From: skunk-works-digest-owner@pmihwy.com To: skunk-works-digest@pmihwy.com Subject: Skunk Works Digest V6 #22 Reply-To: skunk-works-digest@pmihwy.com Errors-To: skunk-works-digest-owner@pmihwy.com Precedence: Skunk Works Digest Wednesday, 26 February 1997 Volume 06 : Number 022 In this issue: Donuts on a rope over Indiana Mr Gibson, Black Triangles & all that Re: Donuts on a rope over Indiana A-6 Retrospective (Moderately long) Re: Double mailings.... Re: Tier 3 Re: Lawn Darts Dick Bong Memorial [request for information) RE: Lawn Dart ETC: Re: donuts roped! Re: Tier 3 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: ConsLaw@aol.com Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 10:08:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Donuts on a rope over Indiana I live in central Indiana, and a few days ago, I saw lots of contrails in the clear sky. A good number of them had pulses, and if taken in isolation could have been taken for "donuts on a rope." I am sure they were simply commercial aircraft with pulses caused by turbulance. I have my doubts as to the feasibility of a human powered external combustion aircraft. My reason: the Germans in World War II, and the Americans after the war attempted to put together an aircraft using the pulse-jet from the V-1 buzz Bomb. The vibrations from the pulsejet were not conducive to human-guided flight. I would think that the dynamic forces on the pilot in an external combustion hypersonic vehicle would be far worse than those of the buzz bomb. (Just a guess) As to the earlier post, asking what the "lawn dart" and the "stinkbug" are. The lawn dart is clearly an F-16. It looks like a lawn dart, and it had an annoying early habit of sticking nose first into the ground. I'm guessing that the "stinkbug" is the F-117, because it was a black project now out in the open, and it kinda looks like a beetle. ------------------------------ From: michael.crutch@ukonline.co.uk Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 19:04:04 GMT Subject: Mr Gibson, Black Triangles & all that Hi all Just for everyone's info (following a number of queries), the British Aviation Reserach Group is a happy bunch of military aviation researchers and historians, all of which perform this activity in their spare time. We produce a magazine (British Aviation Review) once a month on a subscription basis, and totals some 1300 pages of information on aircraft, units and activities world wide, with heavy emphasis on UK and US air ams. In response to one query, we do not received any form of "inside" information, especially to "black" projects. We have never passed comments in our editorials on Silent Vulcan or any other "unknown", the Boscombe incident was a one off as I was interviewed by a guy from Jane's Defence Weekly (the article although finally appeared in the Daily Telegraph, a newspaper along the same standing as the Washington Post); I believe an electronic version may still be available on the 'net for those who are interested. Be warned though - journalists cannot be trusted and the guy from JDW who helped the newspaper guy put it together still went for a sensationalist viewpoint!!! Also, on Chris Gibson, I'm not aware of ANYONE who has doubted his sighting, just exactly what type of plane it could've been. Sorry to take up your download time, but it's worth pointing this out for those who are interested. Best wishes Mike London UK ------------------------------ From: larry@ichips.intel.com Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 12:30:41 -0800 Subject: Re: Donuts on a rope over Indiana ConsLaw writes: >I live in central Indiana, and a few days ago, I saw lots of contrails in the >clear sky. A good number of them had pulses, and if taken in isolation could >have been taken for "donuts on a rope." I am sure they were simply >commercial aircraft with pulses caused by turbulance. You're probably correct. >I have my doubts as to the feasibility of a human powered Say what? human powered? >I have my doubts as to the feasibility of a human powered external combustion >aircraft. My reason: the Germans in World War II, and the Americans after >the war attempted to put together an aircraft using the pulse-jet from the >V-1 buzz Bomb. The vibrations from the pulsejet were not conducive to >human-guided flight. Oh, human-guided! The Germans and Japanese built manned pulsejet powered aircraft during the war and flew them. I don't recall a vibration problem, but assuming there was one. Pulsejets don't have real good combustion efficiency because their combustion pressure is so low. Also, the combustion frequency and therefore the thrust, is a function of the acoustics of the jet pipe, or a function of the length of the pipe. In other words, they work at only one frequency, and they are not supersonic engines. One of the hypothetical propulsion mechanisms that might be responsible for Mr. Card's sighting is a Pulsed Detonation Engine or PDE for short. These engines don't have the low combustion pressure problems that pulsejets have because they use a shock wave caused by a detonation to pressurize the air-fuel mixture. The PDE combustion frequency is also independent of the length of the PDE tube. Indeed the first functioning modern PDE that was built and run on a test stand at the Naval Postgraduate School was controlled by a regular automobile ignition system. Now another point about PDE's. They essentially are very similar to an internal combustion engine where the shock wave acts very much like the piston in an internal combustion engine. The car