From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #29 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, April 15 2000 Volume 09 : Number 029 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Acquired aircraft RE: Acquired aircraft Re: Acquired aircraft Re: Acquired aircraft Re: Acquired aircraft Re: YF-113G White Triangle Re: Latest AvWeek on YF-113G Re: YF-113G Re: Latest AvWeek on YF-113G Re: Acquired aircraft (fwd) Area 51: Triangular aircraft sighted, radio transmission intercepted on 9-8-99 Re: YF-113G Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #28 Re: YF-113G Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #28 *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 15:59:36 -0700 From: David Lednicer Subject: Acquired aircraft Someone suggested putting together a list of aircraft acquired by the US from the Soviets. I have a similar list already up at: http://home.sprynet.com/~anneled/Defections.html - ------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:07:03 -0700 From: Erik Hoel Subject: RE: Acquired aircraft David Lednicer [mailto:dave@amiwest.com] wrote: > Someone suggested putting together a list of aircraft acquired by > the US from the Soviets. I have a similar list already up at: > > http://home.sprynet.com/~anneled/Defections.html An obvious question is whether there is an analogous list of western-block aircraft acquired by the Soviets and Chinese during the cold war? Did this occur? It is a topic that I've never heard much about. Erik - -- Erik Hoel mailto:ehoel@esri.com Environmental Systems Research Institute http://www.esri.com 380 New York Street 909-793-2853 (x1-1548) tel Redlands, CA 92373-8100 909-307-3067 fax ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 17:27:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Re: Acquired aircraft On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, David Lednicer wrote: > http://home.sprynet.com/~anneled/Defections.html Hmmm... the list is incomplete... I remember USA bought a couple of Mig 29 from one of the ex-axis of USSR to prevent selling to other nation like Iran about two years ago. And read from AvLeak that USA also adquired Su-27. May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@its.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "I Trek. Therefore I Am" ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:38:33 -0500 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Re: Acquired aircraft Erik Hoel wrote that > David Lednicer [mailto:dave@amiwest.com] wrote: that > > Someone suggested putting together a list of aircraft acquired by > > the US from the Soviets. I have a similar list already up at: > > > > http://home.sprynet.com/~anneled/Defections.html > > An obvious question is whether there is an analogous list of western-block > aircraft acquired by the Soviets and Chinese during the cold war? Did this > occur? It is a topic that I've never heard much about. "Acquired" should probably be broken down into several categories: bits and pieces, major chunks, intact but unflyable whole aircraft, and last and most interestingly, functioning airplanes. The PRC and Russia clearly have bunches of U-2, F-4, B-52, Huey, etc fragments. They very likely have working samples of whatever the US left behind in Vietnam, and would be remiss in their duties if they hadn't cut a deal with the Iranians for whatever they had. And, after Kosovo, Russia probably has major parts of an F-117. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 20:23:33 -0500 From: Shade Subject: Re: Acquired aircraft "An obvious question is whether there is an analogous list of western-block
aircraft acquired by the Soviets and Chinese during the cold war? Did this
occur? It is a topic that I've never heard much about."
 

Yeah the U2 (in pieces)!  :)

Seriously though, I would have to speculate that there were some NATO jets that made it into combloc countries but I doubt as many as we have grabbed from them. Probably not too many defections, but I would guess that some things were captured by accidents and battles, at least some good chunks of metal and avionics but who knows about a whole jet? It's a good question that I hope someone knows more.

I have another question. Does anyone think we have snatched (or bought) an Su-23 yet? 
