From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #77 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, September 28 2000 Volume 09 : Number 077 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: DC-10 RE: Development Schedules RE: Development Schedules RE: Development Schedules RE: Development Schedules Fw: SR-71 meeting Re: Fw: SR-71 meeting Fwd: "e-AirExpo" TO ENTERTAIN AND INFORM AT NASA AMES Assistance needed X-Planes Tier 3 revealed, new UCAV programs It's amazing what the Air Force PR people put up on web pages (More UCAV) Has anyone heard, is HYPER-X (X-43A) flying this month? *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 21:36:55 -0400 From: John Szalay Subject: Re: DC-10 At 09:44 AM 9/25/00 -0700, you wrote: > >Over the weekend, I did some research on the Raytheon DC-10, based upon >some info someone pointed me to. The aircraft arrived at Goodyear, AZ in >October 16, 1999 (http://www.azstarnet.com/~chisox/gyr-tot.htm) and then >was delivered to the AMARC storage area at Davis-Monthan on August 22 of >this year (http://www.codacomsystems.com/AMARC/previous/frisep012000.htm). >You can find pictures of it at: >http://www.aeropacificimages.com/scan337.jpg >http://home.interlink.or.jp/~shinora/fanclub/d10/d10lhe_d01.htm >http://corsair.flugmodellbau.de/files/sonstige/02550.JPG > >A also stumbled upon info regarding the aircraft's pilot at: >http://www2.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/builders2.html > > Did so more checking of the AMARC inventory list and this is what I found. The ONLY DC-10 listed, and shows the tail number.... NUMBER LOCATION TAIL NUMBER ARRIVAL DATE MDS - ------------ ------------ --------------- ---------------- ---------- AACH0001 FF10 99000910 22-AUG-00 DC10-10 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 100 06:11:38 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: RE: Development Schedules On 9/25/00 11:35AM, in message <416A5F46A2C3D31185B200104B61F8D2A5B62B@bly-msg-07.pmsc.com>, "Weigold, Greg" wrote: > I work for a software company, and I can tell you that making 20 million > lines of code 100% bug free is a LONG arduous task.... We have over 200 > programmers who are working on systems that size, and we have NEVER achieved > 100% bug free!! > > Of course, our stuff doesn't have AMRAAM attached to one end, and doesn't > usually kill anyone.... at least not intentionally!! > > Greg W > > This and other posts illustrate that the software for military use is no longer the most complex or a technology driver. There are civilian projects going on that have code just as complex, if not more so. Software, like anything else is something that has to be planned for, but it can be developed in parallel with other systems. It isn't the reason for the rescheduling; It's something that is factored into the original schedule and, like anything else has to be funded. Here's a real-world example from an aircraft I'm not that fond of. The F/A=-18E/F was rescheduled during its development cycle. The substantial majority of what software there is on that aircraft was already developed for the F/A-18C/D, since they use virtually the same avionics. The development was rescheduled, but it wasn't due to software. Keep in mind that the Hornet tends to always get every penny that's asked for it, so it's how much that was asked for, and when, that was the driver. Regarding software, it is virtually impossible to make anything more than a few lines bug proof. But, you don't have to. That's why there are "voting" systems. What you need to do is when a bug surfaces, the systems should recognize it and be able to respond in a manner to work around the problem. Redundancy and human intervention paly a role. Same as on a mechanical system, only faster. Heck, the software on the Enterprise was always going down. That's why they had Scotty. Art ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 23:40:34 -0700 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: RE: Development Schedules > > > This and other posts illustrate that the software for military use is no >longer the most complex or a technology driver. There are civilian projects >going on that have code just as complex, if not more so. Software, like >anything else is something that has to be planned for, but it can be developed >in parallel with other systems. It isn't the reason for the >rescheduling; It's >something that is factored into the original schedule and, like anything else >has to be funded. > > Here's a real-world example from an aircraft I'm not that fond of. The >F/A=-18E/F was rescheduled during its development cycle. The substantial >majority of what software there is on that aircraft was already developed for >the F/A-18C/D, since they use virtually the same avionics. The >development was >rescheduled, but it wasn't due to software. Keep in mind that the >Hornet tends >to always get every penny that's asked for it, so it's how much that was asked >for, and when, that was the driver. They did that on the Ariane 5 too- it worked well for them :) Especially when it comes to software, using off the shelf systems