From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V8 #91 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 Tuesday, August 10 1999 Volume 08 : Number 091 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: Secrecy, security and the historical record Berlin gang Re: Berlin gang Re: Secrecy, security and the historical record Re: Secrecy, security and the historical record ROSWELL SPACECRAFT HELPED DEVELOP OUR SPY PLANES Re: ROSWELL SPACECRAFT HELPED DEVELOP OUR SPY PLANES Re: Lor-el Re: Fwd: Europe Blows Whistle on That Great Eavesdropper Re: ROSWELL SPACECRAFT HELPED DEVELOP OUR SPY PLANES Sticky Shoes Early depictions of stealth technology Re: Sticky Shoes Re: Machrianish, and [really] Mary. A trip to the bookstore... Re: Machrianish, and [really] Mary. Re: Sticky Shoes Re: Machrianish, and [really] Mary. *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 14:06:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "Stan Brown" Subject: Re: Secrecy, security and the historical record >the "Berlin for lunch bunch" C-130s. The OK I'll bite what was this one? I never heard about it. - -- Stan Brown stanb@netcom.com 843-745-3154 Westvaco Charleston SC. - -- Windows 98: n. useless extension to a minor patch release for 32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition. - - (c) 1999 Stan Brown. Redistribution via the Microsoft Network is prohibited. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 14:24:38 -0500 From: "Robert S. Hopkins, III, PhD" Subject: Berlin gang > >the "Berlin for lunch bunch" C-130s. The > >OK I'll bite what was this one? I never heard about it. At one time there was a daily (almost daily, perhaps I should say) flight using a Sun Valley C-130-II SIGINT airplane (others may have been used) from West Germany to Berlin Templehof through the three air lanes. The plane would land in Berlin and return home late in the day. The regularity of this trip and its stop-over during the lunch hour produced its humorous name. DrBob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 16:19:18 -0400 (EDT) From: "Stan Brown" Subject: Re: Berlin gang > >> >the "Berlin for lunch bunch" C-130s. The >> >>OK I'll bite what was this one? I never heard about it. > >At one time there was a daily (almost daily, perhaps I should say) >flight using a Sun Valley C-130-II SIGINT airplane (others may have >been used) from West Germany to Berlin Templehof through the three >air lanes. The plane would land in Berlin and return home late in the >day. The regularity of this trip and its stop-over during the lunch >hour produced its humorous name. Cute, thanks for the nfo. - -- Stan Brown stanb@netcom.com 843-745-3154 Westvaco Charleston SC. - -- Windows 98: n. useless extension to a minor patch release for 32-bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company that can't stand for 1 bit of competition. - - (c) 1999 Stan Brown. Redistribution via the Microsoft Network is prohibited. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 15:22:04 -0500 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Re: Secrecy, security and the historical record I asked, >>Any other [aerospace] examples, or ones where ultrasecrecy demonstrably worked >>on its own terms and to good effect? And DrBob replied, >The D-21 program, the RB-45 and RB-47 overflights of the USSR during >the 1950s, overflights of the People's Republic of China (U-2s, >RB-57s, RF-101s, etc.), any SIGINT (especially COMINT) flights, >particularly against Cuba, Nicaraugua, Indonesia, the Philippines >(yes), PIE FACE C-97 and the "Berlin for lunch bunch" C-130s. The >aviation list is actually quite long; we are only beginning to learn >about more. With the possible exception of the (failed) D-21 program, I'm not sure that any of these really fit into the context of the original question. They are, to be sure, programs where short-term secrecy of tactical plans was crucial to security (otherwise they'd have been shot down, as some were) and success. But were any of these really in the category of black development of radically new capabilities in the league of U-2, SR-71, F-117...? