From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #64 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 Thursday, August 24 2000 Volume 09 : Number 064 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: update on the Kursk Re: FWD (TLC-Mission) U-2/SR-71 funding and ops Re: Glomar Explorer Re: Glomar Explorer Re: Ionised 'cloak' using Xenon UFO NSA info available Re: Ionised 'cloak' using Xenon FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] Re: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] Re: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] FW: Leave it to the Irish - off-topic, but kinda military..... Re: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] Re: Ionised 'cloak' using Xenon *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 18:03:32 -0400 From: John Szalay Subject: Re: update on the Kursk At 03:48 PM 8/21/00 -0500, you wrote: > >> I wonder if the US, CIA, etc. considered offering to >> use the old Hughes Glomar Explorer! They could just >> list the whole damn thing up. The sub probably isn't >> as heavy as the one they tried to raise years ago. > >The Kursk SSGN is much larger than the Golf SSB the GE tried to recover: >Ca. 18,000 tons submerged vs 3,500; 158 meters long, vs 99; 18 meters beam >vs 8.5. > > ALSO: The Glomar Explorer is no longer conifigured to do the "that type of work" it has been extensively modified to do oil drilling, and the last I checked, working in the deep waters off Africa. and the lifting frame (Clementine) no longer exists. (if reports are correct, the parts were sold for scrap) except what was left on on the bottom of the Pacific of course. (the pushoff cylinders and the arms that broke) http://www.shareholder.com/glm/news/19960801-6955.htm http://www.atlanticmarine.com/atlantic_site/products/glomar_explorer.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/00/0110/6501122a.htm http://www.oilonline.com/news/news_international_hotline_te010700.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 18:29:58 -0400 From: John Stone Subject: Re: FWD (TLC-Mission) U-2/SR-71 funding and ops Hello All, Terry Colvin wrote: >This is the first I have heard of this. By this time 75+, I believe the >SR-71 did belong to the AF. That was the rub with the AF leadership. They cost so much to operate, were an "intelligence" asset for tasking, and they >could not drop bombs or shoot guns. The early YF-12s belonged to CIA. The SRs were the AF answer to the CIAs A-12, the CIA never owned or operated the SR. Though they used it's product with great regularity. The YF-12A was also an AF owned, you might be confusing the 3 built with the A-12s that the CIA flew. Best, John - -- John Stone blackbirds@iname.com U-2 & SR-71 Web page: http://www.blackbirds.net ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:52:51 -0700 (PDT) From: --TIGGER-- Subject: Re: Glomar Explorer Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:27:54 -0500 From: "Albert H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: update on the Kursk I wonder if the US, CIA, etc. considered offering to use the old Hughes Glomar Explorer! They could just list the whole damn thing up. The sub probably isn't as heavy as the one they tried to raise years ago. Al ;-) The Glomar Explorer (ship) underwent massive modification in 1998 and now serves with Houston-based Global Marine Drilling on a 30 year lease from the Navy to do deep sea drilling. (Oil I believe) THe Hughs Mining BArge (HMB-1) was the portion that contained the claw and the enclosed area for the Russian sub and has been in service with the US NAvy since the mid 1980's. It was (and still is) the enclosed barge that the Lockheed Sea Shadow was contsructed in, tested from, and hiden in all of these years. IIRC I think it's undergoing a 5 year test up in the San Franciso Bay. I THINK I have all of that right, anyone have better info??? - -Kevin Helm F-117A: The Black Jet NEW URL as of Sept. 1st.... http://members.xoom.com/goatsucker1 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 00:11:38 -0500 From: "Albert H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: Glomar Explorer - --TIGGER-- wrote: > > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 15:27:54 -0500 > From: "Albert H. Dobyns" > Subject: Re: update on the Kursk > > I wonder if the US, CIA, etc. considered offering to > use the old Hughes Glomar Explorer! They could just > list the whole damn thing up. The sub probably isn't > as heavy as the one they tried to raise years ago. > Al ;-) > > The Glomar Explorer (ship) underwent massive modification in 1998 and > now serves with Houston-based Global Marine Drilling on a 30 year