From owner-skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Fri Nov 21 07:36:39 2003 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:31:28 -0600 From: skunk-works-digest Reply-To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com To: skunk-works-digest@netwrx1.com Subject: skunk-works-digest V12 #6 skunk-works-digest Friday, November 21 2003 Volume 12 : Number 006 Index of this digest by subject: *************************************************** Re: Russian space plane Re: Russian space plane RE: Russian space plane drawings and such RE: drawings and such Re: U-2 document on CIA website Re: U-2 document on CIA website Re: U-2 document on CIA website Re: Russian space plane Re: Russian space plane RE: Russian space plane FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Strange Noises From The Sky [Aurora] Re: A-12 (926) Crash Site Found Re: FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Strange Noises From The Sky [Aurora] Tonopah activity *************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 19:53:40 -0000 From: "David" Subject: Re: Russian space plane From: "Erik Hoel" > Did anyone notice the following in this morning's Stratfor > (www.stratfor.biz) emailing: > > "We would like to conclude with a mention of Russia's announcement about > tests of a new airspace vehicle -- known as a "space plane" -- that is based > on new design principles. The space plane has a round shape, takes off > vertically, would fly 17,000 miles per hour -- making the trip from Moscow > to New York in 50 minutes -- and could carry 1,200 passengers. Military uses > also would be possible: The craft could fly up to 65 miles high in orbit and > launch satellites from the stratosphere. Sound like a fairy tale? The same > was said of the first spacecraft 50 years ago. > > However, both the United States and Russia are working on such technology -- > and despite all of Russia's current weaknesses, we might still see a space > arms race erupt between them, involving China as well. If a space plane > indeed makes it through development -- something Russian space scientists > say would take 10 to 15 years -- this day in early November could be > remembered as the birth of a new era in space exploration." > > Has anyone seen any other announcements in this regard? > > Erik Sounds intriguing, but I'm afraid I haven't heard any more info. When it comes to space plane research, the Soviets have been conducting flight tests for some time - quite aside from the well know Buran 'shuttle.' For anyone who isn't familiar with the story, here's a useful resource - a few quotes about a small X-38-like lifting body (BOR) are cited below: http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya.htm "The BOR-4 vehicle, 1,5 tons by weight, was put into the orbit of 225 km by 65M-RB5 ballistic rocket and after doing one circle around the Earth descended along a trajectory close to the BURAN trajectory The BOR-4 flight vehicle was totally launched 5 times: one suborbital launch for the whole complex examination, and 4 orbital launches, specified as: COSMOS 1374 - June, 4, 1982 COSMOS 1445 - March, 16,1983 COSMOS 1517 - December, 27, 1983 COSMOS 1616 - December, 19,1984" Dave ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 20:12:16 -0800 From: "Mr. K. Rudolph" Subject: Re: Russian space plane Sounds like an awfully agressive design... I haven't heard anything along these lines. Possible Military usage??? Who would think that! Kurt - --- Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division Rosetta Proving Ground ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:11:55 -0800 From: "Joy Richards" Subject: RE: Russian space plane Perhaps the Chinese? They could license the design and build them indigenously - for troop carriers. Joy > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com > [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com] On Behalf Of Mr. K. Rudolph > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 8:12 PM > To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com > Subject: Re: Russian space plane > > > Sounds like an awfully