From: owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com (skunk-works-digest) To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V10 #6 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 Tuesday, March 13 2001 Volume 10 : Number 006 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** SR-71 & Hypersonic photo of classified new stealth aircraft Re: No photo of new stealth aircraft? Re: photo of classified new stealth aircraft SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight Re: SR-71 Dash One Story Re: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition main_wip2 (http://www.edmgroup.net/habu_index.htm) *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 07:26:43 -0600 (CST) From: Todd Madson Subject: SR-71 & Hypersonic I think it's very romantic that people want to think that the SR-71 is capable of going faster than it actually is. But when you consider it, it's pretty much a miracle that it did what it did. I just got through reading the Skunk Works book and after reading about all of the challenges they went through to make that airplane it's amazing it exists at all. However, I always wondered if with all that we know now about materials, propulsion, fuels and structures and with the super- computers we have if they couldn't create something comparable or better. The problem is, after reading the book I know now that it's one thing to create a really fast airplane - the other issue is surmounting not only technical challenges, but political challenges. It was sad to read about all of those in Washington who were against its being made, and the many attempts to shut it down which eventually did work. - -t - -- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 17:01:04 From: "wayne binkley" Subject: photo of classified new stealth aircraft

 a new stealth plane(top secret)

 

Stealth1.jpg


Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 12:06:16 EST From: SecretJet@aol.com Subject: Re: No photo of new stealth aircraft? Hiya! Sorry, but I didn't get the photo, or the address to go online to see it on the web... Could you try again please? (Prefer Plain Text to HTML) MTIA - ---------- Regards, Bill Turner, 'Admin'. Black-Triangle E-Group HQ. Near London Heathrow, UK. AIM:Secretjet2 ICQ: 29271956 http://members.aol.com/Secretjet/index.html http://members.aol.com/BlackTriangles/index.html - ----------------------------------------------------------------- No Door is Closed - To an Open Mind! - ----------------------------------------------------------------- http://members.aol.com/Secretjet/index.html http://members.aol.com/Secretjet/Links.html Black-Triangle Links ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 11:11:39 -0600 From: Tom Genereaux Subject: Re: photo of classified new stealth aircraft Wayne - No can get there from here. Tom On Saturday 10 March 2001 14:01, you wrote: > >

 a new stealth plane(top secret)

>

 

>

Stealth1.jpg src="http://lw14fd.law14.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/saferd/Stealth1.jpg? >_lang=EN&hm___tg=http%3a%2f%2f64%2e4%2e20%2e250%2fcgi%2dbin%2fgetmsg%2 >fStealth1%2ejpg&hm___qs=curmbox%3dF000000001%26a%3d1571ceb4b03ce73b459 >b32614c936185%26msg%3dMSG984177463%2e31%26start%3d1942733%26len%3d9116 >2%26mimepart%3d9%26disk%3d64%2e4%2e20%2e66_d168%26login%3dwbinkley%26d >omain%3dhotmail%2ecom&file=Stealth1.jpg&domain=hotmail.com">

>

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer > at href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com