lease > from the Navy to do deep sea drilling. (Oil I believe) > > THe Hughs Mining BArge (HMB-1) was the portion that contained the claw > and the enclosed area for the Russian sub and has been in service with > the US NAvy since the mid 1980's. > > It was (and still is) the enclosed barge that the Lockheed Sea Shadow > was contsructed in, tested from, and hiden in all of these years. IIRC > I think it's undergoing a 5 year test up in the San Franciso Bay. > > I THINK I have all of that right, anyone have better info??? > > -Kevin Helm > F-117A: The Black Jet > > NEW URL as of Sept. 1st.... > > http://members.xoom.com/goatsucker1 > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! > http://mail.yahoo.com/ Well, looks like I blew that one!! Thanks for all who posted corrections. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 10:25:23 -0600 From: Brad Hitch Subject: Re: Ionised 'cloak' using Xenon Actually, the xenon atoms are ionized only for as long as it takes to accelerate them to the exhaust velocity, then they are neutralized again with a flow of electrons. The xenon leaving the spacecraft is therefore not appreciably ionized. If you didn't neutralize the ions you would build up a large negative charge on the spacecraft which would eventually make it impossible for the engine to work as the positive xenon ions would come back and crash onto the spacecraft. The thrust to weight ratio of these engines is extremely low, making it impossible to use them for powered flight in earth's atmosphere. Ionized gases are also great reflectors of radio waves due to their electical conductivity, rather like metals though not nearly as high. "T.Toth" wrote: > > I was reading about the Deep space 1 mission and the Ion propulsion > engine, and was wondering if such a system first of all would 'work' as > a radar 'cloaking' device, and secondly if it was usable other than > theoretically on a stealth platform. > The ion drive emits only an eerie blue glow as ionized (electrically > charged) atoms of xenon are pushed out of the engine. Xenon is the same > gas found in photo flash tubes and many lighthouse bulbs. Ion propulsion > is not new, it has been around at least since the 1970's. The engine is > very small and it is very efficient (Deep space 1 uses about a 100 gram > of Xenon per day) and can operate for long period of times (thousands of > hours non-stop) which even if you had to divide into several 'thrusters' > to cover the whole platform it would still be enough for 30/40hr > missions. > Due to the extremely low 'thrust' (said to be equivalent to the pressure > exerted by a sheet of paper held in the palm of your hand) such a system > provides it would have no effect on the movement of the platform. > Timothy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 12:40:20 -0400 From: "Morris, Andrew" Subject: UFO NSA info available I read yesterday that the NSA has declassified "most" of its UFO information. I don't know if it is available on-line the blurb I read did not say. But just in case some of you wanted to do some exploring, research or reading. Let us know what you find out. Andy "I like the probing they gave me" Morris ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:20:00 -0700 From: "T.Toth" Subject: Re: Ionised 'cloak' using Xenon Please excuse my ignorance in these matters, but how is the supposed Russian plasma field supposed to work ? I had thought this to be of a similar concept. Timothy Brad Hitch wrote: > Actually, the xenon atoms are ionized only for as long as it takes to > accelerate them to the exhaust velocity, then they are neutralized again > with a flow of electrons. The xenon leaving the spacecraft is therefore > not appreciably ionized. If you didn't neutralize the ions you would > build up a large negative charge on the spacecraft which would > eventually make it impossible for the engine to work as the positive > xenon ions would come back and crash onto the spacecraft. The thrust to > weight ratio of these engines is extremely low, making it impossible to > use them for powered flight in earth's atmosphere. Ionized gases are > also great reflectors of radio waves due to their electical > conductivity, rather like metals though not nearly as high. > > "T.Toth" wrote: > > > > I was reading about the Deep space 1 mission and the Ion propulsion > > engine, and was wondering if such a system first of all would 'work' as > > a radar 'cloaking' device, and secondly if it was usable other than > > theoretically on a stealth platform. > > The ion drive emits only an eerie blue glow as ionized (electrically > > charged) atoms of xenon are pushed out of the