agressive design... I haven't heard > anything along these lines. > > Possible Military usage??? Who would think that! > > Kurt > > --- > Ross Technologies Signals Intelligence Division > Rosetta Proving Ground ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:14:26 -0800 From: "Joy Richards" Subject: drawings and such Larry, I was wondering if you might have some kind of drawings or pictures of the Super Hustler over and above what I have. I need cross-sections - photos of a model would be a good alternative. I'm told that Jay's book has something like that - have you seen anything like that? Want to try and render it in 3D... and I'm going to probably do a few other birds, too. If you know of anything, please let me know - I could use scans or photocopies. Thanks, Joy ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 23:36:35 -0800 From: "Joy Richards" Subject: RE: drawings and such Sorry, wasn't intended for the list, and I replied to the wrong message. However, if anyone has cross-sectional 3-view drawings for the Convair Super Hustler, please do let me know. Thanks, Joy > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com > [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com] On Behalf Of Joy Richards > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:14 PM > To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com > Subject: drawings and such ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:42:28 EST From: UKdragon@aol.com Subject: Re: U-2 document on CIA website Someone called Greg wrote... > I found this history of the U-2 program on the CIA website: > > http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/U2/index.htm > > It appears to have also covered the A-12/Oxcart program but has been > heavily censured. Chris Pocock and Jay Miller are named in the > preface - hmmm. > And your point is....? I was mildly flattered that the Agency's historians should acknowledge my work, and maybe so was Jay Miller. They did not give me any special help, however. Neither did they for my second book on U-2 history, THE U-2 SPYPLANE - TOWARD THE UNKNOWN. Indeed, in my note in that book on sources and acknowledgements, I criticised the CIA for heavily censoring their own U-2 history. Still, though, the CIA chief historian gave my second book a very favorable review, which you can read at: http://www.odci.gov/csi/studies/vol46no2/index.html Chris Pocock ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 06:24:56 -0800 (PST) From: gregd@habu2.net Subject: Re: U-2 document on CIA website On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:42:28 EST, UKdragon@aol.com wrote: > > Someone called Greg wrote... > > > I found this history of the U-2 program on the CIA website: > > > > http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/U2/index.htm > > > > It appears to have also covered the A-12/Oxcart program but has been > > heavily censured. Chris Pocock and Jay Miller are named in the > > preface - hmmm. > > > > And your point is....? My point was simply that CIA acknowledged your and Jay's efforts as credible historical records in spite of their (CIA's) lack of cooperation/disclosure. It was meant as a compliment - by me and I believe by them. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 06:24:56 -0800 (PST) From: gregd@habu2.net Subject: Re: U-2 document on CIA website On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 08:42:28 EST, UKdragon@aol.com wrote: > > Someone called Greg wrote... > > > I found this history of the U-2 program on the CIA website: > > > > http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/U2/index.htm > > > > It appears to have also covered the A-12/Oxcart program but has been > > heavily censured. Chris Pocock and Jay Miller are named in the > > preface - hmmm. > > > > And your point is....? My point was simply that CIA acknowledged your and Jay's efforts as credible historical records in spite of their (CIA's) lack of cooperation/disclosure. It was meant as a compliment - by me and I believe by them. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:25:08 -0600 From: "dethfanatic" Subject: Re: Russian space plane - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Hoel" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 1:03 PM Subject: Russian space plane > Did anyone notice the following in this morning's Stratfor > (www.stratfor.biz) emailing: > > "We would like to conclude with a mention of Russia's announcement about > tests of a new airspace vehicle -- known as a "space plane" -- that is based > on new design principles. The space plane has a round shape, takes off > vertically, would fly 17,000 miles per hour -- making the trip from Moscow > to New York in 50 minutes -- and could carry 1,200 passengers. Military uses > also would be possible: The craft could fly up to 65 miles high in orbit and > launch satellites from the stratosphere. Sound like a fairy tale? The same > was said of the first spacecraft 50 years ago. > > However, both the United States and Russia are working on such technology -- > and despite all of Russia's current weaknesses, we might still see a space > arms race erupt between them, involving China as well. If a space plane > indeed makes it through development -- something Russian space scientists > say would take 10 to 15 years -- this day in early November could be > remembered as the birth of a new era in space exploration." > > Has anyone seen any other announcements in this regard? > > Erik Any idea who the prime contractor is? Tupolev and Mikoyan had aerospace plane concepts ongoing until at least the early '90's, but they were more "conventional" in appearance, not "round" like the above states. Guess this means the Tu-2000 and AJAX are now relegated to pipe-dream status... Cheers, Sean O'Connor ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:56:56 -0700 From: Brad Hitch Subject: Re: Russian space plane The Ajax was ALWAYS pipe-dream status in my opinion. Go look at how much a 10 Tesla LHe-cooled superconducting magnet with all of its support structure weighs based on past MHD experience with a reasonable plasma mass flow of 100 lbs/sec. Ridiculous. You would need something like a 1000:1 weight reduction to even begin to think this was feasible. Brad Hitch dethfanatic wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Erik Hoel" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 1:03 PM > Subject: Russian space plane > > > >>Did anyone notice the following in this morning's Stratfor >>(www.stratfor.biz) emailing: >> >>"We would like to conclude with a mention of Russia's announcement about >>tests of a new airspace vehicle -- known as a "space plane" -- that is > > based > >>on new design principles. The space plane has a round shape, takes off >>vertically, would fly 17,000 miles per hour -- making the trip from Moscow >>to New York in 50 minutes -- and could carry 1,200 passengers. Military > > uses > >>also would be possible: The craft could fly up to 65 miles high in orbit > > and > >>launch satellites from the stratosphere. Sound like a fairy tale? The same >>was said of the first spacecraft 50 years ago. >> >>However, both the United States and Russia are working on such > > technology -- > >>and despite all of Russia's current weaknesses, we might still see a space >>arms race erupt between them, involving China as well. If a space plane >>indeed makes it through development -- something Russian space scientists >>say would take 10 to 15 years -- this day in early November could be >>remembered as the birth of a new era in space exploration." >> >>Has anyone seen any other announcements in this regard? >> >>Erik > > > Any idea who the prime contractor is? Tupolev and Mikoyan had aerospace > plane concepts ongoing until at least the early '90's, but they were more > "conventional" in appearance, not "round" like the above states. Guess this > means the Tu-2000 and AJAX are now relegated to pipe-dream status... > > Cheers, > Sean O'Connor ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 13:47:02 -0800 From: "Smith, Larry O" Subject: RE: Russian space plane So not being a member of www.stratfor.com, so that I can see the original source, this may be something like an example of an announcement from