HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: colombo@bronco.fnal.gov (Rick Colombo - Fermilab)
Subject: Re: SR-71 top speed estimates
Organization: Fermilab Computing Division
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 00:45:58 GMT


From colombo@bronco.fnal.gov (Rick Colombo - Fermilab)


In article <1992Apr10.014334.10616@cbnews.cb.att.com>, kdrolt@athena.mit.edu (Kenneth D Rolt) writes:
> 
> From kdrolt@athena.mit.edu (Kenneth D Rolt)
> 
> have an estimate.  Also, NASA now has at least two SR-71 which will probably
> be painted NASA white, thus making the plane the Whitebird.
> 
> ken rolt	grad student / mit ocean engineering


I suppose everybody already knows this, but the Blackbird isn't painted black,
it's indigo blue, and my book shows a top speed of 3100 mph, but who knows.

 ___________________________________________________________________________
 *****  *   *  From the e-net desk of: Rick Colombo CD/DCD/DSG    *    *
 *      **  *  Fermi Nat'l Acc'l Lab   708-840-8225 Fermilab     * *   *
 ***    * * *  P.O. Box 500   MS 369   Feynman Computer Center  *****  *
 *      *  **  Batavia, Ill. USA 60510 Colombo@fnal.fnal.gov    *   *  *****
 *  Sure to get `Flamed' if I didn't cross all my i's and dot all my t's ;-)

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: yuqian@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman)
Subject: second attack
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 23:15:24 GMT


From yuqian@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman)

RECENTLY QUITE A FEW POSTINGS WERE DEALING WITH ICBMs.

My questions is if some country (say Russia) launch a first attack on US,
what's to be done on the US side, since most of the missles are targeted at
missle silos in Russia, so how fast can you change the target to something
other than empty silos in this senerio, and launch them before the Russian
missles land on top of US silos.

SF
bvc

-- 
******************************************************************************
* #$!#$^%!^&%#%$^@#^#!$%%$#%$!^$&@*^#(&$()%&*%%&$^$#@$@#$#@^&$&^$&$^^%$#$%%# *
*----------------------------------------------------------------------------*
*                yuqian.bvc.edu		    the Suicidal Freshman            *
******************************************************************************

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Allan Bourdius <ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: M-60 gunners
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:26:33 GMT


From Allan Bourdius <ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu>

A USMC M60E3 machine gun team consists of two people:  the gunner and
his assistant.

In addition to the gun itself, the gunner carries the following (normally):
Flak Jacket
Kevlar Helmet
782 Gear
2 Canteens
M9 Pistol
Pistol magazine pouch
K-Bar Knife
Gas Mask
First Aid Kit
Tool Kit for the M60E3

The Assistant Carries the following:
M16A2 Service Rifle
Kevlar Helmet
Flak jacket
2 M16 Magazine pouches
Bayonet knife
Gas Mask
2 Canteens
First Aid Kit
Spare Barrel Bag
1 or 2 replacement barrels
Asbestos glove (for changing barrels)

Ammunition loads vary.  The current 7.62mm round comes in 200 round
belts.  Since Machine Gun Teams are attached to an infantry platoon
(normally), some of the members of the specific squad or section to
which the MG is assigned will also hump the ammo for the '60.

If I remember correctly, barrels are supposed to be changed every 1200
rounds or after 5-10 minutes of firing at the "normal" rate.  As soon as
I dig out my BST manual, I'll post what that says about the gun.

Allan
-------------------------------------
Allan Bourdius [(|)K(-)/USMCR]
ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu
"Give, expecting nothing thereof."
All opinions are those of the author.

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: dfc@sunflare.Corp.Sun.COM (Dan Currie)
Subject: Re: Su-29?
Organization: Sun Microsystems -- Menlo Park, CA
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:45:43 GMT


From dfc@sunflare.Corp.Sun.COM (Dan Currie)

In article 24125@cbnews.cb.att.com, Stainless Steel Rat writes:
>
>(Note: the following information is from the March 1991 Popular Mechanics,
>and may be somewhat dated by now).
>
>The Su-27 ``Flanker'' is most similar to the USAF's F-14 and F-15,

The USAF doesn't fly the F-14, the USN does. I'm sure the Pop. Mech. meant
well though.

>Its two Lyulka engines
>generate 55,000 pounds of thrust, giving the Su-27 a top speed of 1550 mph,
>and a short runway takeoff performance of 1100 feet at 135 knots (the F-14
>and F-15 need around 2000 feet).

