HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: 92bbb@williams.edu (Bradford Behr)
Subject: Re: Advanced Tactical Fighter
Keywords: ATF advanced YF-22 YF-23 grey ghost lightning fighter
Organization: Williams College, Williamstown, MA
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 18:10:24 GMT

In article <1ehjb8INNhd6@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> dwhall@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
                                                 (Dean W Hall) writes:
>  The AirForce chose the YF-22 (a much uglier plane) and then. . .
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I haven't heard much lately, just budget problems.  Does anyone know if the
>f-22 is scheduled for production yet?  Also, any GIF files?

I agree wholeheartedly. I read somewhere (AWST, perhaps) a description
of the YF-22 as looking like "an F-14 with water retention problems."

Added to the budget problems was an unscheduled meeting between one of
the YF-22 aircraft and the ground. Pilot-induced-oscillations are
currently blamed. Don't know much more than that, but I would guess
that this might be holding up the production process.

Brad



Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: wb9omc@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick)
Subject: Re: SR-71 / MIG-25
Keywords: SR-71 bomber (was SR-71/MiG-25)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:51:11 GMT

dlevy@viper.engin.umich.edu (David W Levy) writes:


>I thought the original A-12 was designed to carry a nuclear warhead
>internally.  In the SR-71 design, the bombay was converted to carry
>recon equipment.

	The A12 was essentially designed and built for the CIA as
a follow-on to the U2 that would be more likely to survive overflights of 
the USSR.  Those overflights were primarily for the collection of
intelligence information, mostly photos (apparently).  I have never seen
any evidence that either the A12 or the SR71 would carry any weapons.

	The YF12A was an off-shoot of the A12 and was designed as a
stand-off high-speed interceptor to shoot down Soviet bombers.

Duane

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: steve@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (Steve Bridges)
Subject: Re: Name of B-52
Organization: NCR Corporation -- Law Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:05:58 GMT

chena@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Cheng) writes:

>Can anyone name any famous B-52 bomber?

Sure -- Stratofortress

And now for the trivia minded -- try to supply the name of the following
Boeing military airplanes -- they are pretty easy, some are a bit harder.

	B-17
	B-29
	B-47
	KC-135
	E-3A
-- 
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
steve@law7.DaytonOH.NCR.COM   ___| Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486 (VOICEplus)
Sci.military moderator        | "The airplane does not recognize attitude,
providing a maneuver is conducted at one G" -- A.M. "Tex" Johnston
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: mckinney@athena.mit.edu (Ethan L Mckinney)
Subject: Re: SR-71 / MIG-25
Keywords: SR-71 bomber (was SR-71/MiG-25)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:31:36 GMT

My original source is, I believe, a late 60's National Geographic on the Air
Force, although I could be mistaken.  I am quite sure the Air Force deployed
stream-lined bomb-pods for the SR-71 with 1MT hydrogen warheads.  I have seen
this in more than one pace.  Will check around if I get the chance.
From: davehyde@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: SR-71 / MIG-25
Date: 16 Nov 1992 08:42:47 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


In <lg5adgINNrsr@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff
Miller) writes:

>In _MiG Pilot_, it was mentioned that according to Belenko, it was
>a crime to activate the radar on the ground because of its power,
>and that it was capable of killing rabbits at some distance, I think
>100 meters.

and in <greg.721698099@saltydog> "Gregory R. Travis" <greg@saltydog.dpsi.com>
writes:

>Modern weather radars of ~8kW or so have a "danger" area of only about 4ft in
>front of the radome and do as good a job, or better, as their 1960s brothers.

At least the military airplanes have a weight-on-wheels interconnect to
prevent the radar from
transmitting on the ground.  These can be overridden for ground tests.  Point
that thing out over
the water!  Another problem with powerful radars comes during formation and
inflight refueling.
No WOW switch here!