tml> ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 09:33:25 -0800 From: David Lednicer Subject: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight The NASA SR-71 Researcher's handbook has a chapter on what modifications would be required to allow the aircraft to got M=4. Unfortunately, my copy of this document is at work - I'll look this up on Monday. A friend who works at the SW tells me that the fastest an A-11/YF-12/SR-71 ever went was M=3.6 and the pilot was Darryl Greenamyer. David Lednicer ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 17:01:10 -0600 From: "Albert H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: SR-71 Dash One Story Habu wrote: > > Hi Al, > How ya been? I have finally come to the realizaiton thet since the SR's are > no longer flying, my chances of flying one went from several billion to one, > to "not an ice cubes chance in hell". 8>) Besides, as a retired volunteer > at the Blackbird Airpark, I have access to the original document which the > Goodall book was copied from. Lastly, I must admit that I have found most > of W. E. B. Griffins books to be much more readable. > > Jon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Albert H. Dobyns > To: > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 15:47 > Subject: Re: SR-71 Dash One Story > > > Habu wrote: > > > > > > $450.00+ ? Mine is now for sale. Bought it when it first came out, > used > > > it for reference several times, and its been on the shelf for the past > > > several years. > > > > > > Jon > > > > > Joh, how could a true blue SR fan even consider selling > > such a special item??? That's close to being un-American! > > OTOH if the price makes it up to $750, I'll have to take > > it and run! ;-)) > > Al > > > > I told someone at NASA, probably Mary, that if I won several million bucks in the Illinois lottery, I would pay as much as $1,000,000 for a VIP ride. No dice. And since my wife has "line item veto" status, I'm sure she would have me committed to the nearest mental health facility! My last hope is to get invited to sit in the cockpit of 976 at the USAF museum. But that too is probably unlikely as the ice cube in hell. Oh well, such is life. Al ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 18:18:25 -0600 From: "Albert H. Dobyns" Subject: Re: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight David Lednicer wrote: > > The NASA SR-71 Researcher's handbook has a chapter on what modifications > would be required to allow the aircraft to got M=4. Unfortunately, my > copy of this document is at work - I'll look this up on Monday. > > A friend who works at the SW tells me that the fastest an A-11/YF-12/SR-71 > ever went was M=3.6 and the pilot was Darryl Greenamyer. > > David Lednicer Mach 3.6? That's faster by a bit than the info I've managed to find. An A-12 was said to have reached Mach 3.56 but only very briefly. Another source told me that an SR-71 went to Mach 3.4 but the shock waves from the nose messed up the airflow into the nacelles. This caused an unstart, I think on both engines. I believe the pilot did get the engines going again after slowing down a lot. The plane made it back to the base. Someone posted a note about a YF-12 flight that sounds similar to what I described so I'm not sure if these are 2 separate events or just 1 with maybe an error or two. Could be I'm the one making the errors. Al ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 15:34:42 +0100 From: Andreas Parsch Subject: Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition Frank Markus wrote: > > I went to both Amazon.com and bn.com (Barnes & Noble) and searched under > both Jay Miller and X-Planes. No luck on either. The book was simply > unlisted, no even as forthcoming. Please point me to a source - > preferably an online source - for this book. > Hello Frank, I checked a few other online bookstores, but no luck either ... Anyway, I got the book from the mail order service of Midland Counties Publications (UK). Since they happen to be the publisher of the book, they've probably got a head start ;-)! They have a _very_ new (since a few days) online shop at http://www.ianallansuperstore.com but the title is apparently not yet entered into the database. However, you can order it by phone, fax or e-mail. Strangly, the e-mail address isn't listed on the "Contact" page of the site, but AFAIK is still valid at: midlandbooks@compuserve.com The "Info" page on the website gives details about delivery options, costs and times. Hope this helps! Andreas - -- US Military Aviation Designation Systems http://www.andreas-parsch.online.de ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 10:47:08 -0800 From: Larry Smith Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight I'm reposting something I posted back in July of 1999 that addresses this issue. From CIT max, ie: what is given, it's quite easy to estimate the SR's