~~~~
Shade ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 21:32:06 EDT From: Xelex@aol.com Subject: Re: YF-113G NO!!! The YF-113G was NOT a MiG-23. The MiG-23 variants flown by the RED HATS and RED EAGLES used some of the other YF-113 variant designations. Also, the YF-117D is not related to the YF-117A in ANY way! Peter Merlin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 21:33:28 EDT From: Xelex@aol.com Subject: White Triangle Today, (14 April 2000) I watched an F-117A make several low passes and a landing at Palmdale. It appeared to be painted overall gloss white, top and bottom. Peter Merlin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 18:46:11 -0700 From: Dwight Thibodeaux Subject: Re: Latest AvWeek on YF-113G george.allegrezza@altavista.net wrote: > I'm not totally sure I belive all of this, but FYI . . . > > The discussion of the Century Series designators has appeared before, on this list and elsewhere. The re-emergence of this theory may have prompted the report of the "Northrop F-121 Sentinel" in April's Aircraft Illustrated. > > Mysterious YF-113G Was Actually A MiG-23 > > by David A. Fulghum > > Aviation Week & Space Technology > > 04/13/00 06:19:10 PM U.S. EDT > > The U.S. Air Force's classified YF-113G aircraft was a MiG-23, not an early effort to explore radar-evading technologies, as reported last week. The existence of the aircraft was verified by one service official, but a second had mistakenly identified it as a U.S. stealth testbed that was abandoned by the early 1980s. > > The YF-113G designation was assigned to MiG-23s -- a fighter built in the Soviet bloc that NATO code-named "Flogger" -- flown clandestinely by two special projects units. The aircraft flew in the late 1970s along with "a whole range of aircraft that have operated [on the Nellis test ranges] for years," a senior Air Force official said. > > An air traffic controller at Nellis AFB, Nev., who retired in 1981, told Aviation Week & Space Technology that pilots from a squadron called the Red Hats operated Soviet-bloc aircraft with the designations, among others, of YF-110, YF-112 and YF-113 with various suffixes. > > During the 1970s and 1980s, numerical designations for captured or clandestinely obtained foreign aircraft and U.S. "black" projects were assigned numerical designations on a chronological basis by the Flight Records Group at Norton AFB, Calif., hence the F-117 stealth fighter and other classified, U.S.-built projects appears in the same sequence as re-designated Soviet aircraft. > > In fact, the Air Force sources say, there were two classified units flying Soviet equipment on the Nellis ranges. Tactical Air Command had the Red Eagles, who operated the aircraft for dissimilar combat and tactics development. The Red Hats flew the aircraft while conducting engineering analysis and technical exploitation of the aircraft for Air Force Systems Command. The units recruited some of the services most talented pilots and engineers, such as Lt. Gen. David McCloud, the late commander of Alaska Air Command, who flew with the Red Eagles. The units were disbanded after the end of the Cold War. > > The Soviet-built aircraft were primarily operated from the restricted Tonopah air base in the northwest corner of the Nevada range complex. Lt. Gen. Robert Bond, vice commander of Air Force Systems Command, died after ejecting near Tonopah from an "Air Force specially modified test aircraft" on April 26, 1984. It was thought to be a MiG-23. > > Copyright 2000 AviationNow.Com > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Get your free email from AltaVista at http://altavista.iname.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:17:24 -0700 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Re: YF-113G >NO!!! > >The YF-113G was NOT a MiG-23. The MiG-23 variants flown by the RED HATS and >RED EAGLES used some of the other YF-113 variant designations. > >Also, the YF-117D is not related to the YF-117A in ANY way! > >Peter Merlin For what's it's worth, YF-113B, I'm told, was a Flogger variant (MiG-23 or 27). It's possible tha AvLeak or their sources mixed up the phonetically similar "YF-113B" and "YF-113G". 