re: Difference between western jets and eastern jets. 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: John Burtenshaw Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 14:16:31 -0100 Subject: Mir - Thanks Thanks to all who replied - my collegue is now happy and sends his thanks to the list. Cheers John =========================================================================== John Burtenshaw Internet Applications Developer The Computer Centre, Bournemouth University - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Postal Address: Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow, POOLE, Dorset, BH12 5BB U.K. Internet: jburtens@bournemouth.ac.uk Phone: 01202 595293 Fax: 01202 513293 Mobile: 0850 240931 AX.25: g1hok@gb7bnm.#45.gbr.eu. AMPRnet: g1hok.ampr.org. (44.131.17.82) =========================================================================== ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 11:31:58 -0700 Subject: Re: X-37 Announced (Proposed) (Message inbox:3587) Received: from ormail.intel.com by ichips.intel.com (8.7.4/jIII) id IAA03889; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 08:36:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.orst.edu (mail.ORST.EDU [128.193.4.4]) by ormail.intel.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA13652 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 08:37:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mail.orst.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id HAA27106 for skunk-works-outgoing; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 07:56:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from svr81trw.kee.aetc.af.mil (svr81trw.kee.aetc.af.mil [158.157.16.3]) by mail.orst.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA27097 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 07:56:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Nvlenv-01Date-Posted: 19-Aug-1996 10:00:45 -0500; at 81trw.keesler To: skunk-works-digest@mail.orst.edu Message-Id: <0476183201E32076@-SMF-> Subject: X-37 Announced From: CULLY@svr81trw.kee.aetc.af.mil (CULLY, George Mr) Date: 19 Aug 96 10:00:35 EDT References: <0476183202E32076@-SMF-> Sender: owner-skunk-works@mail.orst.edu Precedence: bulk Content-Type: text Content-Length: 535 Without much fanfare, NASA has revealed "a new series of X-vehicles to flight test air-breathing rocket engines instead of continuing research started on the DC-XA SSTO." So says AW&ST, August 12, p. 20, which reports that NASA is seeking start-up funding in FY97-98, with 2-4 versions of the X-37 envisioned; they are to go around "new engines that will be developed under a separate technology effort launched last month." First flight would be about two years after X-33, i.e, 2001. Anybody have any more details on this? ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 11:42:25 -0700 Subject: Re: X-37 Announced (proposed) Sorry if this already was posted - am having some mailer problems! George writes: >Without much fanfare, NASA has revealed "a new series of X-vehicles to >flight test air-breathing rocket engines instead of continuing research >started on the DC-XA SSTO." So says AW&ST, August 12, p. 20, which >reports that NASA is seeking start-up funding in FY97-98, with 2-4 >versions of the X-37 envisioned; they are to go around "new engines that >will be developed under a separate technology effort launched last >month." First flight would be about two years after X-33, i.e, 2001. >Anybody have any more details on this? Isn't this cool! Anyway, in the recent discussions on X-vehicles, everyone seems to have forgotten several high speed airbreathing programs that were recently written about in AW&ST back in an early May issue (I believe it was May 6). One was a USAF program to develop a scramjet powered missile. The other was a NASA program to develop and test fly a RBCC scramjet up to Mach 10 or so. It was called Hyper-X in the AW&ST piece. Perhaps the NASA program is the propulsion program you're interested in. Larry ------------------------------ From: Kerry Ferrand Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 11:52:30 +1200 (NZST) Subject: re:Mir There's also an unmanned Progress craft orbiting along side Mir at the moment-they had to undock it to let Soyuz TM-24 dock. Its due to redock once a Soyuz departs...things are getting crowded up there with only 2 probe-type docking ports available. K ------------------------------ From: csmith9@vivanet.com (Chuck Smith) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 20:38:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: re:Mir Kerry Ferrand wrote: >There's also an unmanned Progress craft orbiting along side Mir at the >moment-they had to undock it to let Soyuz TM-24 dock. Its due to redock >once a Soyuz departs...things are getting crowded up there with only 2 >probe-type docking ports available. > >K > > > Ah, I remember the good old days when we had a space program, too. Chuck Smith "Aerospace Engineer to the Stars" ------------------------------ From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 04:48:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Recent Publications The latest World Air Power Journal (WAPJ), Volume 26, Autumn/Fall 1996, has a very nice article about the US Army's OPTEC Threat Support Activity and their equipment: An-2, Mi-2, Mi-8, M-14, Mi-17, Mi-24, Mi-25 and Ka-28. The latest (in the USA available) AirForces Monthly (AFM) magazine, No. 101, August 1996, has a very nice article about the British aircraft designation system, including rules and exceptions. The previous AFM, No. 100, July 1996, had a nice article about the U-2 operations from their new base at Istres, France, as well as an article about Lockheed Martin's JAST/JSF