top speed if you understand the physical process that is occurring before the compressor inlet is reached. In fact, it is so simple that it could be easily added as a quiz question to a first aero class course if the professor explained the supersonic diffusion (inlet) process. Given that the supersonic diffusion or inlet process slows the freestream flow before combustion from freestream velocity to about M .2 or so, one can use the stagnation temperature equation to estimate the physical effects of this process! So all of you, go lookup this equation. An additional benefit of this equation is that one can see the effect of cooler ambient temperatures at different altitudes on ultimate Mach No! Use: T0 of 700 degrees K (CIT max, per SR Dash-1 and Bill Brown's Lockheed Horizon's piece. T of 219 degrees K (ambient temp at roughly 85,000 ft) Lambda of 1.4 (Ratio of specific heats) Plug them into the stagnation temperature formula, and solve for Mach No. The answer I get is: Mach 3.32 !! Pretty darn close!! In fact, in the Lockheed Horizons piece by Bill Brown, he mentions 100,000 ft. I recalculated using 232 degrees K for ambient temperature at 100,000 ft. The answer comes out to Mach 3.2, with a CIT of 700 degrees K at 100,000 ft. Ah, the benefit of cooler temperatures! >>>Blackbird was flying right on the hairy edge as it was. The >>>limiting factor that I recall was the design of the canopy. >>>Apparently it was close to self destruction at the low to >>>mid- Mach 3 range. You may be thinking of the XF8U-3 here. A quite capable Mach 2.8 airplane that achieved its speed with a FIXED COMPRESSION inlet, unlike the SR's inlet which was VARIABLE. And it predated the A-12 by around 3-4 years I think. There's interesting food for thought when one compares the two inlets on those two airplanes. Larry > >-----Original Message----- >From: David Allison [mailto:allison@habu.org] >Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 6:45 AM >To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com >Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight > > >Hello, > >John Stone (www.blackbirds.net) covers this topic here: > > http://www.blackbirds.net/bbirdm&f.html > >The airplane itself has enough thrust to achieve whatever speed >it would take to destroy itself. Most of the pilots I've talked >to say that the airframe cruises at Mach 3 in minimum after- >burner; it takes full afterburner to accellerate to that speed, >but very little to maintain it. Thrust is not the limiting >speed factor, temperature is. > >The maximum operating temperature is 427 deg. C at the compressor >inlet (CIT), about 800 deg. F. Some of this 800 degree air is >bypassed thru the engine to cool the rear part of the engine >(believe it or not, blowing 800 degree air on something that's >1200 degrees will cool it down). If the air in the inlet gets >hotter than that, it no longer has the ability to cool the >rest of the engine, and temps begin to rise beyond control >unless you slow back down. > >Jack Layton said once that they took a YF-12 to Mach 3.6 for >exactly 2 minutes, and very bad things started happening very >quickly. When they landed they looked the airframe over and >found they had melted most of the insulation off the wiring >on the engines. As Ray Scalise would say, "That was bad." > > - 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 > >On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Joe Donoghue wrote: > >> At 07:24 AM 3/6/01 -0600, Al Dolney wrote: >> >I seem to recall in Jim Goodall's book that this issue was discussed with >> >Lockheed/Kelly Johnson back in the 60's. The consensus was that the current >> >Blackbird was flying right on the hairy edge as it was. The limiting factor >> >that I recall was the design of the canopy. Apparently it was close to self >> >destruction at the low to mid- Mach 3 range. >> >> >> There is also the issue of swallowing the shock. I believe that the shock >> wave from the nose would impinge on the inlets if the aircraft got much >> faster than M 3.5 or so. (This from memory of this discussion in rec. >> aviation.mil.) >> >> >> Joe Donoghue >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 2001 09:19:14 -0800 From: gregd@habu2.net Subject: Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition On Tue, 06 March 2001, Andreas Parsch wrote: > Anyway, I got the book from the mail order service of Midland Counties > Publications (UK). Since they happen to be the publisher of the book, > they've probably got a head start ;-)! I just spoke with Jay Miller, he said he hasn't even received a copy yet!!!! Jay said the importer is actually Specialty Press (which I think is the same as Midland Counties but not sure). He didn't have any other info on other sources, on-line or otherwise. He did mention that the X-33 chapter alludes to the possibility that the X-33 might be cancelled in the future - the man