From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V8 #18 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 Friday, March 19 1999 Volume 08 : Number 018 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Atwood die Re: Atwood die Re: Lockheed Stealth model Need a source of Air Pictorial magazine in U.S. New F-117 book, sort of. What the hell is it? Re: What the hell is it? U-2 Sortie Shortfall Re: Need a source of Air Pictorial magazine in U.S. Fw: NASA SEEKS PROPOSALS FOR ADVANCED RADAR TECHNOLOGY F/A-18 tests Re: F/A-18 tests Former Skunk Works Engineer to speak at Hill Museum FWD: (IUFO) Phoenix Lights vs. the TR-3B Flying Triangle Re: (IUFO) Phoenix Lights vs. the TR-3B Flying Triangle Re: FWD: (IUFO) Phoenix Lights vs. the TR-3B Flying Triangle FWD: (UASR) "Quiet" Helicopters [was Re: Connecticut Triangles] RF New Air Defense Technology What skunkish things are there left? Re: What skunkish things are there left? Re: What skunkish things are there left? What skunkish things are there left? Re: What skunkish things are there left? *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 02:38:49 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Atwood die It is amazing that nobody mention that Atwood dies. Looks like a lot of important persons is passing away nowadays, Kubrick, DiMaggio, and now Atwwood: http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/990308/bkp.html May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour, and it seems like a minute. That's relativity." Albert Einstein ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 06:28:33 -0800 From: patrick Subject: Re: Atwood die At 02:38 AM 3/9/99 -0800, Wei-Jen lamented: > > It is amazing that nobody mention that Atwood dies. Looks like a >lot of important persons is passing away nowadays, Kubrick, DiMaggio, and >now Atwwood: Good call Wei-Jen. I never realized one person was responsible for so many successful designs as Atwood. Truly phenomenal. Course Stanley "Open the pod bay doors HAL" Kubrick and the Mr. Coffee guy were great too! Vaya Con Dios Mr. Atwood....... LOS ANGELES, March 8 (Reuters) - John Leland ``Lee'' Atwood, the former Rockwell International Corp. president who helped produce one of World War II's most devastating fighter planes and later worked to put a man on the moon, has died, the company said on Monday. He was 94. Atwood died of natural causes at St. John's Hospital in Santa Monica, California. ``Lee Atwood helped shape the initiatives that resulted in Rockwell's diversification and expansion ... and ultimately, the company's role in history's greatest technological triumph, mankind's first steps on the moon,'' former Rockwell Chief Executive Robert Anderson said in a statement. Among his achievements was convincing the British during World War II to let North American Aviation, Rockwell's predecessor company, make a new fighter plane, the propeller-driven P-51 Mustang, instead of modifying their Curtiss P-40. During the war, P-51 pilots accounted for almost half the enemy aircraft downed in the European theater. U.S. pilot Chuck Yeager, who once downed five German planes in one day while flying the P-51, described it as ``the best American fighter in the war.'' Atwood also played an integral role in the design of the B-25 Mitchell medium bomber, and he helped his firm secure leading roles in the development of the F-100 Super Sabre, X-15 rocket-plane and the B-1 bomber. But perhaps his crowning achievement was winning the bid to develop the Apollo space capsule and the Saturn V launch vehicle used to launch Apollo. After the war, Atwood started North American Aviation's Aerophysics Laboratory, which built the Apollo spacecraft. Rockwell, which was formed in 1967 after North American Aviation merged with Rockwell-Standard, has since designed and built the space shuttle and the rockets that launched it. patrick ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 08:55:04 -0600 From: G&G Subject: Re: Lockheed Stealth model Wei-Jen Su wrote: > ...I don't remember the name of the project or aircraft, > but it sound like "Advances Fighter... (two more words)". Probably the next in the series of Advanced Fighter Technology Integration (AFTI) test aircraft. There was an F-111 AFTI that tested the MAW (Mission Adaptable Wing) which "deformed" its shape in flight. GregD %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %% %% %% Reality is for People Who %% %% Can't Handle Simulation %% %% %% %% habu@cyberramp.net %% %% gdfieser@hti.com %% %% %% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 11:40:56 -0800 From: Larry Smith Subject: Need a source of Air Pictorial magazine in U.S. Anyone know where in the U.S. I can get a copy of the UK magazine Air Pictorial? Regards, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 18:29:47 -0800 From: patrick Subject: New F-117 book, sort of. I saw a listing for a new book entitled "Nighthawks" by Patrick Blazek. The publisher might be Schiffer. Not sure. The description is "a photo guide to the insignia patches of the Lockheed F-117A Stealth Fighter" and is in color. 