or reusing code can have undesirable consequences, and modifying existing code/parts/protocols-that-someone-has-made-proprietary (not to name names) can introduce bugs, vulnerabilities and the like. > > Regarding software, it is virtually impossible to make anything >more than a >few lines bug proof. But, you don't have to. That's why there are "voting" >systems. What you need to do is when a bug surfaces, the systems should >recognize it and be able to respond in a manner to work around the problem. >Redundancy and human intervention paly a role. Same as on a mechanical >system, only faster. True in concept, but the few cases I've seen the kind of system you seem to be describing implemented, those same safety features could be pushed into a catastrophic multiple failure that would slip by the human in the loop until it was too late. And recognizing a bug, or even an "expected" error can be non-trivial for a computer system. > > Heck, the software on the Enterprise was always going down. That's why >they had Scotty. > > > > Art And he was MCSE certified too! 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. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 100 06:50:29 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: RE: Development Schedules On 9/25/00 11:40PM, in message , Dan Zinngrabe wrote: > > > > > > > > > Here's a real-world example from an aircraft I'm not that fond of. The > >F/A=-18E/F was rescheduled during its development cycle. The substantial > >majority of what software there is on that aircraft was already developed for > >the F/A-18C/D, since they use virtually the same avionics. The > >development was > >rescheduled, but it wasn't due to software. Keep in mind that the > >Hornet tends > >to always get every penny that's asked for it, so it's how much that was > asked > >for, and when, that was the driver. > > They did that on the Ariane 5 too- it worked well for them :) > Especially when it comes to software, using off the shelf systems or > reusing code can have undesirable consequences, and modifying > existing code/parts/protocols-that-someone-has-made-proprietary (not > to name names) can introduce bugs, vulnerabilities and the like. The difference I think is that in the Super Hornet, they were not reusing existing code in new avionics systems. The Hornet E/F uses mosly the same avionics systems as the C/D. > > > > > > > > Heck, the software on the Enterprise was always going down. That's why > >they had Scotty. > > > > > > > > Art > > And he was MCSE certified too! > > Dan > > I wonder i, "I dinna think she can take any more", will be a new error message in Windows 2000? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 04:29:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Sam Kaltsidis Subject: RE: Development Schedules > On 9/25/00 11:40PM, in message , Dan > Zinngrabe wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a real-world example from an aircraft I'm not that fond of. The > > >F/A=-18E/F was rescheduled during its development cycle. The substantial > > >majority of what software there is on that aircraft was already developed for > > >the F/A-18C/D, since they use virtually the same avionics. The > > >development was > > >rescheduled, but it wasn't due to software. Keep in mind that the > > >Hornet tends > > >to always get every penny that's asked for it, so it's how much that was > > asked > > >for, and when, that was the driver. > > > > They did that on the Ariane 5 too- it worked well for them :) > > Especially when it comes to software, using off the shelf systems or > > reusing code can have undesirable consequences, and modifying > > existing code/parts/protocols-that-someone-has-made-proprietary (not > > to name names) can introduce bugs, vulnerabilities and the like. > > The difference I think is that in the Super Hornet, they were not reusing > existing code in new avionics systems. The Hornet E/F uses mosly the same > avionics systems as the C/D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Heck, the software on the Enterprise was always going down. That's why > > >they had Scotty. > > > > > > > > > > > > Art > > > > And he was MCSE certified too! > > > > Dan > > > > > > I wonder i, "I dinna think she can take any more", will be a new error > message in Windows 2000? > > If aerospace/defense and other companies continue to disrespect and undercompensate their employees including software developers they are going to have a very hard time getting any quality work or working code out of them.... You gotta treat your quality people right, high quality people are assets, they are not expendable. Do you know how long it takes to bring new people up to speed on a product with 20+million lines of code or a technologically advanced and technically complex project??? "Captain! she's gonna blow up!" would probably be more accurate for Windows and most other Microshaft products. Sam CIO - Dark Entertainment LLC http://www.darkent.