From: owner-skunk-works-digest@ (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@eagle.netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V6 #39 Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@ Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@ Precedence: bulk skunk-works-digest Monday, March 24 1997 Volume 06 : Number 039 In this issue: Re: Arizona UFOs Re: skunk-works-digest V6 #38 Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Good Job! Re: Good Job........ Go figure..... test to netwrx1 test to pmihwy Re: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Re: test to netwrx1 The Truth is Out There... Re[3]: Arizona "UFO" Re: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Can't we all just get along? (Yes, if we learn to ignore eachother) Re: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Thanks... Re: Hypersonic Aircraft rolls into Nellis (hypothetically) 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. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 01:48:36 -0800 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: Arizona UFOs I apologize Mary for the rock comment. That was uncalled for. I engaged my fingers before my brain. I usually don't make mistakes like that but I did this time. I'm not perfect. Oh well. Regards, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 08:41:10 -0600 From: Laurel Joy Richards Subject: Re: skunk-works-digest V6 #38 On 3:42 AM -0600 3/22/97, my computer, disguised as skunk-works-digest said: - - >So I can drag any topic I want onto this list, as long as I do it civilly? >Radical feminism? The superiority of Harley-Davidson motorcycles? Lists >of the histories of all 5000+ F-4 Phantom IIs? GIFs of my collies? >British military strategy from 1800 to 1830? Hi, Mary! Were you serious? Lists of the histories of all 5000+ F-4 Phantom IIs? If so, I'd love to get those! *chuckle* Hrmmm. Seriously, if you have a recommended reading list on the Radical Feminism (are you talking separatist?), I'd love to see it. Cheers, Laurel |------------------------------------------------------------------|||| |Laurel Joy Richards "Courage is the price that life extracts ||| |tasha@uncle.org for granting peace with yourself." || | -- Amelia Earhart | |---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 14:49:25 -0500 (EST) From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Subject: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Al, The CIA A-12 at Huntsville, Article 127, USAF serial 60-6930, one of the original "Black Shield" aircraft, is (or at least was) displayed as "NASA" "7930", which is totally bogus. Jim Goodall writes in his SR-71 Blackbird book, that Article 128, USAF serial 60-6931, currently on display at the Minnesota ANG Museum, St. Paul, MN, was restored to represent a 'Black Shield' aircraft, with red bogus tail number '77835'. I have never actually seen a photo of an A-12 with a bogus tail number (besides that one), and can't attest to the accuracy of the claim, even though it was common practice with other "national assets" like RB-57s or RC-135s, to use bogus tail numbers. But the Huntsville example tried to depict a NASA SR-71, rather than a 'Black Shield' A-12. The notion that the aircraft had that number on its tail while with the USAF is bull. There is no evidence that the aircraft was ever painted as a NASA aircraft with the yellow and black "NASA" tail stripe or carrying the "7930" tail number (using even a wrong font as far as I can tell). On the contrary, it is very likely that the aircraft wore, besides the "U.S. AIR FORCE" titles and the national insignia, a white tail number of "06930", when stored at Palmdale after its operational life. - -- 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/ - --- --- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 14:48:50 -0500 (EST) From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Subject: Good Job! A big thanks to George for fixing the double posting problem. Since the move to his new server, all posts and the digest are single again. Well done! - -- 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/ - --- --- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 17:40:12 -0500 From: John Stone Subject: Re: Good Job........ Hello, Well since the resubscription, I've gone from single posts to almost every post is double! Go figure....... That's what God made the delete key for........ 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 07:21:06 -0500 From: John Stone Subject: Go figure..... Hi, Since my previous message posted, everything has gone back to single posting....did you do something George? 