that you drive pulses and you don't feel vibration due to the high frequency of firing and rubber engine mounts that isolate your engine from the chasis of your car. It is believed that these wave jet engines with pulsed cycles can be isolated the very same way. > I would think that the dynamic forces on the pilot in >an external combustion hypersonic vehicle would be far worse than those of >the buzz bomb. Now here's another problem. Here's where the quality of the witness comes in. You're mixing two different 'sightings' into the same thing. This thing is so hopelessly screwed up that it almost seems impossible to straighten up, thanks to certain journalists, and the gullibility of most black aircraft watchers. Your mixing two different things together here. One: Mr. Card's sighting of a "doughnuts on a rope" contrail being made at apparently much higher speed and altitude than a commercial contrail being made at the same time and in the same direction; Two: the diamond shaped aircraft story reported in the Dec. 24, 1990, pp. 41-43, AWST issue. Simply stated, these two stories are TOTALLY UNRELATED!!!! Popular Science magazine merged them for some reason, a long time ago. Then when the sonic booms started happening in the Southwest, the TV Press took the same tack. Let me say this again, these two stories are TOTALLY UNRELATED!!!! Now, the diamond story is much less reliable. It has been proven that external burning for combustion does not work nearly as well as internal burning. This is because with an enclosed combustor, the pressure waves due to combustion have more surface area to act upon. However! External burning IS useful for two things, namely drag reduction and stability and control. Also if you look at the vehicle drawing in the AW&ST issue you'll notice that you see NACA inlet ducts. These are subsonic only inlet ducts! They are not useful for supersonic inlets! Another thing, the source to the AW&ST diamond story never described a pulsed propulsion system at all. His whole thing was continuous external burning, which is not really feasible for propulsion. Since AW&ST never cooperated with the Popular Science piece, for some reason, probably the journalists poor understanding of the issues and impending deadline to make an interesting story, the journalist made his own conclusions. However, let me state this again, the two stories are totally unrelated. I feel there are additional negatives about the diamond shaped aircraft story as well, but this is enough I hope, to make you all question it (both AW&ST and PS versions). Again the point, the quality of the sighting is the ONLY important issue. Also, there is no proof that the even the best source wasn't mistaken. You can only deal in possibilities. You won't know for sure until some announcement is made, OR NEVER MADE. You may have to wait a VERY long time! Larry ------------------------------ From: "Terry Colvin" Date: Tue, 25 Feb 97 13:21:28 GMT Subject: A-6 Retrospective (Moderately long) ________________________ Forward Header __________________________________ Subject: A-6 Retrospective (Moderately long) Author: Bill Riddle at FHU2 Date: 2/25/97 9:58 AM The following is from the January-February 1997 issue of The Naval Safety Center's Aviation Magazine, "Approach." VA-75 introduced the A-6 to combat in Vietnam in 1965. When the squadron comes home with USS Enterprise, and VA-165 returns on board USS Carl Vinson, the Intruder will close out a 37-year career that has seen it involved in no less than seven shooting wars and many peacetime deployments throughout the world. One of the few American aircraft that has never served with any other country, the A-6 first flew in 1960 and entered service in 1963 with the Green Pawns of VA-42. Intruder stories have been a cornerstone of Approach, and we have gasped, chuckled, and marveled at the experiences of A-6 crews. Now, as the bomber from Bethpage retires and the surviving attack wing decommissions, the Commander of Attack Wing, U.S. Pacific Fleet, Capt. Terry J. Toms, a long-time A-6 pilot, offers a few thoughts. FLYING THE INTRUDER HOME Military history is full of stories about men who rode into battle on trusty mounts that became subjects of devotion. A good horse often meant the difference between coming home carrying your shield or being carried on it. My "warhorse" for 24 years has been the Intruder, but the day is rapidly approaching when I will ride the A-6 to pasture for the last time. The Intruder had all the classic attributes of a great mount. It was honest and forgiving, with long legs and able to carry a heavy load. It brought its riders home from battle despite its wounds. It was a true thoroughbred to the end, and often the only horse for a particular job when aviators had to go to bad places on dark nights. My devotion comes from where she took me and how she brought me home. During the 4,200 hours I spent with the A-6, I experienced only three in-flight emergencies. In the past 20 years and 3,500 hours, I've had just one hydraulic failure in the A-6E. It was a great horse for an average pilot. I have the prerequisite number of sea stories, but they all come from people outside the cockpit trying to kill me with guns or radar, or more frequently, the guy with the reins (me) showing bad judgment or not enough skill. But my faithful steed never let me down. As a prelude to disestablishment, my wing commissioned a bronze plaque listing our Whidbey forebears, friends, peers, and successors who gave there lives in Pacific Fleet Intruders - 86 people. Forty-three of