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 Subject: Re: Latest AvWeek on YF-113G >I'm not totally sure I belive all of this, but FYI . . . > >The discussion of the Century Series designators has appeared >before, on this list and elsewhere. The re-emergence of this theory >may have prompted the report of the "Northrop F-121 Sentinel" in >April's Aircraft Illustrated. The "F-121" has popped up several times in the press, though it's most often called a triangular VTOL aircraft with some kind of supercuise capability. >In fact, the Air Force sources say, there were two classified units >flying Soviet equipment on the Nellis ranges. Tactical Air Command >had the Red Eagles, who operated the aircraft for dissimilar combat >and tactics development. The Red Hats flew the aircraft while >conducting engineering analysis and technical exploitation of the >aircraft for Air Force Systems Command. The units recruited some of >the services most talented pilots and engineers, such as Lt. Gen. >David McCloud, the late commander of Alaska Air Command, who flew >with the Red Eagles. The units were disbanded after the end of the >Cold War. Well, either that's incorrect, or the Cold War isn't over. Not only are those units still flying, but their line items in the DoD budget are still receiving considerable funding, and have been throughout the 1990s- and that's just for operating the aircraft and unit, not actually aquiring foreign materials. > >The Soviet-built aircraft were primarily operated from the >restricted Tonopah air base in the northwest corner of the Nevada >range complex. Lt. Gen. Robert Bond, vice commander of Air Force >Systems Command, died after ejecting near Tonopah from an "Air Force >specially modified test aircraft" on April 26, 1984. It was thought >to be a MiG-23. > Which isn't correct either, as there have been photos published from that time period that show MiGs at Groom, not Tonopah (which then was still primarily a DOE facility); and persons known to have been working for those units carried the same thin cover as Groom flight test engineers ("Yeah, I work at Pittman Station, in Henderson, Nevada"). 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: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 10:27:54 +0100 From: "Gavin Payne" Subject: Re: Acquired aircraft Even if they "only" had this number of aircraft, they'd need a pretty large area to keep them. If many of them were still flown, then I doubt they'd want to fragment their engineering skills by putting them on multiple bases. Good to see the old Buff took out 3 or 4 Migs during Vietnam though! - ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Lednicer" To: "Skunk Works Group" Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 11:59 PM Subject: Acquired aircraft > > Someone suggested putting together a list of aircraft acquired by > the US from the Soviets. I have a similar list already up at: > > http://home.sprynet.com/~anneled/Defections.html > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 07:10:45 -0500 From: "George R. Kasica" Subject: (fwd) Area 51: Triangular aircraft sighted, radio transmission intercepted on 9-8-99 On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 22:29:21 +0200, "Meinrad Eberle" wrote: - ----- Original Message ----- From: Meinrad Eberle To: fortean@frontiernet.net Cc: gregweigold@pmsc.com Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 9:22 PM Subject: Area 51: Triangular aircraft sighted, radio transmission intercepted on 9-8-99 ...and it didn't make it on the 12th either! Terry, can you try and post the following to Skunkworks Mailing List, please? Your help is much appreciated. Kind regards from the Swiss Alps - --Meinrad - ----- Original Message ----- From: Meinrad Eberle To: George Kasica Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 10:09 PM Subject: Area 51: Triangular aircraft sighted, radio transmission intercepted on 9-8-99 Hi George, Please be so kind as to post fwd e-mail below to Skunkworks Mailing List, ok? It apparently didn't make it on 4-6-00. Thanks a lot for your help. - --Meinrad - ----- Original Message ----- From: Meinrad Eberle To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 9:20 PM Subject: Area 51: Triangular aircraft sighted, radio transmission intercepted on 9-8-99 In its April issue, UK-based magazine AIRCRAFT ILLUSTRATED launched Part Two of "Secrets of Area 51", a comprehensive Swiss-UK-US-Report [10 pages] about America's most enigmatic base, together with world- exclusive pictures and additional info, as at least partly mentioned in recent postings on this list. For those of you interested in what goes on at that so-called remote test location (and especially who can't get hold of copies of the mag): I was one of the three eye- and ear-witnesses of the event described below. It got published as a World's First in the magazine's March issue already, totalling nine pages and two pull-out posters. Area 51: Triangular aircraft sighted, radio message intercepted on 9-8-99 Groom Lake viewpoint Tikaboo Peak, 8 September 1999, 06:00 AM: The Swiss hikers Raffi Bloechlinger, Dino Regli and this writer intercept and tape-record the following radio message: "Now.traffic departing off Runway 32.a Fastmover.the winds calm. cleared for take-off!" The following excerpt from AI's March issue covers the description of the aircraft that the three of us witnessed on its take-off roll [starting off from the intersection of the base's Southern Delta Taxiway with Runway 14L-32 R], using image-stabilized 15x45 CANON