From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V9 #85 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, December 16 2000 Volume 09 : Number 085 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Aurora Re: Aurora Re: Aurora FUM*_UFOs As Big As a Battleship Ringmakers of Saturn *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 13:45:27 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Aurora Hello Skunk Works members, I was in the IRC chatting with SecretJet in channel #skunk-works and he suggested me that I should let all you know of a weird phenomenon that I observed in my summer vacation. It was the night of August 16th 2000 (I am 90% sure this was the exact day) and I was in Las Vegas, Nevada. Me and a lot of people in Las Vegas observed a strange weather phenomenon above Area 51 (which is located a couple of miles north of Las Vegas). The weather phenomenon looks like aurora (the weather phenomenon that usually is observed in North and South Pole, not the secret aircraft) with different red, green, yellow, and blue brilliant colors. A lot of people in Las Vegas requested the information in the radio about the phenomenon but they only know that it is happening above Area 51. I don't know exactly the duration of the phenomenon, but it was all gone 10 minutes after my initial observation... all dark after that. Any comments? Could be a new radar system to detect stealth aircraft/missiles? Thanks in advances. May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@its.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ " From knowing himself and knowing his airplane so well that he can come somewhere close to touching, in his own special and solitary way, that thing that is called perfection." Richard Bach, 'A Gift of Wings' ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 14:18:12 -0800 From: "Dave Cox" Subject: Re: Aurora On 16 Dec 00, at 13:45, Wei-Jen Su wrote: >The weather phenomenon looks like aurora (the weather >phenomenon that usually is observed in North and South Pole, not the >secret aircraft) with different red, green, yellow, and blue brilliant >colors You didn't mention the time of day, but missile launches right after sunset can be pretty amazing. Photos of a couple of examples at: http://www.schnapp.org/sky/sky_19991002.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 15:25:10 -0800 (PST) From: Wei-Jen Su Subject: Re: Aurora I don't quite remember the time, but I am pretty sure it was way after sunset. I think it was around 10:00 pm. I don't think it was contrail left from some missile launch. Because it was a huge CLOUD of colorfull light about 20 mi width and 10 mi height just on top of Area 51 (localize in that area only!). I am not sure of the exact size, it is just a eye estimation. The base of the cloud was maybe 5,000 ft. above ground. I manage to try to take a picture but it didn't come out... All dark... May the Force be with you Wei-Jen Su E-mail: wsu@its.caltech.edu - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ " From knowing himself and knowing his airplane so well that he can come somewhere close to touching, in his own special and solitary way, that thing that is called perfection." Richard Bach, 'A Gift of Wings' On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Dave Cox wrote: > On 16 Dec 00, at 13:45, Wei-Jen Su wrote: > > >The weather phenomenon looks like aurora (the weather > >phenomenon that usually is observed in North and South Pole, not the > >secret aircraft) with different red, green, yellow, and blue brilliant > >colors > > You didn't mention the time of day, but missile launches right > after sunset can be pretty amazing. Photos of a couple of > examples at: > > http://www.schnapp.org/sky/sky_19991002.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 18:45:47 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FUM*_UFOs As Big As a Battleship FUM*_UFOs As Big As a Battleship *Fortean Unit of Measure Flying Saucer Review/Volume 45/1, Spring 2000, pp. 13 & 14 UFOs "As Big As A Battleship" by Gordon Creighton If you glance through the bound volumes of Flying Saucer Review since Spring 1955 you will find that the phrase "as big as a battleship" has been employed a surprising number of times, and that in quite a lot of the cases the eyewitnesses, frequently numerous, were serving British personnel in the Radar and Observation branches of the Royal Air Force, who sent in to FSR private confidential reports of what they had seen - no names revealed. An interesting recent case - and one which owing to the difficulty of getting everything of note into FSR we have not yet chronicled - was revealed early in June 1999 during a Space Symposium (!) at the R.A.F. Staff College, Cranwell. Speaking there, a senior R.A.F. officer said that the latest Phased Array Radar at the former "Cold War Listening Post" at Flyingdales in North Yorkshire had been picking up some "very interesting mysterious craft". He said: "What we have seen are not weapons. They are craft of which we have no technical knowledge. We know their shapes, speeds, and heights, but cannot explain what they are." This most spectacular case related to a machine spotted by Flyingdales and also by the Dutch Air Force, at 28,000 ft above the North Sea. Describing it as "the size of a battleship", he said that it had zigzagged around at up to 24,000 m.p.h. for 15 minutes - "as if it wanted to be spotted". Another tape display showed a group of 12 oval objects seemingly changing shape, to the amazement of the observers. This most important big thing, at 28,000 ft over the