skunk-works-digest Tuesday, May 19 1998 Volume 07 : Number 029 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: SR-71 footnote. Re: SR-71 footnote. AGM-76 Indian Nukes India Re: India Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs Re: India detonates bombs Re[2]: India detonates bombs Re: India detonates bombs RE: Indian tests and Overhead Recce RE: Indian tests and Overhead Recce F-22 News RE: Indian tests and Overhead Recce Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs Re: India Re: SR-71 footnote. Nuclear "Sniffer" Aircraft & Indian Nuclear Tests Re: nuclear winter Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 07:48:12 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: Re: SR-71 footnote. Art wrote: The best "sniffer" aircraft we have had for years was a C-135 variant (the designator escapes me). Clinton planned to ground them all last year, but Congress voted funding to keep a couple of them airworthy. The "sniffer" C-135's were once called WC-135Bs. Depending on your source, they are now called TC-135B, TC-135W, or WC-135W. And way back when, the U-2 carried the same type of "sniffer" that the WC-135 does, for high-altitude sampling. Don't know if current U-2s/TR-1s have this capability. RB-57Fs also had the same equipment, and I believe there are still two of these flying. NASA has one, and the other, I think, is with some atmospheric research group in Colorado. For the record, variants of these "sniffers" (actually called sampling "foils") have been carried on WB-29s, WB-50s, WB-47s, WC-130s, WB-57Cs and Fs, WC-135s, "W"B-52s, and probably several other aircraft I am not aware of. For many years these missions were highly classified. There was a big article in Aviation Leak last year about the history of airborne radiation sampling, the current state of the art, the obscure agency who directed the operation, mothballing the WC-135 fleet, and plans for permanent ground-based sampling stations worldwide. It was shortly after this article appeared that funding was "found" to keep two WC-135s flying. Not sure if this was coincidence or if some congressman reacted to the article. I'll see if I can find that issue, it was very interesting. _________________________________________________ Tom Robison Raytheon Systems Company 1010 Production Road M/S 25-47 Fort Wayne, IN 46808 Phone: (219) 429-5589 Fax: (219) 429-4385 e-mail: tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 98 05:41:57 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: SR-71 footnote. Pat, In this case, ELINT alone probably wouldn't have given us the information necessary. Remember, it wasn't that we didn't know they were capable of it, it was that we didn't know they were going to do a test. Regarding why the SR went away again, I've given my personal opinions here and in print. To briefly reiterate, my Personal opinions: 1. USAF didn't like the plane before, they weren't going to like it now. 2. No one was going to make General or GS-16 on the SR program. It was a mature system. The career-enhancing programs are when you develop something new. 3. Most of those who know what the SR can do are gone from the upper levels. This makes it easier for opponents to badmouth the system to those unfamiliar. 4. UAVs are the future, but their record so far has been rather poor. If you've hitched your star to UAVs, as long as the SR is flying there's an alternative which may provide those controlling the purse strings to say, "Let's not push your program so hard until you get the kinks worked out". Without the SR, they have no choice but to throw money at you. 5. Satellite people have always been unnecessarily paranoid about their pride and joys. They are wonderful devices, but probably have been oversold, given the incredible cost of using them. They don't like the SR messing around in "their" province. 6. If the restored SRs were as successful as it appeared they were going to be, that would imply that the bogus arguments used by DoD and USAF to retire them in 1990 were wrong. In Washington, it is much more important not to be wrong than it is to be right. 7. I haven't completely settled what I believe on this one in my mind, but here's one for the more paranoid of us. It wouldn't be at all unlikely that the SR would have been used this year or so to check on North Korean compliance with the rather bizarre agreement we did with them a few years back. Congress probably would have insisted. The SR was the only system that could do this. Now, if the SR found a violation, we'd have to do something. Otherwise we'd look like idiots and why would anyone comply with an agreement? The same could apply elsewhere. This would be a situation with a number of choices, all of them politically difficult. Well, the way to handle that is to insure that you don't look. Then if something happens, you can truthfully say you didn't know so you can't look bad politically for not dealing with the situation. Sort of an international, "Don't ask, don't tell". Governments throughout the world and big corporations do this all the time. To insure that we don't have to look into these