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Aug 1999 16:51:09 -0500 From: "Robert S. Hopkins, III, PhD" Subject: Re: Secrecy, security and the historical record >But were any of these really in the category of black development of >radically new capabilities in the league of U-2, SR-71, F-117...? A good question, and I believe I can show that they were. The airplanes you cite were certainly radically new in their capabilities as airplanes: higher, faster, stealthier. Agreed. Although the airplanes I mentioned were nothing new (in fact they were of questionable suitability for their selected roles in intelligence gathering), I refer not to the airplanes themselves but the equipment they carried. The PIE FACE C-97 carried a huge camera on board, perhaps the largest airborne camera to date. Because it was installed in what appeared to be a plain vanilla C-97, it could be flown into and out of places that would otherwise not be subject to undisturbed reconnaissance. The same thing is true with SIGINT: by radically improving the quality of the sensor gear, and operating it in a platform that would not otherwise attract undue attention, the entire suite (not the airplane, which in itself is almost trivial) can be far more effective. The RC-135X COBRA EYE (now defunct and undergoing conversion to another RC-135S COBRA BALL) is another good example. The airplane was pretty much unimpressive (I can't believe that I'M saying that....), but ask some PAO what was inside and they would give you a blank stare, even if you asked "the right question" of the SDIO PA. By staying mum on the nature of the sensor, which was a radically advanced IR sensor, the airplane could operate without suspicion by foreign militaries because they (supposedly) didn't know what the sensor did, how effective it was, and, especially if the airplane kept coming back, how fruitful the collection was. I was simply thinking in terms other than the airplane itself, to include the sensor suite, the weapons package, or some other capability. DrBob ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 15:52:14 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: ROSWELL SPACECRAFT HELPED DEVELOP OUR SPY PLANES Aviation artist William M. McDonald writes, "Now that legendary Lockheed engineer and Chief model kit designer for the Testor Corporation, John Andrews is dead, I can announce that he personally confirmed the design connection between the Roswell Spacecraft and the Lockheed Martin Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs), spy planes, Joint Strike Fighters, and Space Shuttles." How can anyone miss the comparison that my Stingray/Porpoise-like Chimaera design has in common with the three "Aurora" planes, the F-117 Nighthawk, the TR-3A "Black Manta," and even the original old YF-12A/SR-71 Blackbird spy planes of Kelly Johnson's Genius? John Andrews was a close personal friend of "Skunk Works" CEO Ben Rich, the hand picked successor of Kelly Johnson, the man famous for the F-117 Nighthawk "Stealth" fighter, it's half-pint prototype the HAVE BLUE, and the top secret F-19 Stealth Interceptor. Before Rich died of cancer, Andrews took my questions to him and Rich confirmed: 1. There are two types of UFOs. The ones we build, and the ones THEY build. We learned from both crash retrievals and actual "Hand-me-downs." The Government knew, and until 1969 took an active hand in the administration of that information. After the 1969 Nixon 'Purge,' administration was handled by an international board of directors in the private sector. 2. 'An item,' as opposed to 'The item' was recovered near the world's only combat operational atom bomb base (Roswell AAF) in 1947. Hull design, aerodynamic measurements, propulsion info was passed directly to Jack Northrop and Kelly Johnson, beginning in 1950. A major block of data being passed on from 'The Working Group' at Wright Patterson AFB's Foreign Technologies Division in 1952. The item refers to the top secret designation of Kelly's original variant of the U-2 (TR-1) spy plane in congressional and Pentagon budgets in the 1950s. 3. Nearly all 'Biomorphic' aerospace designs were inspired by the Roswell spacecraft from Kelly's SR-71 Blackbird, onward to today's drones, UCAVs, and aerospace craft. 4. The inward canted vertical stabilizers of the F-19, the HAVE BLUE, many drones, some UCAVs, and the SR-71 matched the 30 degrees inward cant of the Roswell spacecraft's shark fin shaped pair of vertical stabs or 'Winglets.' Same goes for the wing camber to fuselage "Blend" of the airframe designs. 5. The outward cants of the F-22 Raptor, the F-117, the McDonnell Douglas YF-23, and the TACIT BLUE stealth concept prototypes perform similar aerodynamic functions for stability in high performance flight. 6. Rich observed that the impression Kelly Johnson's contacts had was a negative impression and Kelly implied in rare conversations on the subject that "Factions" from "Out there" were a threat, more than they were a blessing. The cost of having "Them" around was "Unimaginable" and "Unbelievable." 