From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V10 #1 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 Monday, January 22 2001 Volume 10 : Number 001 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** FWD (Multiple) Re: National Missile Defense Advice Sought RE: TSR-2 and F-111 FWD (SK/PVT) Re: Depleted Uranium Ammunition RE: TSR-2 and F-111 Re: Advice Sought TSR-2 photos FWD (TLCB/PVT) U-2 Refueling [was Re: B-52 and KC-10] *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 22:19:24 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD (Multiple) Re: National Missile Defense But what if the missile was launched by a stateless person? Would it be fair to destroy a country, unaware of the missile firing prior to liftoff, for the act of a terrorist acting outside the values of the country? Jim Stevenson > With all of our technology, our stealth bombers, with our immense second > strike capability, our nuclear subs with nuclear warheads, any country that > was so feckless as to launch a missle at us would be committing suicide. > And the notion that these "rogue" states are a threat to the U.S. is > preposterous, more a massive propaganda effort to justify more spending for > the military industrial complex. > > A total waste of money, that could be better spent elsewheres (education > and health care) and/or rebated to us as a tax refund. > > How some ever, those persons, institutions whom have a financial and > professional interest in military spending and research projects can always > find some way to rationalize and justify "defense" spending. > > Lee - -------------------- Ah ... where to begin? "Another good case for eliminating nuclear weapons, not for a missle defense system." --- Would that it were possible to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle. But it is not. "What has politics got to do with survival and retaliation[?] .... In fact our whole nuclear defense strategy was based on retaliation before weapons strike." - --- Respectfully, American doctrine is that we do not 'launch on warning;' rather, we require that the President (a political figure) decide whether - or not - it is in our national interest to use nuclear weapons. "Assume, assume, assume you can assume yourself into analysis paralysis and you can assume yourself into war." - -- It seems to me that the time to analyze and to prepare is before action is required so that it will be possible to respond both wisely and quickly in crisis. I doubt that you really intend to argue in favor of unconsidered reaction to a crisis. "The fact that the attack was launched from a ship, and especially an NCB device in the ship, only further illustrates the uselessness of a Missle Defense System." - --- Granted that no weapon is the entire solution to all possible threats. Your argument seems to be analogous to saying that children should not be inoculated against childhood diseases because the vaccines do not prevent, say, TB. I would argue that half a loaf is better than none. RE: The reaction of neighboring nations to an American nuclear strike. I did not intend to imply that they would launch a nuclear strike in response. Rather, I was suggesting that our long term interests in the region (and, indeed, worldwide) might be very severely damaged. If by blocking a attack we can gain time and enlarge options, it is a very good thing. I would prefer that our President be given more options than passivity or spasm retaliation. RE: Israel. I seem to recall that Israel took out the American spy ship 'Liberty' when they decided that it threatened them during the Six Day War. Even a 'lap dog' will bite if it is kicked. And history records many 'client states" that have turned on their erstwhile masters notwithstanding their economic interests. Cuba comes to mind. But so does almost every colony -- including the American colonies - that has turned its back on economic advantage in favor of political independence. RE: Israel (redux) -- I seem to have missed the hook on which you are hanging your suggestion that I am defending my 'beloved' Israel. I intended to focus entirely on the interests of the United States. During the Gulf War, it was in the interest of the United States to preserve the coalition against Sadaam and to demonstrate that we would act to prevent damage to our allies. As both Israel and Saudi Arabia were our allies, we sought to protect them from missile attack. Since this protection made it unnecessary for Israel to act unilaterally, it also served to preserve the anti-Sadaam coalition. "If we didn't run around the world, backing thugs, murderers, liars, manipulators, people who dispossess other people (and quote the Bible as an authority), if we acted the way our