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 07:09:09 -0800 From: habu@why.net Subject: test to netwrx1 I have not received any posts since the change to netwrx1.com... Greg Fieser ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 07:09:53 -0800 From: habu@why.net Subject: test to pmihwy I have not received any posts since the change to netwrx1.com... Greg Fieser ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 09:18:43 -0600 From: Albert H Dobyns Subject: Re: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl wrote: > > Al, > > The CIA A-12 at Huntsville, Article 127, USAF serial 60-6930, one of the > original "Black Shield" aircraft, is (or at least was) displayed as "NASA" > "7930", which is totally bogus. I have felt the same way as you do for some time. I was offering what might be a possible explanation for the tail number. And I never believed that the plane had the NASA markings. > > Jim Goodall writes in his SR-71 Blackbird book, that Article 128, USAF > serial 60-6931, currently on display at the Minnesota ANG Museum, St. Paul, > MN, was restored to represent a 'Black Shield' aircraft, with red bogus tail > number '77835'. I have never actually seen a photo of an A-12 with a bogus > tail number (besides that one), and can't attest to the accuracy of the > claim, even though it was common practice with other "national assets" like > RB-57s or RC-135s, to use bogus tail numbers. Oh, so that's the book that had the description of A-12 tail numbers starting with "77"! I couldn't remember which book had the description. Thanks for jogging my memory. We are days away from moving and almost all my Blackbird stuff is packed in boxes. Here's a silly thought: make some labels that say TOP SECRET and SENIOR CROWN clearance required before opening! :) > > But the Huntsville example tried to depict a NASA SR-71, rather than a > 'Black Shield' A-12. The notion that the aircraft had that number on its > tail while with the USAF is bull. There is no evidence that the aircraft was > ever painted as a NASA aircraft with the yellow and black "NASA" tail stripe > or carrying the "7930" tail number (using even a wrong font as far as I can > tell). On the contrary, it is very likely that the aircraft wore, besides > the "U.S. AIR FORCE" titles and the national insignia, a white tail number > of "06930", when stored at Palmdale after its operational life. I believe you! Perhaps someone at that museum decided to take a few liberies and make it look distinctive?? Who knows? > > -- Andreas > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 10:51:17 -0500 (EST) From: "George R. Kasica" Subject: Re: test to netwrx1 On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 habu@why.net wrote: > Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 07:09:09 -0800 > From: habu@why.net > To: Skunk Works > Subject: test to netwrx1 > > I have not received any posts since the change to netwrx1.com... > > Greg Fieser > Did you get this one Greg? You are the first I've heard of that problem. Make sure you're subscribed. George R. Kasica President Netwrx Consulting Inc. P.O. Box 27242 West Allis WI 53227-9998 (414)541-8579 VOICE --- (800)816-2568 FAX ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 08:39:15 -0800 From: patrick@e-z.net Subject: The Truth is Out There... Well....this has been most interesting. Or boring, depending on your point of view. But maybe we can examine boil all these posts down and examine the residue. I would like to suggest that we have only one real problem. What is the consensus definition of the focus of this news list. Is it a tight definition of only LMSW activities or does it include work done by Boeing or others? (Who is left out there?) And how do we define these activities? Known and/or speculated? And for fun, what about ufo's with a small case "c". Is not Chris Gibson's siting a ufo? This is said assuming one accepts the definition of a ufo to be what it was originally defined as. And not the grocery store check out tabloid definition some of us want to abhor. I believe if we can discuss where we want to go in the future we will elimenate some of the recent confusion in here. PS.....If the "Glomar Explorer" is sunk at its moorings by French special op's frogmen, you won't hear about it from me!!! patrick cullumber patrick@e-z.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 10:57:39 -0500 From: gregweigold@pmsc.com (GREG WEIGOLD) Subject: Re[3]: Arizona "UFO" Is the list still alive? GW ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re[2]: Arizona "UFO" Author: gregweigold@pmsc.com (GREG WEIGOLD) at INTERNET Date: 3/21/97 6:15 PM I really think that we ought to just drop this thread and hope that apologizes to Mary are made OFF-LINE where appropriate. Let's try to self-discipline ourselves away from the "lights in the sky" postings, unless there's some reason to believe they may be from a 'black' aerospace project, ie: '...the mysterious lights were followed by multiple sonic booms that were reportedly heard from Seattle to Edwards AFB... ' or something like that. In other words, something more substantial than atmospheric inversions, swamp gas, and reflected street lights. I think we all know what is supposed to be on this list, let's just try to keep it that way. Can we just go on now? Thanks GW Greg Weigold Supr. Tech Support/DBA Policy Management Systems Corp. Columbia, SC ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Arizona "UFO" Author: dadams@netcom.com (Dean Adams) at INTERNET Date: 3/21/97 2:26 PM > As long as an Unidentified Flying Object remains unidentified and as = > long as LMSW is in the business of making airplanes which try very hard = > to be unidentifiable, then we should try to give odd, and possibly = > silly, sightings at least the briefest benefit of the doubt. Fine, but discussing "silly sightings" is NOT the purpose of this list. > I don't see = > that lights in the sky are any less valid a discussion topic than black = > triangles or donut-on-a-rope contrails.