the future, given that the research gets funded now, in other words. One reason for such a conclusion is that you wouldn't build a 1200 passenger version right out of the box. You'd build a smaller concept demonstrator, it's much cheaper, especially if you're strapped for cash. Not only that, but orbital velocity at 65 miles is higher than 17,000 mph. Also a 'round' shape (sphere, disk?) is unusual for a hypersonic vehicle, although there have been a fair number of disk shapes studied, including now, and of course there have certainly been sphere shaped reentry vehicles. Also the upper bounds of the stratosphere are at around 28 miles above the earths surface, not 65 miles. An altitude of 65 miles is in the thermosphere. So given the above issues, I'm skeptical. Larry - -----Original Message----- From: owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com [mailto:owner-skunk-works@netwrx1.com] On Behalf Of dethfanatic Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 10:25 AM To: skunk-works@netwrx1.com Subject: Re: Russian space plane - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Hoel" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 1:03 PM Subject: Russian space plane > Did anyone notice the following in this morning's Stratfor > (www.stratfor.biz) emailing: > > "We would like to conclude with a mention of Russia's announcement about > tests of a new airspace vehicle -- known as a "space plane" -- that is based > on new design principles. The space plane has a round shape, takes off > vertically, would fly 17,000 miles per hour -- making the trip from Moscow > to New York in 50 minutes -- and could carry 1,200 passengers. Military uses > also would be possible: The craft could fly up to 65 miles high in orbit and > launch satellites from the stratosphere. Sound like a fairy tale? The same > was said of the first spacecraft 50 years ago. > > However, both the United States and Russia are working on such technology -- > and despite all of Russia's current weaknesses, we might still see a space > arms race erupt between them, involving China as well. If a space plane > indeed makes it through development -- something Russian space scientists > say would take 10 to 15 years -- this day in early November could be > remembered as the birth of a new era in space exploration." > > Has anyone seen any other announcements in this regard? > > Erik Any idea who the prime contractor is? Tupolev and Mikoyan had aerospace plane concepts ongoing until at least the early '90's, but they were more "conventional" in appearance, not "round" like the above states. Guess this means the Tu-2000 and AJAX are now relegated to pipe-dream status... Cheers, Sean O'Connor ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:49:24 -0700 From: "Terry W. Colvin" Subject: FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Strange Noises From The Sky [Aurora] From: GT McCoy To: UFO UpDates - Toronto Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 07:58:12 -0800 Subject: Re: Strange Noises From The Sky >From: Eustaquio Andrea Patounas >To: UFO UpDates -Toronto >Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 17:01:08 -0200 >Subject: Strange Noises From The Sky >Source: St. George Daily Spectrum, UT >http://www.thespectrum.com/news/stories/20031109/topstories/613898.html >High Country Beat >By Ed Kociela >I haven't seen anything funny in the sky, but I sure have heard >some strange rumblings - and I know it's for real because my >wife has heard them and even my dogs have been startled from >their napping a couple of times over the past few weeks by >strange noises from the sky. >Not long ago, another friend told me he saw the B-2 bomber >flying over Cedar Mountain. This guy is about to become a pilot >and has a set of eyes on him that an eagle would covet, so I >don't doubt his report. >The B-2, however, doesn't sound like some of the things that >have shaken my home and ears. >Whatever it is, it's flying very high - out of my eyesight at >least - and fast. And with the sound seemingly echoing around >the valley, it's difficult to pinpoint the spot in the sky where >this aircraft is flying. >I have noticed that there have been a number of corkscrew >contrails flowing across the sky, indicating some sort of jet >propulsion. Normal jet engines do not produce that kind of >pattern, at least in my experience. Calling the U.S. Air Force >would be futile, especially since we are so close to Area 51 and >Nellis Air Force Base where the military does things we're not >supposed to know about. But if anybody else has heard or seen >something strange in the skies, let me know. I hate to sound >like Art Bell, but there is definitely something odd going on >above us. Hello, All. Well, well, sounds like "Project Aurora" got some funding again.I've seen the odd contrails,heard the Rumbling,booming (Pulse Inigniton) noises more than once over the remote west coast. Also a very fast controlled, aircraft. Two actually. About Two years ago Coos Bay, Oregon had an experience with these rumbling, booming sounds:F-15's of the Oregon Air Guard, according to the media release. Okay. Right. (Been around F-15s/F- 16's a lot - none sound like that.) I am convinced that this is a seceret aircraft. Not extraterresrial. As one friend of mine put it: 'You're up there all alone, and the space helmet is a little uncomfortable when you are grinning." - this about the A-12/SR71. GT McCoy - -- ^SOnly a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.^T Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1@msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program - ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:58:35 -0700 From: jetguy1 Subject: Re: A-12 (926) Crash Site Found Peter, Congratulations on finding 60-6926! I appreciate you sharing the find with us all. I know I talked with you through e-mail years ago about the prospects of locating this A-12. I spent some time myself in Wendover talking with locals and looking for the crash site. I met some one who was a friend of the "pickup truck driver" which picked up Ken Collins and drove him into Wendover. Not to many people still around which lived in Wendover at the time. I remember that you were able to talk with Ken himself about the incident. Just curious, was the crash site in the Utah Test & Training Range or public land? I understand that the cover story was that an F-105 had crashed. Was parts from another aircraft placed at the site to "throw off" persons who came accross the site? I look forward to hearing the story of your search. Does the X-Hunters have a web site? It would be great to see some of your finds in a museum someday. Thanks! Brent C. Xelex@aol.com wrote: >Lockheed A-12 (60-6926/Article 123) was the third built, the second to fly, >and the first to crash. It was lost on 24 May 1963 due to pitot tube icing. >Pilot Ken Collins was forced to eject in an inverted flat spin 14 miles south of >Wendover, Utah. Recovery crews hurriedly removed the wreckage within a few >days. The largest pieces, mainly from the mid fuselage and wings were cut up >with blowtorches. > >On 4 October 2003, I located the crash site in the desert 14 miles south of >Wendover. Crash debris included titanium and some composite laminates, >consistent with Blackbird-type aircraft. Part numbers and Lockheed Skunk Works >inspection stamps were consistent with A-12 parts. Exterior markings indicate that >aircraft was mostly natural metal with black chines. Full-color national >insignia (star-and-bar) was painted against light gray background, consistent >with existing photos of Article 123. Recognizable components included parts of >corrugated wing surface, vent grill fragment, cockpit items, chine assembly >fragments, and engine parts. > >Peter W. Merlin >THE X-HUNTERS >Aerospace Archeology Team ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:47:06 -0800 From: Patrick Subject: Re: FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Strange Noises From The Sky [Aurora] At 11:49 AM 11/13/2003, you wrote: >About Two years ago Coos Bay, Oregon had an experience with >these rumbling, booming sounds:F-15's of the Oregon Air Guard, >according to the media release. Okay. Right. (Been around >F-15s/F- 16's a lot - none sound like that.) U-2's fly regular training missions up to Western Oregon from Beale AFB. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:30:03 -0800 From: "Joy Richards" Subject: Tonopah activity I watch the earthquake reports... There is currently an interesting 'earthquakes' swarm near Tonapah. What makes this interesting is that there is no fault line in the area and they're at 0.0 feet (ground level). Could that indicate some serious weapons testing going on? Good grief, one was a Magnitude 3.2, even. I've highlighted the items occurring at ground level in red. Does anyone have any visibility of what military activity might be going on in the area? Joy ====================================================================== From http://www.seismo.unr.edu/Catalog/nbe.html The Nevada Broadcast of Earthquakes The Nevada Broadcast of Earthquakes is an experimental prototype earthquake warning and response system. NBE is a project of the Nevada Seismic Research Affiliates of the University of Nevada, Reno Foundation. Please call (775) 784-4975 to verify any event reported here. Disclaimers... Test out our new NBE search and interactive mapping page, and our JRTED real-time earthquake monitor for Nevada and eastern California. (Requires Java.). [ What's New | Report an Earthquake | Email webmaster | Contact Us | Statistics | Phones ] Entries shown as "Prelim" below are PRELIMINARY and have NOT BEEN HUMAN REVIEWED - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- date UTC LAT. LON. DEP Local No. hr mn sc (deg.) (deg.) km MAG. pha Comment EVID ---------- -- -- ------ -------- --------- ----- ----- -- ------- - ----- 2003/11/20 20:32:50.288 37.018 N 117.894 W 0.0 1.9 8 Prelim 21237 2003/11/20 06:27:25.862 37.527 N 118.806 W 0.0 1.3 14 Prelim 21203 2003/11/19 16:20:00.477 38.221 N 117.874 W 6.4 2.1 20 Update 21184 2003/11/19 04:15:11.224 38.227 N 117.869 W 7.0 2.1 18 Update 21167 2003/11/18 21:40:21.119 38.220 N 117.874 W 5.2 2.7 20 Update 21154 2003/11/18 21:02:32.223 37.373 N 117.114 W 8.8 2.4 32 Update 21153 2003/11/18 14:49:52.070 38.222 N 117.873 W 5.7 2.0 13 Update 21137 2003/11/18 13:18:29.975 38.225 N 117.875 W 7.7 2.9 21 Update 21133 2003/11/18 07:53:53.373 38.223 N 117.873 W 5.9 3.0 28 Update 21114 2003/11/18 07:41:37.611 38.228 N 117.868 W 5.7 2.1 12 Update 21112 2003/11/18 07:21:34.625 38.224 N 117.871 W 5.1 2.2 15 Update 21111 2003/11/18 07:13:14.580 38.224 N 117.872 W 5.6 2.1 18 Update 21109 2003/11/18 06:59:34.867 38.222 N 117.874 W 6.3 3.8 27 Update 21107 2003/11/18 00:08:28.954 39.444 N 119.624 W 0.0 1.8 15 Prelim 21094 2003/11/17 23:55:00.210 37.444 N 118.694 W 3.5 2.0 31 Update 21093 2003/11/17 21:39:55.633 39.535 N 119.624 W 15.0 1.2 11 Prelim 21089 2003/11/17 21:33:54.041 38.235 N 117.849 W 1.6 2.1 15 Update 21088 2003/11/17 10:58:38.083 38.564 N 117.399 W 15.0 1.6 9 Prelim 21065 2003/11/17 07:08:17.369 38.432 N 117.752 W 15.0 1.8 8 Prelim 21026 2003/11/16 19:52:58.159 39.420 N 119.911 W 6.8 2.6 27 Update 20989 2003/11/16 19:00:11.456 38.160 N 117.990 W 10.0 1.7 24 Prelim 20987 2003/11/16 16:29:15.347 38.251 N 117.872 W 0.0 1.5 20 Prelim 20984 2003/11/16 16:15:22.074 38.206 N 117.931 W 0.0 1.2 12 Prelim 20982 2003/11/16 14:13:00.797 38.160 N 117.990 W 0.0 1.4 8 Prelim 20977 2003/11/16 11:55:27.313 38.204 N 117.815 W 0.0 2.5 50 Prelim 20967 2003/11/16 10:28:12.441 38.205 N 117.873 W 0.0 1.6 25 Prelim 20965 2003/11/16 09:19:21.745 37.520 N 118.833 W 9.8 1.4 7 Update 20964 2003/11/16 08:53:09.627 38.158 N 117.757 W 5.0 2.4 21 Prelim 20963 2003/11/16 08:31:16.446 38.205 N 117.873 W 0.0 1.7 23 Prelim 20959 2003/11/16 08:12:34.109 38.205 N 117.873 W 0.0 1.8 28 Prelim 20958 2003/11/16 07:15:02.920 38.226 N 117.863 W 6.0 2.3 15 Update 20955 2003/11/16 06:08:29.076 38.229 N 117.866 W 10.7 3.5 32 Update 20948 2003/11/16 05:50:33.138 38.220 N 117.881 W 0.0 2.0 13 Update 20945 2003/11/16 05:44:25.739 38.234 N 117.858 W 8.0 2.3 14 Update 20944 2003/11/16 04:27:18.114 38.295 N 117.813 W 0.0 1.0 8 Prelim 20937 2003/11/16 03:59:14.378 38.232 N 117.858 W 5.0 1.8 9 Update 20933 2003/11/16 02:46:05.436 38.080 N 118.180 W 10.7 1.9 24 Update 20928 2003/11/16 