social mythos would have us believe, according to the principles that we espouse but don't practice. We wouldn't have any "enemies" and we wouldn't need any options." - --- Alas, it's a tough world out there. Lots of grays; very little pure black or pure white. America has interests in the world; some entirely beneficent, some less so. But I doubt that you really would have us abandon all our interests to ensure that we must never deal with nations and individual of less-than-biblical purity. Your argument reminds me of a famous remark that John Foster Dulles made after reading the briefing papers about the Middle East after becoming Secretary of State. "I don't see why the Arabs and the Jews can't just get together and settle this like good Christian gentlemen." There is, alas, a profound shortage of the pure, the just and the good in the world. As long as we have anything worth taking, there will be those who will want to take it from us. "I'll tell you how. The same way that anyone manages to protect themselves, by making themselves so big, tough, strong and bad that only an idiot would dare attack them." - --- I regret that I must report that there are idiots out there. Unfortunately, history records enough victories by the weak over the strong that apparently irrational acts can be rationalized by those wishing to do so. I do, however, agree that we should not encourage them by making ourselves weak. "... [T]he subtext behind your defense of and rationalization for a Missle Defense System. To subsidize the defense of Israel at the expense of the American herd of cattle." - --- I am a bit of a loss to understand your confusion of a defense of the American homeland against North Korea and, perhaps, Iran or Iraq with the defense of Israel. I do gather that you have a rather profound animus against Israel and her supporters (dare I suggest coreligionists?). If I am wrong in that last remark, I will happily apologize. Indeed, I very much hope that I am wrong in this. "WE, the people of the United States, do not need to preserve any options. All we have to do is to start doing the right thing and treat the people within our borders, as well as our neighbors and foreigners in accordance with our "lofty" and often stated public principles. When you are the top predator, the biggest shark in the ocean, you are the creature other creatures fear and the only reason any other critter wants to eliminate you is because you are threatening to eliminate them. Suggestion for balancing the budget, giving tax payers a break, and eliminating the enemies we have created in the world. Cut Eratz Y'srael loose and let it sink on it's own, as it will most assuredly do, without the subsidy and support of the vapid American. Lots of luck though. Considering the vast power, influence, (media, political and money) exerted within the U.S., by those whom have dual citizenship and/or loyalties first to Y'srael." - --- Q.E.D. Frank Markus - ------------------ All of the Missle Defense, SDI, arguments are non sequiturs. First thing that needs to be proved is that there is indeed a viable missle threat to the U.S. (not Israel), but the U.S. Then one needs to be able to prove that this viable missle threat can be effectively neutralized by spending trillions of our dollars (and bankrupting the country and our and our children's posterity). The only "enemies" that the U.S. has, are the ones we create through our policies and actions, such as the dispossession and massacre of Palestinians, or taking sides with one faction against another. No. Korea a threat. Har. I doubt it. Osama bin Laden a threat (far fetched impossible), China a threat, I seriously doubt it, especially since we are not a threat to China and in fact and indeed are courting them, offering them trade credits and trade privileges. Russia a threat. I seriously doubt it, even their aircraft are rusting on the tarmack. The only threat we have is from "terrorists" who don't need a missle to launch an attack (as witness the what if's and scenarious posited by Marcus and Stevenson). And the only terrorists that threaten us, are the ones whom we (meaning the Government of the U.S. and it's media) create via our policies and actions. The money spent on missle defense will only go into the pockets of the employees and shareholders of the military industrial complex, and would be better spent by improving health care, social security, education and even a tax rebate for the working middle class American. The only real beneficiaries of a missle defense system, quite obviously, will be the State of Israel,a quite obviously racist, duplicit and aggressive state who has created the very problem, which it now wants the U.S. to defend against. The problem: the tears, frustration and anger of a peoples who have been dispossessed, murdered, marginalized and reduced to common labor at reduced wages for their lords and masters the Citizens of Israel. Considering that this forum is entitle "skunk-works" and a number of the members have a vested industry in the development of weapons systems, I am not making any friends or points. But what the heck, over. I never did, nor never cared either. If the top predator nation spent as much time, money and energy helping other countries to become independent, truly self sovereign and more importantly using its power with International Financial Institutions (to quote Bill Clinton) to enable these countries to import oil and goods, without having to borrow Dollars and Special Drawing Rights, by recognizing their currency as legitimate in the world market, then we wouldn't have any enemies and nothing to "defend" against, but so long as we take sides in disputes, and engage or support aggressive actions by other nations, then we will always have enemies, and so long as we support the Dollar Denominated International Trade scam (Bretton Woods) then there will always be marginal, impoverished and resentful nations who have to sell crap like cocaine and heroin, or export goods made by virtual slave labor, that they can repay the debts to International Financial Institutions, debts incurred for one reason only, to import oil and goods, because the International Financial Institutions don't recognize the currency of the country as legitimate on the world market. And by the way, it is the embargo and only the embargo, that has kept Fidel Castro in power for over 40 years. Castro and the ruling elite suffer for nothing, they merely do their shopping in the Free Port of Colon, in the unofficial terrority of the U.S. called the Republic of Panama, and get everything they need and their heart desires, including food and medicine and fancy toys. Lee Markland - -- 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: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 11:27:45 -0800 From: David Lednicer Subject: Advice Sought > The oldest grandson will be entering high school in the fall. He wants > to become an aeronautical engineer. Can anybody on the list recommend > courses, languages, whatever that he should be focusing on? Any > suggestions on colleges and universities to start looking at? Very few, if any, engineering schools require a foreign language. However, on general principles, learning Spanish would be a good idea. In high school, I would recommend taking every math class possible. Also, writing and communications courses help. Engineers have problems in these areas... I see you are from Illinois - you are lucky, as there is an excellent in-state engineering school there with an aero department (UIUC). In your area, I would also recommend Ohio State and Michigan (where I went). Further away and more expensive, there are (off the top of my head) MIT, Wichita State, University of Kansas, University of Washington, Notre Dame, RPI, UCLA, Texas A&M and Mississippi State. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 14:29:42 -0500 From: Chris Davies <100703.3474@compuserve.com> Subject: RE: TSR-2 and F-111 Art, You are entitled to your views; I can only tell you what I know from frie= nds = who actually worked on TSR-2 and from recently released Govt documents. = The connection with Concorde funding is well known and understood. = Much of the TSR-2 'sweat-equity' subsequently found its way into the = development of the Tornado. Regards the TSR-2 spares. = They were stored at a facility in Shoeburyness, which is where they were = recovered from after the auction took place. = In the same vein, the entire spares inventory for the Lightning were also= = acquired by a single individual and then stored at Bruntingthorpe. Regards, the CAA. = Civilian licences have been granted for all former RAF jet aircraft now = flying, except for the Lightning, which was just too extreme for them. = Both T.7 Lightning aircraft have now been sold, one to the USA and the ot= her = to South Africa. = The A/C in SAF is now used for funflights for those willing to pay for th= e = experience, in much the same way as those offered in Russia in the likes = of = the MIG-29 et al. Regards = > From: Chris Davies, 100703.3474 > To: Terry W. Colvin, Internet:fortean1@frontiernet.net > Cc: George Kasica, Internet:georgek@netwrx1.com > Date: 14, Jan 2001, , 17:59 > = > RE: RE: TSR-2 and F-111 Aardvarks > = I hate to say this, but much of this post is wrong. [What "spares = inventory"? Only one ever flew and that ended 35 years ago?] The cancell= ation of TSR.2 had nothing to do with the Concorde (in fact, the Concorde