From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V8 #60 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, May 21 1999 Volume 08 : Number 060 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: SR-71 comeback? Re: F117's in Grenada? Re: SR-71 comeback? Digest URL (Re: SR-71 comeback?) FWD: (TLCB) Aviation Fuel AURORA Contrails? Testing List Re: AURORA Contrails? Re: AURORA Contrails? Re: AURORA Contrails? Re: Testing List List is back to normal What was first: F104 or U2? Re: What was first: F104 or U2? Another test for automatic handling scripts...sorry Re: What was first: F104 or U2? Final Test Final Test The Black Humor of NATO targeting Continues *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 14 May 99 06:11:04 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: SR-71 comeback? On 5/12/99 1:20AM, in message <951@writer.win-uk.net>, David wrote: > Art writes: > > > > Thanks for your comments Art, they're much appreciated. A couple of points: > > 1) Would you expand a little on the above ? David, While I love to expound on the SR-71, there was quite an extensive discussion of this on the list by a number of parties in the last couple of years, which should be available in the digests. My only reluctance to go into it again is that it might bore many of the readers of the list who've already been through it. My lengthy article on this appeared in the July 1997 issue of Airpower magazine. You can probably get a back issue from (818) 368-2012. I was going to put in that article a prediction that the next thing the opponents would try would be a line item veto, but was asked not to put that in. A few months later I wished I had because sure enough, that's exactly what the Fund-Raiser in Chief was persuaded to do. BTW, no, I don't get anything from additional sales of that issue, it's just that a lot of what you want is in there and others on the list won't have to read me droning on again. I can give you some other sources if you communicate with me privately. > > 2) I was told by more than one informed source that in their considered > opinion, a major factor in the SR's grounding centred on the USAF getting > tired of funding the acquisition of intel. that was then passed on to > other agencies who made no financial contributions to its operational > costs. > > As you didn't mention this aspect in your comprehensive list, I assume > you'd consider it wasn't a factor. Is this correct ? > > It was a factor, but not that big relative to the others. USAF has not been that interested in recon in the last 30 years, except from satellites. The main reason USAF didn't make more use of the intel that the SR could produce was that they chose not to. Regarding other agencies not funding the operation: Remember, this kind of recon is a mission the Air Force claimed for its own, even if they didn't want its product. It was their job. Complaining that other agencies weren't funding it is a straw man. After all, the Air Force doesn't use the product of Close Air Support missions itself, yet doesn't complain that the Army isn't funding CAS (of course, USAF isn't interested in CAS anyway and tries not to do it that often). There were a number of proposals to treat the SR as a national asset, funding it that way, or to turn it over to one of the other services, but that bogged now in bureaucratic in-fighting. Reportedly, one of the opponents was USAF. They may not have wanted the plane, but there's no way they were going to let anyone else control THE FASTEST AIRPLANE IN THE WORLD. Finally, the post- '95 funding was a separate line item. Congress was funding the program separately from the regular USAF budget, anyway. Art ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 02:32:58 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Re: F117's in Grenada? At 10:00 AM 5/12/99 -0400, you wrote: >I was just talking with a friend (Warthog pilot) and he mentioned that >F117's didn't see their first combat in Panama, but rather in Grenada. >Said that it was a real zoo as all the other pilots had to steer clear of >them and whatnot. > >Anyone else ever heard this? > =-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- I'll take a stab at this just to create the discussion if no one else wants to..... I have never heard this which means I know nothing about it. But if you consider the purpose or mission is to attack high risk, high value targets I would question the need for the 117 at Grenada. Secondly, it seems doubtful the plane was staged outside of Nevada. So there should have been no interaction with it at a forward air base. As far as over the target, the 117 is a night time predator while I believe the A-10 operated only in the daylight. The AF was criticised for using the 117's in Operation Just Cause as there was no radar system that required defeating in Panama. Course they then turned on their own aircraft and criticised it in a gambit to ensure approval of B-2 funding approval. But we never discuss AF politics on this newslist! But if your friend has info to the contrary it would be interesting to hear more of it. patrick ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 21:30:55 From: win@writer.win-uk.net (David) Subject: Re: SR-71 comeback? Art wrote: [edit] > While I love to expound on the SR-71, there was quite an extensive >discussion of this on the list by a number of parties in the last couple >of