89 pages. $24.95? I read this at a small vintage aviation website so check your normal book dealers. I have not seen this book. There have been a lot of patches made available that were purported to be official so this book hopefully will identify which are which. patrick ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:36:35 +1000 From: "Andrew See" Subject: What the hell is it? > >Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 23:29:26 -0500 >From: "Thomas, Margaret, and James Lipscomb" >Subject: Numbers extracted from aviation video > >Rarely it is possible to get numbers out of a video when the target is a >tiny, fuzzy blob. It could be a skunky aircraft, and anyway we are >engineers, we like numbers, so I hope this is the right crowd. We >appreciate aviation video better when we know the dimensions, >velocities, and forces. > >See directly > http://www.multiweb.force9.co.uk/ufoscotland/videos/ufocrash.mpg > >Do yourself a favor and skip the speculation on the referencing page: > http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/dledger/video.htm >about 1/2 of the way down under, “MPEG. This amazing piece of footage >....”. VERY interesting sequence. At first glance I thought "so what", but looking closely at the speed and trajectory, and the way the vehicle deflects off the ground with little speed loss, it seems to defy commonsense. I've shown the sequence to a few other aviation enthusiasts at work, and the best guess we've come up with is a Lifting body aircraft. I think a meteorite could be discounted, due to the shallow trajectory. A meteor is going to come in near vertical. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 06:29:02 -0000 From: gavin.payne@cleancrunch.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: What the hell is it? Where did this come from? To me it looks a lot like the bouncing bomb our guys made during the war rather than an aircraft. Gavin - -----Original Message----- From: Andrew See To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Date: 10 March 1999 02:50 Subject: What the hell is it? > >Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 23:29:26 -0500 >From: "Thomas, Margaret, and James Lipscomb" >Subject: Numbers extracted from aviation video > >Rarely it is possible to get numbers out of a video when the target is a >tiny, fuzzy blob. It could be a skunky aircraft, and anyway we are >engineers, we like numbers, so I hope this is the right crowd. We >appreciate aviation video better when we know the dimensions, >velocities, and forces. > >See directly > http://www.multiweb.force9.co.uk/ufoscotland/videos/ufocrash.mpg > >Do yourself a favor and skip the speculation on the referencing page: > http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/dledger/video.htm >about 1/2 of the way down under, “MPEG. This amazing piece of footage >....”. VERY interesting sequence. At first glance I thought "so what", but looking closely at the speed and trajectory, and the way the vehicle deflects off the ground with little speed loss, it seems to defy commonsense. I've shown the sequence to a few other aviation enthusiasts at work, and the best guess we've come up with is a Lifting body aircraft. I think a meteorite could be discounted, due to the shallow trajectory. A meteor is going to come in near vertical. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:25:14 -0500 From: "Frank Markus" Subject: U-2 Sortie Shortfall The lead story on the current AvWeek Washington Outlook page reports that the US is having trouble maintaining surveillance of North Korea. The problem is that there are too few available U-2s or pilots or maintenance personnel. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 18:04:20 From: win@writer.win-uk.net (David) Subject: Re: Need a source of Air Pictorial magazine in U.S. Larry wrote: > >Anyone know where in the U.S. I can get a copy of the UK >magazine Air Pictorial? Just found your mail Larry. I don't know if you've had any joy sourcing a copy in the US, but just let me know and I'll send you a copy. Would it be this April's edition you're after by any chance ! ? David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 21:45:42 -0500 From: "Martin Hurst" Subject: Fw: NASA SEEKS PROPOSALS FOR ADVANCED RADAR TECHNOLOGY So NASA wants to develop a new high resolution radar, do they. Its one-millimeter capabilities seems a little to fine wouldn't you think, should the military deem it so. So I wonder how NASA could get public funding for it development? Read on: << SNIP >> >...NASA is seeking proposals for a low-cost, advanced imaging >radar technology that will reduce the cost and enhance the >performance of Earth observing satellites -- opening new >opportunities for the U.S. commercial remote-sensing industry. > >...minute changes in the Earth's surface, down to the one-millimeter > > ... The satellite's advanced capabilities also will greatly help >improve governments' emergency management efforts and may prove >useful to industries involved in disaster recovery. Other > >... LightSAR's high-resolution imaging capability has significant >commercial potential for mapping the Earth's surface, >environmental surveillance, crop monitoring and land management, > > ... Proposals for mission development and operations using >LightSAR are being sought from many organizations, including >educational institutions, industry, nonprofit institutions, NASA >field centers, federally funded research and development centers >and other government agencies. The LightSAR announcement of >opportunity is available via the Internet at URL: > > http://www.earth.nasa.gov/nra/current/ > > > NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA, is managing >the LightSAR project for NASA's Office of Earth Science, >Washington, DC, which oversees a long-term, coordinated research >enterprise designed to study Earth as a global environmental >system. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 08:11:19 -0600 From: Dave Bethke Subject: F/A-18 tests From the Virginia Pilot Online - - ---------- F/A-18 ``Super Hornets'' pass tests with flying colors ABOARD THE CARRIER HARRY S. TRUMAN -- Back in Washington, plenty of folks think they know what's wrong with the Navy's new F/A-18 Super Hornet -- it costs too much and delivers too little, they complain. But in the Gulf Stream waters off northern Florida this week, pilots and engineers are testing the limits of a pair of Super Hornets -- watching their performance under stresses greater than the Navy expects them to face even in wartime -- in an effort to demonstrate what's right about the $70 million strike fighter. - ---------- The complete story at http://www.pilotonline.com/military/ml0311hor.html. - -- Dave Bethke ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Mar 99 16:23:02 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: F/A-18 tests On 3/12/99 6:11AM, in message <36E92087.9ED0352@ix.netcom.com>, Dave Bethke wrote: > >From the Virginia Pilot Online - > ---------- > > The complete story at > http://www.pilotonline.com/military/ml0311hor.html. > > Basically the complete story says, when you strip away all the PR, "The F/A-18E/F can take off and land on an aircraft carrier". It also says that it's easier to bring aboard than an F-14. They don't mention it, but they're primarily talking about the F-14A model, the D is easier to bring aboard. An interesting phenomena about most naval fighters is that they usually take the cat shot real well but are hard to trap (the F-8 was a prime example) or are easy to trap but not as much fun to launch (the F-4 was very good coming aboard). The F-14 has always been a higher workload aircraft to bring aboard, partly because the A model never had all the features installed (the A model was never supposed to go into production). The Hornet has been easier to bring aboard. BTW, unlike what the article says, the F-14 isn't considered the toughest to bring aboard =, according to my info. That dubious honor belongs to the EA-6B. Of course, the reservations aren't about the E/F's carrier performance, it's about what the airplane does or doesn't do retaliative to its cost when it isn't taking off or landing. Art ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 10:48:18 +0000 From: Brent Clark Subject: Former Skunk Works Engineer to speak at Hill Museum Thought those living near Hill Air Force Base, might be interested in a upcoming lecture given as part of the "Airplane Talk" series. The guest speaker will be Warren Gilmore, former Lockheed Skunk Works Engineer and Program Manager. He will be discussing the SR-71 and the Skunk Works. The lecture will be March 20th at 1:00pm in the Hill Museum lecture room. Free to the public. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 11:58:18 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD: (IUFO) Phoenix Lights vs. the TR-3B Flying Triangle I agree with others that I am having a hard time believing the data on Ed Fouche's website and in his book "Alien Rapture". Fouche's Website = < http://www.fouchemedia.com > After all, if it were absolutely true, why is that data still there on the web, and why is Ed still walking around? We are taking here of data from S-4 (cf - Bob Lazar), not Groom Lake. Much more sensitive data... Also - I'd like to remind all of you that at the Feb. 1999 International UFO Congress, Peter Davenport (of the US UFO Reporting Center) gave a real good talk which included a detailed summary of the "Phoenix Triangle" events of March 13, 1997. I have an audiotape of his talk, and they are available NOW from the Congress, at < http://www.ufocongress.com >. That was NOT any TR-3B. Several witnesses described it as a huge flying wing, with five lights (not 3), and how it was 4 fist-lengths long (at arms length) when it stopped over Phoenix, Peter said at 7,000 to 10,000 feet, so this would make that craft somewhere between 1 and 2 MILES long. That size seems too big! Too bad. A mom and her kids all saw it for over 3 minutes. It stopped dead over them for at least 3 minutes, absolutely silent. An F-15 pilot from Luke AFB (2 F-15s used for Air Force 1 and 2 cover, not assigned to the base) intercepted the craft. An audiotape from an airman at the base says that the base was "closed" after the intercept. Peter said the pilot had to be lifted from his cockpit seat (shock?). Peter also said that the US may have gone to DEFCON 3 that day, and if so, that would account for how Pres. Clinton may have injured his knee (running from the AU golf player's house in FL(?) to a safe haven). It all seems to fit... You don't believe me? Here's the transcript of that airman's tape: < http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/CB970313a.html >. Other witnesses on that tape describe how it took them 2.5 minutes to go underneath that craft at 80 mph, when they were going North into Phoenix. One witness was there at the Congress and personally testified on the micreophone to that statement - she came all the way from Tuscon just to do that for Peter. [2.5*60]*[80*(88/60)]/5280 = 3.3 miles! THE PHOENIX LIGHTS were this (or perhaps several) LARGE TRIANGLES!!! They were not the lights, flares, or whatever they were - that hung in the air and traced the outline of the ridge of a local mountain range an hour (or 2 hours?) after the triangle(s) passed over Phoenix. Get it right! US UFO Reporting Center: < http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/ > PB. < http://www.padrak.com/ufo/ > For the first time in all my years of research, I am truly in awe. - -- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:07:25 EST From: Jasper0007@aol.com Subject: Re: (IUFO) Phoenix Lights vs. the TR-3B Flying Triangle OK, i remember this pheonix lights thing. Full coverage LIVE on CNN that night, i was watching it, the thing was the size of pheonix itself! ID4!!!!!!! ARGH!!! no seriously, i saw it live on CNN, Sky News, and RTL 2 News(German) it was truelly Huge in size, covering most of pheonix below. The amatuers were out, the TV crews were out, and so was the airforce!! Cheers Richard ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 11:38:03 -0800 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: FWD: (IUFO) Phoenix Lights vs. the TR-3B Flying Triangle >I agree with others that I am having a hard time believing the data on Ed >Fouche's website and in his book "Alien Rapture". Regarding the TR-3B fiction, I would suggest analysing the concept from an aerospace engineering and physics standpoint. If one just writes down each alleged technical feature of the vehicle, and then analyses that, I think the result would be quite immediate. I don't understand, how we could use the scientific method and be quite probing in our analysis of F-4 Phantom shock wave photos, but abandon that approach here. >THE PHOENIX LIGHTS were this (or perhaps several) LARGE TRIANGLES!!! >... >For the first time