uses = a = variant of the TSR.2's engines). It was canceled strictly for political = reasons and has a face saving gesture by Dennis Healy, who also mandated = the = destruction of the jigs. It's interesting that he was a contemporary, an= d an = admirer of, Robert McNamara who was equally incompetent and who did much = the = same thing to the SR-71. Because the TSR.2 was optimized around the strike role, it would have= been a better performer than the F-111 in that role, even if the F-111 had met= its = specifications. The F-111 was better than anything else that entered ser= vice, but because of all the McNamara-mandated compromises was not what it coul= d = have = been. = The F-111 had better airfield performance, due to its variable sweep = wing, but in most other strike-related aerodynamic parameters would have been = inferior to the TSR.2. It's hard to say about the electronics since the = TSR.2's never finished development. On the other hawouldn'te TSR.2 wopul= d = have = been harder to maintain. Partly this was do to the fact that at that poi= nt in time, ease of maintenance wasn't much of a priority in British military = aircraft design. A number of British aviation experts used to marvel at = the = fact that there were only seven different screw sizes in the A-7A's tail.= = Another factor complicating maintenance was that the TSR.2 was very tight= ly = packed with wire looms running all over the place. The engines were also= a = very tight fit. Still, it was a remarkable aircraft. If you could affor= d to = maintain it, it would have been a world-beater. Performance-wise, there = isn't a strike aircraft in service today that could match it in everything. We= ll, = unless you count the B-1 as a strike aircraft. = As for flying it, the only two surviving airframes are XR220 at Cosfo= rd = and = XR222 at Duxford. XR220 is fairly complete after "boxes full of TSR.2 bi= ts = were found and sent to Cosford a few years back". XR222 was outside for many = years, = missing panels and the like. It's been brought inside, and cleaned up, b= ut = it's not in as good a shape as XR220, to my understanding. I believe th= ere = is one zero-time TSR.2 engine remaining, at the Gatwick Museum. and vario= us = subassemblies are around. = As for getting TSR.2 in the air again, this is virtually inconceivabl= e = [sigh]. Even if the current owners would allow an attempt to be made, e= ven = if = it were possible to restore this complex unique aircraft (and remember, = neither = of the two extant ever flew), the CAA would never permit it. You have on= ly to look at what happened to the Lightning and the Bucc to see the sad truth = of = that. = Here is an excellent link about this superb aircraft: http://www.csd.uwo.ca:80/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/tsr2.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:11:12 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD (SK/PVT) Re: Depleted Uranium Ammunition Forwarded from a private e-mail: Terry, I worked A-10 aircraft for 3 years. John's explanation of how DU ammo works is not what our weapons people explained to us. There are enough errors in John's e-mail to cause me to doubt that he knows of what he speaks. First, the A-10 gun is a GAU-8A Avenger, 30mm cannon and the muzzle velocity for armor piercing rounds is 3,240 feet per second. High explosive incendiary ammo has a muzzle velocity of 3,400-3,450 feet per second. A typical combat mix of ammo would be 2 round of API (armor piercing) followed by 3-5 rounds of HEI (high explosive). Other mixes are also possible. The projectile portion of the round weighs a little more than a pound, not four ounces. The operation of the DU is such that the lead casing flattens out against the target and acts like a man's hand holding a metal punch, while the interior armor piercing portion, the DU, continues forward, penetrating the armor. Maybe it melts, maybe it doesn't, but it was our understanding that the penetrating portion of the round maintained its shape physical integrity. API is followed by HEI rounds which penetrate through the same hole, exploding inside the target, while the DU, now slowed to the point that it will no longer penetrate metal, ricochets around inside the tank, much to the detriment of the crew. DU API is incredibly dense and holds its shape, basically a cylinder with a very sharp point on one end, bullet shaped. DU has no radioactivity, hence the name Depleted Uranium, and can be safely handled by anyone with no protection from radiation required. I agree with John that if I were a tanker and saw an A-10 heading in toward my tank, I would most definitely abandon the tank and run like hell. I've ridden in the back of pickup trucks being used to simulate tanks as targets for A-10s. A good pilot can hold you in his crosshairs for more than 30 seconds. The GAU-8A on A-10 aircraft is fired in very short bursts as the total quantity of ammo on board is only 1174 rounds. Maximum firing rate for the GAU-8A is 4200 rounds per minute. The only other available rate is 2100 rounds per minute, half speed, switchable between the two rates. I hope this information is helpful. Dan Decker TSgt, USAF Retired 1012 E. Hester/Brownfield, Texas 79316 ddecker@texasonline.net "I wasn't born in Texas, but I got here as fast as I could" "I have the body of a god --------------- Buddha!" 