years, which should be available in the digests. My only reluctance >to go into it again is that it might bore many of the readers of the >list who've already been through it. [edit] Understood. I archived your posts on the SR-71, but along with other data they seem to have gone AWOL on my database. I'm almost ashamed to say that I can't remember where the SW digests can be found. Any pointers....anyone please ? Thanks for putting the comments I'd received in perspective and for offering the opportunity of discussing this by e-mail rather than on the SW List, it's much appreciated. Dave ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 May 1999 16:55:09 -0400 (EDT) From: David Allison Subject: Digest URL (Re: SR-71 comeback?) > > I'm almost ashamed to say that I can't remember where the SW digests can > be found. Any pointers....anyone please ? > > Dave The digest is at http://www.netwrx1.com/skunk-works David Allison webmaster@habu.org ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 May 1999 09:13:45 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD: (TLCB) Aviation Fuel I was in Liquid Fuels Systems Maintenance. If my failing, addle pated memory doesn't fail me, JP-5 was indeed Navy standard. It took higher temperatures to ignite the stuff. It was conidered a safety factor on board carriers. About JP-8, isn't that a juice drink with eight different vegetables in it? :>)) Actually, I recall JP-8 being mentioned in our Tech School, but with time it's use and designated application has escaped from the cobwebbed halls of my memory. "Mitch" 556th CES, RED HORSE NKP 68-69 > I wondered about the gas designations he used also. I retired in 87 so > there's no telling what's in use now. As I remember JP-4 was standard > AF, I think JP-5 was standard Navy. The only difference was the freezing > point. But JP-8 I never used. Beats me what he was talking about. John - -- 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 * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program - ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 01:16:04 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: AURORA Contrails? ParaScope correspondent Alfredo Garcia recently snapped some amazing photographs of the USAF's top-secret "AURORA" aircraft [contrails]. Are those loopy contrails produced by a Pulse-Wave Detonation Engine? < http://www.parascope.com/nb/articles/auroraPixB.htm > - -- 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 * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program - ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 10:58:56 GMT From: georgek@netwrx1.com (George R. Kasica) Subject: Testing List Just a quick test here to make sure the lists are working. I've implemented an automatic system to handle bounced mail and need to know that you are still receiving messages from the lists. THank you. George George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica West Allis, WI USA georgek@netwrx1.com gkasica@hotmail.com gkasica@lycos.com gkasica@netscape.com http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 08:29:07 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Re: AURORA Contrails? At 01:16 AM 5/17/99 -0700, you wrote: >ParaScope correspondent Alfredo Garcia recently snapped some >amazing photographs of the USAF's top-secret "AURORA" aircraft >[contrails]. Are those loopy contrails produced by a Pulse-Wave >Detonation Engine? > >< http://www.parascope.com/nb/articles/auroraPixB.htm > > - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ha ha ha!!! He was so intent on getting evidence of the Aurora that as he watched the craft manoever he concentrated on photographing the contrails??? Wouldn't common sense tell you to photograph the plane first and maybe the contrails later? Here is a guy taking photos of the sky, claims to have watched the "Aurora" fly past him, and he is proud to present a contrail photo? As they say, whats wrong with this picture? Notice the lack of any description of the craft, only that it "hauled butt". And this guy "knows" that acceleration of the craft is the cause of the contrail pattern? What about the cirrus clouds being necessary to the existence of the contrails? As if the motors ingest the clouds and spits them out like a cookie cutter. But his conjecture about coming from Area 51 and heading towards Edwards is priceless. The editor claims these are the first photos of its kind but the photog claims to recognize the contrails from previously published photos. Fellas, get your stories straight!!! Someone should be embarassed for this kind of a report. patrick cullumber ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 09:32:06 PDT From: "wayne binkley" Subject: Re: AURORA Contrails? i ain't no expert bout them pulse -thingy engines,never been to area 51 ,but them thar "aurora contrails" looked just like most any other decaying or dissipating or fading or what ever the terminology is for what starts to happen to contrails immediately after they are formed.i suspect it has many variables such as altitude,temp.humidity,etc.i would also be willing to bet that the usaf has spent a lot of money investigating the phenomena called contrails.where would one go to learn more?. wayne d.binkley >From: patrick >Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com >To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com >CC: pscppol@aol.com >Subject: Re: AURORA Contrails? >Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 08:29:07 -0700 > >At 01:16 AM 5/17/99 -0700, you wrote: > >ParaScope correspondent Alfredo Garcia recently snapped some > >amazing photographs of the USAF's top-secret "AURORA" aircraft > >[contrails]. Are those loopy contrails produced by a Pulse-Wave > >Detonation Engine? > > > >< http://www.parascope.com/nb/articles/auroraPixB.htm > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Ha ha ha!!! He was so intent on getting evidence of the Aurora that as he >watched the craft manoever he concentrated on photographing the >contrails??? Wouldn't common sense tell you to photograph the plane first >and maybe the contrails later? Here is a guy taking photos of the sky, >claims to have watched the "Aurora" fly past him, and he is proud to >present a contrail photo? As they say, whats wrong with this picture? > >Notice the lack of any description of the craft, only that it "hauled >butt". And this guy "knows" that acceleration of the craft is the cause of >the contrail pattern? What about the cirrus clouds being necessary to the >existence of the contrails? As if the motors ingest the clouds and spits >them out like a cookie cutter. But his conjecture about coming from Area >51 and heading towards Edwards is priceless. The editor claims these are >the first photos of its kind but the photog claims to recognize the >contrails from previously published photos. Fellas, get your stories >straight!!! > >Someone should be embarassed for this kind of a report. > >patrick cullumber > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 May 1999 13:33:15 EDT From: INFORMATION RESTRICTED Subject: Re: AURORA Contrails? Oh, Come ON! I have seen litterally HUNDREDS of these types of trails over the years !!! I'll tell you specifically what I have seen on dozens of occasions, and that is a simple passenger jet flying overhead, in fact, most that I have seen form a trail like this just a few miles back from the aeroplane, and you can see"Southwest Airlines" on the left, and the ULTRA COVERT HIGH SPEED AURORA TURBO RECTAL VAPOR TRAILS on the right !!!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! The Canadians are coming Sorry, got a little worked up! Now, in '91 there was a lot of reports from the USGS about sonic booms, usually on a Thursday night, and they managed to trace a path, and speed of a craft using their records, and concluded it was a small ultra high speed craft flying an oval path around Edwards or so and out around Catalina ISland. One perticular night while in the mountains looking for meteors, I quickly shifted my eyes from north-east to south-west, looking for nothng in particular, but noticed in my field of vision as I turned my head, a small long slender bullet or rocket shaped craft with short wing like things set very far back. This took about half to one second to turn my head, and I saw it the whole time, untill I lost sight of it, about the distance from Edwards to Long Beach or so. A few seconds later, I felt and heard a sort of whup whup whup very faintly in the air, like someone opening a door somewhere else ina building and you sense it more than anything else. I talked to some fellow I met, who was an aircraft engineer, and he knew nothng of such a craft, but he drew on a paper for me how the whup, whup, whup came to be. He said when the sound barrier is broken, it sets up a shock wave at 45 º, and each time you go one more mach, the wave is half again, or 22.5 º and so one untill you get going so fast that its almost flat, and since it just sort of comes down over you, like a blanket rather than hit your ears from the side you feel it more than hear it. That's what I saw once, but this photo of the trail is BS, the claim anyway, and you guys are right, why not take a photo of the aircraft itself? 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: Mon, 17 May 1999 17:48:18 -0400 From: "Jim Bostick" Subject: Re: Testing List got it, thx Jim Bostick - ---------- > From: George R. Kasica > To: acg-l@netwrx1.com; felinetalk@netwrx1.com; nursesforum@netwrx1.com; skunk-works@netwrx1.com > Subject: Testing List > Date: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:58 AM > > Just a quick test here to make sure the lists are working. I've > implemented an automatic system to handle bounced mail and need to > know that you are still receiving messages from the lists. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:42:26 +0000 From: georgek@netwrx1.com Subject: List is back to normal Hello: Just thought I'd like to add that our spam problems seem to be fixed with the addition of some filters late on yesterday and the list should be back to normal now, sorry for any inconvenience. George George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica West Allis, WI USA georgek@netwrx1.com gkasica@hotmail.com gkasica@lycos.com gkasica@netscape.com http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:32:56 -0600 From: James Mangin Subject: What was first: F104 or U2? This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------ =_NextPart_001_01BEA165.3B490C20 Content-Type: text/plain I hope this isn't an overasked question, but what was the Skunkworks created for - the development of the F104 Starfighter or the U2 spy plane? Help! - -Jim - ------ =_NextPart_001_01BEA165.3B490C20 Content-Type: text/html What was first: F104 or U2?