competitor. The latest FlyPast magazine, No. 181, August 1996, has an article about surviving B-58 Hustlers, including a photo of the (very derelict) NB-58A 'Snoopy I' (55-0665), which was used in the test program of the YF-12A's ASG-18/GAR-9(AIM-47) weapon control system/missile combination. Last months Air Fan international (AFi) magazine, Vol. 1, No. 5, July 1996, had an interesting article from Rene J. Francillon about the early U-2 models, complete with many color photos. Last weeks Aviation Week & Space Technology, August 12, 1996, reported besides many other things, that the serial of the U-2R, which crashed on August 7, was 80-1088, which would be Article '088'. - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 04:45:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: USAF Museum Lecture Series One of the lectures of the USAFM's Air Force Museum Foundation 1996-1997 Lecture Series might interest the Skunk Works folks: * Thursday, January 23, 1997: "Desert Storm: F-117 Operations (A Behind the Scenes Look)" by Lt. Col. K.D. Boyer, USAF During Operation DESERT STORM, Maj. K.D. Boyer was the Chief of Mission Planning for the F-117s. Admission is free, as always, and the lecture begins at 7:30 P.M., while the museum doors open at 6:30 P.M. -- time enough to spent a lot of money in the well equipped gift shop and book store. For more information etc., contact the USAFM's Public Affairs Office at (513) 255-4704, or write to USAFM/PAS, 1100 Spaatz Street, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH, 45433-7102. - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ From: BMendoza@aol.com Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 12:49:03 -0400 Subject: X-35 Popular Mechanics Sept,1996 issue talks about X-planes, from the X-1 to the XB-70,but it states that the X-35 is Top Secret? Does anyone know what this is. X-35 Mission: Believed to be a classified Air Force project using the designation originally given to a canceled space-rescue vehicle. First Flight: Unknown. Achievment: None yet. That's all it says. ------------------------------ From: Charles_E._Smith.wbst200@xerox.com Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:51:23 PDT Subject: Re: X-35 BMendoza writes: Popular Mechanics Sept,1996 issue talks about X-planes, from the X-1 to the XB-70,but it states that the X-35 is Top Secret? Does anyone know what this is. X-35 Mission: Believed to be a classified Air Force project using the designation originally given to a canceled space-rescue vehicle. First Flight: Unknown. Achievment: None yet. That's all it says. - ----------------------------------------------------------- (end quote) Its a large flying wing bomber! Rumor has it that there is a jet conversion called the YB-49 and a recon version called the YRB49! (end snicker) Gee, I would`ve thought "35" was retired for X-planes. What a pity. Chuck ------------------------------ From: James Easton <100626.2242@Compuserve.com> Date: 22 Aug 96 19:25:07 EDT Subject: Compartmented Information I wonder if anyone could help with some research. I would like to determine the origin(s) of the terms compartmented and compartmentalized. The concept of Sensitive Compartmented/Compartmentalized Information (SCI) has been in existence for many years, but when was this terminology introduced and by whom? A knowledgeable source has suggested that "compartmented" is an American terminology which came out of the U-2 program and was certainly used in retrospect during the 1960s when referring to that program and satellite related material. If anyone can assist, it would be greatly appreciated. James. Internet; 100626.2242@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: BMendoza@aol.com Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 19:49:13 -0400 Subject: Re: X-35 Chuck wrote; Its a large flying wing bomber! Rumor has it that there is a jet conversion called the YB-49 and a recon version called the YRB49! (end snicker) Gee, I would`ve thought "35" was retired for X-planes. What a pity. Chuck - ----------- Chuck; would this be the same as the YB-35? also no rumor I saw all the YB-35,YB-49 and a recon version called the YRB49 on a WINGs video. Is it common for Y and X to be the same plan? ------------------------------ From: "Ori" Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 08:13:34 MGT-200 Subject: Difference between western jets and eastern jets. Here is the translation of the IAF Magazine I promised to translate: *I'm only translating the part concerning the cocpit differences* 1. Brake system operated by handle in cocpit as oposed to pedals. 2. Flight data in k"m and meters. 3. microphone straped on neck(like wwII bomber mic's). If anyone wants more info send me questions and I'll look it up in the article. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ Ori Zakin http://www.makash.ac.il/students/2/orihp.htm oriz@www.makash.ac.il - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ From: TrimtabNYC@aol.com Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 02:33:49 -0400 Subject: Waverider in BusinessWeek magazine The current (August 26th) issue of BusinessWeek has an article on the LoFlyte Waverider, including a picture of the model. The article talks about the need for a "smart" control system and mentions some of the companies that will be involved in building the model. ------------------------------ From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 03:53:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: X-35 BMendoza wrote: >Popular Mechanics Sept,1996 issue talks about X-planes, from the X-1 to the >XB-70,but it states that the X-35 is Top Secret? Does anyone know what this >is. >X-35 >Mission: Believed to be a classified Air Force project using the >designation originally given to a canceled space-rescue vehicle. >First Flight: Unknown. >Achievment: None yet. >That's all it says. And Chuck jokes: >Its a large flying wing bomber! >Rumor has it that there is a jet conversion >called the YB-49 and a recon version called the YRB49! >(end snicker) >Gee, I would`ve thought "35" was retired for X-planes. What a pity. Whereupon BMendoza wondered: >Chuck; would this be the same as the YB-35? also no rumor I saw all the >YB-35,YB-49 and a recon version called the YRB49 on a WINGs video. >Is it common for Y and X to be the same plan? I haven't seen the PM article, and don't know what the article says and who the author is, but I would like to point out, that neither the XB-70 nor the XB-35, YB-35, YB-49 nor YRB-49A are "X-Planes", but "B"omber prototypes. Regarding the question if "Y" and "X" are used for the same plane, I would suggest to re-read my article about the US designation system. "X" and "Y" are status prefixes of the (Bomber) designations, depicting the prototype or development status of those particular versions of the (Bomber) designs. The X-35 is not a secret or classified project -- the author of the article is absolutely wrong here -- the X-35A, X-35B and X-35C are the proposed designations of one of the two finalists in the JAST/JSF competition, depicting the USAF, USMC and USN versions respectively. The other finalist's designs will be designated X-32A, X-32B and X-32C. None of those has been built or even selected yet, but I would suggest that Lockheed Martin will be one of the finalists, and (because of its unusual and 'ugly' design) I would wish Boeing would be the other finalist, but I believe McDonnell Douglas' design, which is much more conservative, will be the more likely second finalist. If JSF will ever go into series -- which would be the very first time in US history that an "X-Plane" evolved into a frontline or at least series production aircraft -- I which it would be Lockheed Martin's design! But they will not get the F-22 and JSF contracts, I suppose. The X-32 and X-35 may not be built in all three versions, because only two prototypes of each design are planned, while the third version would be a modification of one of the other two at a later time. Looking at current budgets, I am not sure if the JSF ever goes into series, but I am pretty sure that if it will be procured, then not in all three versions. The X-35 "designation" of the MSFC design was never official, just a name! - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 04:27:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Difference between western jets and eastern jets. Subject: Difference between western jets and eastern jets. Ori wrote: >Here is the translation of the IAF Magazine I promised to translate: >*I'm only translating the part concerning the cocpit differences* >1. Brake system operated by handle in cocpit as oposed to pedals. >2. Flight data in k"m and meters. >3. microphone straped on neck(like wwII bomber mic's). I personally believe the main difference between western and FSU/Russian designs is -- besides the use of the metric system and cyrillic lettering -- the "inverted" artificial horizon or attitude indicator. In western aircraft, the symbol of the aircraft is stationary, while the horizon is moving, according to the view out of the aircraft. In Russian aircraft, the horizon is kinda stationary, while the aircraft is moving, showing the attitude of the aircraft in respect to the ground, as it would be seen by an outside observer. All designs, up to the Su-27 at least, have those instruments, and as far as I know, the German MiG-29s had those too, before they were modified to the current MiG-29G (NATO) standard, incorporating 'normal' instruments and NATO compatible nav/com gear. Btw, does anyone know the German serial of the MiG-29G that crashed on June 25, 1996 near Dargun? - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@raptor.csc.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ From: seb@tadpole.co.uk (Steven Barber) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 09:55:44 +0000 Subject: Konkordski Saw the program on Konkordski last night on UK TV. Their contention was that the Paris airshow crash was caused by the Tu-144 taking abrupt avoiding action when encountering a Mirage jet that was taking espionage photos of the canards in action. It was pointed out that subsequent French fighter design has incorporated canards. The Concorde, flying immediately prior to Konkordski, had been warned of the presence of the Mirage - the Tu-144 was not. The abrupt 'bunt' caused two or more engines to stall. The pilot dived the a/c to spin the compressors again, realized he'd lost too much height and pulled back hard on the stick. At this point, the Tu-144 started to break up. It was stated that the French and Russian goverments colaborated on the cover up as the Russians didn't want the Tu-144 to be shown to be inferior to the Concorde and the French didn't want it known that their actions had caused the crash (killing 8 French civilians in addition to the crew of the plane). Prior to this, the Russian espionage effort to steal secrets from the Concorde development and apply them to the Tu-144 was covered in fair detail. The program closed showing how the US (in the form of NASA) and the Russians have now colaborated to get the Tu-144 back in the air as a flying test-bed for the development of the 2nd generation SST. Comment was made about the French and British needing funding to try and keep in the SST 'race'. Personally, I'd rather we supported Skylon... Not too skunky but hopefully of interest. Steve Barber ------------------------------ From: Easton James Date: Fri, 23 Aug 96 13:10:00 PDT