North Sea, was seen on February 3, 1999, and reported by the pilot of a private charter flight from Linkoping in Sweden to Luton in England. This chartered plane was a Bae 146 jet, owned by Debonair Air Line, Luton. The pilot said he was some 58 miles off the coast of Denmark, when his cockpit was "immersed in an incandescent light". According to a CAA spokesman, the pilot "saw an unidentified bright light below his aircraft. The area was illuminated for ten seconds." Pilots in three other aircraft reported seeing the UFO, either moving at high speed or static. (!) And the spokesman concluded: "As far as we are concerned, the matter is closed". But the Civil Aviation Authority and the British Ministry of Defence both confirmed that they were aware of the alleged sighting, while both denying that they were investigating it. The CAA spokesman said: "This may sound silly - but is a matter for the M.O.D." And the M.O.D. commented: "Our people have been looking for it but we are not investigating." (One UFO investigator remarked: "WELL - THEY WOULD SAY THAT - WOULDN'T THEY!") The Debonair Air Line office at Luton refused to name the pilot. They said: "He is on four days leave. He definitely saw a big red light". However, - and this is very interesting - the press reports seem to agree that the UFO, tubular, was "silver-coloured and long and pencil-thin, with square windows along the fuselage". And this is precisely the type of tubular UFO that has very often been reported, just as the square windows have often been reported. One of the press reports (Express, London, April 27, 1999) mentions that "at one stage, the UFO came to an abrupt halt before accelerating past the jet plane at thousands of miles an hour". (!) It is evident that not all the press reports mention the shape of the UFO, its row of square windows, and its extraordinary behaviour in halting and the to a speed of thousands of miles an hour. Instead, they prefer to keep referring to "the great red light", or "the incandescent light". A spokesman for the British Ministry of Defence insisted that there were no military aircraft in the area. He said: "We saw nothing". A spokesman for the British Pilots' Associated (6,000 members) said: "We get reports of this nature from our members but they are few and far between. In the past 10 years or so I would say that there have been around six cases (!) of UFOs being sighted. Many pilots are reluctant to make such claims because it tends to lay them open to ridicule. So when they do go as far as making a report we do expect it to be given credence". NO WONDER THE PILOTS DON'T REPORT THEIR CASES! The number of private and commercial pilots from around the entire world who admit to having seen UFOs is - so we are told - 3,500! That is certainly not the total figure of pilots who have seen or encountered UFOs. According to the last reports seen, Mr. Toke Havnstrup, President of Scandinavian UFO Information, had expressed a definite intention to investigate this case of the UFO over the North Sea. PRESS REPORTS SEEN Daily Mail April 27, 1999 Express April 27, 1999 Express April 28, 1999 Scotsman April 28, 1999 NOTE BY EDITOR, FSR O.K.! So what about this little item of thirty years ago?: Reprint from FSR Vol. 5 No. 2 (March/April 1959) page 13. SECRECY OVER FLYING SAUCERS ANGERS PILOTS: UFOS TRACKED BY RADAR ALL OVER USA Commercial aviation pilots are incensed over the secrecy of the U.S. Air Force on flying saucers, states the Newark Star Ledger (newspaper), which has published a report that the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) has been tracking unidentified flying objects by radar in all parts of the United States. A group of 50 commercial pilots who fly into Newark, one of the busiest air-freight and passenger centres in the world, told reporter John Lester that the Air Force's policy of secrecy is just plain silly. Every one of the 50 pilots had reported to the Air Force having seen at least one UFO. Each pilot had been subjected to Air Force questioning and then told, in effect, that he had seen a mirage. Then, to cap it off, he was warned that, if he told anyone else what he had seen he might face up to 10 years in prison for revealing military secrets! The pilots said this policy makes no sense. If gthe UFOs are mirages, as the Air Force claims, then why all the secrecy? And why does the CAA bother to track them by radar! "They are very strict about requiring us to report the mysterious objects and then they are downright insulting in telling us that we haven't really seen anything!", say the pilots. G.C. A few years later, as I recall, we published in FSR another, similar, protest, also from the pilots flying in and out of Newark, saying that, if their senses and their faculties of perception are so dangerously defective as the authorities suggest, how then does it come about that these pilots can be permitted to go on exercising their arduous and heavily responsible tasks as pilots! (This report not yet located in bound set of FSR volumes). G.C. - -- 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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 22:29:30 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: Ringmakers of Saturn Fortean Times 138, October 2000, pp. 30-33 Ringmakers of Saturn When a respected space scientist makes a case for the intervention of hug= e alien machines in our solar system, you'd expect his colleagues to sit up= and take notice. You'd be wrong. Don Ecker interviews Dr Norman Bergrun about his astonishing claim and why it has been greeted with ominous silence