7. It was Ben Rich's opinion, that the public should not be told. He believed they could not handle the truth, ever. Only in the last months of his decline did he begin to feel that the 'International corporate board of directors' dealing with the "Subject," could represent a bigger problem to citizens' personal freedoms under the United States Constitution than the presence of off world visitors themselves. Andrews passed this information on to me in stages, from 1994 until my last phone conversation with him around the Christmas holidays of 1998. Thanks to William M. McDonald at Argonaut- Greywolf@home.com. Editors Note: I thought it was disc shaped, but we have many reports there are both ours and their UFOs in our skies. - -- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 09:18:55 EDT From: JNiessen@aol.com Subject: Re: ROSWELL SPACECRAFT HELPED DEVELOP OUR SPY PLANES To all, Both John Andrews and Ben Rich were close friends...and to this piece of garbage they would have responded, "What a crock of crap." Jay Miller ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Aug 1999 08:51:24 -0700 From: JAZ Subject: Re: Lor-el Maybe its Loral corporation, the defense contractor? >On 8/5/99 7:06AM, in message ><000501bedf4b$a6a4c4f0$9686cd80@anmorris.adm.buffalo.edu>, "Andrew Morris" > wrote: > >> Lor-el was Superman's father I think! >> >> > Lor-el? It was JOR-EL. What has happened to American education today?!? ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Aug 1999 14:07:53 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: Re: Fwd: Europe Blows Whistle on That Great Eavesdropper Perhaps the NSA is looking for the perfect way to make a cuppa tea. The vacuum cleaner approach goes beyond just military goodies, probably hope to gain economic data for American and close ally business interests. Maybe the transnational corporations actually run the show instead of governments. Now on the other hand the French are to be observed at all times! Terry - ------------- patrick wrote: > > FWIW.....so if we really were capable of doing all this eavesdropping in > Europe or just England do you really think that after that expense the NSA > wants to to know what brand of tea evryone uses or which BBC channel they > might tune in to? I suspect its a large net that is capable of looking for > something specific in a broad area. But to monitor all calls or most > calls? Why go to the trouble? Britains just aren't that much interesting > to listen too. But all the calls going in or out of a dozen embassies? > Now that would be worth the expense/effort. > > patrick - -- 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: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 08:15:46 -0400 From: John Stone Subject: Re: ROSWELL SPACECRAFT HELPED DEVELOP OUR SPY PLANES Jay wrote: >Both John Andrews and Ben Rich were close friends...and to this piece of >garbage they would have responded, "What a crock of crap." Jay, thanks for the concise and to the point response to Terry Colvin's message! I couldn't agree more. Thanks, John John Stone blackbirds@iname.com U-2 & SR-71 Web page: http://www.thepoint.net/~jstone/blackbird.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 13:10:26 -0400 From: "Andrew Morris" Subject: Sticky Shoes The aircraft plant in question where the Soviet visitors had sticky soles to pick up metal shavings was the Grumman F-14 plant in Calverton, NY Andy Morris I stand corrected, Jor-El was superman's father, was Lor-El his mother?? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:02:13 -0500 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Early depictions of stealth technology I was just re-reading a Hal Clement science fiction novel (Iceworld, ISBN 0345258053) from 1953 and came across an interesting passage describing how some alien drug-runners had stealthed their probes and spaceship against post-WW II earthly radar. Clement was, IIRC, a science teacher in real life and tried to get both the facts and process of science right in his novels (sometimes slipping into a bit of didacticism). Talking to a new recruit, the alien drug lord says, "Within the last three or four years we have picked up some radiation suspiciously like radar, but it's all been constant frequency so far. We put quarter-wave coatings of plastic with a half-reflecting film of metal on all the [probes], and we haven't had any trouble. They [earthlings] only use a dozen different frequencies, and we're set up for all of them -- when they change, we