Subject: Compartmented Information I wonder if anyone could help with some research. I would like to determine the origin(s) of the terms compartmented and compartmentalized. The concept of Sensitive Compartmented/Compartmentalized Information (SCI) has been in existence for many years, but when was this terminology introduced and by whom? A knowledgeable source has suggested that "compartmented" is an American terminology which came out of the U-2 program and was certainly used in retrospect during the 1960s when referring to that program and satellite related material. There's one example at: http://www.lmsc.lockheed.com/newsbureau/pressreleases/9554.html CORONA PROGRAM PROFILE "To assemble CORONA into operationally-ready satellites, a work area was leased on April 1, 1958 in Menlo Park, California. Within Lockheed, few questions arose since CORONA was compartmented: most workers engaged in a single, segmented phase of the vehicle-assembly process; as of 1963, well into regular CORONA operation, only four people in Lockheed were briefed to the entire CORONA program. CORONA was moved to Lockheed's Sunnyvale, California, plant in 1969". If anyone can assist, it would be greatly appreciated. James. Internet; 100626.2242@compuserve.com ------------------------------ From: John Stone Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 08:53:50 -0400 Subject: Re: Compartmentalization..... James Easton wrote: >I wonder if anyone could help with some research. > >I would like to determine the origin(s) of the terms compartmented and >compartmentalized. > >The concept of Sensitive Compartmented/Compartmentalized Information (SCI) has >been in existence for many years, but when was this terminology introduced and >by whom? > >A knowledgeable source has suggested that "compartmented" is an American >terminology which came out of the U-2 program and was certainly used in >retrospect during the 1960s when referring to that program and satellite >related >material. As I understand it, at least when my father was invovled with some secret projects, they were ony told what they needed to know to do there job, and also a lot of times you didn't know who or what the other people in the project were working on. One story was the guy that lived next door to us was actually working on the aircraft my father was working on, but in a different area, and even though they knew each other they didn't know that they were working on the same aircraft. It wasn't until later that they figured out that they were working on the same plane. I'm not sure if the AF still works this way, as my fahter said that it was very difficult (and expensive) to operate that way, hopefuly they (the AF) has wised up! Best, John | / ^ \ ___|___ -(.)==<.>==(.)- --------o---((.))---o-------- SR-71 Blackbird U-2 Dragon Lady John Stone jstone@thepoint.net U-2 and SR-71 Web Page:http://www.thepoint.net/~jstone/blackbird.html ------------------------------ From: tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com (Tom Robison) Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 08:04:50 +0000 Subject: Corona Speaking of Corona, there is a Discovery Channel special on Sunday night about the Corona program. As they say, check your local listings. Tom Robison Hughes Defense Communications, Fort Wayne, IN tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com (work) tcrobi@fortwayne.infi.net (home) ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 21:38:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: X-35 On Fri, 23 Aug 1996, Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl wrote: > > I haven't seen the PM article, and don't know what the article says and who > the author is, but I would like to point out, that neither the XB-70 nor the > XB-35, YB-35, YB-49 nor YRB-49A are "X-Planes", but "B"omber prototypes. The author was William Garvey. I found some others mistakes in his article also. May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu wjs@webspan.net "During the war (Desert Storm), I ate, I slept, and I flew. You couldn't go to town or off to the mountains. Not allow to do that. We had a joke back then: 'The only time they let you off base is to go bomb Baghdad.'" Capt. Matt Byrd (F-117 pilot) ------------------------------ From: Wei-Jen Su Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 21:41:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Difference between western jets and eastern jets. On Fri, 23 Aug 1996, Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl wrote: > I personally believe the main difference between western and FSU/Russian > designs is -- besides the use of the metric system and cyrillic lettering -- > the "inverted" artificial horizon or attitude indicator. > > In western aircraft, the symbol of the aircraft is stationary, while the > horizon is moving, according to the view out of the aircraft. In Russian > aircraft, the horizon is kinda stationary, while the aircraft is moving, > showing the attitude of the aircraft in respect to the ground, as it would > be seen by an outside observer. Right!!! This issue was commented between Western and Eastern fighter pilot before. They said: that's why Eastern and Western has so much confrontation, they look at the world in different points of view. ;) May the Force be with you Su Wei-Jen E-mail: wsu02@barney.poly.edu wjs@webspan.net "During the war (Desert Storm), I ate, I slept, and I flew. You couldn't go to town or off to the mountains. Not allow to do that. We had a joke back then: 'The only time they let you off base is to go bomb Baghdad.'" Capt. Matt Byrd (F-117 pilot) ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V5 #697 ********************************* 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).