Dave Hyde
davehyde@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
So I said to the Navy, "These are my opinions, go and get your own."
From: hhtra@usho72.hou281.chevron.com (T.M.Haddock)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: RE: SR-71 / MIG-25
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:27:29 GMT
Organization: Chevron

In article <429.417.uupcb@the-matrix.com>, rocky.rawlins@the-matrix.com (Rocky Rawlins) writes:
|> -> The MiG is made in a very crude fashion (apparently they still are,
|> -> looking at the MiG-29 photos), no fairings, exposed hinges, spot
|> -> welded...  Nothing compared to the way an SR or an F-15 is made.
|> 
|> But then that was always part of the Soviet philosophy. A LOT of
|> relatively cheap but adequate aircraft rather than a FEW high
|> performance, high quality models. While the Gulf war showed that one on
|> one or even a couple on one they were inferior to Western aircraft,
|> we've never encountered a 10-1 all out head to head match where it's
|> possible that theory could have been proved to be viable.
|>                                                 Rocky
|>                                                                                                                 

 If you're talking about 10 on 1 odds, isn't it true that at the various
 air combat training schools for the Air Force and Navy, that when the
 odds reach 3-to-1 and higher, no aircraft stands a chance?

 During Red Flag or Gunsmoke exercises, I remember something about the
 F-15 or F-16 besting F-5s in odds of 2-to-1 or 3-to-1 but against greater
 odds, they were always eventually "shot down".  I remember some Aggressor
 pilot taking about how 5 of them bounced 2 F-15s and jokingly said "they
 didn't stand a chance."
 
 TRAVIS
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Al Bowers)
Subject: Re: Height records and Yeager (Was: SR-71 / MIG-25)
Organization: NASA Dryden, Edwards, Cal.
	<1992Nov11.150014.695@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
	<STEINARB.92Nov11182133@hagtorn.idt.unit.no>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 20:11:21 GMT

In article <STEINARB.92Nov11182133@hagtorn.idt.unit.no> steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang) writes:

>>>>>> dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams) writes:

>>> I have heard the rate of climb world record still belongs to 
>>> MIG-25, I am not sure about the speed record. May be someone
>>> could help...

>> I believe the only one it still holds is the absolute height record of 
>> 123,524 ft., which was set on August 31, 1977.  Rocket planes like the
>> X-15 have certainly surpassed that however, and certain newer vehicles
>> with "exotic propulsion" methods may have done the same...

>What about that Starfighter version mentioned near the ending of "The
>Right Stuff", the one Yeager nearly was killed in. Did that plane
>really exist? The book is supposedly a documentary.

>It was an F-104 fitted with an auxillary rocket engine and maneuvering
>jets a la X-15. I don't remember the exact designation, NF-104
>something, I think...

The E-266 (an early developmental version and/or modified MiG-31
Foxbat) still holds the time-to-climb record for 25,000, 30,000 and
35,000 meters (those are 82,021, 98,425, and 114,829 feet), plus the
absolute height record of 123,524 feet.  The F-15 Streak Eagle (a
modified variant of the F-15 Eagle) still owns all time-to-climb
records below that altitude.  The old records before that were held by
miG-25s, the F-4, the E-166 (a modified MiG-21) and the NF-104.  The
absolute altitude record of the NF-104 was 118,500 feet.  Only three
NF-104s were built, two were crashed and the remaining one is
displayed at the Air Force Flight Test Center's Test Pilot School in
Edwards CA.  The display NF is missing the peroxide reaction control
wingtips (cannabalized a long time ago), but the nose RCS it still
there to see...

--
"But the fact that a 1938 touring bodied Alfa Romeo I once had is
worth $1 million sometimes bothers the hell out of me.  It's a
personal problem."                                     -Phil Hill
Al Bowers                                 bowers@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov
Iaido   Takamine   Hobie   Rossignol   Alfa Romeo  Ducati (DOD #900)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: lhawkins@olaf.wellesley.edu (Lee Hawkins)
Subject: Re: SR-71 / MIG-25
Organization: Wellesley College
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:17:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.194827.4292@craycos.com> rh@craycos.com (Robert Herndon) writes:
>2) a KE air-to-ground kill system.  Basically a large iron rod
>   with some guidance.  Mach 3 launch + 80,000'+ fall of 1000+#
>   of iron carries a lot of punch.  Never carried as far as
>   development or testing.