trouble spots, we eliminate the only system presently capable of doing so. Problem solved. Still thinking about this one. You can take the above Opinions for what they're worth (Cost nothing and worth the price). As for Clinton being surprised, '...As ye sow so shall ye reap'. Art ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:07:25 -0500 (EST) From: ROTRAMELJE%AM4@mr.nawcad.navy.mil Subject: AGM-76 At the NASM Garber restoration facility there is hung a Hughes AGM-76 air-to-ground missile. Its design was clearly based on that of the YF-12's AIM-47 air-to-air missile. I know its designation was assigned on 30 August 1966, but that's all. Does anyone know anything else about this mystery missile? Jim Rotramel ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 12:11:15 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: Indian Nukes Why was CIA caught off guard by India nuclear tests? May 17, 1998 Web posted at: 3:25 p.m. EDT (1925 GMT) WASHINGTON (AP) -- Easily evaded spy satellites. A shortage of clandestine sources. A failure to heed clear warnings. Each of these, observers say, contributed to the CIA's failure to foresee India's nuclear tests. Full story at http://cnn.com/US/9805/17/india.cia.ap/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:30:25 -0700 From: Lee Watters Subject: India The tests don't surprise me all that much - I've felt that was inevitable for a long time. And that India/Pakistan thing has been building for hundreds of years. What really scares me - almost more so than nuclear war in the middle East - is how we missed it. Brrrrrr. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:59:45 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Re: India At 11:30 AM 5/18/98 -0700, you wrote: >The tests don't surprise me all that much - I've felt that was inevitable for a long >time. And that India/Pakistan thing has been building for hundreds of years. > >What really scares me - almost more so than nuclear war in the middle East - - is how we >missed it. Brrrrrr. > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Well if they have one, we won't miss out on it. We will sit here (or where ever you may be!) and wait for that good ole radiation cloud to reach out and touch someone. And of course if the news can be believed the Indians went as far as exploding a hydrogen bomb. I heard this weekend a story will be published today that IBM sold India recently a supercomputer which was the forerunner I believe to their "Big Blue" chess playing computer. The procuring organization was the weapons research group in India. And it was of course approved by.......the US State Department. There is always much more to any story when you begin probing below the surface. And thanks Art for listing your SR-71 Manifesto! Your posts are always tasty food for thought. patrick cullumber patrick@e-z.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 13:36:22 -0700 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs >>What really scares me - almost more so than nuclear war in the middle East >>- is how we missed it. Brrrrrr. >Well if they have one, we won't miss out on it. We will sit here (or where >ever you may be!) and wait for that good ole radiation cloud to reach out >and touch someone. Yes, exactly, good point Pat. The REAL danger here is much deeper than just the acquiring of technology, which the world will eventually do, it's what you do with it. For example. Will they big larger weapons and stockpile them? I think the answer is YES! They have done so already with their low yield junk fission bombs, as they have stock piled over 100 of those things. Will this start an arms race? I think we're seeing the begining of that. Because of this, what will the availability of these things be over time? Will they be much more easily available to terrorists? Since the US and the Soviet Union have had trouble with disposing of the byproducts of manufacturing these things as well as disposing of the weapons themselves, what will the new owners of these weapons do with waste and old weapons? The tendency is to sweep them under the carpet somewhere. The natural tendency for us has been to sweep the problem under the carpet. Where will this waste show up in the future? I might remind you all that scientists say that an exchange of over 300 thermonuclear weapons can throw a dust cloud into the air that will cause nuclear winter, equivalent to the earth being hit by a massive meteor (popular these days given the movies). Given an arms race, and a desire to stockpile, for the same reasons we and the Soviets stockpiled, this is NOT far fetched. Given how northern India and pakistan hate each other, and how these nations will eventually stockpile these things, and given the nuclear winter statement above, we have to HOPE and PRAY that we can TRUST these countries with this technology! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 15:50:55 -0500 From: "Tom C Robison" Subject: Re: India detonates bombs Larry Smith wrote: Given how northern India and pakistan hate each other, and how these nations will eventually stockpile these things, and given the nuclear winter statement above, we have to HOPE and PRAY that we can TRUST these countries with this technology! ============= Scarier than that is the mutual mistrust between China and India... I think the real intent of India's sabre-rattling is to give China some pause for thought... _________________________________________________ Tom Robison tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 98 17:34:39 -0500 From: gregweigold@pmsc.com Subject: Re[2]: India detonates bombs The Chinese have been doing alot of buying of defense hardware from the former Russian republics.... it wouldn't surprise me to think that China, rather than Pakistan, was the ultimate target of the 'message' delivered last week. Greg W ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: India detonates bombs Author: at INTERNET Date: 5/18/98 3:50 PM Larry Smith wrote: Given how northern India and pakistan hate each other, and how these nations will eventually stockpile these things, and given the nuclear winter statement above, we have to HOPE and PRAY that we can TRUST these countries with this technology! ============= Scarier than that is the mutual mistrust between China and India... I think the real intent of India's sabre-rattling is to give China some pause for thought... _________________________________________________ Tom Robison tcrobi@most.fw.hac.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 14:55:07 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Re: India detonates bombs At 03:50 PM 5/18/98 -0500, you wrote: > >Larry Smith wrote: >Given how northern India and pakistan hate each other, and how these >nations will eventually stockpile these things, and given the nuclear >winter statement above, we have to HOPE and PRAY that we can TRUST these >countries with this technology! >============= > >Scarier than that is the mutual mistrust between China and India... >I think the real intent of India's sabre-rattling is to give China some >pause for thought... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I am having a deja vu all over again. Back in the late sixties books like "Thinking About the Unthinkable" by Hermann Kahn were popular reading regarding bargaining over nuclear weaponry. The bottom line always was a lose/lose condition. You start it and you can't stop it till every bomb has been detonated. Every scenario the US/Russian think tanks ever ran ALWAYS ended up with the same scenario. All out nuclear war/end of of life on earth. Hard to imagine we survived such bleak and dismal years. But..... A nuclear war between India and Pakistan seems totally illogical. Being literally across the border from each other a first strike obliterating Pakistan would ultimately poison and kill most Indians as the radiation spread eastward across northern India contaminating all water supplies flowing south. Surely the Indians are aware of this. Are they stupid? Were we when we built our stockpile large enough to kill every citizen of the planet 5 times? I would hope China and India would come to some agreement to disagree. I remember once regreasing the CV joints on the transaxle on my Volkswagon beetle. The VW dealer sold me a small tube of grease. It was sticky and seem to get everywhere. By the end of the day I could find traces of it all over the garage, in the kitchen, the bathroom, on the mailbox, on the TV set. I wonder if nuclear radiation is as nasty. patrick cullumber patrick@e-z.net PS: Anyone want to argue the point we have a moral right/obligation to call a preemptive strike on foreign nuclear facilities as Israel did to Iraq? Might be doable if the Russians took half the targets and we took the other half. I have often thought we should retire our Delta Force, SEALS/Ranger's, etc. and simply contract the Israeli's to do the work instead. What were we talking about anyway? Oh....SR-71's!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 08:52:35 +0930 From: Dennis Lapcewich Subject: RE: Indian tests and Overhead Recce News from this end of the world is saying this: 1) The tests occurred 24 years to the day of the last test. The Indians are known for their timing. (Well, at least here they are known for their timing!) 2) The Indians are tying in a STRONG religious significance to the tests (holy war with Pakistan?). 3) Daytime temps were in excess of 50*C. 4) There were overcast skies. 5) The local inhabitants were not notified of the tests. No info yet available if there are any casualties. 6) In at least one of the tests the monitoring stations were destroyed in the blasts. No info yet available if there are any casualties. 7) If you weren't local, and hadn't been there for a long time, you would have stood out like a sore thumb. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:31:48 -0700 From: patrick Subject: RE: Indian tests and Overhead Recce News tonite is that the hydrogen bomb tested last week in India never went critical and thus fizzled out in layman's terms! Thank god for small favors. patrick PS: Who wants to call the Cia and bring them up to speed? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 18:47:33 -0700 From: patrick Subject: F-22 News For all you amateur historians....starting jotting down these numbers! _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. (AFNS) -- The F-22 Raptor added another page to this base's long history of aviation milestones when it resumed active flight testing at approximately 7:30 PDT May 17. Lt. Col. Steve Rainey piloted the craft. He is the first Air Force pilot to fly the F-22 since it rolled off the Lockheed assembly line in Marietta, Ga., last summer. "The aircraft handled like a dream," Rainey said. "It's the best flying aircraft I have flown, and it sets a new standard of excellence in fighter aviation." He said this was a true test flight with three objectives: flying qualities envelope expansion, speedbrake handling qualities, and formation flying qualities. Rainey said each of the three test points was flown precisely as briefed and that the flight was a successful test mission. The sortie marked the Raptor's entry into formal flight test. Raptor 01, the nickname of the aircraft at Edwards, is the first of three engineering and manufacturing development F-22s that will be used to test flying qualities and explore the edges of the aircraft's performance envelope. This first aircraft, officially referred to as Aircraft 4001, will undergo roughly 50 test flights prior to delivery of the second aircraft. Aircraft 4002 is now in preparation for its first flight at Lockheed Martin Aeronautical Systems in Marietta. The second F-22 is scheduled for delivery to Edwards this fall. The F-22 is widely regarded as the most advanced fighter in the world, combining a revolutionary leap in technology and capability with reduced support requirements and maintenance costs. It is destined to replace the aging F-15 as America's front-line air superiority fighter, with deliveries beginning in 2002. Its combination of stealth, integrated avionics, maneuverability, and supercruise (supersonic flight without afterburner) will give Raptor pilots a first-look, first-shot, first-kill capability against the aircraft of any potential enemy. For more information on the flight at Edwards, visit http://www.edwards.af.mil/ppa/pressrel/61u.html on the World Wide Web. patrick@e-z.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 98 02:12:11 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: RE: Indian tests and Overhead Recce On 5/18/98 6:31PM, in message <3.0.1.32.19980518183148.0076175c@e-z.net>, patrick wrote: > News tonite is that the hydrogen bomb tested last week in India never went > critical and thus fizzled out in layman's terms! Thank god for small favors. > > patrick > > PS: Who wants to call the Cia and bring them up to speed? > India's first four or five attempts to detonate the first time fizzled. Despite want you read from the press (gotta get those headlines), it's really very, very hard to build a nuke that will work. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 98 02:19:27 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs Small (since it's off topic) note regarding nuclear winter. That was a kind of controversial hypothesis to begin with, and has been largely discredited. It seems the proponents didn't figure wind and weather into the calculations. We've also had real world evidence from erupting volcanoes that throw much, much more dirt and dust to the same altitudes, yet we've survived (although I haven't checked lately). That said, nukes are really nasty things. Only good thing that could be said for them is that they keep other folks from using CBW. We know that from defctors in the Gulf War and elsewhere. Art ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 98 02:22:24 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: India On 5/18/98 11:30AM, in message <35607E41.F0C4B47@earthlink.net>, Lee Watters wrote: > > > What really scares me - almost more so than nuclear war in the middle East - is > how we > missed it. Brrrrrr. > I'll scare you a bit more. When South Africa set off their nuke, we weren't sure they had done it even After it went off. It wasn't until years later when they admittted that we thought we may have detected was in fact a nuke. Art ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 98 02:26:28 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: SR-71 footnote. Thanks for that info, Tom. Something to keep in mind about "sniffers" is that they are very useful in analyzing the type of explosion, nuclear or otherwise. They aren't useful for giving warnings of one that hasn't occurred. Art "KABOOM" Hanley ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 98 09:02:59 EDT From: keller@eos.ncsu.edu Subject: Nuclear "Sniffer" Aircraft & Indian Nuclear Tests In this week's Aviation Week, which conveniently landed in my snailmailbox yesterday, there's a brief paragraph in the Washington Outlooks page, which says that the sole remaining US nuclear sampling aircraft, currently designated as TC-135, was just starting six months of depot level maintenance last week when the Indian nuclear tests ocurred. The article says that it's been rushed back into service for the purpose of