From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest)
To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com
Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #49
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      Wednesday, July 12 2000      Volume 09 : Number 049



     Index of this digest by subject:
***************************************************
Firefighters
Re:FWD (TLC-Mission) Reunion - Secret War in Laos
B-52 jamming capabilities
Re: Firefighters
Re: B-52 jamming capabilities
RE: Firefighters
test message - ignore
RE: Firefighters
RE: test message - ignore
Re: FWD (TLCB) Civilian use of military aircraft [was - Warbird
F-22/JSF
RE: Firefighters
Filling the gap in EW (was Re: B-52 jamming capabilities)
RE: Firefighters
helium 3(never heard of it)
FWD (UASR) Aurora and Chinook
Aurora killed my Chinook...
O/T(VA/purple heart/priority change)
***************************************************

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 09:23:15 -0700
From: David Lednicer <dave@amiwest.com>
Subject: Firefighters

	Speaking of the warbirds now serving as waterbombers, I saw the
two Martin Mars on Monday.  We were driving back from sea kayaking near
Tofino and stopped at Sproat Lake to see them.  They were anchored out in
the lake, looking like they were ready for action.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:15:38 -0700
From: Timothy Toth <Timothy_toth@bc.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re:FWD (TLC-Mission) Reunion - Secret War in Laos

There was/is also a 3-4 page article about the USAF's secret war in Laos in the "USAF 2000 yearbook"

Timothy

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:21:10 -0700
From: Timothy Toth <Timothy_toth@bc.sympatico.ca>
Subject: B-52 jamming capabilities

I just learned that during operation Allied Storm a B-52 was fitted with an ALQ-99 pod (EA-6B jammer pod) apparently the operation ended before modifications where finished but the
'program' (or experiment) is ongoing.

Timothy

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 22:42:02 -0700
From: patrick <patrick@e-z.net>
Subject: Re: Firefighters

At 07/05/2000 -0700, you wrote:

>         Speaking of the warbirds now serving as waterbombers, I saw the
>two Martin Mars on Monday.  We were driving back from sea kayaking near
>Tofino and stopped at Sproat Lake to see them.  They were anchored out in
>the lake, looking like they were ready for action.
>
>
>
I posted four pictures at alt.binaries.pictures.aviation ("Martin Mars") of 
these airplanes.  The local mill in Port Alberni, British Columbia, Canada 
caught on fire several summers ago and they lumbered up in the air to save 
the town.

patrick cullumber

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 04:22:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sam Kaltsidis <skaltsid@mcs.kent.edu>
Subject: Re: B-52 jamming capabilities

> I just learned that during operation Allied Storm a B-52 was fitted with an 
ALQ-99 pod (EA-6B jammer pod) apparently the operation ended before 
modifications where finished but the
> 'program' (or experiment) is ongoing.
> 
> Timothy
> 

<my opinion>

<rant and rave>

The B-52 could obviously be a very powerful jammer aircraft, however what the 
USAF really needs is a dedicated EW aircraft capable of replacing it's EF-111A 
Raven (which was retired prematurely) and EA-6B Prowler (whose wings are falling 
off) predecesors. Naturally, the B-52 is one gigantic sitting duck with or 
without an insurance policy in the form of fighter escorts, therefore an 
effective, high performance, survivable EW/SEAD platform is required to replace 
the overextended EA-6B Prowlers (did I forget to mention their wings are falling 
off???). It would be nice if that platform had the ability to carry all EW 
sensors and jammers in internal electronics bays so that any internal weapons 
bays and or external hardpoints could be used for carrying weapons instead 
(air-to-air missiles for self-defense as well as anti-radiation missiles for 
SEAD). In addition to all this with the recent advances in ESA antennae it may 
even be possible to squeeze ELINT/SIGINT capabilities into the same package (if 
only the right software could be developed). The EA-6B Prowler though still 
surprisingly capable as an EW platform despite its age is rapidly becoming 
obsolete which is resulting in increased maintenance costs and reduced 
availability rates (oh yeah their wings are falling off).

I just hope we don't get caught with our pants down, i.e. without any effective 
/ state of the art EW aircraft, when some adversary decides to do something
stupid, like start a war. Human nature being what it is, it is a matter of when
it happens not if it happens.

For the sake of the US and our allies, I sincerely hope the next administration 
is able to correct this and numerous other problems facing our armed forces so 
that we may celebrate many more 4th's of July in the future.