from his establishment colleagues. It is difficult to find 'mainstream' scientists who will publicly discuss= the subject of UFOs rationally or objectively. Generally, there seems to be a built-in prejudice among academically-trained scientists when UFOs are discussed. But sometimes there are exceptions. One such exceptional scientist is Dr Norman Bergrun, author of The Ringmakers of Saturn. I first heard of the book in early 1988. It had recently been published, and I was eager to read it because its author made the startling claim that detectable activity in the vicinity of the planet Saturn seemed to be under intelligent direction. Dr Bergrun made a credible case for his discovery of 'huge' artificial objects that were operating within the rin= gs of the planet. Although the book had been printed in 1986 - by the Pentland Press, Edinburgh - it was almost impossible to locate in the United States. In November 1991, I was invited to appear on CNN's Larry King Live and took the opportunity to show publicly, for the first time, a photograph I had recently obtained from Dr Marina Popovich of the Russian Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Popovich was a retired colonel in the old Soviet Air Force, a cosmonaut, and the most decorated female aviator in the world. Her former husband had been General Pavel Popovich, himself a Soviet space hero. The photograph in question was taken by the Soviet probe Phobos 2 on its way to Mars. What made it so unusual was the fact that, according to some in the Russian Space Agency, it showed a huge anomalous object - 25 kilometres (15.5 miles) long and one kilometre (550 yards) in diameter - which apparently manoeuvred toward their probe and destroyed it. Other striking anomalies were observed on this joint NASA-USSR mission, but the huge unknown object, photographed by the Phobos probe prior to destruction, was the strangest. At that time, I thought it would be impossible to encounter UFOs larger than this. I was wrong. In October 1999, I finally tracked down Norman Bergrun and got a copy of his book. After I reviewed it for UFO Magazine (US), Dr Bergrun agreed to be interviewed regarding his conclusion that huge artificial 'machines' are operating in our solar system. This is what he had to say=85 Don Ecker (DFE): Your book, The Ringmakers of Saturn, was not an easy read, nor was it easy to find. But for someone like me, interested in the anomalies of the solar system in relation to UFOs, it's an invaluable tool. Norman Bergrun (NB): Correct. It's important to really take your time and go through it. If you're looking for entertainment, this is not the book to have. DFE: During World War II, you were working for the huge American defence firm McDonnell Douglas. NB: I started working there after college. Then I went up to Ames Lab at Moffitt Field, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), which was the precursor to NASA. From there I went to Lockheed. I was a research scientist at Ames, flying around in clouds, doing icing research work. I've seen a lot of weather. I built an electromagnetic wind tunnel, which later led into the work I did on my book. At Lockheed I was responsible for flight-test analysis of the Polaris missile system. DFE: The military was doing a lot of testing with missile systems back then, incorporating what they'd learned from the captured German V-2 rockets. NB: On the Polaris project, we had a fellow named Willy Fiedler, who was a key designer of the missile. He worked on the V-2 during the war. Hitler visited Peenemunde on a Monday and wanted rockets hitting England by the following week, or else. Willy came up with a control system that had to be manually operated, so he ended up flying in one of those things. DFE: A manned flight. He had gauges on board and was able to see all the forces at work, and from that he was able to come up with an automated system. DFE: You're obviously well grounded in scientific principle and theory. NB: I've had a pretty good workout. DFE: Most mainstream scientists will not discuss the subject of UFOs in public, though privately they admit there's something to it. But they're worried about their careers and reputations. NB: Correct. At Stanford, if you don't have tenure and you mention this subject, you're out. DFE: Isn't that academic fascism? NB: It sure is. DFE: Isn't science supposedly to study the unexplained, not explain the unstudied? NB: Philosophically, that's correct. But in real life, no. There's a party line out there, and they're not about to have it fractured. DFE: Did you ever have an interest in the subject of UFOs, before you began researching the Voyager photographs? NB: When I was at Lockheed, we had classified work to do. Behind closed doors, we used to look at and discuss a lot of different things, one of which was the possibility of UFOs. We kicked the subject around for quite a while and decided that it didn't seem possible, based on the physics we knew then. My book says there's now some different physics at work out there, something that's capable of immense power. That wasn't a consideration back then. I was once vacationing near Monterey Bay, California, in September 1971. Every day a US Navy helicopter would fly along the same route nearby. One day around noon, I saw a shimmering bright light in the same area. I thought it was another Navy helicopter travelling the usual route. But it seemed to hover at a distance and it took on motions that made me realise it was no helicopter. I grabbed some binoculars and a camera and got a good look at it. It was one of those