2000 feet! I thought the F-15 needed about 4000 feet. I don't think any
USAF plane can take off in less than 3000, except for maybe the C-130.

---
	Dan
From: yarvin-norman@CS.YALE.EDU (Norman Yarvin)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Mutant Crowbars From Space
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:35:58 GMT
Organization: Yale Computer Science Department


From yarvin-norman@CS.YALE.EDU (Norman Yarvin)

dasher!patter@uunet.UU.NET (24224-guthrie) writes:

>>	Could someone please explain to me how this is possible?  Am I to
>>understand that the Thor (aka Crowbar) weapons system has an impact
>>explosion equivalent to 16 tons of TNT!?
>
>That is correct. That statement is based on the assumption that these
>"crowbars" will be traveling fast enough to vaporize on impact with
>little penetration.

Traveling fast doesn't necessarily mean vaporization.  Sure, the crowbar
has enough energy to vaporize.  But when it strikes, the energy will be
converted into one of

	- kinetic energy in whatever it hits.

	- elastic bending in whatever it hits.  This is potential energy
	like the energy stored in a spring.  Eventually when the thing
	springs back it will be converted into heat.

	- noise -- sound wave or shock wave energy propagating away.

	- inelastic bending in itself, and in whatever it hits.  i.e.
	internal energy, i.e. heat.

The last of these is the only one that would cause vaporization.  My guess is
that the first and third effects would predominate: you'd get a big hole in
whatever it hit, and shrapnel around it; also a shock wave, though not on
the scale of shock waves produced by explosives.

> Essentially you wind up with a partial conversion
>of mass to energy.

No!  This is strictly Newtonian physics.

We don't have to put these crowbars into space to get a good effect.  Kelly
Johnson proposes dropping steel bars from SR71-like aircraft in his
autobiography.  He calculates that they would hit the ground at Mach 3, and
says that guidance would be the main problem.

--
Norman Yarvin						yarvin@cs.yale.edu
From: booth@mdd.comm.mot.com (Greg Booth)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US Navy's request for Beretta M9 cancellation...
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:40:09 GMT
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC


From booth@mdd.comm.mot.com (Greg Booth)

In <1992Apr8.005538.15304@cbnews.cb.att.com> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:


>From henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)

>an attempt to use very limited combat experience to get rid of a weapon
>that is disliked for other reasons.  The whole 9mm pistol business was
>crammed down the services' throats for political reasons; there was little
>technical reason to replace the (arguably superior) .45 automatic, and

Except for the fact that US stockpiles were down to 100,000 or so
thrashed 45s. The ones on hand were seriously showing their age, as
demonstrated by lack of accuracy and reliability problems.

They had to get new sidearms, the question was new 45s, or 9mms like
everybody else in NATO.

>the specs for the 9mm competition showed clear signs of being written by
>people largely ignorant of pistol engineering and military pistol use.
>(For example, the two-column magazine adds bulk and weight -- serious
>problems in a weapon whose whole justification is easy carrying -- and

Umm, a modern double column 9mm weighs less fully loaded than an empty
1911. 18 rounds of 124 FP in a Ruger P89 weighs less than an empty
Colt 1991A1 Government "service" model.

>is hard to make reliable, while the larger number of rounds is not worth
>much in what is essentially a light-duty weapon.  Soldiers typically

Modern 9mms are as reliable as the 1911, even the Browning P35 HighPower has a
reliability history similar to the 1911. When your down to using your
pistol, there is no such thing as too much ammo.

>would much prefer a weapon that is *on hand* and *reliable*, even if it
>doesn't fire quite as many times between reloads.)


The problem is that 9mm is supersonic (i.e. loud) and thus difficult
to silence, where the 45 delivers slightly better stopping power, and
can be easily muffled because of its low sub-sonic velocity.

Navy SEALs etc, LIKE silenced weapons.

-- 
Greg Booth BSc                        | Diligentia-Vis-Celeritas
BCAA-PCDHF-BCWF-NFA-NRA-IPSC-BCFSS    |  	Incolumitas
Motorola Mobile Data Division         | 
booth@mdd.comm.mot.com CGB003 at X400MRP
From: steve@lawday.daytonoh.ncr.com (Steve Bridges)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: accidental nuclear detonation
Keywords: accident, Broken_Arrow, Nuke
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:33:45 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department


From Steve Bridges <steve@lawday.daytonoh.ncr.com>

Stuff about the Titan explosion deleted...

When I was at Vandenberg AFB, I talked to a Titan tech about the accident.
Here is how I remember it.