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 08:06:50 -0500 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Fw: SR-71 meeting I just got this question from an e-correspondent. Unfortunately, I don't recall the meeting he asks about. Can anyone here provide the details? TIA > Awhile back you sent me a notice about an event in (I think) Richmond, VA > involving a bunch of SR-71 pilots. I want to go, but cannot find my > printout. Do you remember anything about this? > > I know it is mid-October. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:28:11 -0400 (EDT) From: David Allison Subject: Re: Fw: SR-71 meeting > I just got this question from an e-correspondent. Unfortunately, I don't > recall the meeting he asks about. Can anyone here provide the details? > TIA > > > Awhile back you sent me a notice about an event in (I think) > > Richmond, VA involving a bunch of SR-71 pilots. I want to go, > > but cannot find my printout. Do you remember anything about this? > > I know it is mid-October. It's less than 3 weeks from now, the weekend of October 14-15, at the Virginia Aviation Museum, on the grounds of Richmond International Airport. Here's 2 links with more details: http://www.habu.org/museums/vam/sr71forum2000.html http://www.smv.org/SR71Forum2K.html FYI I also keep an events page at http://www.habu.org/events.html - D - David Allison webmaster@habu.org S L O W E R T R A F F I C K E E P R I G H T tm / \ / \ _/ ___ \_ ________/ \_______/V!V\_______/ \_______ \__/ \___/ \__/ www.habu.org The OnLine Blackbird Museum ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 16:08:11 GMT From: "wayne binkley" Subject: Fwd: "e-AirExpo" TO ENTERTAIN AND INFORM AT NASA AMES - ----Original Message Follows---- From: "NASANEWS@Ames" To: ames-releases@lists.arc.nasa.gov Subject: "e-AirExpo" TO ENTERTAIN AND INFORM AT NASA AMES Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 08:31:03 -0900 Laura Lewis September 26, 2000 RELEASE: 00-62-AR "e-AirExpo" TO ENTERTAIN AND INFORM AT NASA AMES The skies will be alive over Moffett Field in 2001. NASA Ames Research Center has signed an agreement with The Air Show Network to develop an annual world-class air show and information technology and aeronautics exposition, beginning in August of 2001. The annual "e-AirExpo" will combine an air show, featuring the finest in modern military aircraft, with two different expositions. A "business-to-consumer" exposition, located in historic Hangar 1 beginning in 2001, will feature displays and interactive exhibits demonstrating cutting-edge research in aviation and information technologies from NASA, universities and Silicon Valley companies. Beginning in 2002, a "business-to-business" exposition, featuring a major national technical conference, will be added to provide a forum for professionals in the information and aeronautics communities to share ideas and exchange knowledge. "The e-AirExpo offers NASA an extraordinary opportunity to promote our mission in information technology and aeronautics," said Dr. Henry McDonald, director of NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA. "It will also enable us to develop new strategic partnerships with the private sector. Through these partnerships industry will benefit from the advanced research capabilities we have at this Center, and we will benefit from their expertise in making our technologies more readily available to the public." "We are pleased to be working with NASA, the premier space and technology organization in the world, in the development of this important event," said Jim Breen, president and founder of The Air Show Network, Carpinteria, CA. "As the leader in aerospace and technology, the United States should have a world-class event to showcase its achievements, and we believe the e-AirExpo will be such an event." The air show portion of e-AirExpo will be an exciting way to demonstrate current flight technologies, the growing and critical role of information technologies in aeronautics, and other aspects of modern aviation to the public. Attendees can expect to see performances by premier military jet teams and world-class aerobatics pilots, as well as experimental aircraft and static aircraft displays. "Located in the heart of Silicon Valley, Moffett Field offers the finest combination of location and facilities possible for the development of a world class event such as e-AirExpo," said Breen. "This is an exciting announcement and a wonderful use of the airfield that will benefit the whole Bay Area community," said Pat Vorreiter, mayor of the city of Sunnyvale, along with Mountain View one of NASA Ames Research Center's adjacent cities. Mountain View Mayor Rosemary Stasek agreed, "the air show and exposition events planned for the e-AirExpo will be a tremendous opportunity for NASA and its government, university and industry partners to showcase the latest developments in aviation and information technology. Both of our cities look forward to working closely with NASA and The Air Show Network in the development of this exciting event." "This activity fits in well with our new NASA Research Park initiative," explained McDonald. "The NASA Research Park will bring together the best of Silicon Valley, and the nation, to work with us to accomplish our