From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #19 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 Saturday, March 4 2000 Volume 09 : Number 019 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #17 Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #17 Re: FWD (TLCB) Mach2 Biz-Jet RB-104 [Fwd: F-15 vs Security vehicle...] Re: [Fwd: F-15 vs Security vehicle...] Superhornet for 2002 Deployment Scalar radar vis-a-vis conventional radar Experimental MIG maiden flight Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment RE: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment Fwd: mil.search eng. Antelope Valley Press sorry Sonic Boom reduction and 'hole' in radar clutter. Re: Sonic Boom reduction and 'hole' in radar clutter. *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 16:02:51 -0800 From: Lee Markland Subject: Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #17 > Nick and Sam: That photo originally popped up in Britain's UFO MAGAZINE > in 1996 (Vol.15, No.2, pg.43) as part of magazine editor Graham > W.Birdsall's article on the "Black Triangle" Flap over Belgium in > 1989-91. The photo was reproduced again in Vol.15, No.4 as part of an > interview with a Belgian AF F-16 pilot who pursued several triangles. > Neither photo appears to be as "doctored" as the one on the WEB site. > The original photo is copyrighted by someone called Quest Picture > Library (English?). Interestingly enough, a photo of an almost identical > object, photographed over Tagresk, Russia in 1990 appears on p.47 of the > Vol.15, No.2 issue. > > Best regards, > > Jim > Suspect picture from a very suspect source. Even if such an aircraft existed it would never fly over populated areas and allow itself to be pursued by air defense forces and be photographed. Skeptical Sam What would it take to overcome your skepticism. Reports by BBC? CBS NBC CNN Fox Wall Street Journal Time Magazine President Clinton CSAF An outright admission by DARPA? All of the above? None of the above? As a non believer in ET UFO's (why would anyone want to visit us except as a science project, or as an Intergalactic Theme Park (Earth - the Serengeti of the Galaxy). Brussels (where these objects appeared and were reported by police and others) is home to NATO Headquarters. Just think of a Demonstration Performance by the Air Force and DARPA - lookie, lookie at what we have - any doubt about our capabilities? In that context, and with the new politiks of Europe (the Eastern Bloc - joining NATO), such a demonstration would send political signals, and be bloodless as well. Flying triangles and stealth blimps, not necessarily the same thing, could be different technologies and weapon systems. Just thoughts. Somewhat skeptical Lee ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 19:44:36 -0600 From: "Albert H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #17 Lee Markland wrote: > > > Nick and Sam: That photo originally popped up in Britain's UFO MAGAZINE > > in 1996 (Vol.15, No.2, pg.43) as part of magazine editor Graham > > W.Birdsall's article on the "Black Triangle" Flap over Belgium in > > 1989-91. The photo was reproduced again in Vol.15, No.4 as part of an > > interview with a Belgian AF F-16 pilot who pursued several triangles. > > Neither photo appears to be as "doctored" as the one on the WEB site. > > The original photo is copyrighted by someone called Quest Picture > > Library (English?). Interestingly enough, a photo of an almost identical > > object, photographed over Tagresk, Russia in 1990 appears on p.47 of the > > Vol.15, No.2 issue. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Jim > > > > Suspect picture from a very suspect source. Even if such an aircraft > existed it > would never fly over populated areas and allow itself to be pursued by air > defense forces and be photographed. > > Skeptical Sam > > What would it take to overcome your skepticism. > > Reports by BBC? > CBS > NBC > CNN > Fox definitely NOT Fox network. how about MSNBC (I think that's the right name. My son feels it is the best source but our cable tv system doesn't carry it) > > Wall Street Journal > Time Magazine > > President Clinton nah, but then I never trusted a president since Truman. > CSAF <---who are they? > > An outright admission by DARPA? sounds promising! > > All of the above? > None of the above? > > As a non believer in ET UFO's (why would anyone want to visit us except as > a science project, or > as an Intergalactic Theme Park (Earth - the Serengeti of the Galaxy). Well it was good enough for Klaatu to travel at 4000 mph to try to get us to see the folly of our ways! > > Brussels (where these objects appeared and were reported by police and > others) is home to NATO Headquarters. I don't think Police are much better equipped to interpret a sighting of something unusual. They probably do what most of would do...try to make it fit something we are