02:17:00.711 38.220 N 117.865 W 5.3 2.5 22 Update 20926 2003/11/16 01:21:33.515 38.226 N 117.863 W 0.0 1.9 15 Update 20924 2003/11/16 00:54:45.175 38.223 N 117.879 W 0.0 1.9 16 Update 20922 2003/11/16 00:13:55.870 38.295 N 117.813 W 0.0 1.5 19 Prelim 20917 2003/11/15 23:58:38.505 38.219 N 117.871 W 6.8 2.0 11 Update 20913 2003/11/15 23:53:09.947 38.228 N 117.889 W 0.0 1.8 18 Update 20911 2003/11/15 23:14:47.546 38.223 N 117.887 W 0.0 2.1 27 Update 20907 2003/11/15 22:39:40.548 38.251 N 117.872 W 0.0 1.3 17 Prelim 20905 2003/11/15 22:27:11.732 38.231 N 117.862 W 11.4 2.4 11 Update 20902 2003/11/15 21:36:42.461 38.205 N 117.873 W 0.0 2.1 45 Prelim 20896 2003/11/15 21:34:01.232 38.219 N 117.893 W 0.0 1.8 13 Update 20894 2003/11/15 21:19:36.660 38.219 N 117.870 W 6.4 4.5 27 Update 20893 2003/11/15 21:05:06.927 38.241 N 117.866 W 0.0 1.7 10 Update 20929 2003/11/15 21:02:45.156 38.251 N 117.872 W 0.0 1.1 9 Prelim 20890 2003/11/15 20:55:54.786 38.205 N 117.873 W 0.0 2.2 49 Prelim 20888 2003/11/15 20:42:18.818 38.226 N 117.867 W 7.4 3.4 28 Update 20886 2003/11/15 20:37:02.909 37.435 N 118.634 W 15.0 1.0 17 Prelim 20884 2003/11/15 20:11:59.231 38.222 N 117.873 W 8.8 4.5 38 Update 20881 2003/11/15 11:01:12.832 38.719 N 119.591 W 7.4 2.1 19 Update 20859 2003/11/14 19:33:11.309 37.107 N 115.109 W 18.2 1.9 5 Update 20837 2003/11/14 17:38:19.464 37.105 N 115.121 W 12.3 1.9 7 Update 20832 2003/11/14 16:55:35.736 38.166 N 118.308 W 12.0 1.7 19 Update 20831 2003/11/14 00:09:42.879 39.203 N 117.383 W 0.0 2.1 8 Prelim 20813 ? 2003/11/13 18:47:29.764 36.923 N 117.658 W 0.0 2.4 16 Update 20803 2003/11/13 14:31:21.851 37.435 N 118.806 W 5.0 1.6 13 Prelim 20791 2003/11/13 06:00:30.491 38.490 N 119.384 W 0.0 1.7 12 Update 20775 2003/11/13 05:57:23.485 37.407 N 118.603 W 8.4 1.4 24 Update 20774 2003/11/13 03:14:53.024 37.479 N 118.625 W 11.9 2.1 33 Update 20763 2003/11/12 12:35:46.737 39.188 N 118.206 W 3.9 2.0 20 Update 20741 2003/11/12 03:09:53.387 37.481 N 118.864 W 0.0 1.4 30 Prelim 20732 2003/11/11 23:19:55.170 35.909 N 115.262 W 0.0 1.9 11 Prelim 20723 2003/11/11 21:48:37.401 37.407 N 118.604 W 9.1 2.2 33 Update 20719 2003/11/11 19:11:42.296 37.417 N 117.082 W 0.0 1.4 16 Prelim 20716 2003/11/11 19:11:42.207 37.424 N 117.092 W 5.9 1.9 24 Update 20733 2003/11/11 10:33:50.253 37.307 N 118.132 W 7.3 1.7 21 Update 20703 2003/11/11 10:23:26.117 37.303 N 118.133 W 7.9 2.9 34 Update 20731 2003/11/11 10:22:38.981 37.307 N 118.129 W 8.4 2.4 31 Update 20701 2003/11/11 09:01:56.175 37.310 N 118.133 W 7.9 1.8 24 Update 20697 2003/11/11 02:07:52.869 37.343 N 118.635 W 0.0 3.2 58 Prelim 20693 2003/11/10 20:58:46.299 37.527 N 118.806 W 15.0 1.2 9 Prelim 20689 2003/11/10 15:20:21.997 37.412 N 117.096 W 5.9 1.8 29 Update 20684 2003/11/10 05:22:27.789 37.481 N 118.806 W 0.0 1.1 9 Prelim 20669 2003/11/09 13:34:30.653 37.399 N 117.114 W 11.5 2.2 33 Update 20647 2003/11/09 11:04:22.197 38.718 N 119.698 W 11.0 2.3 26 Update 20645 2003/11/09 05:02:19.005 37.664 N 118.863 W 5.0 1.3 22 Prelim 20638 2003/11/09 03:51:11.753 37.664 N 118.863 W 5.0 1.3 18 Prelim 20635 2003/11/09 02:43:04.247 37.527 N 118.806 W 5.0 1.1 10 Prelim 20633 2003/11/09 02:40:15.063 36.918 N 117.655 W 7.2 2.1 14 Update 20631 2003/11/08 22:26:22.446 37.618 N 118.863 W 10.0 1.4 23 Prelim 20621 2003/11/08 19:41:21.842 38.035 N 118.568 W 7.7 1.7 29 Update 20620 2003/11/08 16:47:51.504 36.921 N 117.657 W 8.0 2.4 15 Update 20618 2003/11/07 00:16:21.797 39.490 N 119.624 W 0.0 1.6 23 Prelim 20581 2003/11/06 22:42:06.661 39.490 N 119.683 W 0.0 1.5 15 Prelim 20579 2003/11/06 06:17:45.105 37.442 N 118.692 W 2.3 1.9 25 Update 20566 2003/11/05 22:25:24.366 37.480 N 118.691 W 0.0 1.7 21 Prelim 20555 2003/11/05 12:50:42.876 37.527 N 118.806 W 0.0 1.2 9 Prelim 20538 2003/11/05 09:48:01.720 38.710 N 119.462 W 9.0 1.7 19 Update 20533 2003/11/03 23:04:19.952 39.596 N 120.667 W 9.4 1.8 13 Update 20496 2003/11/03 11:10:07.463 36.719 N 116.305 W 9.8 1.5 45 Update 20482 2003/11/02 23:38:43.508 38.476 N 118.402 W 10.0 2.5 24 Update 20473 2003/11/02 02:22:07.293 38.335 N 119.302 W 4.8 1.7 14 Update 20442 2003/11/02 00:12:24.351 37.527 N 118.806 W 5.0 1.0 14 Prelim 20439 