certainly has his sources!!! Greg Fieser ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 10:47:08 -0800 From: Larry Smith Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight I'm reposting something I posted back in July of 1999 that addresses this issue. From CIT max, ie: what is given, it's quite easy to estimate the SR's top speed if you understand the physical process that is occurring before the compressor inlet is reached. In fact, it is so simple that it could be easily added as a quiz question to a first aero class course if the professor explained the supersonic diffusion (inlet) process. Given that the supersonic diffusion or inlet process slows the freestream flow before combustion from freestream velocity to about M .2 or so, one can use the stagnation temperature equation to estimate the physical effects of this process! So all of you, go lookup this equation. An additional benefit of this equation is that one can see the effect of cooler ambient temperatures at different altitudes on ultimate Mach No! Use: T0 of 700 degrees K (CIT max, per SR Dash-1 and Bill Brown's Lockheed Horizon's piece. T of 219 degrees K (ambient temp at roughly 85,000 ft) Lambda of 1.4 (Ratio of specific heats) Plug them into the stagnation temperature formula, and solve for Mach No. The answer I get is: Mach 3.32 !! Pretty darn close!! In fact, in the Lockheed Horizons piece by Bill Brown, he mentions 100,000 ft. I recalculated using 232 degrees K for ambient temperature at 100,000 ft. The answer comes out to Mach 3.2, with a CIT of 700 degrees K at 100,000 ft. Ah, the benefit of cooler temperatures! >>>Blackbird was flying right on the hairy edge as it was. The >>>limiting factor that I recall was the design of the canopy. >>>Apparently it was close to self destruction at the low to >>>mid- Mach 3 range. You may be thinking of the XF8U-3 here. A quite capable Mach 2.8 airplane that achieved its speed with a FIXED COMPRESSION inlet, unlike the SR's inlet which was VARIABLE. And it predated the A-12 by around 3-4 years I think. There's interesting food for thought when one compares the two inlets on those two airplanes. Larry > >-----Original Message----- >From: David Allison [mailto:allison@habu.org] >Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 6:45 AM >To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com >Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight > > >Hello, > >John Stone (www.blackbirds.net) covers this topic here: > > http://www.blackbirds.net/bbirdm&f.html > >The airplane itself has enough thrust to achieve whatever speed >it would take to destroy itself. Most of the pilots I've talked >to say that the airframe cruises at Mach 3 in minimum after- >burner; it takes full afterburner to accellerate to that speed, >but very little to maintain it. Thrust is not the limiting >speed factor, temperature is. > >The maximum operating temperature is 427 deg. C at the compressor >inlet (CIT), about 800 deg. F. Some of this 800 degree air is >bypassed thru the engine to cool the rear part of the engine >(believe it or not, blowing 800 degree air on something that's >1200 degrees will cool it down). If the air in the inlet gets >hotter than that, it no longer has the ability to cool the >rest of the engine, and temps begin to rise beyond control >unless you slow back down. > >Jack Layton said once that they took a YF-12 to Mach 3.6 for >exactly 2 minutes, and very bad things started happening very >quickly. When they landed they looked the airframe over and >found they had melted most of the insulation off the wiring >on the engines. As Ray Scalise would say, "That was bad." > > - 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 > >On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Joe Donoghue wrote: > >> At 07:24 AM 3/6/01 -0600, Al Dolney wrote: >> >I seem to recall in Jim Goodall's book that this issue was discussed with >> >Lockheed/Kelly Johnson back in the 60's. The consensus was that the current >> >Blackbird was flying right on the hairy edge as it was. The limiting factor >> >that I recall was the design of the canopy. Apparently it was close to self >> >destruction at the low to mid- Mach 3 range. >> >> >> There is also the issue of swallowing the shock. I believe that the shock >> wave from the nose would impinge on the inlets if the aircraft got much >> faster than M 3.5 or so. (This from memory of this discussion in rec. >> aviation.mil.) >> >> >> Joe Donoghue >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ Date: 6 Mar 2001 09:19:14 -0800 From: gregd@habu2.net Subject: Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition On Tue, 06 March 2001, Andreas Parsch wrote: > Anyway, I got the book from the mail order service of Midland Counties > Publications (UK). Since they happen to be the publisher of the book, > they've probably got a head start ;-)! I just spoke with Jay Miller, he said he