How much KE was left after a fall from 80,000 feet if air drag is not
neglected?  In other words, what was the terminal velocity of such a 
projectile?  It's hard to imagine it staying supersonic on its own, so
(assuming I'm not way off base) I doubt it would have been much more
effective than the same weapon dropped from, say, an A-6.

Just curious,
--Lee
________________________________________________________________________________
R. Lee Hawkins					 lhawkins@annie.wellesley.edu
Department of Astronomy				 lhawkins@lucy.wellesley.edu
Whitin Observatory
Wellesley College                                   Ph. 617-283-2708
Wellesley, MA 02181                                 FAX 617-283-3642
________________________________________________________________________________
>
>-r
>-- 
>Robert Herndon		    --	not speaking officially for Cray Computer.
>rh@craycos.com			   --|--		719/540-4240
>AOPA, EAA, & SSA member		-----o-----		C-172A N7511T
>PP-ASEL,I 			    " "			Glider student
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: U.S. aircrews executed by Stalin
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:28:07 GMT
Followup-To: rec.aviation.military
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <1992Nov16.181652.18454@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> acura@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (james.r.feeney) writes:

>Does anyone have any info on the B-29ski? I think it was given a
>Tupolev designation.


It was the Tupolev Tu-4, NATO reporting name Bull.  I saw a photograph
in AvLeak awhile ago that showed a couple of *turboprop* Tu-4s in 
China -- supposedly a gift from Uncle Joe before China and the USSR
had their falling out.  The engines looked like Ivchenko AI-20s, like
those on the Ilyushin Il-18 airliner. 


Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller                    + + + + + + + +        Sun Microsystems
geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM  + + + + + + + +     Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)
Subject: Re: ACM
Keywords: ACM
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:48:56 GMT

>In article <ahng.721723039@ee.ualberta.ca>, ahng@ee.ualberta.ca (Allan Hong-Kay Ng) writes:
> Hi,
>ACM angles tactics versus energy tactics....discuss.
>
>A. Ng


Angle.....importance depend on weapon.  Radar missile, best angle head-on.
heat-seeker, best angle dead 6... gun..angle not as important as being in
target's plane of motion, but still to be considered.

Energy....better have some.

Anything else?

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
From: wb9omc@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Duane P Mantick)
Subject: Re: SR-71 / MIG-25
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:36:07 GMT

geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller) writes:

>Given their cost and the presumed need for them in squadron service, it
>surprises me that so many examples of current frontline aircraft are in
>museums.  The B-1A is a test article, of course, and was probably not easily
>modifiable to the operational B-1B configuration.  But the A-10 mentioned
>above is an example of an airframe that I'd have thought would be needed
>out in the field, as is the USAF Museum's F-117A.  Sounds like a waste
>of assets to put such aircraft on display while the types they represent
>are still in active service.

>Until I read this, I'd always assumed that the Streak Eagle was returned 
>to a standard configuration and passed along anonymously to a squadron
>as just another F-15.  After all, I take it that this wasn't an extra 
>airframe built for the sole purpose of breaking performance records, but 
>an airplane diverted from the regular production run.


	Either at USAF museum or from watching WINGS on the Discovery channel,
I have been led to believe that it was determined that the Streak Eagle
was not viable for modification to combat status.  I don't recall the
reasons for this.

	As for the A10 and some other aircraft (modern) in museums, you will
find that many of these were damaged in some way that prevented them from
being used as a combat aircraft.  The damage could be repaired enough
for display, but the airframe would not be structually sound enough for
most missions.  There are several aircraft in the USAF museum that
reportedly fall into this category; not sure if the A10 was one of them.