binoculars: [SNIP] - - Streamlined silhouette - - Smoothed-out overall appearance - - Massive upper main body/fuselage - - No shining parts whatsoever visible - - Aircraft in dark colour, most probably black - - Cockpit hardly visible, well integrated into aircraft body - - Two very high and massive-looking rear fins close to wingtips - - No undercarriage whatsoever visible - - No signs of engines mounted under, at or right above wings - - No signs of engines integrated into lower aircraft body - - No engine inlets visible The aircraft continued accelerating down the tarmac and got airborne before climbing swiftly to altitude, accompanied by a distinctly audible low rumbling -but not pulsating - noise. The craft then hung a left high above Emigrant Valley, not too far away from Bald Mountain. Previously seen in side view, the craft's silhouette then started growing - - into a DELTA SHAPED PLATFORM, showing us its flat, dull dark [black?] belly. No engines were visible, no apparent air intakes and no under-fuselage stores of any kind - just a smoothed-out triangular bodywork. Details as follows: - - Estimated overall length: 100 ft. - - Estimated overall height: 12+ ft. - - Estimated overall width: 55ft. - - Estimated wing sweep: 75 degrees Also striking was the complete lack of lights on the aircraft: Neither any blinking or turning red anti-collision nor any other lights of any description/colour were visible. Just one dark mass turning westward, steadfastly heading out of sight. Having decided, much to our regret, to watch the departing craft by means of binoculars instead of trying to film with the 44-times digital zoom videocam or even take photos, we then tracked - for the last few seconds - the craft's wide backside as it turned [the latter] towards us. But WHAT a backside! Visible was a roughly segmented rear wing area with two vertical fins, which left us with the initial impression that they were slightly canted outward, reaching up higher than the main fuselage, but that effect might just have been created by wavering air over that long distance. My two colleagues had the impression that they were not canted in any way. Topping it all off were two huge, just HUGE exhausts, which appeared to be still on afterburner. The engine exhausts seemed to be integrated into the main upper fuselage, rather than bolted down onto wing area or such. Their shape and size? For a split-second, they did not look like round exhaust holes. Not your-run-of-the-mill rounded black engine holes like on the SR-71, for example. I got the distinct impression they were rectangular in shape. And huge, so huge! [SNIP] A few comments on the contents published in AI so far: It is incorrect that I believe to have witnessed "Project Aurora" take off from Groom that morning (do I see pale faces out there in the audience already?). The craft did in fact look more or less like the triangle Chris Gibson witnessed flying over a North Sea oil rig in the late Eighties. I'd rather prefer to plainly call that [rocket-?]ship "Fastmover" (pardon me for sticking to that term, ok?). But I really would never be so daring as to label it "Project Aurora", not at all (shudders running down my neck). In October 1998, however, Raffi Bloechlinger, Rohan Bourke (AUS) and I intercepted the following radio message while on Tikaboo Peak: [SNIP out of Trip Report 98] Our scanner suddenly started spitting out a call sign never heard before: "BLACK SPOT, you're F-L......" What followed were statics and some sort of hacked, garbled voice mumbling a pair of numbers. The latter were DEFINITELY not more than just two numbers, I'm sure: They were either SIX-FIVE or THREE-FIVE. With F-L most probably standing for Flight Level, that airborne device was certainly NOT flying higher than 99K:) [SNIP] BLACK SPOT. Now THAT could indeed make for a nice nickname attributed to a triangular craft of such dimensions. Just remember that the bird Project Oxcart finally stood for was all but clumsy and slow. Maybe the same idea could be behind this intercepted callsign (if I may be so daring..). Steve Douglass of Project Black did a great job in drawing the triangular craft according to our team's description, thus contributing to the success of the Report. However, this third rock from the sun we're living on is a weird one: There were indeed quite a few people asking me about how the heck we could make out those....NUTS AND BOLTS as well as red NO STEP-writings on the aircraft. Well, what shall I say. Those few ones apparently forgot to read the article, might have looked at the [high-quality] pictures/drawings only: The three of us did NOT see any nuts or bolts on the aircraft, beware. Just read above-mentioned description again: All we saw is included therein, with nothing added or omitted. Even more important, no instructios were ever given to Steve to draw