hasn't even received a copy yet!!!! Jay said the importer is actually Specialty Press (which I think is the same as Midland Counties but not sure). He didn't have any other info on other sources, on-line or otherwise. He did mention that the X-33 chapter alludes to the possibility that the X-33 might be cancelled in the future - the man certainly has his sources!!! Greg Fieser ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 12:16:09 -0600 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition > I just spoke with Jay Miller, [snip] > He did mention that the X-33 chapter alludes to the possibility that the X-33 might be > cancelled in the future - the man certainly has his sources!!! The X-33 had the smell of death about it for the last couple of years at least. There was some early hope that the program wasn't so much for development and demonstration of several new technologies as for bringing them out of the black world. Alas, that seems to have been wishful thinking. For those who have access to Usenet archives, pertinent discussions were carried on in sci.space.policy. One hopes that a book is written about X-33. (This is a hint for a certain author who has delved into the F-18 E/F and A-12 stories. :) ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 08:32:32 -0800 From: Erik Hoel Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight Larry, This was always a good post - even back in 1999! I am curious if anyone has done a sensitivity analysis where you vary the CIT max in increments of 5 or 10 degrees and observe how much the Mach number varies. I am not a conspiracy theorist by any means; I am just curious how the Mach would vary if say the real CIT max was for example 720 degrees K rather than 700 degrees K. One note - I am not an engineer and have never taken an aero class (and do not have the formula in question); otherwise I would do this myself. Erik > -----Original Message----- > From: Larry Smith [mailto:larry@ichips.intel.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 10:47 AM > To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com > Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight > > > > > I'm reposting something I posted back in July of 1999 that addresses > this issue. > > From CIT max, ie: what is given, it's quite easy to estimate the SR's > top speed if you understand the physical process that is > occurring before > the compressor inlet is reached. In fact, it is so simple > that it could be > easily added as a quiz question to a first aero class course if the > professor explained the supersonic diffusion (inlet) process. > > Given that the supersonic diffusion or inlet process slows > the freestream > flow before combustion from freestream velocity to about M .2 > or so, one > can use the stagnation temperature equation to estimate the > physical effects > of this process! > > So all of you, go lookup this equation. An additional benefit > of this equation > is that one can see the effect of cooler ambient temperatures > at different > altitudes on ultimate Mach No! > > Use: > T0 of 700 degrees K (CIT max, per SR Dash-1 and Bill > Brown's Lockheed > Horizon's piece. > T of 219 degrees K (ambient temp at roughly 85,000 ft) > Lambda of 1.4 (Ratio of specific heats) > > Plug them into the stagnation temperature formula, and solve for > Mach No. > > The answer I get is: Mach 3.32 !! Pretty darn close!! > > In fact, in the Lockheed Horizons piece by Bill Brown, he > mentions 100,000 ft. > I recalculated using 232 degrees K for ambient temperature at > 100,000 ft. > The answer comes out to Mach 3.2, with a CIT of 700 degrees K > at 100,000 ft. > > Ah, the benefit of cooler temperatures! > > > >>>Blackbird was flying right on the hairy edge as it was. The > >>>limiting factor that I recall was the design of the canopy. > >>>Apparently it was close to self destruction at the low to > >>>mid- Mach 3 range. > > You may be thinking of the XF8U-3 here. A quite capable Mach > 2.8 airplane > that achieved its speed with a FIXED COMPRESSION inlet, > unlike the SR's inlet > which was VARIABLE. And it predated the A-12 by around 3-4 > years I think. > There's interesting food for thought when one compares the two inlets > on those two airplanes. > > Larry > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: David Allison [mailto:allison@habu.org] > >Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 6:45 AM > >To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com > >Subject: RE: SR-71 & Hypersonic Flight > > > > > >Hello, > > > >John Stone (www.blackbirds.net) covers this topic here: > > > > http://www.blackbirds.net/bbirdm&f.html > > > >The airplane itself has enough thrust to achieve whatever speed > >it would take to destroy itself. Most of the pilots I've talked > >to say that the airframe cruises at Mach 3 in minimum after- > >burner; it takes full afterburner to accellerate to