engine. Xenon is the same > > gas found in photo flash tubes and many lighthouse bulbs. Ion propulsion > > is not new, it has been around at least since the 1970's. The engine is > > very small and it is very efficient (Deep space 1 uses about a 100 gram > > of Xenon per day) and can operate for long period of times (thousands of > > hours non-stop) which even if you had to divide into several 'thrusters' > > to cover the whole platform it would still be enough for 30/40hr > > missions. > > Due to the extremely low 'thrust' (said to be equivalent to the pressure > > exerted by a sheet of paper held in the palm of your hand) such a system > > provides it would have no effect on the movement of the platform. > > Timothy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 20:01:20 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] EXCLUSIVE FOR/EYES ONLY ECHELON (NSA, GCHQ ...) AND CARNIVORE (FBI) QQQQ FORWARDED FROM THE IUFO MAILING LIST. CAVEATS AND MESSAGE FORMATTING LOOK FAMILIAR. WNINTEL AIR DEFENCE HOT SPOTS INDICATE ALL UFOS ARE BALLOONS! TWC P.S.: Caveat - NSA site opens and spools slowly. - --- (Umbra has Latin roots, FWIW. Shelter. Cover. Help me, Obi Wan Kanobie! You're my only hope! --SW) - ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 23:56:07 +0000 From: Scarecrow Subject: [SO] Top Secret Umbra To: Skyopen Organization: Search For Truth [ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] Here is some more information regarding Security Classifications higher than Top Secret. I found in "Alien Agenda" by Jim Marrs, this quote by Barry Goldwater: "The subject of UFOs is one that has interested me for some long time. About 10 or 12 years ago I made an effort to find out what was in the building at Wright-Patterson AFB where the information is stored that has been collected by the Air Force, and I was understandably denied this request. It is still classified above Top Secret." Taken from a letter he wrote in March 28, 1975. While perusing the UFO documents the NSA released to the public, thanks to a nudge from Peter Gersten and CAUS, I ran across this interesting proof that Top Secret Umbra is an official classification. I have interviewed people who claimed to hold it, but had not personally recognized any acknowledgement that it was a genuine classification. But you will note at the bottom of the page that in spite of being blacked out, you can read the classification TOP SECRET UMBRA. You need Adobe acrobat to read these, and a link to get it is porvided at the National Security Agency server: < http://nsa.gov/docs/efoia/released/ufo/ufo2_E.pdf > Onward thru the Fog... .:*:._.:*:.scArEcRow.:*:.__.:*:. http://www.colaw.net/scarecrow.html Lions and Tigers and Grays, Oh My - -- Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@frontiernet.net > Alternate: < terry_colvin@hotmail.com > 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 - ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Allies, CIA/NSA, and Vietnam veterans welcome] Southeast Asia (SEA) service: Vietnam - Theater Telecommunications Center/HHC, 1st Aviation Brigade (Jan 71 - Aug 72) Thailand/Laos - Telecommunications Center/U.S. Army Support Thailand (USARSUPTHAI), Camp Samae San (Jan 73 - Aug 73) - Special Security/Strategic Communications - Thailand (STRATCOM - Thailand), Phu Mu (Pig Mountain) Signal Site (Aug 73 - Jan 74) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:30:31 -0700 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Re: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] >EXCLUSIVE FOR/EYES ONLY ECHELON (NSA, GCHQ ...) AND CARNIVORE (FBI) Oh no, not that BS again..... Has anyone bothered to read Bamford's book, which described what people now insist is "Echelon" back in 1983? I could probably pay my hosting bills for a few years by posting Amazon links for that book to UFO mailing lists! >QQQQ >FORWARDED FROM THE IUFO MAILING LIST. >CAVEATS AND MESSAGE FORMATTING LOOK FAMILIAR. >WNINTEL AIR DEFENCE HOT SPOTS INDICATE ALL UFOS ARE BALLOONS! > >TWC > >P.S.: Caveat - NSA site opens and spools slowly. > >--- >(Umbra has Latin roots, FWIW. Shelter. Cover. Help me, Obi Wan >Kanobie! You're my only hope! --SW) > >------- Forwarded message follows ------- >Date sent: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 23:56:07 +0000 >From: Scarecrow >Subject: [SO] Top Secret Umbra >To: Skyopen >Organization: Search For Truth > >[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ] > >Here is some more information regarding Security Classifications higher >than Top Secret. I found in "Alien Agenda" by Jim Marrs, this quote by >Barry Goldwater: "The subject of UFOs is one that has