=20 Lights in the sky are not a valid discussion topic *here* unless there is some serious reason to suspect they are related to a black project. > In fact, it seems to me, that the black triangle and silent vulcan = > reports, which were once commonly dismissed as UFO nonsense, are now = > receiving more serious consideration on this list Not really, since there has been nothing to elevate them to a more "serious" level. It remains nothing more than the level of totally unsubstantiated UFO urban myth. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 11:58:43 -0500 (EST) From: Mary Shafer Subject: Re: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s The whole subject of NASA and the 93x series of aircraft is confusing, since there were four aircraft and three tail numbers involved, with only two actually at NASA as part of "the yellow-tail air force". Originally, YF-12As 935 and 936 were designated for joint NASA-USAF research, with 935 coming to Dryden (with the tail repainted) and 936 stayed with the USAF. We did quite nicely with 935, mostly looking at structural modes (the Blackbird is very flexible--Fast Eddie describes flying it as feeling like one is out on the end of a diving board, with it flexing up and down). The camera that we installed showed, for example, that the aft end deflects as much as 15 cm (6 in.) under load, and the load limit is pretty small. On the other hand, 936 didn't fare so well. It stayed with the USAF, in USAF markings, and shortly after the beginning of the program the plane caught fire (a fatigue failure of a fuel line), the crew ejected, and the plane burned. I don't know what its livery looked like, but I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there wasn't much change. This left the joint program with one airplane that was finished with the structures program and no airplane to do the performance and propulsion testing. So the USAF pulled an SR-71A off, renumbered it 937, called it a YF-12C, and sent it to Dryden, where the tail got repainted. However, because of the classified nature of the SR-71, compared to the YF-12, this plane was tested with YF-12 inlets and engines. As a result, it wasn't really an SR-71 when it was here. Think of it as being like the SR-71C, only without a crash in its background. We did a lot of research with the aircraft, mostly in support of SST. Aerodynamics, performance, control systems, aerodynamic heating, and so on. When we finally finished up, the YF-12A 935 was flown to the USAF Museum at Wright-Patterson, where it still is. (I don't know if it's still in the NASA livery.) The YF-12C went back to Palmdale, where it got turned back into an SR-71A and got its own proper tail number back. It went on operational status, of course, and blended in with the rest. I think that the proper number is on the list commonly available here, by the way. As Andreas writes, NASA never ever had an A-12. And trying to simulate one of our YF-12s with an A-12 sounds like a bad joke. Regards, 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 Sat, 22 Mar 1997, Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl wrote: > Al, > > The CIA A-12 at Huntsville, Article 127, USAF serial 60-6930, one of the > original "Black Shield" aircraft, is (or at least was) displayed as "NASA" > "7930", which is totally bogus. > > Jim Goodall writes in his SR-71 Blackbird book, that Article 128, USAF > serial 60-6931, currently on display at the Minnesota ANG Museum, St. Paul, > MN, was restored to represent a 'Black Shield' aircraft, with red bogus tail > number '77835'. I have never actually seen a photo of an A-12 with a bogus > tail number (besides that one), and can't attest to the accuracy of the > claim, even though it was common practice with other "national assets" like > RB-57s or RC-135s, to use bogus tail numbers. > > But the Huntsville example tried to depict a NASA SR-71, rather than a > 'Black Shield' A-12. The notion that the aircraft had that number on its > tail while with the USAF is bull. There is no evidence that the aircraft was > ever painted as a NASA aircraft with the yellow and black "NASA" tail stripe > or carrying the "7930" tail number (using even a wrong font as far as I can > tell). On the contrary, it is very likely that the aircraft wore, besides > the "U.S. AIR FORCE" titles and the national insignia, a white tail number > of "06930", when stored at Palmdale after its operational life. > > -- 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/ > --- --- > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 10:34:41 -0800 From: Mike.Mueller@jpl.nasa.gov (Mike Mueller) Subject: Can't we all just get along? (Yes, if we learn to ignore eachother) Mary said: >If you're not willing to do the work to set up your own list discussing >research into UFOs as aeronautics phenomena, then you don't deserve to >have one as far as I'm concerned. And you really don't have the right to >steal this one. Speaking of technical solutions to the problem of "ambiguous list charter", there is a relatively simple way to filter e-mail and discard posts containing subjects, content, or authors that you would prefer not to waste your time reading. It is commonly called a bozo filter. It would be more difficult to set up if you subscribe to the digest version, but is still possible. I use a UNIX program called procmail to filter my incoming mail, but a lot of e-mail client software also has the ability to filter incoming mail. An object that is witnessed to be moving in the atmosphere but is not identified by the observer could be a 747, a black aircraft, a weather balloon, or even a alien spaceship. Only one of my examples is a valid topic for this list, but it is still a UFO until it is identified as a black aircraft. I don't believe that any member of this list can state the absolute, statistical odds of a UFO to belong to a particular category of objects and based on this belief I feel that UFO reports that have characteristics that plausibly fit those of black aircraft are valid topics for discussion here. Many people may disagree with me on this, and I feel that those that strongly disagree should set up bozo filters to remove e-mail containing subjects that offend them and from authors who offend them for whatever reason. I prefer to place the responsibility of list moderation on myself because only I am able to determine what I am interested in reading. I don't use bozo filters on this digest (partly because I haven't bothered to figure out how to do it with digests) but I do practice my right to ignore messages that I am not interested in. However, if I were very emotional about avoiding a particular topic I would figure out how to filter it instead of trying to push my particular interests onto a population of others with similar but not identical interests to mine. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 11:53:52 -0800 From: larry@ichips.intel.com Subject: Re: Bogus tail numbers on A-12s Andreas writes: >I have never actually seen a photo of an A-12 with a bogus >tail number ... I have seen something similar. It actually wasn't an A-12, but an MD-21 (I think the drone was on there). I recall a takeoff shot (maybe it was landing - I know I'm hardly being helpful here), taken from one of the F-104 chase aircraft that the blackbird test programs used at Groom Lake (I think I'm right here). Anyway, it shows 940 and good ole 940 is definitely NOT wearing 940. It wasn't wearing anything like 941 either. I'll check Miller tonight to see if it's in there. It was black and white if I recall correctly (the photo). Regards, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 19:02:24 -0800 From: habu@why.net Subject: Thanks... Thanks to all that responded to my "test to xxx.com" message. I guess I was just a little bit paranoid about the new setup. I really enjoy this list and it's now evident I'd be going through withdrawl therapy without it :) Speaking of the new address, a hearty congratulations on solving the duplication issue. Greg Fieser ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Mar 97 17:10:36 nA From: ahanley@usace.mil Subject: Re: Hypersonic Aircraft rolls into Nellis (hypothetically) Reply by : Art Hanley@IM@SPK Date : Monday, March 24, 1997 17:10:35 Reply to : smtp@SPKSYS12@Servers[] Reply CC : internet[] Reply: Now what would be nerve racking is if it landed and taxiied over to the Sukhoi display! Art Hanley My employer disavows any knowledge of my actions and keeps hoping that I'll self- destruct in five seconds -------------------------- [Original Message] ------------------------- To : From : larry@ichips.intel.com Subject : Re: Hypersonic Aircraft rolls into Nellis (hypothetically) Date : Friday, March 21, 1997 at 6:39:26 pm PST - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >However, I also agree with Andreas that this list is particularly valuable >for discussion of "skunk works" and stealthy types of subjects, and should >not just tbe "The Lockheed Show". For example, suppose at the Nellis >airshow next month, what if a black triangular shaped aircraft lands and >it's announced that it just flew from Kadena, Japan in 90 minutes. If it >parks at the Boeing display does that mean it would be off-limits here? That would be REALLY cool! In fact, what would be really, really cool is if Boeing (or the birds manufacturer) then claimed the X-prize! Larry ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V6 #39 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@netwrx1.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@netwrx1.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@netwrx1.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