simply use another drone. I suppose they'll start using two or more wavelengths in one area or maybe frequency modulation eventually, and we'll have to get a non- reflective coating. That would be simpler anyway -- only it's more expensive. I learned that when I had the [main spaceship] coated. I wonder how we'll get around it if they learn to pick up infra-red?" I'd guess Clement's quarter-wave stealth concept was inspired by the dielectric antireflective coating on lenses, or perhaps interference filters. In any case, this seems to show that the notion of radar stealth and specific ways to achieve it were in circulation in the early 1950s. A question, maybe a FAQ: are there other examples in early fiction or semi-fiction (e.g., Popular Mechanics writing) of radar stealth based on real physical principles, as opposed to magic or imaginary future science? How much earlier than 1953 do they go? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 16:24:00 -0700 From: JAZ Subject: Re: Sticky Shoes >The aircraft plant in question where the Soviet visitors had >sticky soles to pick up metal shavings was the Grumman F-14 plant >in Calverton, NY > >Andy Morris No I believe it was a Lockheed plant in the Los Angeles area, but I'm not sure. I read about it a long time ago, and I've seen several references to it since then. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 11:01:39 -0700 From: Steve Apthorpe Subject: Re: Machrianish, and [really] Mary. > From: Dan Zinngrabe > And, from Trader's (Paul) last report on his SENIOR CITIZEN research, Has he discovered anymore illustrations? (Do you have an up-to-date URL to cover his most recent SC findings?). >> Hmmm, yes Stonehenge is about 2 miles west of the airfield, but why did >> you connect the two? > Because us Yanks would never know how to find Boscombe Down on a map > otherwise :) I didn't think about that! Boscombe Down never used to be on any maps but I knew where it was, which was kinda handy as I was born, raised and lived there (before emigrating to sunnier climes.) > The DERA . Although new technology is tested there its > not the place where they'd test completely new aircraft Well, new aircraft have been tested there (I wish I could remember seeing the TSR2, however I was still in my pram when it last flew), and I've certainly seen some unexpected planes flying, including a Pucara (after the Falklands War, before the conspiracy theorists get all excited, over nothing, again ...) > Boscombe is a fairly secure place as I've found as many a time. You can > park at the end of the runways, only big CCTV systems bring the MOD police > in as soon your even think about getting a camera out! Well, that's hardly surprising as its illegal to photograph the establishment! You can oversee the airfield from Freedom Ridge, err I mean Beacon Hill which has a lay-by handily adjacent to the A303 [a two-lane freeway]. You can also see each end of the runway from public roads, however my favourite spot was on the mound (between the 'Officers Mess' and 'The Palace,' looking at the flight lines and runways) which, I'm told, is nowadays behind the wire. > Does anyone really know what happened there (Boscombe) on 'That night' in > September 1994? All sorts of things happened, except the crash of a 'black' aircraft. I have read a number of extremely tenuous stories, including one at Dan's [Zinngrabe] site. The story appears to rely on the 'Amesbury - Salisbury' road being closed. A short stretch was closed by the Ministry of Defence Police, and while not common, is not unheard of. This is done because the road is fairly close to the end of the runway (hence the local name of 'low flying corner') in case something trailing off of an aircraft could endanger passing traffic. My father, who worked at BD for most of his working life, and was there in 1994, told me that in-flight refuelling tankers occasionally landed with the drogue extended, due to unserviceability, for which this section of the road was closed. So, the road closure in itself is no big deal. In this particular case, the road was closed for a Tornado to land trailing a towed decoy (I don't know why the decoy could not be winched back to the aircraft, but that is irrelevant as it evidently couldn't be, either by design or unserviceability.) One reason that this is dismissed as a legitimate reason for road closure is that the towed decoy pod could've been ejected from the aircraft, enabling the aircraft to land safely. This is fallacious as all of the decoy avionics are stored in the pod, and ejecting