interested me for >some long time. About 10 or 12 years ago I made an effort to find out >what was in the building at Wright-Patterson AFB where the information >is stored that has been collected by the Air Force, and I was >understandably denied this request. It is still classified above Top >Secret." Taken from a letter he wrote in March 28, 1975. "Above Top Secret" is actually Secret Compartmented Information. Legally, Top Secret is as high as it can go- but things like compartmented information circumvent whatever law it was that laid out classification levels back in the 1940s. UMBRA was a generic compartment for SIGINT/COMINT material that NSA used until it was publically compromised in the late 1970s or early 1980s, when UMBRA was replaced with a new codeword. No one has ever denied UMBRA, and it's been public knowledge for at least 20 years. 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: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 08:53:18 +0100 From: "David" Subject: Re: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] Terry W. Colvin forwarded: [-] > Here is some more information regarding Security Classifications higher > than Top Secret. I found in "Alien Agenda" by Jim Marrs, this quote by > Barry Goldwater: [-] Hmmm...I've discussed the notion of the 'Above Top Secret' classification with people who should know, and I always receive the same answer: There is no higher level of classification than TS, because any disclosure of such information would seriously damage NatSec - and by definition that's as bad as it can get I'd be surprised if anyone on the SW list doesn't know that access Special Access Programs is compartmentalised - i.e.on a Need To Know basis. If this alleged Above TS classification was ever cited - with FOIA evidence ( even if it was totally blacked out) for anything other than UFOs - I'd be very interested to see it. Best David ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:48:06 -0400 From: "Weigold, Greg" Subject: FW: Leave it to the Irish - off-topic, but kinda military..... 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_01C00DD2.3E96CD5C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" This is off-topic, but I figured this list would really appreciate it Greg W - -----Original Message----- Tenacious One boring afternoon, Saddam Hussein was sitting in his office wondering who to invade when his telephone rang. "Hello Mr Hussein," a heavily accented voice says, "This is Paddy down in County Meath, Ireland. I am ringing to inform you that I am officially declaring war on you." "Well, Paddy," Saddam replies, "This indeed is important news! Tell me, how big is your army?" "At this moment in time," says Paddy after a moments' calculation, "there is myself, my cousin Sean, my next door neighbors Gerry and the entire darts team from the pub - That makes 8!" Saddam sighs and says, "I must tell you Paddy that I have 1 million men in my army waiting to move on my word." "Oh shit" says Paddy, "I'll have to ring you back!" Sure enough, the next day Paddy rings back. "Right Mr. Hussein, the war is still on! We have managed to acquire some equipment!" "What equipment would that be, Paddy?" Saddam asks. "Well, we have 2 combine harvesters, a bulldozer and Murphy's tractor from the farm." Once more Saddam sighs and says, "I must tell you Paddy that I have 16 thousand tanks, 2 thousand mine layers, 14 thousand armored cars and my army has grown to 1 and a half million since we last spoke." "Bugger me!" says Paddy, "I'll have to ring you back!" Sure enough, Paddy rings again the next day. "Right Mr. Hussein, the war is still on! We have managed to get ourselves airborne! We've kitted out old Ted's crop sprayer with a couple of rifles in the cockpit and the bridge team has joined us as well!" Once more Saddam sighs and says, "I must tell you Paddy that I have 10 thousand bombers and 20 thousand Mig 109 high maneuverability attack planes and my military complex is surrounded by laser Guided surface to air missile sites and since we last spoke, my army has increased to 2 million." "Oh bollocks," says Paddy, "I'll have to ring you back." Sure enough, Paddy calls again the next day. "Right Mr. Hussein, I am sorry to tell you that we have had to call off the war." "I'm very sorry to hear that," says Saddam, "Why the sudden change of heart?" "Well," says Paddy, "We've all had a chat and there's no way we can cope with 2 million prisoners." - ------_=_NextPart_001_01C00DD2.3E96CD5C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
This is off-topic, but I figured this list would really appreciate it
Greg W
-----Original Message-----
  Tenacious