familiar with. > > Just think of a Demonstration Performance by the Air Force and DARPA - > lookie, lookie at what we have - any doubt about our capabilities? > > In that context, and with the new politiks of Europe (the Eastern Bloc - > joining NATO), such a demonstration would send political signals, and be > bloodless as well. > > Flying triangles and stealth blimps, not necessarily the same thing, could > be different technologies and weapon systems. > > Just thoughts. > > Somewhat skeptical Lee Just small responses. When I was young I was convinced we were being visited bt ETs. Then when nothing turned out to be true, I gave up on the idea. The last thread I'm holding onto is the X-files tv show. If they don't find the real answer by the end of this season, I quit. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 23:20:57 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Re: FWD (TLCB) Mach2 Biz-Jet On Sat, 26 Feb 2000, Terry W. Colvin wrote: > Just read where Lockheed and another aircraft builder are collaborating on a > Mach 2 business jet. Supposedly it presents no sonic boom or a "low-boom" > as the article called it. The shape of the nose seems to be part of the > secret, it appears to be (for a Mach 2 aircraft) very blunt. Theory is that > the blunt nose builds up a pressure spike out in front of the plane, thus > raising the air pressure around the aircraft, thus increasing the speed of > sound. Mach speed no go "boom". The wings are designed to distribute lift > over the entire wing instead of allowing a pressure wave to build up at the > center of lift (again no "boom"). The tail configuration may also have > something to do with the "no boom". It's supposed to carry 10-12 people. > > "ZOOM-ZOOM" > > "Mitch" Mr. Colvin, will you please forward this to the original author "Mitch"? Thanks! Dear Mitch, will you please be more specified about your statement? There is any picture of the blunt nose that you are decribing out in the web? Thanks in advance. May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I Trek. Therefore I Am" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:00:47 -0800 From: David Lednicer Subject: RB-104 Since first becoming aware of Greenamyer's F-104, thanks to an article in Newsweek in October 1976, I have been collecting everything I can get my hands on related to this aircraft. I just missed seeing the aircraft - I was in Southern California the week after it crashed. I have tons of articles and photos related to the aircraft, but most importantly, I have some actual pieces of the plane. Back in the 1980s, the wreckage was in the boneyard at Mojave. On one of my consulting trips to Scaled, at quitting time I convinced several Scaled guys to drive me in the company van out to the wreck. Since that time, I have worked with Darryl on another project and have asked him for copies of his pictures. Unfortunately, they are in deep storage, so it might be a while. The aircraft was a combination of pieces from various sources. The forward fuselage was from a ground test rig, rebuilt by Darryl and his crew. The tail section was from a F-104G and I think the wings were from the same source. Yes, it had no speed brakes. Darryl swung a deal with NASA and managed to get the reaction control system off one of the NF-104s that was on a pedestal at Dryden. The engine we now know came from the US Navy - the Air Force did its best to keep him from getting one, but the Navy loved what he was doing. Its just a shame that Darryl had to punch out of it. - ------------------------------------------------------------------- David Lednicer | "Applied Computational Fluid Dynamics" Analytical Methods, Inc. | email: dave@amiwest.com 2133 152nd Ave NE | tel: (425) 643-9090 Redmond, WA 98052 USA | fax: (425) 746-1299 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 19:18:47 -0500 From: "James J. Bjaloncik" Subject: [Fwd: F-15 vs Security vehicle...] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------6AE38845073 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fellow Skunkers: While this isn't "deep black" sort of stuff, I suspect you all will get a kick out of it (unless you've already found this site). Future son-in-law (father is a 30-year retired USAF master sargent) shipped it off to me today. Gonna have to relearn them security boys at Elgin how to drive them new automobiles. Jim - --------------6AE38845073 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: ryan.coleman@eds.com Received: from ahmler3.mail.eds.com (ahmler3.mail.eds.com [192.85.154.74]) by darcy.gwis.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA33412 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:07:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from ahmlir2.mail.eds.com (ahmlir2-2.mail.eds.com [192.85.154.29]) by ahmler3.mail.eds.