For those of you who didn't get the joke about wings falling off, I was trying 
to express my disappointment at the Navy declining to re-wing the A-6 Intruder 
and EA-6B Prowler fleets due to budgetary constraints back when they were trying 
(in vain) to save the A-12 if I recall correctly.

I have great respect for the armed forces but the premature retirement of the 
EF-111 Raven was a huge mistake as was the the Navy's failure to re-wing and or 
re-engine the EA-6B Prowlers. Furthermore, even though I am a big F-22 
supporter, I believe that the F-22 will NOT be able to replace the Prowlers as 
an EW platform as well as the F-16CJs as a SEAD platform.

</rant and rave>

</my opinion>

Standard legal disclaimers apply.

Concerned Sam

CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC
http://www.darkent.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 09:52:50 -0400 
From: "Morris, Andrew" <morris@admissions.buffalo.edu>
Subject: RE: Firefighters

How does one access newsgroup?  So sorry if this is a stupid question, I
just don't frequent them (obviously).  Please contact me off list.

Thanks,

Andy Morris
morris@admissions.buffalo.edu

- -----Original Message-----
From: patrick [mailto:patrick@e-z.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 1:42 AM
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: Re: Firefighters


At 07/05/2000 -0700, you wrote:

>         Speaking of the warbirds now serving as waterbombers, I saw the
>two Martin Mars on Monday.  We were driving back from sea kayaking near
>Tofino and stopped at Sproat Lake to see them.  They were anchored out in
>the lake, looking like they were ready for action.
>
>
>
I posted four pictures at alt.binaries.pictures.aviation ("Martin Mars") of 
these airplanes.  The local mill in Port Alberni, British Columbia, Canada 
caught on fire several summers ago and they lumbered up in the air to save 
the town.

patrick cullumber

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 10:32:56 -0400 
From: "Weigold, Greg" <GregWeigold@mynd.com>
Subject: test message - ignore

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_01BFE757.375787BC
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Testing.....   Please ignore this message

Greg W

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFE757.375787BC
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2650.12">
<TITLE>test message - ignore</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>Testing.....&nbsp;&nbsp; Please ignore this message</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>Greg W</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFE757.375787BC--

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 09:04:25 PDT
From: "wayne binkley" <wbinkley@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: Firefighters

what is alt.binaries.pictures.aviation and how do you get there. wayne




- ----Original Message Follows----
From: "Morris, Andrew" <morris@admissions.buffalo.edu>
Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: RE: Firefighters
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 09:52:50 -0400

How does one access newsgroup?  So sorry if this is a stupid question, I
just don't frequent them (obviously).  Please contact me off list.

Thanks,

Andy Morris
morris@admissions.buffalo.edu

- -----Original Message-----
From: patrick [mailto:patrick@e-z.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 1:42 AM
To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com
Subject: Re: Firefighters


At 07/05/2000 -0700, you wrote:

 >         Speaking of the warbirds now serving as waterbombers, I saw the
 >two Martin Mars on Monday.  We were driving back from sea kayaking near
 >Tofino and stopped at Sproat Lake to see them.  They were anchored out in
 >the lake, looking like they were ready for action.
 >
 >
 >
I posted four pictures at alt.binaries.pictures.aviation ("Martin Mars") of
these airplanes.  The local mill in Port Alberni, British Columbia, Canada
caught on fire several summers ago and they lumbered up in the air to save
the town.

patrick cullumber

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 12:05:23 -0400 
From: "Weigold, Greg" <GregWeigold@mynd.com>
Subject: RE: test message - ignore

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_01BFE764.21439008
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Thanks George!

- -----Original Message-----
From: Weigold, Greg [mailto:GregWeigold@mynd.com]
Sent: July 06, 2000 10:33 AM
To: 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com'
Subject: test message - ignore



Testing.....   Please ignore this message 

Greg W 


- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFE764.21439008
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>test message - ignore</TITLE>

<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN 
class=902120616-06072000><EM>Thanks George!</EM></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma 
  size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Weigold, Greg 
  [mailto:GregWeigold@mynd.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> July 06, 2000 10:33 
  AM<BR><B>To:</B> 'skunk-works@netwrx1.com'<BR><B>Subject:</B> test message - 
  ignore<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
  <P><FONT size=2>Testing.....&nbsp;&nbsp; Please ignore this message</FONT> 
</P>
  <P><FONT size=2>Greg W</FONT> </P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFE764.21439008--