in all my years of research, I am truly in awe. I wouldn't be in awe. Public perceptions are not anything you can go to the bank with. It is interesting, and worthy of finding out what it is, but that is all. It is incorrect reasoning that just because it seems unusual, that it is a alien space ship. There are also many natural phenomenon that could explain some of this. For example, the study of natural plasmoids. Even potentially dark natural plasmoids. You need instruments in the field, and an effort to fund scientific imvestigation into this field. Without that, UFO studies is just a religion. Anyway, this second topic is off topic. Sorry I couldn't resist a little comment. Regards, Larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:10:54 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD: (UASR) "Quiet" Helicopters [was Re: Connecticut Triangles] From: Jan Aldrich Via: CE-list The foregoing reports do sound somewhat UFO-like. However, there are some reports that sound like regular man-made objects or testing of advanced aircraft. The objection being that one would not test new aircraft over populous areas. Not quite true. Looking back on some NICAP*CONN investigations, we found that in 1963 over Wallingford and again over East Hartford in 1964 lights flying in crazy patterns were identified as tests of "quiet" helicopters by Kaman Aircraft. The lighting pattern on the helicopters was also unusual for aircraft and was part of the test. Thanks, Ray, for the additional sighting. I have some more here somewhere including two sighting reports by police officers of which one was a daylight sighting. - -- Jan Aldrich Project 1947 http://www.iufog.org/project1947/ P. O. Box 391, Canterbury, CT 06331, USA Telephone: (860) 546-9135 - -- 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 Long Binh, Can Tho, Danang (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: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 22:44:47 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: RF New Air Defense Technology Nezavisimaia gazeta's Nikolai Baranov ("A NEW 'MIG' AND A SUPERRADAR"," Moscow, 2, 3/6/99) reported that a new RF-made MiG-29SMT fighter has undergone over 100 test flights. The test program will be over by summer. Another 100 test flights with live ammo firing are required. So-called fifth generation avionics--used for the first time in the RF-- and provisions for new ways of rendering information to the pilot are the main features of the fighter. Tests have also been completed for a new radar complex at some unnamed scientific research institute. The placing of the transmitter and the receiver at different places allows the detection aircraft flying in between. Because of that, the new radar system can detect stealth-technology aircraft and missiles as easily as the traditional ones. It can detect targets of any size and create "an automatically functioning radiolocation barrier up to 500 kilometers long." - -- 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 Long Binh, Can Tho, Danang (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, 18 Mar 1999 20:38:58 -0600 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: What skunkish things are there left? As an on-and-off follower of Skunk Works, I find myself asking, "Why does the list exist? Does it still have a topic?" At the beginning of the decade, there were more-or-less plausible reports of funny things in the sky that sometimes correlated with strange sounds/seismic signals/whatever. In addition, there were budget analyses that seemed to correllate with Something Hidden going on in the aerospacereconnassaince world. And so forth. Now, what? Mostly, I'd say, it's the peculiar deficiency in aerial reconnaissance (U-2 shortfalls, SR-71 absence), plus the continued operation of Area 51 that *might* point to something interesting flying up there. What think you all? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 19:37:58 -0800 From: patrick Subject: Re: What skunkish things are there left? At 08:38 PM 3/18/99 -0600, you wrote: >As an on-and-off follower of Skunk Works, I find myself asking, "Why does >the list exist? Does it still have a topic?" > >At the beginning of the decade, there were more-or-less plausible reports of >funny things in the sky that sometimes correlated with strange >sounds/seismic signals/whatever. In addition, there were budget analyses >that seemed to correllate with Something Hidden going on in the >aerospacereconnassaince world. And so forth. > >Now, what? > >Mostly, I'd say, it's the peculiar deficiency in aerial reconnaissance (U-2 >shortfalls, SR-71 absence), plus the continued operation of Area 51 that >*might* point to something interesting flying up there. > >What think you all? > > Before I joined, I believe it was established to discuss aircraft designed or built by Lockheed's Skunkworks. Since becoming a member several years ago the consensus appears to allow discussion of designs and products of other aircraft companies that compete with the Skunkworks. As always, discussion of UFO stuff is considered verboten here. I personally take an interest in the F-117 which is an on going program. Others discuss the capabilities of the SR-71. Others groove on U-2's. The Skunkworks appears to be as busy as always. So who knows....yet. Much of the folklore you allude to has been hammered to death on this newslist. Relevancy sometimes is in the eye of the beholder......or bandwidth. patrick cullumber ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 01:47:32 EST From: INFORMATION RESTRICTED Subject: Re: What skunkish things are there left? Here's one for the list then.. This afternoon about 1300, I head two quite distinct sonic booms over Carson City NV, enough to startle the hell out of me. Any ideas??? Kurt Amateur Radio Stations KC7VDG/KK7RC Monitor Station Registry KCA6ABB Based In Nevada, United States Of America In use: Kenwood: TM-251A/E, TS-570d, Yaesu: FT-8100R, FT-2500M, FT50rd, Realistic: DX-394, Icom: IC-706MKII, Uniden: BC-200xlt, BC-760xlt, Whistler: CO403DC scanning video reciever 55-806 MHz On Thu, 18 Mar 1999 20:38:58 -0600 "Allen Thomson" writes: >As an on-and-off follower of Skunk Works, I find myself asking, "Why >does >the list exist? Does it still have a topic?" > >At the beginning of the decade, there were more-or-less plausible >reports of >funny things in the sky that sometimes correlated with strange >sounds/seismic signals/whatever. In addition, there were budget >analyses >that seemed to correllate with Something Hidden going on in the >aerospacereconnassaince world. And so forth. > >Now, what? > >Mostly, I'd say, it's the peculiar deficiency in aerial reconnaissance >(U-2 >shortfalls, SR-71 absence), plus the continued operation of Area 51 >that >*might* point to something interesting flying up there. > >What think you all? > > > ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 01:54:24 EST From: INFORMATION RESTRICTED Subject: What skunkish things are there left? What are the Skunk Works current projects if any? Kurt Amateur Radio Stations KC7VDG/KK7RC Monitor Station Registry KCA6ABB Based In Nevada, United States Of America In use: Kenwood: TM-251A/E, TS-570d, Yaesu: FT-8100R, FT-2500M, FT50rd, Realistic: DX-394, Icom: IC-706MKII, Uniden: BC-200xlt, BC-760xlt, Whistler: CO403DC scanning video reciever 55-806 MHz ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 08:58:50 -0000 From: gavin.payne@cleancrunch.demon.co.uk Subject: Re: What skunkish things are there left? According to their website they're still working on not-so-classified projects such as C-130 upgrades etc. For the last couple of years they were upgrading the U-2Rs to U-2S too. With regards to the shortage of U-2s, I seem to remember hearing this was due to a lack of pilots. The question I'd like to ask is where did all the SR-71 pilots go to? After having flown the SR-71 for a few tours, you're hardly likely to want to fly much else in the inventory. But you would have pretty high security clearance and a good security record. Makes them good to fly something new! Regards, Gavin - -----Original Message----- From: INFORMATION RESTRICTED To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Date: 19 March 1999 07:05 Subject: What skunkish things are there left? > >What are the Skunk Works current projects if any? > >Kurt > > >Amateur Radio Stations KC7VDG/KK7RC >Monitor Station Registry KCA6ABB >Based In Nevada, United States Of America >In use: Kenwood: TM-251A/E, TS-570d, Yaesu: FT-8100R, FT-2500M, FT50rd, >Realistic: DX-394, Icom: IC-706MKII, Uniden: BC-200xlt, BC-760xlt, > Whistler: CO403DC scanning video reciever 55-806 MHz > >___________________________________________________________________ >You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. >Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html >or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V8 #18 ******************************** 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