surveilling the Indian tests. Through an intermediate reference given in this article, I was able to locate the Avleak issue which had the special report on the nuclear sampling aircraft. That special report appeared in the Nov. 3, 1997 issue. I don't have time to reread the report & summarize it for the list. If Tom Robison wants to do so, he should feel free. To answer Patrick Cullumber's question of whether radioactivity spreads as easily & nastily as his CV joint grease, if anything, it's worse, and it's also easily detectable in extremely tiny quantities. It's also possible to learn an enormous amount of information about the type of device exploded as well. I did have time to skim the Nov. 3, 1997 Avleak report, and they report that Noble gasses, Xenon in particular, will leak out of even underground nuclear tests in detectable quantities, so there is some hope of learning some things about the Indian tests from nuclear sampling. Concerning the 1979 South African nuclear test: Working from now-fifteen year old memories of an article which appeared around '81 or '82 in the journal _Scince_ on that event, one very important reason for why the VELA satellite detection of that test was dismissed as spurious was the utter lack of detectable radioactive fallout from that event. While Aviation Week reported in an article about a year or so ago that the USAF sniffer aircraft were not able to penetrate the airmass that the VELA sighted the flash in, the _Science_ article noted that even a low-kiloton yield test, which is what it appeared to be from the VELA data, should have been easily detectable in rainwater in Australia. It never was. About nuclear winter: I'll echo Art's word that the worst of the nuclear winter hypotheses have been discredited, even for hypothetical multi-thousand megaton exchanges between the US and former Soviet Union. The Indians & Chinese have nowhere near that sort of arsenal. Even if Pakistan decides to join the nuclear club there still won't be anything in Asia to match the US & Soviet arsenals. - --Paul Keller ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:12:17 -0700 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: nuclear winter >About nuclear winter: I'll echo Art's word that the worst of the >nuclear winter hypotheses have been discredited, even for hypothetical >multi-thousand megaton exchanges between the US and former Soviet >Union. OK, references please. Since Dr. Kaku seems fairly accessible, I will confront him with this to evoke his response. Larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 12:03:02 -0700 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs >Small (since it's off topic) note regarding nuclear winter. That was a kind of >controversial hypothesis to begin with, and has been largely discredited. It >seems the proponents didn't figure wind and weather into the calculations. We've >also had real world evidence from erupting volcanoes that throw much, much more >dirt and dust to the same altitudes, yet we've survived (although I haven't >checked lately). Well pardon my skepticism about what you claim Art. I posted what I heard Superstring Theorist and Professor of Theoretical Physics Michio Kaku say last Friday night. Including the 300 thermonuclear detonations number. He seemed pretty well informed. In fact several titles of his are: "Nuclear Power: Both Sides" and "To Win a Nuclear War: the Pentagon's Secret War Plans". Larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 19:25:18 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs At 12:03 PM 5/19/98 -0700, you wrote: >>We've also had real world evidence from erupting volcanoes that throw much, much more >>dirt and dust to the same altitudes, yet we've survived (although I haven't >>checked lately). > Art, I had to shovel for 2 days to get the 3 inch layer of Mount St. Helens ash out of my driveway but at least it didn't glow in the dark! Peter Jennings announced on the ABC 6:00 News tonight the Indians were actually conducting a bogus missile launching at the same time of their nuclear tests. The ruse was intended solely to distract attention from the activity at their test site. (And you can believe Jennings. After all, he is Canadian!) I think this subterfuge alone begs the question of a retalitory air strike. Let's see, Diego Garcia? Ah yes, there it is on the map. Gee, not all that far as the BUF's fly. Well if those Indians want to play with nuclear radiation then so be it! We fly at dawn. patrick cullumber ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 98 04:06:29 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs On 5/19/98 12:03PM, in message <199805191903.MAA211302@pdxcs199>, Larry Smith wrote: > > > Well pardon my skepticism about what you claim Art. > > I posted what I heard Superstring Theorist and Professor of Theoretical Physics > Michio Kaku say last Friday night. Including the 300 thermonuclear detonations > number. > He seemed pretty well informed. In fact several titles of his are: "Nuclear > Power: Both Sides" > and "To Win a Nuclear War: the Pentagon's Secret War Plans". > > Larry > This is way off