any piece of artwork based on our team's sighting details only: He was very kind in providing this service to AI, made use of some nifty graphics software not known to me and contributed to the great success of the so far published story. In this context, the nifty details in Steve's drawing represent only a "how-it-could-probably-look-if-standing-right-in-front-of-one's-nose". And let's use common sense, please: By no means the drawing shows the Real Thang: It COULD have reddish NO STEP-writings all over its fuselage. It COULD have written US AIR FORCE (or whatever) on its main body. It COULD be equipped for aerial refueling, etc. Artwork ALWAYS bears the danger of being looked at too closely, so to speak. Especially if that many neatly drawn details are shown. My initial pencil drawing of the witnessed aircraft was left behind at a friend's premises in California, three days after the sighting: Despite a full-scale search, he managed to track it down too late for publication in AI. Otherwise, we'd surely have done so. Those of you interested in a scan of AI's March issue cover page showing Steve's drawing as well as relevant WAV-file of intercepted radio transmission may contact me off-list. Important links: For additional Area 51 info, exclusive pictures, trip reports, etc., do not forget to check out http://www.desertsecrets.com AI website at http://www.ianallanpub.co.uk/airillus They might sell BACK ISSUES of above-mentioned Report, Parts 1 to 2. To at least try and secure a copy, you might be so tempted as to contact sales@ianallanpub.co.uk to arrange that for you: As indicated in mag's editorial, back issues are subject to availability. To avoid disappoint- ment, check availability before you order. Each copy costs Cover Price [£ 3,10 for UK, Swiss Francs 12.- for the Continental Alps] plus P & P: 70 p for UK, £ 1,30 Europe, £ 1,95 rest of world. Their fax number: 01932 266633. The SR-71 might definitely be grounded now, but another not-so-black-any-more "Fastmover" is already proudly prowling the skies again. Meinrad Eberle, Switzerland 4-4-2000 George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica Waukesha, WI USA georgek@netwrx1.com http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 15:16:30 +0200 From: Andreas Parsch Subject: Re: YF-113G Xelex@aol.com wrote: > > NO!!! > > The YF-113G was NOT a MiG-23. The MiG-23 variants flown by the RED HATS and > RED EAGLES used some of the other YF-113 variant designations. > > Also, the YF-117D is not related to the YF-117A in ANY way! > > Peter Merlin Peter, as you seem to know a lot about the "century series" numbers used for Migs, black a/c etc., and I - and probably others ;-) - know virtually nothing about them, could you please post a summary of your information regarding this subject? Of course, I don't ask for classified data ;-), so a list like - - YF-113B - Mig 23 "Flogger B" - - YF-113G - black airplane (and no info for YOU!), but NOT Mig23! ... would be perfectly fine for me :-) Thank you very much! Andreas ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:44:36 -0700 From: Lee Markland Subject: Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #28 At 02:45 PM 4/14/00 -0500, Someone wrote: >During the 1970s and 1980s, numerical designations for captured or >clandestinely obtained foreign aircraft and U.S. "black" projects were >assigned numerical designations on a chronological basis by the Flight >Records Group at Norton AFB, Calif., hence the F-117 stealth fighter and >other classified, U.S.-built projects appears in the same sequence as >re-designated Soviet aircraft. This of course is the official obfuscation, and of course we are all zomibies and believe everything told us by official sources :) As I said, the story doesn't wring out, because my friend Dave Weber at davweber@gte.net, worked on casting the handles for the F117 circa 1968 -1969. He can provide more details as to the blueprints, who provided them (an unusual story as it was some "Oil Company"). And hasn't anyone's eyebrows been raised by the video footage of F117 attacks on Baghadad. It was a two craft operation, one LASED the target, while the other let loose a missle, and in one released footage you can hear the conversation between the targeting aircraft and the delivery craft. But what interests me more than anything, is that the targeting aircraft "hoveres" as evidenced by the fact that there was no change in angle, depth perception or anything else as the targeting aircraft LASED its target. In other words the targeting aircraft is quite obviously in a "hover" mode. When other aircraft are used as targeting craft, such as the F111 (not used in Baghad) you can see movement in the video, in other words the craft and its camera are obviously moving, as there is a constant and gradual change in resolution, perception and angle, but not in the F117 attacks on Baghdad. Seems to me then, that this esoteric craft has a lot more technology wrapped up in it, than its design, paint and material construction. Let's hear some more official "explanations". ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 10:04:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: Re: YF-113G > Xelex@aol.com wrote: > > > > NO!!! > > > > The YF-113G was NOT a MiG-23. The MiG-23 variants flown by the RED HATS and > > RED EAGLES used some of the other YF-113 variant designations. > > > > Also, the YF-117D is not related to the YF-117A in ANY way! > > > > Peter Merlin > > Peter, > as you seem to know a lot about the "century series" numbers used > for Migs, black a/c etc., and I - and probably others ;-) - know > virtually nothing about them, could you please post a summary > of your information regarding this subject? > Of course, I don't ask for classified data ;-), so a list like > > - YF-113B - Mig 23 "Flogger B" > - YF-113G - black airplane (and no info for YOU!), but NOT Mig23! > ... > > would be perfectly fine for me :-) > > Thank you very much! > > > Andreas > I seem to vaguely recall reading that the IAI Kfir had received a designation in the century series; my memory fails me at the moment and I have been unable to locate my source as it is in storage, so I am not sure which designation was allegedly used for it. As far as former soviet aircraft are concerned, I recall reading that the US had "acquired" the following articles: MiG 15, MiG 17, MiG 19, MiG 21, MiG 23, MiG 27, MiG 25, MiG 29, Su 15?, Su 24?, Su 25, Su 27? This is neither an exhaustive list nor am I able to guarantee the accuracy of this information. Perhaps Peter could shed more light on this subject. Naturally, I totally agree with Andreas, if any of this information is classified then we should change the subject immediately and forget we ever had this discussion, after all national security comes first. Speaking of national security, I have a friend who overheard a member of the armed forces speaking to his mother on a public payphone telling her about everything he had learned that day in his training session including sensitive and classified data!!! for all I know he may have been speaking to a foreign agent pretending to be the guy's mother. Had it been up to me I would have crucified that person even if it really was his mother that he was speaking to! Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 10:34:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: Re: skunk-works-digest V9 #28 > At 02:45 PM 4/14/00 -0500, Someone wrote: > > > >During the 1970s and 1980s, numerical designations for captured or > >clandestinely obtained foreign aircraft and U.S. "black" projects were > >assigned numerical designations on a chronological basis by the Flight > >Records Group at Norton AFB, Calif., hence the F-117 stealth fighter and > >other classified, U.S.-built projects appears in the same sequence as > >re-designated Soviet aircraft. > > > This of course is the official obfuscation, and of course we are all > zomibies and believe everything told us by official sources :) > > As I said, the story doesn't wring out, because my friend Dave Weber at > davweber@gte.net, worked on casting the handles for the F117 circa > 1968 -1969. He can provide more details as to the blueprints, who > provided them (an unusual story as it was some "Oil Company"). > > And hasn't anyone's eyebrows been raised by the video footage of F117 > attacks on Baghadad. It was a two craft operation, one LASED the target, > while the other let loose a missle, and in one released footage you can > hear the conversation between the targeting aircraft and the delivery craft. > > But what interests me more than anything, is that the targeting aircraft > "hoveres" as evidenced by the fact that there was no change in angle, depth > perception or anything else as the targeting aircraft LASED its target. In > other words the targeting aircraft is quite obviously in a "hover" mode. > > When other aircraft are used as targeting craft, such as the F111 (not used > in Baghad) you can see movement in the video, in other words the craft and > its camera are obviously moving, as there is a constant and gradual change > in resolution, perception and angle, but not in the F117 attacks on Baghdad. > > Seems to me then, that this esoteric craft has a lot more technology > wrapped up in it, than its design, paint and material construction. > > Let's hear some more official "explanations". > No, no, no you have this all wrong!! the government ordered those parts to cover up the fact that the F-117s were manufactured by alien beings on another planet and subsequently sold to the government. Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #29 ******************************** 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