that speed, > >but very little to maintain it. Thrust is not the limiting > >speed factor, temperature is. > > > >The maximum operating temperature is 427 deg. C at the compressor > >inlet (CIT), about 800 deg. F. Some of this 800 degree air is > >bypassed thru the engine to cool the rear part of the engine > >(believe it or not, blowing 800 degree air on something that's > >1200 degrees will cool it down). If the air in the inlet gets > >hotter than that, it no longer has the ability to cool the > >rest of the engine, and temps begin to rise beyond control > >unless you slow back down. > > > >Jack Layton said once that they took a YF-12 to Mach 3.6 for > >exactly 2 minutes, and very bad things started happening very > >quickly. When they landed they looked the airframe over and > >found they had melted most of the insulation off the wiring > >on the engines. As Ray Scalise would say, "That was bad." > > > > - 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 > > > >On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Joe Donoghue wrote: > > > >> At 07:24 AM 3/6/01 -0600, Al Dolney wrote: > >> >I seem to recall in Jim Goodall's book that this issue > was discussed with > >> >Lockheed/Kelly Johnson back in the 60's. The consensus > was that the current > >> >Blackbird was flying right on the hairy edge as it was. > The limiting factor > >> >that I recall was the design of the canopy. Apparently > it was close to self > >> >destruction at the low to mid- Mach 3 range. > >> > >> > >> There is also the issue of swallowing the shock. I believe > that the shock > >> wave from the nose would impinge on the inlets if the > aircraft got much > >> faster than M 3.5 or so. (This from memory of this > discussion in rec. > >> aviation.mil.) > >> > >> > >> Joe Donoghue > >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 12:16:09 -0600 From: "Allen Thomson" Subject: Re: "The X-Planes" - 3rd Edition > I just spoke with Jay Miller, [snip] > He did mention that the X-33 chapter alludes to the possibility that the X-33 might be > cancelled in the future - the man certainly has his sources!!! The X-33 had the smell of death about it for the last couple of years at least. There was some early hope that the program wasn't so much for development and demonstration of several new technologies as for bringing them out of the black world. Alas, that seems to have been wishful thinking. For those who have access to Usenet archives, pertinent discussions were carried on in sci.space.policy. One hopes that a book is written about X-33. (This is a hint for a certain author who has delved into the F-18 E/F and A-12 stories. :) ) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 21:50:06 -0500 From: "Martin Hurst" Subject: main_wip2 (http://www.edmgroup.net/habu_index.htm) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C0AC07.913CBFC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Anybody know about this website? http://www.edmgroup.net/habu_index.htm Its a Habu dedicated website. Has some photos of the event as well, http://www.edmgroup.net/photos.html Kind of looks like some of the people are get'n older now. It would have been nice to have some captions under each photo, with names and memories, etc., for the rest of us who were not there and who don't know perhaps a lot of the attendees by name and face. Take a look at the list of some of the attendees, for the "HABU 2000" http://www.edmgroup.net/attendees.html Tom Alison, tom.alison@nasm.si.edu Reg Blackwell, reg@blackwellins.com Pat Bledsoe, ahbledsoe1@cs.com Larry Boggess, larryjan@worldnet.att.net Blair Bozek, blairb@ptw.com Jerry Crew, gacrew@netins.net Nevin Cunninngham, HABUTEN@aol.com Charlie Daubs, charlie67habu@aol.com David Dempster, eagle1@nwlink.com Dave Fruehauf, hotsauce@edge.net Rich Graham, Habu05@aol.com Bill Groninger, bgroninger@aol.com Pat Halloran, PatHABU@aol.com Mac Hornbaker, dhornbaker@autometric.com Mort Jarvis, mortjarvis@netscape.net Bruce Liebman, No E-mail Phil Loignon, PGLoignon@uspa-ira.com Brian McCallum, No E-mail John Murphy, itemprice@aol.com Doug Nelson, dnelson@page.az.net Ed Payne, payneranch@aol.com Al Pennington, HABU3PLUS@cs.com Bob Powell, mfpowell@syix.com Gray Sowers No E-mail Dennis Sullivan, srsllvn2@cs.com Jim Sullivan, sullivan@trilobyte.net Jack Veth, JJV@ca.speiserkrause.com Dewain Vick, dewainvick@cs.com Don Walbrecht, dwalbr8331@aol.com - ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C0AC07.913CBFC0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="main_wip2.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="main_wip2.url" [InternetShortcut] URL=http://www.edmgroup.net/habu_index.htm Modified=409DADB82FACC001DE - ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C0AC07.913CBFC0-- ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V10 #6 ******************************** 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