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 00 14:44:13 -0500
From: wings <wings@sky.net>
Subject: Re: FWD (TLCB) Civilian use of military aircraft [was - Warbird

Hawkins and Powers aviation currently flies a number of former warbirds 
as 
"Firefighters".  They also do restoration work on the side.
Here's the URL for  photos of some of  their fleet:
http://www.hawkinsandpowers.com/photo.html

Wayne Busse
wings@sky.net
      Zz
       zZ
    |\ z    _,,,---,,_
    /,`.-'`'    _   ;-;;,_
   |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (  `'_'
  '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 15:17:13 -0500
From: "Tom C Robison" <tcrobi@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>
Subject: F-22/JSF

I know I read somewhere that the power bus in the F-22 (or was it the JSF?) was
270 Volts DC.

Of course now I can't find that statement anywhere.

Can someone point me to the electrical system specifications for F-22 and JSF?

Thanks.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 18:23:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Kathryn & Andreas Gehrs-Pahl <schnars@ais.org>
Subject: RE: Firefighters

Andy Morris wondered:

>How does one access newsgroup? So sorry if this is a stupid question, I
>just don't frequent them (obviously). Please contact me off list.

And Wayne Binkley asked:

>what is alt.binaries.pictures.aviation and how do you get there.

The easiest way to get those pictures without using UseNet and a News Reader, 
is to point your Web Browser to: http://www.nailnews.com/

They carry all *.binaries.pictures.* news groups, and you can get the files 
displayed as nice little thumbnail images. They have apparently public (free) 
and subscription-only newsgroups, but alt.binaries.pictures.aviation is free.

- -- Andreas

- ---                                                                       ---
  Andreas & Kathryn Gehrs-Pahl         E-Mail: schnars@ais.org
  1517 Michigan Avenue                     or: gpahl@wazoo.com
  Alamogordo, NM 88310
  Tel: (505) 434-6276                 WWW URL: http://www.ais.org/~schnars/
- ---                                                                       ---

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 15:53:11 -0700
From: Timothy Toth <Timothy_toth@bc.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Filling the gap in EW (was Re: B-52 jamming capabilities)

Sam Kaltsidis wrote:
>The B-52 could obviously be a very powerful jammer aircraft, however
what the USAF really needs is a dedicated EW
>aircraft capable of replacing it's EF-111A Raven (which was retired
prematurely) and EA-6B Prowler (whose wings are
>falling off) predecesors. Naturally, the B-52 is one gigantic sitting
duck with or without an insurance policy in the form of
>fighter escorts, therefore an  effective, high performance, survivable
EW/SEAD platform is required to replace the
>overextended EA-6B Prowlers (did I forget to mention their wings are
falling off???). It would be nice if that platform had
>the ability to carry all EW sensors and jammers in internal electronics
bays so that any internal weapons bays and or
>external hardpoints could be used for carrying weapons instead
(air-to-air missiles for self-defense as well as
>anti-radiation missiles for SEAD). In addition to all this with the
recent advances in ESA antennae it may even be possible
>to squeeze ELINT/SIGINT capabilities into the same package (if only the
right software could be developed). The EA-6B
>Prowler though still surprisingly capable as an EW platform despite its
age is rapidly becoming obsolete which is resulting
>in increased maintenance costs and reduced availability rates (oh yeah
their wings are falling off).
>I just hope we don't get caught with our pants down, i.e. without any
effective/ state of the art EW aircraft, when some
>adversary decides to do something stupid, like start a war. Human
nature being what it is, it is a matter of when
>it happens not if it happens.
>For the sake of the US and our allies, I sincerely hope the next
administration is able to correct this and numerous other
>problems facing our armed forces so that we may celebrate many more
4th's of July in the future.
>For those of you who didn't get the joke about wings falling off, I was
trying to express my disappointment at the Navy
>declining to re-wing the A-6 Intruder and EA-6B Prowler fleets due to
budgetary constraints back when they were trying
>(in vain) to save the A-12 if I recall correctly.
>I have great respect for the armed forces but the premature retirement
of the EF-111 Raven was a huge mistake as was the
>the Navy's failure to re-wing and or re-engine the EA-6B Prowlers.
Furthermore, even though I am a big F-22 supporter, I
>believe that the F-22 will NOT be able to replace the Prowlers as an EW
platform as well as the F-16CJs as a SEAD
>platform.
></rant and rave>
></my opinion>
>Standard legal disclaimers apply.
>Concerned Sam

The need for a new dedicated EW platform has been widely recognised for
quite sometime, and operation Allied Storm
just highlighted the problem.
As defenders become more and more tactfull (exchanges between Russia,
China, Irak, and Serbia have helped) Planners
have come to realise that greater emphasis has to be placed on DEAD
rather than simply on SEAD. (this means moving from
simply disturbing ennemy emission and/or destroying a few antennas, to
completely obliterating the emitter, co-located equipement and AAA/SAM
systems).

