From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V7 #72 Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sender: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Errors-To: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Precedence: bulk skunk-works-digest Wednesday, November 4 1998 Volume 07 : Number 072 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: [Fwd: SR71 @ UDORN -( PIC)] U-2 in the news Photos of the Sukhoi S-37 Berkut 'Royal Eagle' Terror on board the Mir space station FWD: Aurora-type report Missing X-Planes ? Surely Not. skunky web site RE: skunky web site Re: skunky web site SR-71: It's Official equipment test, Don't bother to read Off-Topic Humor Re: Off-Topic Humor Global Hawk Re: Global Hawk Re: Global Hawk Re: Global Hawk Skunk Works Home Page Re: Logic, no SR-71 Replacement .. Humour Re: Humour RE: Humour and the Govt would ... *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 23:36:15 GMT From: georgek@netwrx1.com (George R. Kasica) Subject: Re: [Fwd: SR71 @ UDORN -( PIC)] Terry: Hello Again: Just a few simple notes/requests: 1) NO ATTACHMENTS OF ANY SORT on E-Mail. Many people still use readers that don't know how to handle this and it causes BIG problems. Also please remember our digests are created at 30K in size, one attachment can EASILY force a digest as happened today. 2) DO NOT QUOTE THE ENTIRE DIGEST! Just PLEASE use the piece you are replying to. Same reasoning as above, it happened again today and it just wastes bandwidth and drive space. 3) AGAIN...UFO type postings have their own forum. THIS IS NOT IT however. Please try to refrain from this type of posting unless you can tie it in reasonably to the already stated topics here. Thank you for your cooperation, George George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica West Allis, WI USA http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 01:11:45 +0000 From: John Szalay Subject: U-2 in the news Another article "borrowed" from to-day's AFnews . ................................................................ 981604. U-2s fly over Kosovo, monitor Yugoslav compliance by Master Sgt. Brian Hibbard 31st Air Expeditionary Wing Public Affairs AVIANO AIR BASE, Italy (AFPN) -- As Lt. Col. Bruce Jinneman flies through the skies high above Kosovo, he flies alone and has plenty of time to think about his historic role in garnering peace. Flying the U-2 Dragon Lady reconnaissance aircraft, Jinneman and other airmen with the 99th Expeditionary Reconnaissance Squadron deployed here from Beale Air Force Base, Calif. They began flying missions Oct. 16 to verify Yugoslavia's compliance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1199. Jinneman is proud of the unique capabilities of the U-2 and its role in keeping the peace at locations around the world, most recently its role of monitoring the withdrawal of Yugoslavian army and special police forces from the province of Kosovo. "U-2s have traditionally been used for this type of role," Jinneman said. "The U-2 has traditionally been used as a peace-monitoring instrument." Flying as high as 70,000 feet, U-2 pilots can't see much of the scenery below them, but it's what they can't see that matters. The aircraft carries a variety of sensors and cameras to provide nearly instantaneous data to commanders in the field. The data they collect is downlinked from the aircraft to a ground station where it is formatted and transmitted via satellite to the deployed ground station at Beale. From Beale, the data is analyzed and transmitted back to the field commanders. The data can tell a variety of things -- the location of troops, artillery and enemy aircraft. The entire process takes about four to five minutes, according to Jinneman. "There's not much that can hide from a U-2," Jinneman said. "The data gives commanders a complete, comprehensive overview of the target area they're looking at." The colonel said the average U-2 mission lasts nine hours. "It's like flying from London to Los Angeles with your seatbelt on and you can't move for the entire flight," explained Jinneman. "It gets tiring, and the aircraft is pretty challenging to fly." One of the biggest challenges U-2 pilots must overcome is the hours of preparation it takes before they can take off. After an extensive mission briefing, pilots undergo what Jinneman calls a mini-physical. Checking their ears, nose, throat and blood pressure, physiological support specialists make sure there isn't the slightest trace of illness. "Because of the altitude and length of the missions, the pilots must be in perfect physical health," Jinneman stressed. After the quick physical, the pilot slips into a special pressurized suit resembling those worn by astronauts. Once in the suit, the heavy garment is