432 AMS, INS/FLR Shop, Udorn RTAFB, 1970 Life Member #585 CORMV Proud Member Udorn AFTN Memorial VFW Post #10249 Proud Member American Legion China Post #1, In Exile Proud Charter Member Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood TLCB Webpage URL: www.tlc-brotherhood.org Annell's URL: www.angelfire.com/hi/AnnellDecker/index.html AOL IM Decker206Z - -- 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: Mon, 22 Jan 101 03:24:27 GMT From: betnal@ns.net Subject: RE: TSR-2 and F-111 On 1/21/01 11:29AM, in message <200101211429_MC2-C28A-8E29@compuserve.com>, Chris Davies <100703.3474@compuserve.com> wrote: > Art, > > You are entitled to your views; I can only tell you what I know from friends > who actually worked on TSR-2 and from recently released Govt documents. > The connection with Concorde funding is well known and understood. > Much of the TSR-2 'sweat-equity' subsequently found its way into the > development of the Tornado. The key here would be showing how money "saved" by canceling TSR.2 then showed up on Concorde. Canceling the TSR.2 for Concorde seems too charitable to the people involved. The Labour party had repeatedly said they would kill the plane if they got in power, it was one of their platforms. They were of the same attitude as Duncan Sandys of the previous decade. You know, there was no need for new British manned aircraft. If new aircraft were needed, they could be bought from the US. P.1154, the new tactical transport and CVA01 all also went that way. If Healy and Co. were killing TSR.2 for Concorde, why not just say so and score some bonus points (Concorde being quite popular at the time)? Why go through the subterfuge if it wasn't needed? Regarding the destruction of the aircraft and the line, parallels exist in Canada and in the US with the Arrow and Blackbird, respectively. Here too you had an elite more interested in ego and face than what made sense. Destroying the line (and in the case of Arrow and TSR.2, stopping test flights and destroying the aircraft) insured that the decision could never be "proven" wrong or reversed. As you state, a lot of what was spent on TSR.2 found its way onto other programs (even French ones) after the cancellation. > > Regards the TSR-2 spares. > They were stored at a facility in Shoeburyness, which is where they were > recovered from after the auction took place. > > In the same vein, the entire spares inventory for the Lightning were also > acquired by a single individual and then stored at Bruntingthorpe. There's a difference here. Lightning was coming off RAF service. There was a good spares stock. In the case of TSR.2 only one had ever flown, the aircraft on the line were developmental aircraft with differences between them, and not that much spares inventory had been built up. I'd be very surprised if there was that much left of what wasn't destroyed at the time, since there wasn't that much to begin with, and it's been 35 years. > > Regards, the CAA. > Civilian licences have been granted for all former RAF jet aircraft now > flying, except for the Lightning, which was just too extreme for them. > Both T.7 Lightning aircraft have now been sold, one to the USA and the other > to South Africa. > The A/C in SAF is now used for funflights for those willing to pay for the > experience, in much the same way as those offered in Russia in the likes of > the MIG-29 et al. > You are correct about the CAA, and that's my unfortunate point. If the Lightning and Buccaneer, two aircraft with extensive service histories, were too extreme for them, they'd go into cardiac arrest over letting a refurbished example (that had never flown before) of a design that only made a few flights and was much More extreme, into the air. Even if Cosford (they'd probably try with XR220) or Duxford would agree, we'd need a Big change of attitude there at CAA. Remember, the aircraft that went to South Africa were fully restored to flight status prior to being shipped, but the CAA would not even permit a few "farewell to the UK" flights under any conditions. The gentleman in South Africa is a dedicated preservationist. He