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA18405; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:06:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ahmlir2.mail.eds.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ahmlir2.mail.eds.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA23414; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:06:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from usahm007.exmi01.exch.eds.com (usahm007.exmi01.exch.eds.com [207.37.138.147]) by ahmlir2.mail.eds.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA23392; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:06:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by usahm007.exmi01.exch.eds.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2651.32) id ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:06:16 -0500 Message-ID: <440F51E90750D211B7EA00A02461FD0C05097FCF@usahm011.exmi01.exch.eds.com> From: "Coleman, Ryan" To: "'vampire@apci.net'" , "Andy Yun (E-mail)" , "Josh Wasielewski (E-mail)" , "Home (E-mail)" , "'jjbjal@gwis.com'" Subject: F-15 vs Security vehicle... Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 08:06:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2651.32) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hey, You want a good laugh, check this out... http://www.avweb.com/articles/eglin/ An accident between a F-15 Eagle and a Security vehicle. Jeremy, you should send this on to Pete as I don't have his address here at work... Ryan Coleman EDS - Janesville, WI *: 608-756-7304 *: ryan.coleman@eds.com - --------------6AE38845073-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 21:28:05 -0500 From: John Szalay Subject: Re: [Fwd: F-15 vs Security vehicle...] At 07:18 PM 2/28/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Fellow Skunkers: While this isn't "deep black" sort of stuff, I suspect >you all will get a kick out of it (unless you've already found this >site). Future son-in-law (father is a 30-year retired USAF master >sargent) shipped it off to me today. Gonna have to relearn them security >boys at Elgin how to drive them new automobiles. > You want a good laugh, check this out... > > http://www.avweb.com/articles/eglin/ > > An accident between a F-15 Eagle and a Security vehicle. > You should check out the one showing the Dutch F-16 with a wingtip missile though the windshield of a crew vehicle parked on the ramp edge. and with WHITE weapons on the hardpoints, not blue ones... got the picture but not a URL to show... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 00 10:54:23 -0600 From: wings Subject: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment More for the SuperHornet grist mill: As reported today, after passing flight tests, the Department of the Navy announced the the F-18E/F will be ready for deployment in two years. The first squadron for deployment is to be on the carrier Abraham Lincoln. World Tribune News Report: http://www.worldtribune.com/Archive-2000/ss-military-02-17.html Wayne Busse wings@sky.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 12:21:13 -0800 From: "A.J. Craddock" Subject: Scalar radar vis-a-vis conventional radar - --=====================_392731635==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed "Any radar can be converted to a scalar EM radar quite simply. Indeed, a modification kit to accomplish that can be developed and held until the scalar mode is desired. The modification kit can be quickly installed to provide the scalar capability. "Scalar radars, for example, cannot track "corner reflector" targets. However, they can magnificently track smoothly filleted corners; rounded, smoothly curved surfaces; and curved or flat metalized dielectrics. Against aerial targets using special construction to lower their cross-section to normal radars, the application of the scalar radar mode is immediately obvious. "Scalar waves pass through the electron shells of an atom and interact with the nucleus. They are continually absorbed and emitted by all nuclei in the universe." ______________________________ Excerpt from "Fer de Lance, A Briefing on Soviet Scalar Electromagnetic Weapons by Lt. Col. T.E. Bearden (retd.), 1986 See http://www.cseti.org/bearden/ferdelance/s24.htm for complete text. The "flap" over the F-117's radar "visibility/invisibility" suddenly comes more into focus (no pun intended). And for those of you that need to learn the theory of this extended EM theory that is not in the textbooks, read the preceeding 23 chapters on the Website, plus those following it. Plus some of the Patents that have been awarded for its application! Tony Craddock - --=====================_392731635==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" "Any radar can be converted to a scalar EM radar quite simply. Indeed, a modification kit to accomplish that can be developed and held until the scalar mode is desired. The modification kit can be quickly installed to provide the scalar capability.