pressurized and the pilot undergoes an hour-long process of breathing pure oxygen to rid his body of nitrogen. With too much nitrogen, the pilot could experience what divers call the "bends." Like a monarch with several personal attendants, the pilot doesn't have much to do -- mainly because he can't. Life support specialists and physiological support personnel meticulously check and double check the suit. "We have zero percent tolerance for errors in this job," said Staff Sgt. Julian Pacheco, a physiological support supervisor. "If they lose pressure in their suit at altitude, they can't survive." After an hour of breathing pure oxygen, the pilot is led to his aircraft. From there it takes about 45 minutes of systems checks and rechecks before he can take off. Normally, U-2 pilots operate from locations where they are alone. At times they seem a bit proud of being lone wolves. Even their unit patch boldly proclaims "Solum Volamus" -- Latin for "We Fly Alone." It takes a special person to become a U-2 pilot, according to Jinneman. There are only about 50 in the entire Air Force. "Out of every 100 pilots who apply to the program, only about 20 are selected," said Jinneman. "Normally, we're the kind of pilots that don't like to fly with a crew. We like to fly by ourselves." Alone during their nine-hour missions, Jinneman said they have to rely entirely on their own skills and knowledge. "You have to be very confident in your abilities as a pilot," he said. "It's not like you can look over your left shoulder and ask, 'What do we do now boss?'" But while at Aviano, the U-2 pilots may have to put their love for solitude aside. "The biggest challenge at Aviano is integrating with the rest of the aircraft that are flying out of here and the rest of the daily operations," said Jinneman. "It's a new experience for us to go into a large air base like this and try to integrate our operations in with everyone else's, but it's been a positive one for us." (Courtesy of U.S. Air Forces in Europe News Service) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:43:08 -0600 From: Todd McDaniel Subject: Photos of the Sukhoi S-37 Berkut 'Royal Eagle' At this web page http://www.io.com/~scooter/berkut.htm, you can see some photos of the S-37 Berkut, a foward-swept wing prototype from Sukhoi. It's first flight was on September 25, 1997. The photos are from the Autumn/Fall 1998 issue of World Air Power Journal. This issue also has extensive articles on Mig-25/31 variants and S-3/ES-3A series. - -Todd McDaniel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:35:54 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Terror on board the Mir space station This was the title of last nights episode of NOVA on the Public Broadcasting System. A rather revealing if not startling insight to several terrifying events that plagued the vehicle. The "unplanned burning of an oxygen cannister" as the Russian PR department announced was actually a four foot long two foot in diameter flame emanating from the oxygen generator on the interior of the Mir which burned unabated for 14 minutes. The docking procedure was equally misleading and frightening. They were attempting a new docking procedure using a TV camera onboard the supply ship to allow the crew to fly it into place. On the first attempt, the empty craft was flown back to the Mir after being jettisoned. The camera malfunctioned and the crew "flew" the smaller unit past the Mir narrowily avoiding a collision. They complained vehemently of the design. Several months later a second attempt was made with a fully loaded resupply craft. It was directed to the Mir and was to be braked and docked by the crew. The craft was essentially a guided missile and crashed into the Mir. All efforts by the crew proved futile in controlling the steering or braking rockets. When later tested in a simulator on the ground by 8 different cosmonauts essentially the same result occured. However the commander of the MIR, a military officer, was charged with failure to follow procedures. Worse was NASA ignorance of the procedure. They admitted they never thought to ask. The Russians appear to use pilots as "replaceable components" in their programs. Their story needs to be told. patrick cullumber ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:09:20 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD: Aurora-type report Sure Terry foward it if you wish. Regards, RLL Terry W. Colvin wrote: > Bob, > > Any worthy responses to your post? There is little doubt that black program > stealth aircraft are flying the skies, especially in flight paths over > northern Scotland and between Los Angeles and Area 51. Aurora could be the > project name or not. > > Again, flying triangles could be both terrestrial and