cylindrical objects, and it performed for me. I could see azure-blue flames at each end, which looked to me like an airplane's engine cowl; it was aerodynamically superb. Streamers came out lengthwise from this thing and joined together like a wishbone. The streamers were light yellow-green and tapered. They looked like what physicists call a 'pinched plasma'. There was a projection on one side that looked like a wing or a cross, with another streamer, something like a flame, surrounding an interior black bar, ending in a rectangular device. DFE: What was the duration of your sighting? NB: Not more than a minute. DFE: And your reaction to the whole experience? NB: Very straightforward. I had been around rockets and knew how you manipulated forces to get them to work. It was obvious to me that this thing was a space ship. I was privy to everything the United States had, and this was not ours. There was a fellow over at Stanford who, at the time, collected these various sightings reports and shared them with his colleagues. I told them what I had seen. I also told my congressman. I had worked on one of his steering committees before, so he and I knew each other well. He wasn't a believer, but he believed what I reported because he knew I didn't make things like that up. That's where things stood until I saw the Voyager 1 and 2 encounter photos with Saturn. I spent a lot of time studying the returns from both missions. The statements the Voyager scientists were making didn't correlate at all with what I was seeing. For instance, during Voyager 1, the spokesman said that the space between the A and B rings - the Cassini Division - was pure space. On the Voyager 2 photos, that space was filled up. It was obvious to me the spokesman was fumbling with his script, not knowing what to say about this because it was against the party line. I've had enough experience in the business to know when somebody doesn't know what they're talking about. At that point I decided that this was fair game for analysis. That's when I made up my mind to really get into it. DFE: Do you believe the scientists are unaware of all this or that they've been ordered not to talk about it? NB: I can tell you how things work at a government lab. During the icing experiments I conducted while at NACA (forerunner of NASA), officials from the airplane companies would come in and want to know specific factors and numbers involved so they could design heating systems to overcome those conditions. You'd have to be very careful in what you told them because you didn't want to give them the wrong numbers since it would cost a lot of money to fix any mistakes. So you would put them off, saying "we're not talking about that yet". That was our policy. The same thing has happened with this material. The scientists have chosen not to talk about it. I believe they're aware of these anomalies but are no closer to explaining them now than they were back then. DFE: What caused you to look at these Voyager photographs in the first place? NB: Scientific curiosity based on my previous experiences. Around 1981, I bought all the transparencies and slides that were publicly available and started going through them. I found this one plate - plate number three, NASA SP-451, Voyager's Pictures of Saturn - and I looked at it under a microscope, along with comparison photos from Voyager 2. You couldn't trace the rings all the way around Saturn. On plate five, for example, showing the Cassini Division, it's quite obvious there's nothing much to speak off between the rings except some curious streamers and 'exhaust'. And the 'A' ring looks awfully narrow to me. It should measure out to be three to four times the width of the Cassini Division, but it's barely more than one Cassini Division length. The 'A' ring is not all there, radially - why is that? Because there's something [else] there - an artifact of some sort that's 'making' the ring. And that's how my book got its title, The Ringmakers of Saturn. DFE: What was the original size of the photograph you studied? NB: A 35mm transparency. DFE: And there was no good NASA explanation for what you were seeing on the original plate, NASA SP-451? NB: That's right. The only official comment on this plate and the comparison photos was that the Voyager 2 rings look brighter than the Voyager 1 rings. DFE: Did you bring your analysis to your associates at NASA? NB: Oh, yes. A former associate of mine at Lockheed had later gone to work at Ames and had become chief scientist there. I went to see him and showed him what I had found. His explanation was that it looked like an "energy roll". Remembering my sighting experience - in which I had seen 'exhaust' like this before - I deferred my judgement out of respect to him. He certainly didn't try to talk me down, rather he referred me to a specialist. The specialist did try to talk me down. He said that on plate five, the picture had been "cut off", and that's why I couldn't trace the ring. In rebuttal, I pointed out the light source - the blue dot - on the photo. The same back and forth happened on all the photographs I showed him. It was the kind of response I expected. I showed him the last photo and by then he just gave up. He said this was something "we just don't talk about". I told him that this was the first statement he had made all day that made any sense. Again, having worked at Ames before and being in a similar position myself, I understood his position completely. DFE: This, in effect, was an admission that certain individuals within NASA know that somebody is out there? NB: That's true. DFE: There are stories circulating now on the Internet that, from the mid-1970s to the present, the National Security Agency has been launching highly secret deep space probes within our solar system. What do you know about this? NB: I worked in government during that time, so it's a period I know something about. I had a high security clearance then and was on top of all that stuff. To my knowledge, we did not have any deep space probes flying at that juncture. DFE: How do you view NASA today? NB: I understand that Dan Goldin (NASA Administrator) had the goal of taking this country to Mars. Everything else be damned, including the facts. He seems to have squandered any other opportunity. That bugs me. DFE: Goldin took over NASA during the Bush administration, coming over from TRW [the American defence contractor Thompson, Ramo, Woolridge]. When the Clinton administration took over, Goldin was the only appointee who was kept on. Regardless of all the failures that have occurred - especially with regard to Mars - he's stayed on. If this had happened in private industry, would heads have rolled by now? NB: That's not what people get fired for. They get fired for going against the party line. DFE: You know the joke, that NASA stands for Never A Straight Answer? NB: They're very good at coming up with stories, or attacking those asking the questions. I meet with NASA types regularly, and they're well practiced in speaking 'Washington-ese'. DFE: The objects you claim to see in the rings of Saturn are immense. Have you seen the photographs taken during the Russian's Phobos II mission to Mars, of the huge object that was supposed to have destroyed the probe? NB: Yes. The size of that thing was like 25 kilometres (15.5 miles) long. That's about the size of an object I found near Miranda (one of Saturn's moons), and it fits perfectly with some other things I know. I've analyzed the Phobos picture and have come up with a different answer from the Russians. DFE: This suggests that there are operational bases in our solar system. NB: I think that's true, especially with regard to Saturn. I consider its rings to be a polluted parking lot. I can't tell you exactly what's going on, but I do know that Saturn is harbouring a number of 'units'. There's evidence in the rings of Jupiter, too. DFE: When you discovered the Saturn photograph anomalies and became convinced there was intelligence behind them, it must have been a fearful discovery. Did you approach anyone else with your findings? NB: No. I made my decision early on how I was going to handle it. Instead of looking to convince government entities - which from experienc= e I knew wouldn't work - I decided first to try to get an American publishe= r for my book. Of course, no one would touch it. I had a contact in the United Kingdom, and the more I thought about it, the more I realized=20 that this would be the ideal way to deal with it. The UK is always bugging the US on everything and I was sure they would take the book=85 and they did. As a consequence, the information has bee= n spread all over Europe. I've also talked about the book quite a bit on radio programmes here in the States. It's been quite awhile since the book came out, and I've been doing other research. DFE: Have you considered updating the book? NB: I have a lot of new material. I've wanted to do a follow-up but hav= e hesitated since people seem more interested in what's going on closer to home. Saturn is so far away. That's why, instead, I wrote a book about the Moon called Earth's Moon: Why We Never Returned. I have a draft completed. DFE: That should be extremely interesting. Most people look up at the Moon and don't give it a second thought. They've been conditioned to think it's an airless, lifeless body. Yet it seems apparent that the Moo= n is also an operational base. NB: It's quite evident there's life there =85 a lot of activity. DFE: If it's true, as some suggest, that an alien intelligence has been here on Earth longer than recorded history, then the accounts of early humans interacting with 'gods' may have a basis in reality. NB: Yes. But even the best accounts and research can't prove it. I'm interested in data that's irrefutable and indisputable; this is where it takes you, this is what it tells you, pay attention! DFE: Do you ever think the admission that we are not alone in the Universe will come through official channels, especially with the nationa= l security operation that's been in effect? NB: Yes, if you push hard enough, if you can back these guys into a corner. You have to be relentless and keep pushing. You have to educate the constituents of the elected officials so they can go in and beat on their desks. That's the way it's got to be done. I have faith in some government people; some of them can help. But we need to provide them with the right material and we have to say it in the right way. We're not going to make headway if we start by criticizing the heck out of them, which is the way some people like to play the game. You have to know the right words to say. REFERENCES George H Leonard, Somebody Else is on the Moon (1976) Paul R Hill, Unconventional Flying Objects, A Scientific Analysis (1995) Donald E Keyhoe, The Flying Saucer Conspiracy (1955) RECOMMENDED SURFING UFO Magazine (US) < http://www.ufomag.com > Lunascan Project < http://www.evansville.net/~slk/lunascan.html > - --=20 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) ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V9 #85 ******************************** 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