mission. A critical element of our mission is to share what we learn with the public: what better way than through an exciting air show and exposition." Located in the heart of California's Silicon Valley, NASA Ames Research Center encompasses the Moffett Field property formerly occupied by the Navy. Ames is NASA's lead center for Astrobiology, information technology, and aviation systems operations and capacity. For more information about NASA Ames Research Center, visit: http://www.arc.nasa.gov/ The Air Show Network is the largest air show event company in North America having served over 600 aviation events over the past 14 years working with all branches of the US Military as well as the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Royal Air Force of the United Kingdom. The Air Show Network is owned by Umbrella Entertainment Group, a privately held company based in Carpinteria, California. For more information about The Air Show Network, visit: http://www.airshownetwork.com - - end - To receive Ames press releases via email, send an email with the word "subscribe" in subject line to: ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov. To unsubscribe, send an email to: ames-releases-request@lists.arc.nasa.gov with "unsubscribe" in subject line. Also, the NASA Ames Public Affairs Home Page at URL, http://ccf.arc.nasa.gov/dx includes press releases and JPEG images in AP Leaf Desk format minus embedded captions. Laura Lewis Communication and Development Office (Public Affairs) NASA Ames Research Center, MS 204-12 Moffett Field, Ca 94035 650-604-2162 fax 604-3953 _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 11:58:14 -0500 From: George R. Kasica Subject: Assistance needed Hello: Can anyone help me locate one of these??? Its for a friend of mine here that flies and her husband, also a pilot. George >>I've seen this poster a few times but it's been several years. >> >>It's a poster of a really old guy (probably at least 90 yrs old) wearing a military fighter jet type helmet and flight suit. He doesn't have any teeth and his mouth is sort of pushed in making a prune face. I don't recall if the poster had any words that went with the picture. >> >>Have you seen such a poster or picture? I'm really interested in finding a copy of it because I want to give it to Ron for his birthday one of these years. It's such an awesome poster! It would be a great 50th birthday gag gift for pilots. George, MR. Tibbs & The Beast Kasica Waukesha, WI USA georgek@netwrx1.com http://www.netwrx1.com ICQ #12862186 Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'_' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 17:51:33 EDT From: JNiessen@aol.com Subject: X-Planes Hi troops, As some of you know, I'm working on a third, totally revised and updated edition of The X-Planes. It currently sits at 432 pages, 275,000 words or text, and 1,250 illustrations. Approximately 70% of the photos are new...including the first images ever published of the actual Convair X-6 configuration. I'm looking for information pertaining to the following and would appreciate help from any of you who might be able to provide it: X-39, X-41, X-42 (I have basic references and data, but am looking for details, including histories). Fresh photos of the Curtiss-Wright X-19. And finally, contact with my old friend Richard Koehnen (anybody know where he is or how to e-mail him?). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 01:08:35 -0700 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: Tier 3 revealed, new UCAV programs I'm surprised no one has posted this yet, but.... I'm sure someone on the list has been wondering what happened to BAT, LOCAAS, and the other mini-munition programs that disappeared from view a few years ago (granted, those programs have gotten some press, but not enough). BAT and several other new brilliant micromunitons have been tested on the Lockheed UCAV II demonstrator mentioned in the article. The chemical/biological sensing package mentioned was tested in 1997 at Groom - supposedly against live biowar agents that *the US isn't supposed to have* according to the BW treaty. Some information on the testing was posted in the public domain by Groom watchers (Norio, I think) and the payload was to be tested on GlobalHawk, DarkStar, Predator, and Cypher UAVs. As far as I know no service has actually *bought* Cypher, though it would make sense to test this kind of payload on a rotary wing aircraft (Cypher is a flying saucer-looking thing with a ducted rotor). The article also is the first accurate report of the Tier III program. They correctly elaborate on the "Q" nickname (actually Quartz - ever notice that CIA aircraft programs always have a "kwah" sylable?) and how the competition was won. AWST fails to mention the Boeing entry's connection to the TEAL CAMEO "Condor" UAV or several other Boeing efforts funded by DARPA, NRL, and other funny agencies - nor anything about Boeing's use of Moses Lake Washington's former Larson Air Force Base as it's own pseudo-Groom. And they left out that whole fly-off competition aspect of the program. The $150 million