The incident occured at Little Rock AFB, which had a wing of Titan-II
ICBMs.

Techs were working on platform 1 inside the silo (up at the top near the
warhead).  Work platforms are lowered from the side of the silo against the
missile.

Rubber "boots" are supposed to flop over as the platform is lowered to lie
between the side of the platform and the missle.  For some reason, the boot
on this platform did not perform as it was supposed to.

The tech was using a socket wrench on somthing.  Somehow the socket came
off of the wrench, and dropped down to the bottom of the silo (around 70
feet). 

The socket then bounced off of the thrust ring, and punctured an oxidizer
and fuel line.

Since the fuels are hypergolic, they ignited on contact.

The resulting explosion destroyed the silo complex.  The blast door over
the silo was blown 300 years, and the warhead was blown 3/4 of a mile away.

2 of the 3 detenators did got off, but there was no real danger of a nuclear
explosion (something due to the warhead design).

Steve
-- 
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
Steve.Bridges@DaytonOH.NCR.COM   | Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486 (VOICEplus)
steve@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM    | AOPA #916233
                                 | PP-ASEL, AMEL (I want a P-38 type rating)
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Shahar Brovender <shahar@shum.huji.ac.il>
Subject: Re: Dirty Little Secrets (Bradley)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 00:50:01 GMT


From Shahar Brovender <shahar@shum.huji.ac.il>

In sci.military you write:
>From Don Johnson <johnson@amsaa-cleo.brl.mil>

>My previous opinions of the Merkava were not very good. But maybe they are
>just twenty years ahead of the rest of the world.
>--
>W. Donald Johnson

The Merkava is only one of a whole range of sexy "future" combat vehicles.
Old Israeli tanks are now converted into IFVs - turret assembly removed,
ammunition stowage removed and a fighting compartment created.

Here comes the cavalry :-)

Shahar

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: kdrolt@athena.mit.edu (Kenneth D Rolt)
Subject: SR-71 top speed estimates
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:43:34 GMT
Keywords: blackbird  mach 3


From kdrolt@athena.mit.edu (Kenneth D Rolt)

over a year ago, the last official USAF "public" flight of the SR-71
Blackbird was conducted.  It was a Pacific coast to Atlantic coast 
controlled dash from California to Washington DC (area).  It took about
an hour and the avg speed was around 2100 mph.  The plane also topped off
its tanks after takeoff over the Pacific and prior to the coast cross - so
they had a full tank and a literal 'flying' start :-) !!  likewise, they were
'nearly' empty when they made it to the East coast, and immediately met a
KC-135 (or equivalent), so they could land.  So the speed used to cross the
country was chosen so that they had JUST ENOUGH fuel to make the trip.  The
question is, if the trip distance was much shorter, say 200-300 miles, instead
of 2000 miles, how fast could they have gone?  And finally, what is the true
top speed of the aircraft?  I haven't checked Jane's so I don't know if they
have an estimate.  Also, NASA now has at least two SR-71 which will probably
be painted NASA white, thus making the plane the Whitebird.

ken rolt	grad student / mit ocean engineering
From: EACZ02XE%GRTHEUN1.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: RE:stoppingpower, seals guns, suppressed9mm
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:10:20 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From EACZ02XE%GRTHEUN1.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu

here is some more info on the matter

- stopping power issue.here some data i can remember:
        9mm                      .45
115grjhp - 81%      200gr jhp(cci, lawman) - 81%
115jhp+P+-89%       230gr hydra-shock      - 88%
147gr about 75%
124gr fmj - 75%     230gr fmj              - 78%
as you may see there's no great difference.
+P+ ammo that is available to the public is:
 remington 115 grain jhp  9mm
   "  "    185 gr jhp     .45
the cor-bon line of ammo (at least the add said that way)
some ammo from MAGSAFE

-here is the book that was discussed:
"HANCGUN STOPPING POWER" a definitive study.
by Evan Marshall and Edwin J Sanow (both deputy sherrifs,ballistic expert
s, and evan has too big a history to mention)

SOURCE:PALADIN   p.o.box 1307-2DCboulder , CO 80306        $40
 (this is NOT an addvertisment!!!!!!!!!!)