topic for this place, but the simplest response from the sources I've read and talked to years past is that it's not a question of physics or even the aftermath of nuclear war (which would not be a pleasant thing). It's a question of weather and how heavier than air debris would behave at the various altitudes and quantities the various explosive detonations might cause. It would still be incredibly dirty stuff and do ungodly amounts of damage, but evenly distributing itself and staying up there for indefinite periods doesn't seem likely. Those who posit that nuclear winter is unlikely note that weapons wouldn't be set off evenly all over the world, but would be concentrated about the various targets. They also point to the amount of debris thrown out by the various and sundry volcanoes hither and yon. A volcano puts out gobs and gobs and gobs of this stuff into the upper atmosphere, yet it precipitates out in a reasonable amount of time. Those skeptics point out that the people to ask this question to are geologists and meteorologists. Art "Duck and Cover" Hanley ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 20 May 98 04:23:36 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: India detonates fission/fusion bombs And, here's ANOTHER one the satellites missed: MICROSOFT TESTS NUCLEAR DEVICE AT SECRET HANFORD FACILITY REDMOND (BNN)--World leaders reacted with stunned silence as Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) conducted an underground nuclear test at a secret facility in eastern Washington state. The device, exploded at 9:22 am PDT (1622 GMT/12:22 pm EDT) today, was timed to coincide with talks between Microsoft and the US Department of Justice over possible antitrust action. Microsoft is going to defend its right to market its products by any and all necessary means,” said Microsoft CEO Bill Gates. “Not that I’m anti-government” he continued, “but there would be few tears shed in the computer industry if Washington were engulfed in a bath of nuclear fire.” Scientists pegged the explosion at around 100 kilotons. “I nearly dropped my latte when I saw the seismometer” explained University of Washington geophysicist Dr. Whoops Blammover, “At first I thought it was Mt. Rainier, and I was thinking, damn, there goes the mountain bike vacation.” In Washington, President Clinton announced the US Government would boycott all Microsoft products indefinitely. Minutes later, the President reversed his decision. "We've tried sanctions since lunchtime, and they don't work", said the President, "Besides, the poll nubers don't look good". Instead, the administration will initiate a policy of “constructive engagement” with Microsoft. Microsoft’s Chief Technology Officer Nathan Myrhvold said the test justified Microsoft’s recent acquisition of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation from the US Government. Not only did Microsoft acquire “kilograms of weapons grade plutonium” in the deal, said Myrhvold, “but we’ve finally found a place to dump those millions of unsold copies of Microsoft Bob.” Myrhvold warned users not to replace Microsoft NT products with rival operating systems. “I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of a radioisotope thermoelectric generator inside of every Pentium II microprocessor,” said Myrhvold, “but anyone who installs an OS written by a bunch of long-hairs on the Internet is going to get what they deserve.” The existence of an RTG in each Pentium II microprocessor would explain why the microprocessors, made by the Intel Corporation, run so hot. The Intel chips “put out more heat than they draw in electrical power” said Prof. E. E. Thymes of MIT. “This should finally dispell those stories about cold fusion.” Rumors suggest a second weapons development project is underway in California, headed by Microsoft rival Sun Microsystems. “They’re doing all of the development work in Java,” said one source close to the project. The development of a delivery system is said to be holding up progress. “Write once, bomb anywhere is still a dream at the moment.” Meanwhile, in Cupertino, California, Apple interim-CEO Steve Jobs was rumored to be in discussion with Oracle CEO Larry Ellison about deploying Apple’s Newton technology against Microsoft. “Newton was the biggest bomb the Valley had developed in years,” said one hardware engineer. “I’d hate to be around when they drop that product a second time.” Copyright 1998 by the Bogus News Network. (...I just thought we were getting too far off topic) ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V7 #29 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe in the body of a message to "skunk-works-digest-request@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 local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe in the body. Administrative requests, problems, and other non-list mail can be sent to 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 viewing by a www interface located at: http://www.netwrx1.com/skunk-works If you have any questions or problems please contact me at: georgek@netwrx1.com Thanks, George R. Kasica Listowner