As you mention one can only wonder as to the reasons for the retirement
of the EF-111 and the lack of funds for keeping EW
dedicated platforms up to date. (I think people in the EW buisness say
that it's because the USAF prefers thing that go Bang)
Talking of the EA-6B, about a year ago I was talking to an EA-6B crew
whom didn't seem overconfident (to say the least) as
to the capabilities of the aircraft to stay in the field for another
10-15 years (I don't remember seeing any tape or elastics to
hold the wings though :-) ).

I don't think the B-52 would be the way to go, if it is to be a
replacement for a dedicated EW platform. However this
program is taken as just an added capability to the B-52 and simply a
supplement to a dedicated EW platform. Yes the
B-52 would be very vulnerable (especially with those new chinese long
range HOJ SAM missiles) but it would stay well
behind the lines to act as a powerfull standoff jammer.
A far as the F-16CJ's are concerned, the community is very proud of the
aircraft and their job, they claim that not one aircraft
that was acompanied by them was shot down (the F-117 and F-16CG shot
down where not accompanied by them). However
they have to work in connection with F-16CG for DEAD missions. Luckely
this is greatly simplified by the IDM with which
both aircraft are equipped (automatic exchange of target info).

Concerning SEAD, DEAD and weapons; DEAD has become more and more of a
neccessity, and this is done with big fat
munitions and not with ARM missiles. It was reported that during the
Kosovo operation one emitter was shot at, more than
120 times with HARM! (it is also reported that only 6 ALARM where
needed, 4 of wich hit the emitter). This seems like
incredible, but even if only partly true it only proves the necessity of
DEAD missions.The Navy has just tested a combination
millimeter-wave radar/RF-homing seeker for a follow-on to the current
Harm radar-killing missile called the Advanced
Anti-Radiation Guided Missile. And the USAF appears to have a black
program working on its own smaller,
"next-generation, Harm-like missile".

So what is needed is a powerfull jamming platform, an escort
jammer/quick reaction SEAD capability (just to keep the
enemy busy and worried and occupied long enough for a good DEAD attack),
and a good DEAD capability.

Aircraft to fill these roles are being studied, they are the F/A-18G
Growler, the JSF, the F-22 (JSF and F-22 are
being Refocused On Electronic Warfare) and the B-52 ( both the F-15 and
an americanised version of the Tornado
have been dropped).

The B-52 we have alreay talked about; could be a powerfull Standoff
jammer, but would be severly limited by it's
vulnerabilities, and could only be viewed as a supplement. It is said to
have been chosen to supplement the EA-6B's
stand-off jamming capabilities because of it's 'global reach, global
power' capabilities. The new computer that are now
being installed are much ligter and smaller than the ones they replace
which leaves more room for electronics. A pod other
than the ALQ-99 was also said to have been chosen, this is the lowband
Spear pod (same as EC-130 Compass Call). These
pods would be fitted instead of the fuel tanks.

The F-22 is said to be nearing approval for the Wild Weasel role. The
F-22's RCS is equivalent to F-117 and B-2
(0.005sqm range?), this is said to be enough to approach to within
15(-21)NM of the latest S-300 (SA-10/12) familly of
systems without being detected (so about 44NM against the S-400). A
reduced RCS is not important just because it delays the detection but
also because it makes the aircraft much easier to hide behind jamming.
The ability of its passive systems to locate and identify electronic
signals makes it an ideal platform to search out and attack enemy radar.
The problem is that 15 mi. is the extreme range of the F-22's standard
air-to-ground weapon, the 1,000-lb. JDAM, when launched from about
40,000 ft and neither the JSOW or the Jassm fit inside the F-22's
weapons bays.The F-22 already has the capability to jam radar and com
from hostile aircraft with it's own radar, of course this is power and
frequency limited.
The solution would be the new ARM missile being developped which would
fit in the F-22's bays. Still, unless specialised equipement is
installed it's capabilities would be limited, and it doesn't have much
room for specialised electronics AND weapons.