-silenced 9mm
the first subsonic 9mm was the OLIN-WINCHESTER 147gr jhp developed for th
e seals and still anavailable to the public (olin makes a dublicate for
the people)it is supposed to be ussed in the seals suppressed MP-5=MP-5SF

-special low penetration ammo
BLAZER , MAGSAFE theconcept is simple .a copper jacket to act as a cup,
shot , and epoxy to keep the things in one piece.
FEDERAL also offers a shot load for the308 winchaster (7.62 nato)

-SEALS arms here what i know on their guns:
 -sig p226 officialy given (they did not beretta's)
 -Gunsite Service PIstols (JEFF COOPER's PISTOL)
 - MP-5SF
 - M16's
 - AK's
 - they asked and got M-14's in the gulf

that's all folks!!!!!!! kostas papakotas the "sniper" (relay nick.ch224)
Newsgroups: sci.military
From:      "Clifford Johnson" <Cliff@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Accidental ICBM launch
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 01:03:25 GMT


From      "Clifford Johnson" <Cliff@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>

From medin@cincsac.arc.nasa.gov (Milo S. Medin)
> In any case, Jan is right, it's HIGHLY unlikely that an
> accidental launch could occur.  And the USAF has an extensive PRP
> (Pesonnel Reliability Program) to weed out possibly unstable
> personalities from any command staff.  SAC is (used to be) a very
> professional organization.

The risk of accidental ICBM launch lies *with* the launch crews's
reliability.  They are screened not only to assure they wouldn't
attempt launch by themselves (in any case they'd need a valid EAM,
unless working in conjunction with maintanance crews to bypass launch
code processing), but, more dangerously, they are screened to launch
automatically upon receipt of a valid EAM (correct launch code).  The
risk lies with the issuance of a valid launch order for no valid
reason, such as a one caused by a false warning of attack (but not
limited to that possibility -- the military have launch codes to
guard against decpaitation etc.).

In such a case, note well that launch would not be constrained to a
single missile.

To:  MILITARY@ATT.ATT.COM
From: zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Laser-guided AAM?
Date: 17 Apr 92 00:58:42 GMT
Organization: Curtin University of Technology


From zrepachol@cc.curtin.edu.au

In article <1992Mar31.043914.15593@cbnews.cb.att.com>, adrian@cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt) writes:
> Meanwhile, he fires an IR AAM and runs away.  You can either try to
> evade his missile, in which case you lose your laser lock, and he
> might miss while you definitely miss; or you can keep tracking him, and
> hope that your missile hits first (unlikely since he is moving away from
> you and your missile, while you are moving towards him and his missile).

Or he could get between you and your missile. Should give it a REAL bright
target. :-)

~Paul
From: erudnick@pica.army.mil (FSAC-SID)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US Navy's request for Beretta M9 cancellation...
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:16:16 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>


This responds to several postings; please pardon any disjointedness.

According to data published by Evan Marshall and Ed Sanow, based on 
empirical studies of police shootings, the 9mm and .45 ball rounds
have essentially identical effectiveness (63 vs 66 % one shot stops).

A feature of the high capacity 9mm pistols not present with the M1911A1
is a limited capacity for suppressive fire, something often required in
military usage yet rarely encountered in police/civilian shootings. An
acquaintance, a Huey pilot shot down in Vietnam who had to make do with
a revolver, impressed this on me very forcefully.

The 147 grain Olin Super Match JHP was developed specifically for high
accuracy in the SEALs' suppressed MP5s (MP5SD3?). Although a hollow point,
it is not intended to expand. Rather, since the base of the bullet has
more effect on accuracy than the nose, the JHP has a jacketed base, whereas
most "full metal jacket" designs have an exposed base.

FN has proposed their P90 "Personal Defense Weapon" as a replacement for 
pistols. It is essentially a full-auto-only SMG, of unusual appearance
but with excellent ergonomics, firing a new 5.7mm cartridge from a 100
round magazine. The Saudi Arabian National Guard is the first customer.
The cartridge delivers less recoil impulse than the 5,56x45mm, and relies
on immediate tumbling for lethality (having seen videos of firings into
gelatin, I can attest to that - whether this will be reflected in real
stopping power remains to be seen), the bullet being very long and only
weighing 29 grams. 

Certain SEAL units use the MP5, as mentioned. There was also a photo out
of Panama showing a Marine with the Colt (M16 lookalike) 9mm SMG.

The FBI did in fact pick the 10mm, but the "light" 10mm, which the .40
S&W duplicates in a shorter case. The search for a new round after the
Miami shootout was a result of the FBIs inability to admit that their
personnel made gross errors in tactics. After all, they are infallible :)

SEALs also use SIG-Sauer 226 9mm pistols.