I hope this isn't an overasked question, but what was the Skunkworks created for - the development
of the F104 Starfighter or the U2 spy plane?

Help!

-Jim

- ------ =_NextPart_001_01BEA165.3B490C20-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:42:28 -0700 From: Larry Smith Subject: Re: What was first: F104 or U2? >I hope this isn't an overasked question, but what was the Skunkworks created >for - the development of the F104 Starfighter or the U2 spy plane? Neither. The P-80. Larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:52:16 +0000 From: georgek@netwrx1.com Subject: Another test for automatic handling scripts...sorry Test message to capture bad addresses, please ignore. George George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica West Allis, WI USA georgek@netwrx1.com gkasica@hotmail.com gkasica@yahoo.com gkasica@netscape.com http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 17:35:05 EDT From: JNiessen@aol.com Subject: Re: What was first: F104 or U2? Neither. The Skunk Works was created to support development of the XP-80 in 1943. Jay Miller ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 14:56:24 +0000 From: georgek@netwrx1.com Subject: Final Test George ===[George R. Kasica]=== +1 414 541 8579 President +1 800 520 4873 FAX Netwrx Consulting Inc. West Allis, WI USA http://www.netwrx1.com georgek@netwrx1.com gkasica@hotmail.com gkasica@yahoo.com gkasica@netscape.com ICQ #12862186 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 15:04:35 +0000 From: georgek@netwrx1.com Subject: Final Test George ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 11:00:31 -0400 From: "James P. Stevenson" Subject: The Black Humor of NATO targeting Continues [From a Senate Hill Staffer] Frantic to eliminate the impression that it might be getting smart about targeting (per my last message), NATO last night resumed attacking targets inside Belgrade -- and promptly imparted severe damage to a hospital (see picture in this morning's Post) and light damage to -- according to Yugoslav sources -- eight (yes, 8) diplomatic residences, one of them with a reception going on (a new twist on party crashing). The bombing pause over Belgrade for the last 9-10 days was presumably a stand down while General Clark had his targeters figured out what-is-where in the European capital he had been bombing for six weeks before he took out the Chinese embassy. Apparently, they think they have that sorted out now. There's just a few more problems: 1) They are still drinking their own bath-water about guided weapons; they obviously continue to believe their own propaganda about the precision of what they call "precision guided weapons (PGMs).". They think these types of "misses" only occur on the rarest occasions. And, when they do, they excuse themselves by saying that they are the unfortunate consequences of war. No! They are the predictable consequences of bombing cities, towns, and villages, you a------s! The 1,500 foot miss (about a quarter-mile) that hit the hospital last night is a very predictable outcome of the use of laser guided bombs. Even Air Force boasts in Desert Storm had 10-20% of these going astray. Using the Wheeler rule of DoD effectiveness claims (empirically proven in the GAO study): double that, and you'll get accurate data for Desert Storm. But, with the lousier weather and urban setting in Belgrade, you can probably double that again. When someone does an independent and competent study on this camapign, we'll know if I'm wrong -- but not until then. Don't hold your breath. 2) We still have the problem of just a teeny-weeny bit of dissention in NATO about our strategy: see, in the article below, how NATO continues to be all over the lot on whether we are going to -- some day -- threaten the use of ground troops and what we will settle for in the negotiations we started. Meanwhile, Milosevic is making offers -- as NATO inspects its own navel and can't decide if it's an "inny" or and "outty." 3) In another brilliant public relations ploy (not addressed in the article below), we all heard last night how NATO is dropping unused bombs in the Adriatic -- some of them close enough to the shore that Italian fishermen are netting the bombs. Hell, if they catch a new fangled JDAM or AGM-130 they'll be able to "net" a whole lot more on the international market than a prime tuna at the Tokyo fish market. I guess this is just NATO's own strange way of saying thank you. Oh, by the way, this is now America's longest war since Vietnam, and it shows every promise of being just as much fun. ______________________________ NATO Bombs Damage Belgrade Hospital By Katarina Kratovac Associated Press Writer Thursday, May 20, 1999; 8:33 p.m. EDT BELGRADE, Yugoslavia (AP) -- NATO warplanes hammered Belgrade and its suburbs Thursday, leaving a hospital in smoldering ruins, three patients dead and eight foreign diplomatic missions damaged. An attack late Thursday hit a fuel depot in the capital and the blast damaged the home of the Swiss ambassador, who was hosting a diplomatic reception at the time, the private Beta news agency said. The day's attacks came amid new accounts of desertions in the Yugoslav army and a fresh round of diplomacy in Moscow involving Russian, Finnish and American troubleshooters. The bombings Thursday were the strongest in Belgrade since China's embassy was mistakenly hit by NATO on May 7, and came the same day thousands turned out for a religious holiday to pray for peace in Yugoslavia. Detonations lighted the sky in the capital and the sound of jets and anti-aircraft fire could be heard. NATO did not acknowledge the hit on the hospital, which occurred early Thursday morning, but said one of its laser-guided weapons missed its target -- an army barracks -- by about 1,500 feet and struck a building. It did not elaborate other than to say ``one of the bombs was misdirected for technical reasons.'' Besides leaving the hospital destroyed, the airstrikes damaged the residences of the ambassadors from Sweden, Norway, Spain, Hungary, Pakistan and Israel, and the Libyan Embassy, Yugoslav media reported. Later Thursday, tens of thousands of people wound in a religious procession through Belgrade to mark the ascension of Christ. Patriarch Pavle, head of the Serbian Orthodox church, prayed for peace. The bombings came hours after President Slobodan Milosevic accepted the general principles for a Kosovo peace plan drawn up by Russia and the top Western powers, known as the Group of Eight. But Milosevic -- after meeting Wednesday with Russia's Balkans envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin in Belgrade -- demanded Yugoslavia directly negotiate details of the peace plan with the United Nations. That appears to fall short of NATO conditions for halting the air campaign. The alliance seeks a total withdrawal of Milosevic's 40,000 forces in Kosovo, a return of all refugees and a well-armed international force to police the peace accord. Chernomyrdin met Thursday with U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott and Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari to brief them on his talks with the Yugoslav president, which he described as ``tense.'' The G-8 countries have their own divisions over the plan. Envoys from the countries met for 12 hours in Bonn, Germany, trying to draw up a U.N. resolution dictating peace terms to Milosevic that Russia and China will support in the Security Council. The G-8 foreign ministry envoys began drawing up a draft. But after 12 hours of work, talks broke up with divisions over much of the text. The group was to resume work Friday. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, meanwhile, visited a tent city in northern Albania and called for the United Nations to play a key role in resolving the conflict. Annan was surrounded by applauding refugees in Kukes, temporary home to 100,000 Kosovars -- the largest single concentration of the nearly 800,000 ethnic Albanians who have fled Kosovo since March. In the attack on the hospital, the state-run news agency Tanjug said an operating room was demolished and that infants and pregnant women were evacuated from the maternity ward. Witnesses said the hospital's neurological building was directly hit and an intensive care unit was leveled. Hospital director Milovan Bojic, a Serb deputy premier and Milosevic's political ally, called the attack ``a savagery.'' Three patients were killed and three other patients and a security guard were injured. Associated Press Television News footage showed two corpses in the hospital morgue, including a woman's body, her head caked in blood and half of her right arm missing. Swedish diplomats said windows were smashed and a door was blown up at their residence 200 yards from the hospital. They said no one was injured, but insisted the bombing underscored the need once again to avoid bombing populated areas. The NATO strike at the Chinese embassy killed three people, one of at least nine mistaken attacks that have caused deaths in thousands of airstrikes since the allied bombings began March 24. NATO has said it regrets causing any deaths but some casualties are unavoidable given the nature of the conflict. President Clinton said Thursday that the bombing campaign is working but made no mention of the most contentious issue facing the alliance -- whether and when to introduce ground troops into Kosovo to get the displaced refugees back home before winter. There were new accounts, meanwhile, of Serb soldiers deserting following U.S. reports that 500 have quit, mainly drafted soldiers from northern Kosovo. Media in Montenegro, the Serb republic's smaller partner in the Yugoslav federation, reported army reservists deserting and returning to their home towns. The daily Vijesti said 400 reservists arrived in Aleksandrovac, their hometown, saying they will not go back to the front. They turned down an offer to treat their absence as a short vacation, saying they want the war to end, the newspaper said. c Copyright 1999 The Associated Press Back to the top ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V8 #60 ******************************** 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