The JSF: Aerospace industry officials are being asked to study the Joint
Strike Fighter's suitability for the task of penetrating
enemy air defenses to jam radar and critical communications from
relatively close ranges.The JSF's stealth is rated as
effective until 2025 and impervious even to the  generation of
antiaircraft weapons expected to follow the emerging S-400
family. JSF's low radar cross section (RCS) varies from version to
version the USAF's CTOL version is said to overlap the
lower end of the F-22 signature but other versions would be at around
0.01 sqm. (Stealth is said to have been limited to
respect price constraints but requirement for JSF is 0.01sqm).  Just
like the F-22, the JSF has the capability to jam radar and
com. from hostile aircraft with it's own radar(but the JSF's radar is
less powerfull than the F-22's). Lockheed Martin
proposes a JSF derivative that carries a second radar-jamming package,
probably on pallets in the main weapons bay, that
can jam a wider range of frequencies with much greater power including
long-range early-warning radar and those that direct
antiaircraft missiles and guns. Other targets are the communications
that link aircraft, missile sites and command posts.This
would need a second AESA antenna and would limit jamming to high power
directive jamming in a FOV of 30 deg. (I
wonder if smart skins could'nt do better). By the way directive jamming
done with precise pencil beam emissions would
prevent targetting of the jamming platform by HOJ missiles. Boeing is
discreet on the matter but they do admit that they are
studying Electronic Attack alternatives, with electronics in the weapons
bay and towed decoys.
The problem of having the weapons bay full of electronics instead of
weapons could be (partly) compensated by having
teams of aircraft (one armed, one electronics) work together exchanging
info in realtime just like the F-16CG/CJ do now.

The F/A-18G's RCS would only be marginally better than the F-16CJ,
unless further stealth improvements are made. This RCS of approx. 1sqm
would mean,( just for the sake of comparison) that detection range for
SA-10/12 would be around 60-85NM and 170NM against S-400). Reportedly at
the center of the Growler proposal is the adaptation of many of the
Prowler’s Improved Capability III (ICAP-III) upgrades to fit the F/A-18,
including modified AN/ALQ-99s (although with an eye towards replacing
these systems with a single, multiband jammer) and the USQ-113
communications receiver. The Growler would possess integrated antenna
systems and other electronics, as well as datalinks, sat. com., GPS and
a MIDS, all of which would aid in the communication of jamming schemes,
a capability found to be lacking in even the ICAP-III Prowlers. An AESA
radar could also be incorporated (scheduled for fleet introduction in
2005). The AESA would allow the Growler to carry a high-powered jammer
that operates in the AESA’s frequency without interfering with the
radar. A number of cockpit modifications would also be needed.
The advantage of the F/A-18G is in hard-kill capabilities, with nine
hardpoints it could carry a wide array of armaments
from AGM-88 HARM to PGMs (like the AGM-154 JSOW and GBU-29/30/31/32
JDAM).

It seems to me it's going to be F-22 and B-52's for the USAF, and
F/A-18G for the Navy. And so far only the F/A-18G seems to be designed
with the full array of EW misions in mind (as EA-6B). What do you think?

Timothy

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 19:52:05 -0700
From: patrick <patrick@e-z.net>
Subject: RE: Firefighters

At 07/06/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>Andy Morris wondered:
>
> >How does one access newsgroup? So sorry if this is a stupid question, I
> >just don't frequent them (obviously). Please contact me off list.
>
>And Wayne Binkley asked:
>
> >what is alt.binaries.pictures.aviation and how do you get there.
>
>The easiest way to get those pictures without using UseNet and a News Reader,
>is to point your Web Browser to: http://www.nailnews.com/
>
>They carry all *.binaries.pictures.* news groups, and you can get the files
>displayed as nice little thumbnail images. They have apparently public (free)
>and subscription-only newsgroups, but alt.binaries.pictures.aviation is free.
>
>-- Andreas
=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==--=-==--==-=-=-=-

I used www.dogpile.com and searched the Usenet files for the subject.

patrick

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 09:17:20 PDT
From: "wayne binkley" <wbinkley@hotmail.com>
Subject: helium 3(never heard of it)