2003/11/01 08:53:30.430 40.399 N 119.730 W 0.0 2.2 11 Update 20418 Fri Nov 21 01:16:01 PST 2003 ---------- -- -- ------ -------- --------- ----- ----- -- ------- - ----- date UTC LAT. LON. DEP Local No. hr mn sc (deg.) (deg.) km MAG. pha Comment EVID Time of last update above. (List is updated at regular intervals but may or may not contain new data) ############################################################################ # - -> "Prelim": Entries are PRELIMINARY and have NOT BEEN HUMAN REVIEWED <- Only events with Local Mag. >= 1.0 and No. pha >= 10 are posted. - -> "Update": Entries have BEEN HUMAN REVIEWED <- All such events are posted, regardless of magnitude or # phases. ############################################################################ # Please call (775) 784-4975 to verify any Prelim event reported here. Prelim entries may contain ERRORS and may be UPDATED or DELETED at any time. Prelim entries have up to a 50% chance of not representing any actual earthquake. Prelim entries with origin times within 30 seconds may represent a single event. "No. pha" means the number of arrival times used in locating the event and is an indicator of the quality of the location. This is a list of the previous 100 automated (or updated) locations recorded by the Nevada Seismological Laboratory. All times are Greenwich Mean Time. Subtract 8 hours for Pacific Standard time, and 7 hours for Pacific Daylight time. Depths are in kilometers. Magnitudes are estimated as "local magnitudes" from the horizontal components of digital stations. The Nevada Seismological Lab is a member of the Council of the National Seismic System. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- The probable earthquakes listed appear on this page (near the top) within a few minutes of their occurrence. The Nevada Seismological Laboratory hopes to continually increase the reliability of this system. Rapid earthquake locations are also available to the public on display terminals located at the Seismological Lab next to our earthquake helicorder display. Large earthquakes may also appear within a few minutes on the NSL Helicorder Camera. Disclaimer: The information included in these documents is intended to improve earthquake preparedness; however, it does not guarantee the safety of an individual structure or facility. The State of Nevada does not assume liability for any injury, death, or property damage that occurs in connection with an earthquake. Locations and magnitudes of seismic events within approximately 50 km of Yucca Mountain are preliminary information only. Please contact the Yucca Mountain Project Technical Library (URL = http://www.ymp.gov/reference) to obtain quality-assured technical data relating to seismic activity or other natural phenomena near Yucca Mountain. More disclaimers... The NBE may show events occurring outside our monitoring network, giving them erroneous locations near the network's borders. Always check the analyst-reviewed locations on our Recent Earthquakes page. The NBE is a tool for rapid earthquake notification and response, and does not produce an accurate record of earthquake locations. Click on the image for a larger map in GIF format, or here for a map in PostScript format showing the most recent 100 events (about 60 kbytes). The latest of the last 100 events is also labeled boldly. The PostScript plot is most usefully sent to your printer to output a high-resolution map. You can view a PostScript plot on your screen using a PostScript display program such as GhostScriptor Adobe Acrobat Distiller and Reader. Unfortunately, this PostScript file is notEPS and will not directly import to popular page-layout or graphics applications. ------------------------------ End of skunk-works-digest V12 #6 ******************************** To subscribe to skunk-works-digest, send the command: subscribe skunk-works-digest 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 skunk-works-digest local-skunk-works@your.domain.net To unsubscribe, send mail to the same address, with the command: unsubscribe skunk-works-digest 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