"Scalar radars, for example, cannot track "corner reflector" targets. However, they can magnificently track smoothly filleted corners; rounded, smoothly curved surfaces; and curved or flat metalized dielectrics. Against aerial targets using special construction to lower their cross-section to normal radars, the application of the scalar radar mode is immediately obvious.

"Scalar waves pass through the electron shells of an atom and interact with the nucleus. They are continually absorbed and emitted by all nuclei in the universe."
______________________________

Excerpt from "Fer de Lance, A Briefing on Soviet Scalar Electromagnetic Weapons
by Lt. Col. T.E. Bearden (retd.), 1986

See http://www.cseti.org/bearden/ferdelance/s24.htm for complete text.

The "flap" over the F-117's radar "visibility/invisibility" suddenly comes more into focus (no pun intended).

And for those of you that need to learn the theory of this extended EM theory that is not in the textbooks, read the preceeding 23 chapters on the Website, plus those following it.  Plus some of the Patents that have been awarded for its application!

Tony Craddock

- --=====================_392731635==_.ALT-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Feb 00 15:35:01 -0600 From: wings Subject: Experimental MIG maiden flight In the news today, a new MIG fighter designed in the 80's to counter the development of the F-22 Raptor, made its maiden flight today from Zhukovsky Air Base. Known as Project 1.44, is purported to be a testbed for future multifunctional fighters, and has no stealth technology. During the 18 minute flight from Zhukovsky Air Base, test pilot Vladimir Gobunov climbed to 3,300ft at about 300kts, and circled the base twice before landing. Wayne Wayne Busse wings@sky.net ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 Mar 100 05:48:33 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment On 12/31/69 9:59PM, in message <200002291656.KAA28871@eagle.netwrx1.com>, wings wrote: > More for the SuperHornet grist mill: > > As reported today, after passing flight tests, the Department of the > Navy announced the > the F-18E/F will be ready for deployment in two years. > > The first squadron for deployment is to be on the carrier Abraham > Lincoln. > > Beware, Enemies of Freedom: The USN will face the threats of the '00s and beyond with the technology of the '80s, while paying the prices of the '90s. Onward to mediocrity! Art ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:33:13 -0500 From: "Weigold, Greg" Subject: RE: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment 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_01BF838B.132B7572 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Amazing, ain't it! - -----Original Message----- From: betnal@ns.net [mailto:betnal@ns.net] Sent: None To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment On 12/31/69 9:59PM, in message <200002291656.KAA28871@eagle.netwrx1.com>, wings wrote: > More for the SuperHornet grist mill: > > As reported today, after passing flight tests, the Department of the > Navy announced the > the F-18E/F will be ready for deployment in two years. > > The first squadron for deployment is to be on the carrier Abraham > Lincoln. > > Beware, Enemies of Freedom: The USN will face the threats of the '00s and beyond with the technology of the '80s, while paying the prices of the '90s. Onward to mediocrity! Art - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF838B.132B7572 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" RE: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment

Amazing, ain't it!

-----Original Message-----
From: betnal@ns.net [mailto:betnal@ns.net]
Sent: None
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment


On 12/31/69 9:59PM, in message <200002291656.KAA28871@eagle.netwrx1.com>, wings
<wings@sky.net> wrote:

> More for the SuperHornet grist mill:
>
> As reported today, after  passing flight tests, the Department of the
> Navy announced the
> the F-18E/F   will be ready for deployment in two years.
>
> The first  squadron for  deployment  is to  be on the  carrier  Abraham
> Lincoln.
>
>


    Beware, Enemies of Freedom:  The USN will face the threats of the '00s and
beyond with the technology of the '80s, while paying the prices of the '90s. 
Onward to mediocrity!