Ed Rudnicki     erudnick@pica.army.mil     All disclaimers apply
"It demoralized them. Not to mention killed them."
     --- 3rd AD officer describing effects of DPICM in ODS
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: megazone@wpi.WPI.EDU (MEGAZONE 23)
Subject: Spinoffs
Organization: WPI USAF -- United Society of Animation Fans
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 03:42:10 GMT


From megazone@wpi.WPI.EDU (MEGAZONE 23)

Hello, it's me again. New term and a new class. This term I'm trying to 
do an oral report/paper on spinoff technology from government projects,
especially aerospace projects. Things such as laminar flow research, prop
fans, new materials, high performance engines, even lightning strike research
wold be great.

I have some data already, but I am trying not to overlook anything. So, if
you now of any materials or technology that was developed in a government
project that later became useful to the civilian market, please send me some
pointers so I can narrow my research down a bit. And please email replies, for
although I read sci.military, I may not see the replies soon enough. (The oral
report is Thursday, the paper do a week later.)

And thanks to all who responded to my posts on the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion
program.

Thanks and I hope to hear from you.

###############################################################################
# I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity.  Use your mind, think! #
#Email megazone@wpi.wpi.edu  Moderator, WPI anime FTP site 130.215.24.1 /anime#
###############################################################################
From: gallaghe@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Michael Gallagher)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Mini-Gun question
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:50:36 GMT
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD


From gallaghe@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Michael Gallagher)


In sci.military, sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes:
>
>I went to the machine gun shoot in Louisville KY. last year, and they
>were selling time on a GE 7.62mm minigun (100 rnds, $75).

    Since this gun shoots 6000 rounds a minute and you get 100 rounds,
this equates to $75 for 1 second of fun.  Pretty darn expensive.

>
>I was wondering what you'd use this for. Too small to put in an
>airplane. Mount it in a helicopter? APC?
>

The weapon in discussion here is, if I remember right, the General
Electric GAU-2.  It is a six-barrel, electric drive gatling gun that
was used on helicopters in Vietnam for supressive fire.
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: <PAISLEY@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject: Re: raised section on 637-class sub
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 04:01:45 GMT


From <PAISLEY@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU>

In article <1992Apr10.014646.10988@cbnews.cb.att.com>, kdrolt@athena.mit.edu
(Kenneth D Rolt) says:
>
>From kdrolt@athena.mit.edu (Kenneth D Rolt)
>
>in a previous posting, jan wolitzky directed us to the April 92 issue of
>the Procedings of the Naval Institute, p. 73, for a photo of a Sturgeon class
>(637) sub, the USS Parche.  the sub had two odd protrusions, one fore and one
>aft of the sail.  i'll offer my guess as to what they are:
>
>the foremost rasied section resembles the hydro fairing which covers the
>exposed portion of a missile tube that doesn't quite fit into a hull.
Looks can be deceiving....

>since
>the SSN 683 Parche is a late-model 637, but not a newer 688, it might have
>been considered worthy of some substantial alterations.... to see how a
>vertical missile launcher would work in an SSN.
Yes, it is *possible* but not very likely,  As far as I know, SSN VLS was not
developed until SSN-718 (or -719), and were not standardized until SSN-720 (or
-721) in the mid-80s.  It is likely that no one even really thought about it
until we had cruise missiles in large numbers.


> i think i read somewhere
>(unclassified.. Jane's ???) that some of the newer 688s have such a system,
>though presumeably more refined, and blended into the hull rather than
>patched in as i'm guessing for the Parche photo.
Yeah, VLS tomahawk is now standard-issue for all 688-class boats, and is
located in the forward ballast tanks.

>the photo isn't detailed enough (or my eyes are good enough)
>to observe doors on top of the section.
Well, don't worry about your eyes, when I saw Parche, I couldn't see any
doors either (when I saw her tied up on the same pier as my boat in San
Diego last summer), although it is possible that there were, because I
wasn't inspecting her, and didn't think that this opportunity was that
big a deal.
The sailors I talked to said that even some of the crew of Parche didn't
know what that thing was.  It was a special modification for Special
operations, but there is no word as to just what it is.
My conclusion is that it is probably som extra space for some really
sophisiticated electronics gear, and that the details are a secret that
is actually being kept a secret.
>
>these are my armchair guesses.  other views?
Ditto that, although I have actaully seen her, it doesn't help much.  I
know she does Spec Ops, so it is possible that they could be for almost
anything.

Gordon.
1170 to be.  26 & a wakeup!
All standard disclaimers apply.