12.   Moon's Helium-3 Could Power Earth (Space.com) - Researchers andspace
enthusiasts see helium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent,
nonpolluting, with virtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim
it’s the fuel of the 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it isfound
on Earth. But there is plenty of it on the moon. Society is straining to
keep pace with energy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 asthe
world population swells toward 12 billion. The moon just may be theanswer.
"Helium 3 fusion energy may be the key to future space exploration and
settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski, Director of the Fusion Technology
Institute (FTI) at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Scientists
estimate there are about 1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enoughto
power the world for thousands of years. The equivalent of a single space
shuttle load or roughly 25 tons could supply the entire United States'
energy needs for a year, according to Apollo17 astronaut and FTIresearcher
Harrison Schmitt. When the solar wind, the rapid stream of chargedparticles
emitted by the sun, strikes the moon, helium 3 is deposited in thepowdery
soil. Over billions of years that adds up. Meteorite bombardmentdisperses
the particles throughout the top several meters of the lunar surface.
"Helium 3 could be the cash crop for the moon," said Kulcinski, alongtime
advocate and leading pioneer in the field, who envisions the moonbecoming
"the Hudson Bay Store of Earth." Today helium 3 would have a cash valueof
$4 billion a ton in terms of its energy equivalent in oil, he estimates.
"When the moon becomes an independent country, it will have something 
totrade."
- ---------------
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 23:05:19 -0700
From: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1@frontiernet.net>
Subject: FWD (UASR) Aurora and Chinook

A very interesting article about the RAF Chinook crash:

< http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/11847.html >

Dave

- -- 
Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA)
< fortean1@frontiernet.net >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: Fortean Times * Northwest Mysteries * Mystic's Cyberpage *
   TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:35:49 +0100
From: Wayne Turnbull <wayne.turnbull@kcl.ac.uk>
Subject: Aurora killed my Chinook...

If anyone's interested, here's a link for an imaginative explanation for
the Mull of Kintyre Chinook crash a few years ago.

www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/11847.html

WT

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 08:50:52 PDT
From: "wayne binkley" <wbinkley@hotmail.com>
Subject: O/T(VA/purple heart/priority change)

i know this is not the proper forum,but if it helps just one vet get better 
medical treatment,i think it is worth one email.if you don't have a purple 
heart,now is the time to use your "delete" button and like me,consider your 
self lucky.wayne                                  
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxWASHINGTON, 
D.C. =97 Veterans awarded the Purple Heart for combat
wounds will find it easier to get medical care from the Department 
ofVe=terans
Affairs (VA).
Under new VA rules, Purple Heart veterans now have a higher priorityfor
health-care services than before. Also, they don=92t have to 
makeout-of=-pocket
payments, technically known as "co-payments," for either inpatient orou=
tpatient VA medical services.
"VA has always recognized and appreciated the contributions of thosewho
hold the Purple Heart," said Dr. Thomas L. Garthwaite, VA=92s ActingUnd=er
Secretary for Health. "Now, we are according those veterans a priorityb=
efitting their service to this nation."
The new rules authorize VA to reimburse Purple Heart recipients for any
medical co-payments made to VA for care given after November 29, 1999.
Purple Heart recipients are still responsible for making co-payments of=$2 
for
each 30-day supply of prescription medicine given to outpatients 
forcon=ditions
that are not related to military service.
"We urge Purple Heart recipients who have medical conditions theybeliev=e
are related to their military service to contact VA for help in filinga=
claim," said Joe Thompson, VA=92s Under Secretary for Benefits.=20
By itself, the Purple Heart doesn=92t qualify veterans for VAdisability
compensation. That requires a separate screening process. Nor does the
Purple Heart affect eligibility for long-term nursing care.
VA=92s new eligibility rules for Purple Heart recipients were approvedl=
ast year by
Congress in the Veterans Millennium Health Care and Benefits Act. The
change affects the seven-step priority system that Congress set up forV=A
health care.=20
It moves Purple Heart recipients who were in VA=92s priority groups 
4th=rough 7
into priority group 3. Purple Heart recipients who qualify for priority=
groups 1 or
2 by virtue of service-connected disabilities will stay in those higher=
groups.=20 Anyone claiming benefits as a Purple Heart recipient must prove 
that
the=y have been awarded the decoration. VA will accept the following as 
proof:
Defe=nse Department Form 214, discharge papers, military personnel records,
order=s or award certificates.
The Purple Heart is the nation=92s oldest military medal. GeorgeWashing=ton
presented the first medals in 1783. Today, there are approximately600,0=00
living veterans who were wounded in combat and received the medal,
according to the Military Order of the Purple Heart.
- ------------------------------
End veterans@lists.militaryhub.com Digest (07/11/2000 21:01)
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

End of skunk-works-digest V9 #49
********************************

    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