was a large fleet. When he saw what the demand was, he decided to offer rides to qualified people (who could also pay) to help defray the costs of maintaining these wonderful aircraft. Personally, this is a subject I would LOVE to eat crow about! Seeing one of these beauties fly would be the thrill of a lifetime... Art ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 10:40:44 -0700 From: Brad Hitch Subject: Re: Advice Sought You forgot about Purdue in West Lafayette IN, alma mater of a significant fraction of the astronaut corp, including Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee, and Neil Armstrong. David Lednicer wrote: > > > The oldest grandson will be entering high school in the fall. He wants > > to become an aeronautical engineer. Can anybody on the list recommend > > courses, languages, whatever that he should be focusing on? Any > > suggestions on colleges and universities to start looking at? > > Very few, if any, engineering schools require a foreign language. > However, on general principles, learning Spanish would be a good idea. In > high school, I would recommend taking every math class possible. Also, > writing and communications courses help. Engineers have problems in these > areas... > > I see you are from Illinois - you are lucky, as there is an excellent > in-state engineering school there with an aero department (UIUC). In your > area, I would also recommend Ohio State and Michigan (where I went). > Further away and more expensive, there are (off the top of my head) MIT, > Wichita State, University of Kansas, University of Washington, Notre Dame, > RPI, UCLA, Texas A&M and Mississippi State. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:36:22 From: "wayne binkley" Subject: TSR-2 photos for some nice shots of the TSR2 and more go to: http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/tsr2/gallery1.html "All modern aircraft have four dimensions: span, length, height and politics. TSR.2 simply got the first three right." - - Sir Sydney Camm _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:48:06 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD (TLCB/PVT) U-2 Refueling [was Re: B-52 and KC-10] The early U-2s didn't have IFR capability. The two remakes have full IFR capabilties and are refueled by the KC-135Q/T. Besides the SR-71, the 135Q also refueled the A-12 Oxcart aircraft. =20 The early model U-2 were operated from a location close to their recon area, to keep the flying distance to a minimal. They evidently had fairly long range, although I don't know the specs for the different versions. Check the Blackbird web sites for specs. =20 When we ferried an early model, the KC-135Q and U-2 made scheduled refueling stops along the way to the final destination. The IFR Boom was lowered, a special hose connected and the U-2 refueled right next to the tanker during these stops. Just like a big gas pump with wings. When we arrived at the final destination the remaining JP-7 (had PF-1 written on the fuel trucks back then) was pumped off to be used for photo missions. The personnel and equipment were offloaded and we returned to Beale. Usually dragging our feet, with as many maintenance stops and RONs as the air crew could swing. The portable party! =20 We could carry a whole detail of U-2 personnel and equipment to set up an new photo recon operation anywhere in the world. I went along as part of the KC-135Q maintenance team. Besides the four flight crew members, there was the tanker crew chief, and his assistant, plus radio, radar, autopilot, engine, electrician and IFR troops. Every time the same exact number of personnel.=20 We were treated like kings on these missions. The wall dividing officer and enlisted was dropped on the missions. We were one team, together. I thoroughly enjoyed each TDY. We never knew where we were going until we had picked up our cargo, and were heading to our destination. The shop chief used to ask if I wanted to go TDY. "How many days? Oh, a week or so." I knew it was a U-2 TDY. Next words were "when does the plane leave?" The KC-135Qs hav been re-engined and are now called the KC-135T. I do believe they are still refueling the U-2. And Terry, you don't have to send this off for grading. I know exactly what I did on U-2 ("Twined Thumb") missions. Hap Howard S. "Hap" Wyman TLCB Membership Committee =20 Aircraft Radio Maintenance=20 56th AEMS ~ 56th Air Commando Wing Nakhon Phanom RTAFB, 1968-69 Oxcart Support ~ "Black Shield" Ops 903rd ARS/KC-135Q ~ Kadena AB, 1967 456th AEMS ~ Beale AFB, 1966-68 Member ~ ACA =95 TLCB =95 VFW #10249 - --=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 V10 #1 ******************************** 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