unknown craft. We just > do not know. Your sighting outside the two areas cited above and the long > duration sighting on 13 March 1997 from NW of Phoenix, over Phoenix, and SE > of Phoenix (a 70 mile flight path) are cases where an Aurora-type explanation > isn't conclusive. > > Perhaps I can forward your report, anonymously if you wish, to the Skunk-Works > [black aviation] list and the Forteana [paranormal] list. What do you say? > > Best wishes, > > Terry > > ---------------------- > Robert Luttrell wrote: > > > > -> IUFO Mailing List > > > > Terry et al. > > > > As I reported last year in November, I saw an Aurora type aircraft while flying > > from Seattle to Atlanta on Delta Airlines. The aircraft appeared above 30, 000 > > feet, transversed an arc of sky of about 30 degrees at about 5 to 10 miles > > distant in less than 15 seconds. It was shaped like and had similar paint and > > decal markings to the Aurora project art work at the NASA web site. I saw the > > aircraft near Denver at around mid afternoon above the clouds in a clear sunlit > > sky. I was north of the craft looking south. I have forgotten the exact date > > but could look it up in my personal log. The last time I posted this information > > I was attacked and called a liar by some members of the IUFO list. I know what I > > saw, and given the small amount of time for the observation and the distance it > > was as Aurora like as the viewing circumstances would allow me to observe. I do > > not think the Aurora exists, I know it exists, but I don't know if it is called > > Aurora or some other name. > > > > Regards, > > > > Bob L in Poulsbo, Wa. - -- Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean@primenet.com > Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/8832 Sites: Fortean Times * Northwest Mysteries * Mystic's Cyberpage * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program - ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: http://www.seacoast.com/~jsweet/brotherh/index.html Southeast Asia (SEA) service: Vietnam - Theater Telecommunications Center/HHC, 1st Aviation Brigade (Jan 71 - Aug 72) Thailand/Laos - Telecommunications Center/U.S. Army Support Thailand (USARSUPTHAI), Camp Samae San (Jan 73 - Aug 73) - Special Security/Strategic Communications - Thailand (STRATCOM - Thailand), Phu Mu (Pig Mountain) Signal Site (Aug 73 - Jan 74) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:44:26 From: win@writer.win-uk.net (David) Subject: Missing X-Planes ? Surely Not. As it's gone a little quiet, I wonder if I could ask if I've missed something with regard to X designations. IIRC, the X-37 was to be an air breathing demonstrator, but I've lost track of it..has it been re-designated X-43 which used to be called Hyper-X ? We know about the X-38 ACRV and the X-40A USAF SMV. So what's happened to: X-39, X-41 & X-42 ? Any thoughts would be very welcome... Best David ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:30:19 -0800 From: G&G Subject: skunky web site Hope I'm not stealing any thunder, but a couple of weeks ago I came across "www.habu.org". I wrote to owner and asked if he was a member of this list. He wasn't but as I understand he has sinced subscribed. Evidently a modest guy, so I'll blow his horn for him - check out: http://www.habu.org/ Greg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 15:07:04 -0000 From: "Gavin Payne" Subject: RE: skunky web site Good site, thanks for the link > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com > [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com]On Behalf Of G&G > Sent: 30 October 1998 15:30 > To: Skunk Works > Subject: skunky web site > > > Hope I'm not stealing any thunder, but a couple of weeks ago I > came across "www.habu.org". I wrote to owner and asked if he > was a member of this list. He wasn't but as I understand he > has sinced subscribed. Evidently a modest guy, so I'll blow his > horn for him - check out: > > http://www.habu.org/ > > Greg > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:50:20 -0700 From: Dave Cox Subject: Re: skunky web site Indeed. A horn worthy of blowing. Welcome to the list. On 30 Oct 98 at 7:30, G&G wrote: > was a member of this list. He wasn't but as I understand he > has sinced subscribed. Evidently a modest guy, so I'll blow his > horn for him - check out: > > http://www.habu.org/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 30 Oct 98 20:26:49 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: SR-71: It's Official From: Cummings James P Capt ACC/DIE=20 > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 1998 11:22 AM > To: ACC/DIS C2ISR Systems Operations Division > Cc: Shaefer Joe L Col ACC/Res ADI > Subject: SR-71 TERMINATION >=20 > P 282300Z OCT 98 > FM HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC//XOI// > TO RHDIAAA/HQ ACC LANGLEY AFB VA//DO/LG/XP// > INFO RUVAFMC/HQ AFMC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OH//CV// > RUVAFMC/HQ ASC WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OH//CC// > RUEAHQA/OSAF WASHINGTON DC//AQI/AQIJ/FMB/FMBO/GCA/LL// > RUVAFMC/645MATS WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OH //CD// > RUEAHQA/HQ USAF WASHINGTON DC//ILY/ILS// > BT > UNCLAS > SUBJ: SR-71 TERMINATION > 1. ON 6 MAR 98, THE AIR FORCE RECEIVED THE SECDEF MEMORANDUM WHICH > APPROVED THE PERMANENT RETIREMENT OF THE SR-71. SINCE THEN, WE HAVE > PROCEEDED CAUTIOUSLY WITH PROGRAM TERMINATION ACTIONS DUE TO THE > SUPREME COURT'S DECISION ON THE LINE ITEM VETO AND RELATED > CONSIDERATIONS. WE ARE NOW READY TO PROCEED WITH FULL PROGRAM > TERMINATION. > 2. UPON RECEIPT OF THIS MESSAGE, ALL AGENCIES TAKE ALL REQUIRED > ACTIONS TO PERMANENTLY AND EXPEDITIOUSLY RETIRE THE SR-71. REQUEST > MAJCOMS COORDINATE ALL ACTIONS WITH THEIR COMMAND FMS IN IDENTIFYING > ACTUAL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS DEACTIVATION. ALL UNFUNDED > REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO SAF/FMBO. > 3. THIS IS AN AF/XOI AND SAF/AQI COORDINATED MESSAGE. AIR STAFF POC > IS COL SCOTT MERROW, XOIRC, DSN:225-5072. SAF POC IS MAJ CHUCK > RIECHERS, AQIJ, DSN 425-1638. > BT You'll note there is No direction on what to do with the aircraft (including honoring NASA's request for two), as well as where any money is going to come from to accomplish this. You can't legally take any action until funding is available. This kind of situation is representative of the obscene haste with which AF and the Administration want this program buried. One other reason for the rush is the upcoming meteor shower next month. This apparently will be one of the largest in decades. A number of satellites are being reoriented so that they will present the smallest surface area to upcoming cloud. There is the distinct possibility that a number may be hit and conceivably could theoretically be taken out of action. If this happens, they might want to make sure the SR is in no condition for someone to fill the even larger than normal void that would develop. My information is that the two SRs' engines were run for the last time under USAF guise on Tuesday and Wednesday. Art ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 98 00:47:04 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: equipment test, Don't bother to read Told you not to ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 13:12:43 +1030 From: Dennis Lapcewich Subject: Off-Topic Humor Top Ten Changes at NASA to Accommodate 77 Year-Old John Glenn's Return to Space Aboard the Shuttle 'Discovery' 10. All important devices now operated by the Clapper. 9. Shuttle's thermostat set at 80 degrees. 8. Shuffle board installed in cargo bay. 7. "Early Bird" specials from Morrison's Cafeteria included on menu. 6. One monitor specifically designated for Matlock. 5. Little bowls of candy scattered randomly about the ship. 4. Top speed of shuttle set at 25 miles per hour. 3. Installed a new bifocal windshield. 2. Space pants now go up to armpits. 1. Left-blinker left on for entire mission. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 01 Nov 98 23:12:09 -0500 From: gregweigold@pmsc.com Subject: Re: Off-Topic Humor Heard this on John Boy & Billy? ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Off-Topic Humor Author: at INTERNET Date: 11/2/98 1:12 PM Top Ten Changes at NASA to Accommodate 77 Year-Old John Glenn's Return to Space Aboard the Shuttle 'Discovery' 10. All important devices now operated by the Clapper. 9. Shuttle's thermostat set at 80 degrees. 8. Shuffle board installed in cargo bay. 7. "Early Bird" specials from Morrison's Cafeteria included on menu. 6. One monitor specifically designated for Matlock. 5. Little bowls of candy scattered randomly about the ship. 4. Top speed of shuttle set at 25 miles per hour. 3. Installed a new bifocal windshield. 2. Space pants now go up to armpits. 1. Left-blinker left on for entire mission. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 18:57:19 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Global Hawk Hey Skunkers, since the list is slow, I just want to mention that I spoke with one of the head of the Ryan Global Hawk and I found out that the Tier 2+ is not protected against EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse). So, in case of nuclear war, bye bye Global Hawk. Anyone know if the Lockheed Martin Dark Star is protected against EMP? Anyone know what is the self-defense systems of the Global Hawk? May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu "And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the very first Fokker airplane built in the world. The Dutch call it the mother Fokker." -- custodian at the Aviodome aviation museum, Schiphol airport Amsterdam ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Nov 98 06:19:09 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: Global Hawk On 11/2/98 6:57PM, in message , Wei-Jen Su wrote: > Anyone know what is the > self-defense systems of the Global Hawk? > > May the Force be with you > > Wei-Jen Su > Global Hawk is supposed to be able to deploy a towed decoy. If this works as advertised, it will force an opponent to say, "Fire Two", right after he says, "Fire One", in order to convert Hawk into a flaming datum. It is also capable of a 15 degree bank, which no doubt should defeat a fighter capable of nine gs. Hawk will cruise higher than fighters normally do, but not higher than their missiles can go. Even though it's thought to be "cheap" at $13 million a pop, we really can't afford to lose too many, so its major defense is to not fly it where someone might shoot at it. Neither Global Hawk or Darkstar are designed to function in a nuclear environment. For that you'd need something like the SR-..., oh never mind. Art ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1998 23:06:02 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Re: Global Hawk On Tue, 3 Nov 1998 betnal@ns.net wrote: > Global Hawk is supposed to be able to deploy a towed decoy. If this works as > advertised, it will force an opponent to say, "Fire Two", right after he says, > "Fire One", in order to convert Hawk into a flaming datum. It is also capable of > a 15 degree bank, which no doubt should defeat a fighter capable of nine gs. Hawk > will cruise higher than fighters normally do, but not higher than their missiles > can go. Even though it's thought to be "cheap" at $13 million a pop, we really > can't afford to lose too many, so its major defense is to not fly it where someone > might shoot at it. Yeah, I figured that Global Hawk use towed decoy or something similar. When I spoke with the guy, I asked how the heck this UAV can self-defense... He said "I can not comment anything with respect to that". Ussually, that means two things: Or the system work extremely well that nobody expect something similar, or the system doesn't works... May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu "Physics is like sex, you have to do it with someone or you will call it something else..." Richard Feynman 1965 Physics Nobel Laureate ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1998 16:18:14 -0800 From: patrick Subject: Re: Global Hawk At 11:06 PM 11/2/98 -0800, you wrote: > > > >Ussually, that means two things: Or the system work extremely well that >nobody expect something similar, or the system doesn't works... > > ROTFLMAOPIMPSTCAD!!!!!! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1998 14:28:40 +0100 From: "Stefan Dornbusch" Subject: Skunk Works Home Page The Skunk Works has got a new URL: http://www.skunkworks.net/lmsw/docs/index.html The automatic link from the old one does not work. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Nov 1998 15:20:28 -0500 From: Mark Pepin Subject: Re: Logic, no SR-71 Replacement .. I'm just getting caught up on some old postings. Here is something to add. And it's Non-DOD, so the capability is there. I bet if a system exists they probably have better data rates. See http://hawkeye.arc.nasa.gov/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------ >>If there was a replacement for the SR-71 but he didn't want to tell >> about it, he won't have to lie about it or even mention that there was a >> 2 day delay in getting the recon data. >> >> Assuming the delay was in getting the data, not processing it. >> >If the data was digital, processing time would be negligible, and >iterpretation wouldn't take that long for BDA vs. recon. Not at all. Spaceborne radar data is not *rt*, as many seem to beleive. it's not even close- the volume of data generated by a space based ground observation radar easily exheeds the bandwidth of SDS and TRDS. A day's worth of radar data could take 2 days to get from the satellite, for example. And then you have to do all sorts of wonderful, time consuming signal processing on that data. Not time spent burning up supercomputers mind you, though that takes time too. Analysis of Lacrosse-type data is still an inexact science, from what I've heard. There is a lot of weeding out retroreflections, foiliage, etc. that the computers miss. As I stated earlier, BDA for cruise missile strikes has proved clumsy. A Big Black Smudge isn't necesarily a mission kill. >If it was wet film, the nearest processing capability would be aboard an >aircraft carrier (I doubt Aurora has a tailhook) or in England and that >would take time. For BDA, though, you'd want to use digital. >> >> Of course, the US has never officially admitted it has reconaissance >> satellites save for Corona, and it took them how long to unwrap that little >> gem? >> >True, but we knew that there were recon satellites, even if they weren't >acknowledged, by the early 1960s. Also, we took public actions based on >data from these "unidentified" sources. This lack of this latter is what tends >to make be think there's no operational "Aurora". ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 08:15:58 +1030 From: Dennis Lapcewich Subject: Humour The list is a bit quiet so maybe a little light-hearted thoughts are in order. Anyone who's worked with "joint services" (USAF, Army, Navy, and Marines "working together") will appreciate this humor: One reason the Services have trouble operating jointly is that they don't speak the same language. For example, if you told Navy personnel to "secure a building," they would turn off the lights and lock the doors. Army personnel would occupy the building so no one could enter. Marines would assault the building, capture it, and defend it with suppressive fire and close combat. The Air Force, on the other hand, would take out a three-year lease with an option to buy. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 16:42:45 -0600 From: brian.hodge@blockbuster.com Subject: Re: Humour Great, that is soo true. I am new to the list. I know this is a little off topic, but does anyone have any solid info on the MiG 1.44, their 5th gen fighter. Thanks, Brian ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 21:07:09 -0500 From: Martin Hurst Subject: RE: Humour and the Govt would ... - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE0837.1A096780 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wrote: Dennis Lapcewich, Wednesday, November 04, 1998 5:15 PM - ---------- For example, if you told Navy personnel to "secure a building," they would turn off the lights and lock the doors. - ------------------ ... And the Government would change the locks on all the doors after doing an IRS Tax Audit on the company that was in it ... - -Martin - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE0837.1A096780 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhACAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG ADABAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAE0AAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd AQ9UAgAAAABza3Vuay13b3Jrc0BuZXR3cngxLmNvbQBTTVRQAHNrdW5rLXdvcmtzQG5ldHdyeDEu Y29tAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAYAAAAc2t1bmstd29ya3NAbmV0d3J4 MS5jb20AAwAVDAEAAAADAP4PBgAAAB4AATABAAAAGgAAACdza3Vuay13b3Jrc0BuZXR3cngxLmNv bScAAAACAQswAQAAAB0AAABTTVRQOlNLVU5LLVdPUktTQE5FVFdSWDEuQ09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAA CwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAADATsBCIAHABgAAABJUE0uTWljcm9zb2Z0IE1haWwuTm90 ZQAxCAEEgAEAIgAAAFJFOiBIdW1vdXIgYW5kIHRoZSBHb3Z0IHdvdWxkIC4uLgDaCgEFgAMADgAA AM4HCwAEABUABwAJAAMADAEBIIADAA4AAADOBwsABAAVAAMAJAADACMBAQmAAQAhAAAANjdDOEE3 RTBCNjczRDIxMTk2QTI0NDQ1NTM1NDAwMDAA0wYBA5AGAHQDAAASAAAACwAjAAEAAAADACYAAAAA AAsAKQABAAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAwNFa/mAIvgEeAHAAAQAAACIAAABSRTogSHVtb3VyIGFuZCB0 aGUgR292dCB3b3VsZCAuLi4AAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABvghg/lHgp8hoc7YR0paiREVTVAAAAAAe AB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAAFgAAAG1hcnRpbmhAaXgubmV0Y29tLmNvbQAAAAMA BhAdZaF5AwAHEBMBAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAABXUk9URTpERU5OSVNMQVBDRVdJQ0gsV0VETkVTREFZ LE5PVkVNQkVSMDQsMTk5ODU6MTVQTS0tLS0tLS0tLS1GT1JFWEFNUExFLElGWU9VVE9MRE5BVllQ RVJTT05ORUxUTyJTAAAAAAIBCRABAAAA6wEAAOcBAAASAwAATFpGdVjTPtz/AAoBDwIVAqgF6wKD AFAC8gkCAGNoCsBzZXQyNwYABsMCgzIDxQIAcHJCcRHic3RlbQKDM3cC5AcTAoB9CoAIzwnZO/EW DzI1NQKACoENsQtgYG5nMTAzFFALA2wQaTE4MALRaS0x/DQ0DfAM0BpzC1UUUQvysmMAQCBXA2AT 0DoK4VkLaDE2CqAcYmMFQESHCfADAAQgTGFwYwfQbmkRcBsvHDAsHL8dxVdFCYBuB5BkYXkgYE4U b3YT4GIEkCAwNAEgYDE5OTggNTpgMTUgUE0Kjxt3IBYtJeckNUYFsWV4YZptC1BlIGAGkCB5CGAU IHQG8GQHsGF2efQgcASQcwIgIiADICgwFCAiEbBjCHBlIGEoIGJ1AxBkC4BnLNIiKCBoZSiwdwhg KFFqdAhwbiQ1bw3QKuIg8RnQZ2h0BCAAcChgFaAkY2ssg2RvBbBzLt8kPxt8JegmDS51LjJgFLD7 LVEskkcisQSgB4ACMCs1/xFxGRAqACyTLZEEIAIgKhD+bClRLeYqEAGAIwEuECqRES0xIElSBfBU YXj9FLB1KoAFQDVBLJIFoCdg1wBwKLAq8GEzsWEEIAuATyewBUAyYTGMLU0KwHS/C4Audy9bHbYu dRUxAD4QAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABAAAcw4MfIf2AIvgFAAAgw4MfIf2AIvgEeAD0AAQAAAAUA AABSRTogAAAAADfi - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE0837.1A096780-- ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V7 #72 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe 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 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