them died since I walked into VA-128 in 1973. "Things are a little crazy, "someone told me, "we lost a crew last night," Since then, I've periodically had to view the cost of Navy TACAIR up close and personnel. I've stood in the water looking at wreckage off the end of a runway with a parachute wrapped around the A-6's tail. I've stood in a phone booth in South Dakota while on leave, crying as the SDO told me two of my JO buddies had done loops on a low-level until they ran out of airspeed, altitude and ideas. I've watched dumbstruck as two of my former FRS students dove into the water three seconds off the cat on a dark night. I've sadly contemplated a salvaged Intruder's cockpit after a fellow jaygee forgot to lower his flaps. I've tried to make it through the eulogy for a pal while his four-year-old stared at me from the front row. I've heard the plaintive calls of a fellow skipper to "Jackal 404" who didn't return from a night mining mission over Iraq. Many of our losses come with the territory. "Did not return from night combat mission" is a frequent one-line explanation for two friends who didn't walk back into the ready room on Yankee Station during Vietnam. As I thought about the 41 non-combat losses since I first crossed Deception Pass Bridge, it occurred to me that 30 of those aviators died in aircraft that were healthy and strong, without any known problems. I've seen mishaps in my community and others that I call "Lindbergh accidents." Because of human failure outside the cockpit or a rare material failure, it wouldn't have made any difference if Lindbergh was holding the stick. The crew was dead, and there was nothing they could have done to prevent it. Those are the ones you think about in quiet moments. Most of my friends did control their fate. They hit the ground or water in a perfectly good jet. Some would be alive today if it hadn't taken so long for relatively simple survival items, like FLU-8s and command ejection, to reach the fleet. But most did it to themselves. Sixteen of my friends went in at night or in IMC. Ten did something stupid close to the dirt on a perfect day. In many cases, we're left to wonder why two people simultaneously lost SA and became the honorees at a memorial service. There were some givens in aviation safety before the first Intruder flew, and those constraints will still be there when I park the last of my old friends in the desert. The ground has a Pk of 1.0, (one crew I knew proved the Pk of water is only .99). When one seat crashes, the other is never far behind, so work together. Technology is wonderful, but maturity and experience are even better. "A person's got to know his limitations," Clint Eastwood once declared. If you have to ask yourself if you feel lucky, it's probably a bad idea. My takeoffs and landings in the A-6 will be equal. When my faithful warhorse gracefully retires, I'll pat her on the nose one last time, remember some friends, and whisper, "thanks baby." To which I add one thought: As an Army Aviator I have to say that I doubt CAPT Toms' characterization of himself as an "average pilot." I consider Navy Wings of Gold the mark of someone much above average. I spent two weeks in Saratoga in 1980. I was able to make one flight in the right seat of a KA-6. A high light of my life. They lost an A-6 crew while I was aboard. I well remember the captain's words on the 1MC: "We're in a risky business, gents..." After a few minutes reflection (and I am sure many a fervent "Amen"), everyone got on with their job. The A-6 community, and Naval Aviation in general, provide good examples of the folks who won the Cold War. Bill Riddle ------------------------------ From: "George R. Kasica" Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 20:05:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Double mailings.... > > Hi George, > > Volume 6 seems to be offering extra value for money (what money you ask!) I've > received : 2 copies of #'s 2, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19 20 and 21 and three copies > of number 18 - a bonus issue that one :-) > > Now I appreciate that Skunk Works Digest is worth reading carefully, and bears > frequent re-reading, and I may have missed some announcement, but is there > anything _I_ can do to reduce the duplication? I'd rather get two copies than > none so I'm not being critical, I wouldn't run a mail list for money - and > you're doing it for nothing... > > Best wishes > Arthur > Arthur: We're looking at it here yet...haven't got a clue as to what broke but we're still looking :) Anyway, the solution may be that I will move the list to my own Internet Server here (I KNOW the address will change just a bit...) and that will give me ALOT more flexibility and control over it. I used to be the Network Manager were it is now at pmihwy.com but left there on 12/31/96 to pursue a career as an Independent Consultant. I recently (About 2/5) set up my own server and think that the move may be best for all. Will keep you posted. George ------------------------------ From: Xelex@aol.com Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 01:15:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: Tier 3 Dan Zinngrabe is absolutely correct in citing the differences between the Tier 3 and Tier 3 - (Darkstar). The Tier 3 design was based on Lockheed's advanced technology bomber concept. A prototype made manned flights at Groom Lake, although the operational version was meant to be pilotless. The prototype survived the tests, and is in a museum at Groom. Lockheed wanted to test the Tier 3 - at Groom, but was turned down because Darkstar was not sufficiently "black." It ended up at NASA Dryden instead. Peter W. Merlin THE X-HUNTERS ------------------------------ From: habu@why.net Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 08:02:04 -0800 Subject: Re: Lawn Darts ConsLaw@aol.com wrote: > The lawn dart is clearly an F-16. It looks like a lawn dart, and it > had an annoying early habit of sticking nose first into the ground. I have heard this nickname for the F-16 before, but have not heard why is has acquired this reputation - can anyone shed some light on the history of this accident-prone nickname ??? Others I've heard: F-4 Rhino F-14 Turkey F-15 Flying Tennis Court YF-23 Black Widow A-12 Dorito (the cancelled MDD/GD/Navy program) Greg Fieser ------------------------------ From: "Terry Colvin" Date: Wed, 26 Feb 97 11:23:28 GMT Subject: Dick Bong Memorial [request for information) Please respond to Bob (p38bob@deepwell.com). Subject: Dick Bong Author: p38bob@deepwell.com at smtp-fhu Date: 23/02/97 15:14 Hi Terry Have you seen any info on the Bong Memorial and also on the restoration of "Marge" in anything Lockheed is publishing? check6 bob ps check out my home page "There are no fighter pilots down in hell" "Because of damn good crew-chiefs" Home Page http://www.deepwell.com/p38bob/index.html p38bob@deepwell.com p38bob@worldnet.att.net bob@pizzazzu.com ------------------------------ From: JOHN SZALAY Date: Wed, 26 Feb 97 17:45:23 EST Subject: RE: Lawn Dart ETC: >ConsLaw@aol.com wrote: > > The lawn dart is clearly an F-16. It looks like a lawn dart, and it > had an annoying early habit of sticking nose first into the ground. > >I have heard this nickname for the F-16 before, but have not heard why >is has acquired this reputation - can anyone shed some light on the >history of this accident-prone nickname ??? > >Others I've heard: > > F-4 Rhino > F-14 Turkey > F-15 Flying Tennis Court > YF-23 Black Widow > A-12 Dorito (the cancelled MDD/GD/Navy program) > > Greg Fieser - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Emmanuel Gustin has posted an extensive list of aircraft nicknames that he has compiled. If he does not post it again, (I,m sure he's here on this list) I,ll post it, from my archives. :) John Szalay jpszalay@tacl.dnet.ge.com ------------------------------ From: Charlie Hattendorf Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 17:37:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: donuts roped! > > I spent over a month out in the desert with ground-based equipment; for > most of the day the most exciting thing to do was to study contrails, most > of them from airliners going north out of LAX around R-4508. I saw a lot > of "donuts on a rope", as this is a common phenomenon just before a > contrail stops looking like a contrail. There's enough vorticity left to > wrap chunks up into donuts and a faint central core, or rope, visible. > The next step is for the rope to vanish, followed by the donuts fading out > more slowly. > > Regards, > Mary > > Mary Shafer DoD #0362 KotFR shafer@ursa-major.spdcc.com Hi Mary, I have to add that while being north of you at China Lake, and outside a lot of the time, I've only seen the fabled "roped donuts" once. And this is after spending a lot of time viewing flight characteristics of aircraft. What draws one's attention and leads to speculation of a different aircraft type is the repeated puffs in line with the contrail in a regular succession, unlike what one might believe to be caused by a natural phenomenon...'course this is from someone who is not an aeronautical engineer. And no,I did not see the aircraft that caused the interesting contrail. I've seen the distortion in contrails in R-4508 and the occurrence I mentioned bore no resemblance to what I've seen so far... Have fun and keep the Blackbird flying! Charlie ------------------------------ From: jeffhclark@juno.com (Jeff Clark) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 22:02:04 EST Subject: Re: Tier 3 On Wed, 26 Feb 1997 01:15:05 -0500 (EST) Xelex@aol.com writes: >Dan Zinngrabe is absolutely correct in citing the differences between the >Tier 3 and Tier 3 - (Darkstar). The Tier 3 design was based on Lockheed's >advanced technology bomber concept. A prototype made manned flights at Groom >Lake, although the operational version was meant to be pilotless. The >prototype survived the tests, and is in a museum at Groom. > >Lockheed wanted to test the Tier 3 - at Groom, but was turned down because >Darkstar was not sufficiently "black." It ended up at NASA Dryden instead. > >Peter W. Merlin >THE X-HUNTERS Could you elaborate on this Groom Lake museum? How did you hear about it? What is supposed to be in it? Also, have you heard anything more on the plans to recover one of the Have Blue aircraft, which you mentioned a while ago? Jeff Clark ------------------------------ End of Skunk Works Digest V6 #22 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@pmihwy.com". 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@pmihwy.com" or, if you don't like to type a lot, "georgek@netwrx1.com". 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 e-mail request by sending a message to majordomo@pmihwy.com with no subject and a line containing "get skunk-works-digest vNN.nMMM" (where "NN" is the volume number, and "MMM" is the issue number). You can get a list of all available digests by sending the one line command "index skunk-works-digest". If you have any questions or problems please contact me at: georgek@netwrx1.com Thanks, George R, Kasica