cost for the vehicle, from what I have heard, is a bit low. $250 million is more realisitic. While the article points out the connection between Tier III and Darkstar - and Darkstar's cancellation- it doesn't say anything about the concept Lockheed has been shopping around since before DarkStar even flew- a scaled down, single engine Tier III - a very short evolutionary step from the subscale Tier III demonstrator that flew several years ago. Darn. I had just started work on a new Tier III web page when this article came out. Guess I'll just have to make it a book. Tier I was CIA's GNAT 750. Tier III was Quartz. Some have said that Tier II was to be the Predator development of the GNAT 750 - which makes no sense when you look at what CIA had done to the 750 to make it the Tier I configuration being operationally developed in Albania - - Tier I and Predator were the same thing as far as CIA was concerned. Makes you wonder what Tier II was, doesn't it? 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. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 02:42:13 -0700 From: Dan Zinngrabe Subject: It's amazing what the Air Force PR people put up on web pages (More UCAV) Could this be the UCAV in question? My my, here it is again! (notice that the inlet is essentially the same as that on the Lockheed Tier III patent) Now, if I were Lockheed, I'd be leveraging my experience with the SENIOR PROM cruise missile, Lockheed's failed TACIT RAINBOW and TSSAM proposals, and maybe a more recent tailess aircraft to design an overgrown cruise missile/submunitions dispenser and label it a UCAV. This might be that other Lockheed tailess demonstrator: And then, just to make things interesting, let the Air Force and DARPA pay for it, and run a semi-parallel white world test program with NASA and another contractor with a skunkworks-type operation - don't want to let one contractor team have all the fun with a groundbreaking set of new technologies, that would erode the future industrial base - just like how DARPA handled the X-Wing project of the 1980s. In the mid 80's NASA flew an X-wing demonstrator built by Sikorsky - the idea was to have a helicopter that stopped it's four-bladed rotor in flight and used it as an X-shaped wing. The NASA aircraft explored propulsion configurations (using a turbofan linked to the rotor in rotary flight, and as a jet engine in fixed-wing flight). The NASA X-wing flew both as a helicopter with the rotor, and with the rotor detached as a fixed wing aircraft with small stub wings. In fixed wing flight - notice the tail rotor turning, but no main rotor. In rotary flight (for some reason I could only find these at Ames) When I was at Dryden in 1991 an RSRA (X-wing) was stored in shrink-wrap near the parking lot (trivia - it snowed at Edwards that day) If you search CASI TRS for "rsra", you can see abstracts for a bunch of NASA papers on the X-wing (and CASI is a great resource for researchers!) NASA was working on the flight dynamics of the X-wing concept, while deep in the heart of Nevada another contractor team was working on the thorny problems of how to make such an aircraft stealthy. Unfortunately, the stopped rotor forms angles to enemy radar systems that don't make it easy to reduce the RCS of an X-wing. The contractor team working in the black world used separate engines for rotary and fixed wing flight, leaving that problem to NASA. Just a few years ago, the X-36 program was flying at Dryden. Oddly enough, it was announced to the public relatively shortly before beginning it's flight test program. Even odder, it's exhaust nozzle - incorporating thrust vectoring for yaw control in a low observables design - was classified. Not every NASA program has major components classified. X-36 explored a lot of the flight dynamics issues surrounding tailess, stealthy configurations. McDD (Boeing now) was the major contractor on the X-36 (coincidently, in the past few years they have shopped around a stealthy X-wing concept). Canard-rotor-wing stealthy X-wing (notice something that looks like a cockpit?): Patent # and DARPA info for the CRW concept: Hey! DARPA is funding it, rolling out later this year (the Hummingbird mentioned is a very long endurance helo designed by the engineer behind AMBER/Gnat 750/Predator - Jane's had a recent story on it): A new UAV fromt he lead designer on McDD's classified X-wing: The X-36 at Boeing: At Dryden: Of course, I'm not Lockheed, nor DARPA, so any of the above could be complete horse-puckey. Then again, a vehicle like that depicted in the first two links above (top) would be just right for hanging off an F-15E pylon if it's wings folded. Oh well. There goes another book idea. 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: Has anyone heard, is HYPER-X (X-43A) flying this month? Last May they slipped the first Mach 7 flight to September. So what's going on. I'm starting to get my twitch. It must be getting ready. GO BABY GO!! Break the X-15A-2's record! Larry ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #77 ******************************** 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