said pod would cause the loss of some very expensive, if not irreplaceable, equipment, especially when considering that the landing of aircraft trailing some gear has happened before, ie it is not a flight safety issue. The next piece of evidence is that the crashed aircraft was parked inside the Weighbridge hangar (the largest hangar at BD, which gets its name from it actually housing a weighbridge). While some people have claims from people who were on the flight-line etc, I have a witness from inside the hangar. My father worked in said hangar for many years, and he said he didn't see anything in or around the hangar during the timeframe. I have to admit there is the possibility that he is giving me the party line (ie it did happen, but he can't tell me) but I don't believe this from the manner in which he told me; I have had a number of conversations with dad that ended in a brick wall when discussing other work at BD. So, the road closure is something that happens at this R&D establishment, and nothing crashed or was stored in/around the hangar as claimed. Trying to link in any visiting aircraft is opening up a whole can of worms (ie all the military airfields I have been on have visiting aircraft). If I had to guess (and this is NOT based on info from my father) the Galaxy was more likely bringing AH/MH-6's for exercises on Salisbury Plain/Middle Wallop (BD is the closest runway that could support a Galaxy), and the Yanks were quite pleased of the diversion. In other words, a, relatively, 'normal' day/night at a military test airfield. If nothing else this has been an interesting study in the propagation of myth, including our own contribution. We had an innocent comment from Mary, leading to a particular response from me (I must have been watching 'Deep Throat' again, no not THAT film, the first episode of 'The X-Files'), leading to comparisons with Menwith Hill (I wasn't aware that Menwith had an active runway...), and we're off [charter] on the trail of 'big brother/NWO' eavesdropping conspiracies involving 'UKUSA Agreement' sites. Oh please do not bring Pine Gap into this ... Steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 22:50:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl Subject: A trip to the bookstore... After my AW&ST and AI (AirInternational) arrived in the mail today, I also made a trip to the bookstore, and picked up some Skunk Works-related items. First, the cover article of the new Popular Mechanics is about the Skunk Works, written by "Area 51 has moved" Jim Wilson, and illustrated by Mike Machat. It contains quite a few errors and several months old data on Dark Star and the SR-71, combined with Aurora lore and Stealth Blimp "facts". (Not quite worth $2.95). Secondly, I got the new F-117 book: "F-117 Nighthawk", by Paul F. Crickmore and (his wife) Alison J. Crickmore, published by MBI Publishing (Motorbooks), 1999, ISBN: 0-7603-0585-4. (Absolutely worth its $29.95). This hardcover book with high quality, glossy paper, and many large-size photos, is another Skunk Works fan "must have". It even contains several "new" (to me) photos, including the previously unreleased photo of ship '782' with the "stars and stripes" underside! Also included is an updated list of Bandits (up to 546, June 30, 1998), and individual aircraft histories -- not listing any USAF serials, though, just article numbers, but up to and including the loss of '806' in Yugoslavia. As opposed to Jane's "How to Fly and Fight in the F-117A Stealth Fighter" (for $18), it actually has an OCIP Cockpit layout with many instrument descriptions, and much better historical data -- something the Janes' book is nearly completely missing. Also, the new AW&ST has a nice article on the Boeing (Phantom Works) X-37 project, info on the latest THAAD tests, and an update on the F-22 funding controversy, while the AI was pretty much 'Skunk free'. - -- Andreas - --- --- Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl E-Mail: schnars@ais.org 313 West Court St. #305 or: gpahl@acm.flint.umich.edu Flint, MI 48502-1239 Tel: (810) 238-8469 WWW URL: http://www.ais.org/~schnars/ - --- --- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 20:13:04 -0700 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Re: Machrianish, and [really] Mary. >> From: Dan Zinngrabe >> And, from Trader's (Paul) last report on his SENIOR CITIZEN research, > >Has he discovered anymore illustrations? (Do you have an up-to-date URL >to cover his most recent SC findings?). > The last time I heard from Paul he was doing a lot of traveling