One boring afternoon, Saddam Hussein was sitting in his office  wondering who to invade when his telephone rang.

"Hello Mr Hussein," a heavily accented voice says, "This is Paddy   down in County Meath, Ireland. I am ringing to inform you that I am  officially declaring war on you."

"Well, Paddy," Saddam replies, "This indeed is important news! Tell  me, how big is your army?"

"At this moment in time," says Paddy after a moments' calculation,  "there is myself, my cousin Sean, my next door neighbors Gerry and  the entire darts team from the pub - That makes 8!"

Saddam sighs and says, "I must tell you Paddy that I have 1 million  men in my army waiting to move on my word."

"Oh shit" says Paddy, "I'll have to ring you back!"

Sure enough, the next day Paddy rings back. "Right Mr. Hussein, the  war is still on! We have managed to acquire some equipment!"

"What equipment would that be, Paddy?" Saddam asks.

"Well, we have 2 combine harvesters, a bulldozer and Murphy's tractor  from the farm."

Once more Saddam sighs and says, "I must tell you Paddy that I have 16 thousand tanks, 2 thousand mine layers, 14 thousand armored cars  and my army has grown to 1 and a half million since we last spoke."

"Bugger me!" says Paddy, "I'll have to ring you back!" Sure enough,  Paddy rings again the next day.  "Right Mr. Hussein, the war is still  on! We have managed to get ourselves airborne! We've kitted out old  Ted's crop sprayer with a couple of rifles in the cockpit and the  bridge team has joined us as well!"

Once more Saddam sighs and says, "I must tell you Paddy that I have 10 thousand bombers and 20 thousand Mig 109 high maneuverability  attack planes and my military complex is surrounded by laser Guided  surface to air missile sites and since we last spoke, my army has  increased to 2 million."

"Oh bollocks," says Paddy, "I'll have to ring you back."

Sure enough, Paddy calls again the next day. "Right Mr. Hussein, I  am sorry to tell you that we have had to call off the war."

"I'm very sorry to hear that," says Saddam, "Why the sudden change of  heart?"

"Well," says Paddy, "We've all had a chat and there's no way we can  cope with 2 million prisoners."
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C00DD2.3E96CD5C-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 21:02:32 -0400 From: John Szalay Subject: Re: FWD (IUFO) TOP SECRET UMBRA [NSA's UFO Files] At 08:53 AM 8/24/00 +0100, you wrote: > >Terry W. Colvin forwarded: > >[-] >> Here is some more information regarding Security Classifications higher >> than Top Secret. I found in "Alien Agenda" by Jim Marrs, this quote by >> Barry Goldwater: >[-] > > >If this alleged Above TS classification was ever cited - with FOIA evidence >( even if it >was totally blacked out) for anything other than UFOs - I'd be very >interested to see it. >Best >David > AS LONG as it DON'T deal with UFO's! I'm game too. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 23:26:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: Re: Ionised 'cloak' using Xenon > Please excuse my ignorance in these matters, but how is the supposed Russian > plasma field supposed to work ? I had thought this to be of a similar concept. If it is ionized plasma (which is what plasma is by definition - duh!!!) it will light up the aircraft like a Christmass tree... (please forgive the quasi-religious comment) both by reflecting radar signals and generating an IR signature. Then there's the problem of keeping the plasma conformed to the airframe and preventing it from degrading aerodynamic performance. And on top of all that, you would need to ensure that the "plasma cloud" surrounding the airframe does not generate a visual signature that would presumably be visible for tens of miles (after all the aurora borealis and the aurora australis are plasma phenomena visible hundreds if not thousands of miles away). Unless someone's been able to re-write the laws of physics, I don't see how a plasma stealth device could work... Please correct me if I'm wrong... where's a physicist when you need one? Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com > Timothy > > Brad Hitch wrote: > > > Actually, the xenon atoms are ionized only for as long as it takes to > > accelerate them to the exhaust velocity, then they are neutralized again > > with a flow of electrons. The xenon leaving the spacecraft is therefore > > not appreciably ionized. If you didn't neutralize the ions you would > > build up a large negative charge on the spacecraft which would > > eventually make it impossible for the engine to work as the positive > > xenon ions would come back and crash onto the spacecraft. The thrust to > > weight ratio of these engines is extremely low, making it impossible to > > use them for powered flight in earth's atmosphere. Ionized gases are > > also great reflectors of radio waves due to their electical > > conductivity, rather like metals though not nearly as high. > > > > "T.Toth" wrote: > > > > > > I was reading about the Deep space 1 mission and the Ion propulsion > > > engine, and was wondering if such a system first of all would 'work' as > > > a radar 'cloaking' device, and secondly if it was usable other than > > > theoretically on a stealth platform. > > > The ion drive emits only an eerie blue glow as ionized (electrically > > > charged) atoms of xenon are pushed out of the engine. Xenon is the same > > > gas found in photo flash tubes and many lighthouse bulbs. Ion propulsion > > > is not new, it has been around at least since the 1970's. The engine is > > > very small and it is very efficient (Deep space 1 uses about a 100 gram > > > of Xenon per day) and can operate for long period of times (thousands of > > > hours non-stop) which even if you had to divide into several 'thrusters' > > > to cover the whole platform it would still be enough for 30/40hr > > > missions. > > > Due to the extremely low 'thrust' (said to be equivalent to the pressure > > > exerted by a sheet of paper held in the palm of your hand) such a system > > > provides it would have no effect on the movement of the platform. > > > Timothy > ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #64 ******************************** 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