	Duane
From: bob@reed.edu (Robert Ankeney)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
Subject: Re: Garmin 55 ADV port info
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:24:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov18.172427.1072
Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon


     From what I've seen about NMEA formats from GPS products, the fact that
they're NMEA doesn't say much at all.  NMEA says little more than data will
be of a form:
  $xxxxx,yyy,<data>,<data>, ... ,<data>*nn
     where xxxxx specifies the type of equipment generating the information
(which is pretty much user definable), yyy is the type of field (also user
definable), and the user can have as many fields of whatever data is desirable.
The '*nn' is a checksum field.
     In other words, the fact that it's NMEA doesn't tell you anything about
the content.  From the receivers that I've seen that produce NMEA output,
there's not much in common with them, and without a specification, you're
pretty much left to guess what the fields are.

     Robert Ankeney

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Ankeney                 | "Yield and overcome.                |
...!tektronix!reed!bob         |  Bend and be straight.              |
...!tektronix!bob@reed.EDU     |  Empty and be full."    - Lao Tzu   |
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
Subject: COMDEX - Street Atlas USA with GPS support
Date: 21 Nov 92 08:18:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Nov21.081840.10693
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

For those who does not know what is Street Atlas USA, it is a $99 CD-ROM
that contains 2 gigabytes of data (compressed to 500meg) taken from the
US Census Bureau's Tiger dataset, depicting EVERY single roads/streets/
highways/interstates, etc, in the US.  Some data are out-of-date, but most
are OK.

There is a GPS button in the program, but it never really say how it
is supposed to work (obviously you click on the button, and the program
get the GPS location from the GPS receiver and center the display screen
on the GPS location).

I talked to the Director for Business Development Stephen S. Leen from
DeLorme Mapping who made the above CD-ROM at Comdex.  He said that the
GPS button would not work in the $99 version.  But a $795 version would
soon come out which will actually support GPS receivers, but also allow
selection of an air-route upon which the program will print out small 
squares of map (map-following?) along the way indicating roads, rails,
buildings, etc, to assist the pilot.
From: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
Subject: Re: Garmin 55 AVD - Datap
Date: 14 Nov 92 21:49:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Advanced Computer Concepts BBS, New Rochelle, NY 914-654-1981
Reply-To: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 

> |>  Does anyone know the technical specifications - physical and softwar
> |> parameters to read the data port on the the Garmin GPS? What baud rat
> |> parity etc as well as the format of the data output. I am looking
> |> for information to be able to write my own interface program.

As I recall, the Garmin provides NMEA-183 format output, which can be
used to drive a moving map display, etc.

What specifically are you trying to accomplish?

        D/

 * OLX 2.2 * Bring back A-N airways!!    Dick.Zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com
                                                                                                            
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
From: schneidj@eecs.wsu.edu  (John B. Schneider)
Subject: FOR SALE: SONY AIR-8 SCANNER
Reply-To: schneidj@eecs.wsu.edu
Organization: Washington State University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 04:37:47 GMT

                Sony Air-8 Portable Scanner
                
The Air-8 is a four-band receiver that includes the aviation band (108
- 136.975 MHz), the public band (144 - 174 MHz), and AM and FM. Ten
programmable frequencies (in each band), priority and delay, whip
antenna, manual and automatic squelch, LCD display with back lighting.
Earplug and carrying strap included.  Operates on four AA batteries or
6V DC adapter.  Original box and instruction manual.

  List price       = $269.00 (rather meaningless)
  Price I paid     = $203.00 (more meaningful)
+----------------------------------------------+
| Price I'm asking = $150.00 (most meaningful) |
+----------------------------------------------+

Price includes shipping within the US.