            Art

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF838B.132B7572-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 12:53:23 EST From: MELUMAN@aol.com Subject: Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment Have you seen the NEW MIG page on FAS? Great photos! http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/mfi.htm meluman ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 22:33:36 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Re: Superhornet for 2002 Deployment On Wed, 1 Mar 2000 MELUMAN@aol.com wrote: > Have you seen the NEW MIG page on FAS? Great photos! > > http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/mfi.htm How reliable are those FAS coments and data sheet? May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I Trek. Therefore I Am" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 10:45:48 PST From: "wayne binkley" Subject: Fwd: mil.search eng. i don't know if this is new or not. when i entered"C-130" i got 4,943"hits".a random sampling was all connected to military herks in some manner, a lot of photos.good place for surfing.WDB >SEARCH ENGINE COVERING U.S. MILITARY WEB SITEShttp://www.searchmil.com > DESCRIPTION: Over 1 million military pages indexed and ranked >in order of popularity. --- SearchMil.com, covering exclusively >U.S. Military web sites, maintains its lead with the largest >index of the .mil domain. --- Advanced web page ranking technolo- >gy puts the quality web pages at your fingertips by listing the >most popular results first. This is especially important for que- >ries that return thousands of hits, because it keeps the good >hits from getting buried. --- The results for each hit include >excerpts from the target page showing all the search words in >context. This makes it easy to see why each hit matches the que- >ry, without having to visit every site. > PUBLISHER: MaxBot.com, Beckstrom Software, Kirkland, WA, USA. > LINKS: SearchGov.com | SearchEdu.com. > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 13:26:09 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Antelope Valley Press Anyone have the full transcript of the aritcile from Antelope Valley Press (9 Feb. 2000) saying about the problem of Skunk Works? Thanks in advance! May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I Trek. Therefore I Am" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 13:34:25 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: sorry Sorry, I found the transcript in the skunk works newsgroup. May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@cco.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I Trek. Therefore I Am" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 21:28:49 -0800 From: Timothy Toth Subject: Sonic Boom reduction and 'hole' in radar clutter. Someone mentioned sometime ago that sonicbooms would be a problem because they would be very hard to hide. Well, last month's edition of Popular science (or Popular mechanics?), has an article on how a company with the help of the skunk works plan to develop a Mach 2+ buisness jet for 2005. What is interesting is that the skunk works part in this venture will be to provide the technology for the sonic boom reduction to provide a more comfortable 'ride'. If they can have such a system fielded on a buis jet for 2005, they must surely have what's needed now to do it on other ac. We where also mentionning in previous messages how stealth aircraft showed up as holes in the radar background clutter. And I had mentionned that this had also proved to be a problem with the Sea Shadow. In fact in the book 'Skunk works' by B. Rich & L. Janos, they aknowledge that this was a problem but they claim that it was solved after several months research. Of course no info was given on how this is achieved. I guess they can use refelectors or a narrow beam transmitter linked to high accuracy recivers, to mimic the background, but how do you know what the background is like? It would take active sensors, or a very big data bank and powerfull computers to make all this work properly according to the angle of illumination. Any ideas? Timothy reading Dan Zinngrabe wrote: > >> I read on this list a few months ago > >> that a European magazine had posted an > >> alleged photo of the TR3. > >> > >> I searched at the time, but could not > >> locate it. > >> > >> Someone else did and sent it, along with the > >> alleged unit patch (image) to me. I have no > >> idea as to the authenticity, but.... > >> > >> I have posted it on a page at: > >> > >> http://www.angelfire.com/de/deger/page7.html > > > > > >The picture is too messed up to be able to tell what the heck the pictured > >object is. It is very heavily pixelated and GoatoShop(TM) may have > >been used to > >create or alter it. The picture also had the heck compressed out of > >it so it is > >impossible to say what is really shown in the picture. > > > >"I" suspect it was faked. > > > >Sam > > I've seen it several times before in UFO publications, and seen a > number of similar photos and video from places as far from Belgium > (where this was purportedly taken) as you can get- Ohio, Oregon, etc. > JPL and others have analyized this particular photo, but IIRC they > found nothing conclusive. Apparently the Belgian AF was interested > enough to attempt to intercept triangular "things" at the time. > Glenn's Belgian Triangle link page: > > Video footage this still is from(?) : > > And a fairly objective record of Belgian F-16 intercepts of the > triangular contacts: > > Note the details on how it was only observable on radar from some aspects. > > Of more interest to me is the patch on the page- note the star in the > general area of New Mexico or Nevada :) > > Dan > > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > Have you exported RSA today? > print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> > )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2000 00:05:19 -0800 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Re: Sonic Boom reduction and 'hole' in radar clutter. >Someone mentioned sometime ago that sonicbooms would be a problem >because they would be very hard to >hide. Well, last month's edition of Popular science (or Popular >mechanics?), has an article on how a >company with the help of the skunk works plan to develop a Mach 2+ >buisness jet for 2005. What is >interesting is that the skunk works part in this venture will be to >provide the technology for the >sonic boom reduction to provide a more comfortable 'ride'. >If they can have such a system fielded on a buis jet for 2005, they >must surely have what's needed now >to do it on other ac. Well, you can't legally lay a sonic boom down over populated areas, so I suppose a supersonic business aircraft would be a hard sell unless you did something about the boom. It's as not much good if you can only use it over water. At any rate, it's a fairly trivial problem to solve with today's tools. The real stumbling block would be making the aircraft fuel efficient. >We where also mentionning in previous messages how stealth aircraft >showed up as holes in the radar >background clutter. And I had mentionned that this had also proved >to be a problem with the Sea >Shadow. In fact in the book 'Skunk works' by B. Rich & L. Janos, >they aknowledge that this was a >problem but they claim that it was solved after several months >research. Of course no info was given >on how this is achieved. I guess they can use refelectors or a >narrow beam transmitter linked to high >accuracy recivers, to mimic the background, but how do you know >what the background is like? It would >take active sensors, or a very big data bank and powerfull computers >to make all this work properly >according to the angle of illumination. Any ideas? Sure. I could rattle off a couple of things that you could do today that weren't really feasible at the time (creating a wavelet basis for generating the noise based on sea state, etc.), or you could just fit the craft with a modified jammer. The problem was that Sea Shadow interrupted the natural radar clutter of the ocean's movement. Most radars would have filters to reduce the clutter of the sea and to highlight potential threats. I suppose it would only be a matter of tweaking out ECM gear enough and adjusting tactics so that Sea Shadow was ignored by the filtering algorithms. Just about anything else would require a much larger time investment. Dan _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ The software you were born with helps you write code into the wee small hours, find the bugs in your competitors' products, and create fake demos for the first six months of a project. It deserves the operating system designed to work with it: the MacOS. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #19 ******************************** 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