and was not able to devote much time and energy into A/C. Several other list members do have "illustrations" and other material that may pertain to SENIOR CITIZEN, but Trader had the real gold nuggets in his budget analysis. > >All sorts of things happened, except the crash of a 'black' aircraft. I >have read a number of extremely tenuous stories, including one at Dan's >[Zinngrabe] site. Since then I've collected 2 more stories of that night, from two radically different perspectives, but those (if they're published at all) will wait for v2.0 of the website or a book :) More interesting is a sighting of a U-2 like aircraft on the moors around the same time, that will definitely be in Black Dawn 2.0 (yup, still have it Chris G.). > >So, the road closure is something that happens at this R&D >establishment, and nothing crashed or was stored in/around the hangar as >claimed. Trying to link in any visiting aircraft is opening up a whole >can of worms (ie all the military airfields I have been on have visiting >aircraft). If I had to guess (and this is NOT based on info from my >father) the Galaxy was more likely bringing AH/MH-6's for exercises on >Salisbury Plain/Middle Wallop (BD is the closest runway that could >support a Galaxy), and the Yanks were quite pleased of the diversion. >In other words, a, relatively, 'normal' day/night at a military test >airfield. For better or for worse, no (American) Little Birds were on the scene at the time. The C-5's supposed destination does raise some eyebrows though. The speculation that it was one of the C-5's that is configured to carry "special" cargo is irrelevant- it's not like the accident involved a KH-11 or the Hubble. > >If nothing else this has been an interesting study in the propagation of >myth, including our own contribution. We had an innocent comment from >Mary, leading to a particular response from me (I must have been >watching 'Deep Throat' again, no not THAT film, the first episode of >'The X-Files'), leading to comparisons with Menwith Hill (I wasn't aware >that Menwith had an active runway...), and we're off [charter] on the >trail of 'big brother/NWO' eavesdropping conspiracies involving 'UKUSA >Agreement' sites. Oh please do not bring Pine Gap into this ... I just find the whole Echelon thing to be very boring these days because it's been so well documented in the past. The only information to come to light recently has been the efforts to monitor the Interent, and even that was more or less what any SysAdmin or spook would expect NSA to do. Dan _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ The software you were born with helps you follow thousands of different threads on the Internet, whip up gourmet feasts using only ingredients from the 24-hour store, and use words like "paradigm" and "orthogonal" in casual conversation. It deserves the operating system designed to work with it: the MacOS. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Aug 99 03:20:30 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: Sticky Shoes On 8/9/99 10:10AM, in message <002601bee28a$130e6fb0$9686cd80@anmorris.adm.buffalo.edu>, "Andrew Morris" wrote: > The aircraft plant in question where the Soviet visitors had > sticky soles to pick up metal shavings was the Grumman F-14 plant > in Calverton, NY We did the same thing to determine that the Soviets had in fact learned how to rewokr titanium and were building submarines out of it. Ironic note about teh Soviet espionage was that the information on the titanium in the carry through and elsewhere wasn't classified! They could have asked! > > Andy Morris > > I stand corrected, Jor-El was superman's father, was Lor-El his > mother?? > His mother's name was Lara. I'm shocked-- Shocked, I say, at the lack of key knowledge being taught at our schools! Art ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 09 Aug 1999 23:26:02 -0700 From: patrick Subject: Re: Machrianish, and [really] Mary. Steve-- You forgot to mention the mysterioso mach 6 airplane covered under a tarp near the end of the runway where it crashed. The road was closed to prevent viewing, the C5 was to haul off the wreckage..... The whole incident was debunked in a British Aerospace magazine, the name and date of which escape me. But it seems this info is in an archival copy of this newslist and can be retreived. patrick ps: The aircraft turned out to be some steel beams or boarding equipment. ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V8 #91 ******************************** 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