John Schneider
schneidj@eecs.wsu.edu
(509) 332-0696 (H)
(509) 335-4655 (W)
From: dinsdale@berlioz.nsc.com (Steve McRobert)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
Subject: Re: Garmin 55 ADV port info
Summary: NMEA is a marine spec
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:32:20 GMT
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation, Santa Clara

In article <pcdug.13.0@mineral.ualberta.ca> pcdug@mineral.ualberta.ca (Doug Booth) writes:
>
> Thanks to all who have responded to my original request for information. 
>Perhaps I should have been more specific. In the Garmin brochure they say 
>that the data port is "NMEA 180/2/3". To me this sounds like some sort of
>standardized protocol like RS488 or IEEE. To my knowledge this would be
>public information - the input sequences might be proprietary to modify the
>database or upload info into memory, however I would think that the output
>would be standardized and available.
>	Doug Booth  email: userDABO@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca

NMEA is a spec originated in the boating industry so you could connect
your loran etc. to other stuff.
National marine electronics association?
C
National

-- 
Steve Mc Robert (a.k.a. Dinsdale Piranha) PP ASEL, Glider, Tow Pilot
Organisation: National Semiconductor. Aircraft: DG300 GJ
Want to soar?  Call the Ames soaring club 510 516 1745 at Byron airport
From: jac@asns.tredydev.unisys.com (Judy Cadmus)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
Subject: A few good words about Serengeti Drivers sunglasses
Date: 23 Nov 92 18:00:48 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Unisys Corporation, Tredyffrin Engineering Offices

I purchased my pair of Serengeti Drivers sunglasses about 5 years ago.  For
the past couple of years, the top edge of one of the lenses kept popping out.
No big deal, as it was easy enough to press back into place, until a few weeks
ago, when the entire lens popped out and landed on the garage floor, breaking
it in two.  Needless to say, I was not very happy about having to buy a new
pair.  So, at my husband's suggestion, I called the manufacturer (Corning 
Optics) and asked if they could sell me a replacement lens.  The customer
service rep informed me that they couldn't sell me a replacement lens, however,
she did tell me that the glasses were defective, and if I returned them, 
they'd send me a new pair.  I did state that the glasses were a few years old,
and that I didn't have a receipt or anything, and she said that there would
be no problem if I simply enclosed a letter describing what happened.  Less
than a week later, a brand new pair of Serengeti's arrived in the mail. Now,
I just need a nice, sunny weekend, so I can use them! :^)

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Judy Cadmus  PP-ASEL, Instrument Student
Skylane N42202                                  jac@asns.tredydev.unisys.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.products
From: dent@s1.gov (Dave Dent)
Subject: Rottax 912 Experience
Followup-To: rec.aviation.products
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:20:00 GMT

I am looking for information on the Rotax 912 engine.  Users and alike that
have been flying or using it.  I would like information related to TBO's,
not published but actual,  or any major items found during overhaul.   Any
problems that may have come up during use such as valve failures, cooling,
ignition, fuel system, oil pump, etc.  We're doing research on one now  and
any addional information you might have would be a big help.  Please E-mail
responses to dent@s1.gov.  Thanks in advance.  

Dave Dent
Lawrence  Livermore  National Laboratory
7000 East Ave., P.O. Box 808, MS L-285
Livermore, CA 94550
510-294-6596,  E-Mail dent@s1.gov
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: awtron@strawber.princeton.edu (Andrew Tron)
Subject: Re: GTE DUATS Flyer (& rec.aviators)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:37:48 GMT

In article <1689E10699.WSD10@CCCVM.CCC.AMDAHL.COM> WSD10@CCCVM.CCC.AMDAHL.COM (Chip Davis) writes:
>I just received the Fall, 1992 edition of the GTE DUATS Flyer, a six
>page newsletter from those fine folks in Chantilly, VA.  On the front
>page is a photo of their booth at Oshkosh with none other than our own
>geoff@peck.com standing there in his hat-of-many-buttons.  Unfortunately,
 ....

>So, Geoff, are you too modest to tell us why you were hanging out with
>the GTE crowd?  :-)
> 
I can't vouch for Geoff's modesty (one way or the other), but it would
be appropriate for the guy who wrote the software for GTE's Flight Planner
to be hanging out with that crowd.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Tron at Princeton University  | awtron@strawber.Princeton.EDU
And of the living ... none, not one who truly loves the sky
Would trade a hundred earth bound hours for one that he could fly.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation