HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Tony.Buckland@mtsg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Some time back, I saw a move called, if memory serves,
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:36:52 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From Tony.Buckland@mtsg.ubc.ca

 "Twilight's Last Gleaming."  In it, a terrorist group seized an
 ICBM site and threatened to fire a few.  Lots of complications
 involving the President, the good motives of the terrorists (who
 wanted to expose the Real Truth About Viet Nam), etc.  But to my
 point: naturally, the Army brought up infantry, armor, artillery,
 etc., although they didn't find anything useful to do under the
 circumstances.  But it occurred to me, that in this or any similar
 situation, if an attempt were ever made to actually launch,
 the missiles would be total sitting ducks as they launched, and
 could be turned into scrap metal by a concentrated point-blank
 barrage.  So a terrorist attack on such a site would be useful
 only if the terrorists had the knowledge and the determination
 to immediately bypass all the hardware and software barriers and
 then launch, not threaten.
From: USCLPAO@nctamslant.navy.mil (USCINCLANT PAO)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Navy to Christen Cape St. George (CG-71)
Date: 13 Apr 92 03:57:26 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From "USCINCLANT PAO" <USCLPAO@nctamslant.navy.mil>

The following Memorandum for Correspondents was released on
Friday, 10 April, 1992 by the Department of Defense in
Washington, DC. 
 
NAVY TO CHRISTEN CAPE ST. GEORGE (CG-7l) 
 
    The Department of the Navy has set the christening of the
guided missile cruiser Cape St. George (CG-71) for 11:00 a.m.,
Saturday, April 11, 1992, at Ingalls Shipbuilding, Pascagoula,
Mississippi. 
 
    Representative Gene Taylor, (D-MS), will be the ceremony's
principal speaker.  Mrs. Doree Hekman, wife of VADM Peter M.
Hekman, USN (Ret.), is the ship's sponsor. 
 
    Cape St. George (CG71) commemorates the battle fought off the
island of New Ireland, in the Bismarck Archipelago, on 5 November
1943 between Captain (later Admiral) Arleigh Burke's forces of
five destroyers and five Japanese destroyers. Three enemy ships
were sunk, and one damaged, without damage to any of Burke's
squadron.  No other ships have borne this name. 
 
    Cape St. George is the 25th of 27 Ticonderoga class cruisers
to be built. The Ticonderoga class is designed to provide the
primary anti-air warfare protection for the Navy's battle forces.
Equipped with the Aegis combat system, the ship will be able to
operate in all warfare mission areas to detect, track and destroy
enemy aircraft, missiles, submarines and surface ships.  The
Aegis system, comprising radars, computers and weapons, 15
designed to function effectively in all weather and hostile
countermeasure environments. 
  
    The ship will be equipped to carry standard surface-to-air
and Tomahawk missiles launched from fore and aft vertical
launching systems; two fully automated, radar-controlled Phalanx
anti-air weapon systems; Harpoon surface- to-surface missiles;
two five-inch guns; electronic warfare systems and two Light
Airborne Multi-Purpose System (LAMPS) helicopters. 
 
    Cape St. George is 567 ft. in length, has a beam of 55 ft.
and, upon completion, will displace approximately 9,500 tons
fully loaded.
From: SORENSD@SLUVCA.SLU.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: low-altitue flying
Date: 17 Apr 92 01:25:16 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From SORENSD@SLUVCA.SLU.EDU


I always heard that the B-1b was the best aircraft to fly low to the ground.
Not just because of their autopilot, but becuase of the engines, and fuel
efficiency.  From what I was told they can fly at almost mach 1 for a 
reasonable amount of time very low to the ground where any other planes
would run out of fuel trying to follow them at that speed.

My roommates father is a truck driver that concentrates his time between
Southern California and Texas and has countless stories of being straifed
by military jets.  The US does it, they just don't get any publicity.

Daren
From: TWZ101@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Self-Destruct Mechanisms
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:45:21 GMT
Organization: Penn State University


From <TWZ101@psuvm.psu.edu>

In article <1992Apr4.012834.13270@cbnews.cb.att.com>,
th2_oate@csd.brispoly.ac.uk (Tom Oates) says:
>
>From th2_oate@csd.brispoly.ac.uk (Tom Oates)
>
>In article <1992Apr2.011116.19533@cbnews.cb.att.com>
>craig.patten@f824.n680.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Craig Patten) writes:
>>
>>From craig.patten@f824.n680.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (Craig Patten)
>>
>>Hi. Seeing that the F-117A and the Stealth Bomber are such highly advanced
>>machines, and have such highly advanced weaponry and systems, is there any
>>sort of protection (eg. "Self Destruct") to stop the equipment getting into
>>enemy hands in, say, the case of an emergency landing?

     I'm not sure about the F-117A or the B-2, but there was one incident
 during the Gulf War recounted in James Dunnigan's _From Shield to Storm_
 that would argue against it.

     During the first days of the ground fighting, an AH-64A Apache was shot
 up by anti-aircraft fire, and forced to make an emergency landing inside
 enemy territory.  The pilot got away, but the machine was evidently left
 mostly intact.  In order to prevent the technology from falling into enemy
 hands, the Apache was destroyed with an anti-tank guided missile, probably
 fired from another helicopter, or perhaps an A-10.

                                                  --Tom Zarzecki--
                                                "Do you trust what I trust...?"
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: srcon@pro-rapid.cts.com (Sean Conard)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: accidental nuclear detonation
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:34:49 GMT
Organization: ProLine [pro-rapid]


From srcon@pro-rapid.cts.com (Sean Conard)

>that's the usual version....

It is not unusual for maintenance folks to drop their equipment (wrenches,
screw drivers, ect...)  but it usually does not result in a propellant
disaster.  That Titan incident must have happened a LONG time ago (old
weapon system)!  I heard a similar story, not the welding part, but of
workers in that system causing propellant accidents.  The Titan used a 
highly ignitable propellant fuel, whereas later systems like the Minuteman
Twos use a different propellant.  See, the work space between the missile
and the workcage is only about the width of a man plus some in the 
Minuteman II system, wheras the work space was much greater in the Titan
days.  There were more damaging accidents.  As long as I've been on crew
duty, there haven't been any major incidents (at least not at Ellsworth).

Sean Conard
44 OPG/DOV
We got to war every day, that others may live in peace!
From: dep+@CS.CMU.EDU (David Pugh)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: M1A1 vs. the squirt gun from hell
Date: 15 Apr 92 23:02:52 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University


From dep+@CS.CMU.EDU (David Pugh)

The talk of crowbars from space brings up an idea for another weapon
(one that is probably theoretically impossible to build unless we get
some new theories).

Consider a gun that fires 1cc water droplets at 5% c. What would happen
if one of these droplets hit the frontal armor of a tank?

Running through the numbers ...
	KE of shot = .5mv^2 = .5 * 1e-3 kg * (1.5e7 m/s)^2
		  ~= 1e11 J
		  ~= explosive force of 20,000 kg TNT
	which is more than enough to total a tank.

I suspect, however, that the droplet would probably punch a small hole
through the armor. Two questions:
	Would the exit hole be significantly larger than the entry hole?
	What would happen to the armor in the path of the drop ... would it
	be displaced to the sides or driven into the tank?
-- 
... He was determined to discover the		David Pugh
underlying logic behind the universe.		...!seismo!cmucs!dep
    Which was going to be hard, because
there wasn't one.	_Mort_,  Terry Pratchett
From: uunet!rosevax.rosemount.com!tom (Tom Brennan @)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: How smart are U.S./Russian Sonobuoys?
Date: 11 Apr 92 00:15:16 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From uunet!rosevax.rosemount.com!tom (Tom Brennan)



Greetings and Salutations,


Does anyone know just how smart U.S. and Soviet sonobuoys are?  Are they
just able to tell the plane/helicopter that there is a sub x distance
away or are they smart enough to keep track of their orientation and
give a bearing as well?  

I realize that a crude way to keep track of orientation is to put a 
magnetic compass in the buoy and do it that way.  The more I 
think about it the more complex the problem becomes.  You would have
to correct for the difference between magnetic north and true north
and that would be dependent on where the buoy was dropped.  There also be 
some oscillation and/or rotation due to ocean currents and being dropped 
from a couple of hundred feet.  I would think that this would especially 
be a problem with the multi-depth sonobuoys.  If the ocean currents were 
traveling in different directions at different depths then you would have 
conflicting forces at different depths.  Like I said, the more I 
thought about it the more complex the problem becomes.  There probably
is some simple way that to do all this and I just can't figure it out ( I 
only have two brain cells left and sometimes they just don't work in 
sync ).  So how do sonobuoys keep track of their orientation if in fact 
they do?

I read something several millennium ago that a fisherman had caught a Russian
version of a sonobuoy in his net.  When they took it apart they found that
it was a direct copy of a U.S. version.  They had even copied in the bugs with
that particular version.  You would think that if they can reverse engineer 
something like an intergrated circuit from a sonobuoy that they would find the 
bugs and correct them.  Oh well, I guess thats the difference between reverse 
engineering and copying something.

The reason I'm asking is because I'm playing Larry Bond's wargame called
Harpoon by mail and I am supposed to be a fearless American sub captain.  
Depending on how smart sonobuoys are will tell me how deep in guano I've 
buried myself. Hey, its five ships and two helicopters against one U.S.
sub with me and my limited mental capabilities at the wheel........ what do 
you expect? 

Thanks,


Tom


*	Tom Brennan		*	Question:  If Christopher Columbus    *
*	Rosemount Inc.		*	had discovered America from the	      *
*	12001 Technology Dr.	*	west, would the people living in      *
*	Eden Prairie, MN	*	Mid-West be living in the Mid-East    *
*	55344			*       now?				      *
*	tom@rosemount.com	*					      *
From: randall@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (THE Upholder of Truth)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Present locations of surviving German WWII U-Boats?
Date: 15 Apr 92 23:36:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnews.1992Apr15.233656.3557
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


From randall@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (THE Upholder of Truth)

malc@pyramid.cs.unr.edu (Malcolm L. Carlock) writes: 

>As I recall, the Allies originally divvied up the surviving U-Boats in some
>"mutually agreeable" fashion.  The U-505 (the capture of which is described
>in Adm. Dan Gallery's "Eight Bells") ended up as an above-ground display at
>the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry.

This is true.. the U-505 has been incorporated into the Museum.
Tours are cheap ( <$5 ) and they still show the film of the capture
following the tour for those interested.  But just to clarify, the U-505
was/is the only Submarine captured at sea during time of war...

It wasn't one of those "divvied up" following the war.


-- 
The Upholder of Truth		  	    I am not only ready to
Upholder@uiuc.edu (BSD/ASCII mail)          retract this, but also
jar42733@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu (NeXT mail)    deny I said anything.  =)
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: rlbell@babbage.waterloo.edu (Richard Bell)
Subject: Re: Some time back, I saw a move called, if memory serves,
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 23:35:39 GMT


From rlbell@babbage.waterloo.edu (Richard Bell)

Several years ago, the USAF reported that one of their minuteman silos had
a computer error that might cause an accidental launch.  To prevent missile
release, they simply parked an old armoured car on the blast door.  As the
blast door slides to uncover the silo explosively, the armored car would simply
drop down the silo, a la pulling the tablecloth out from under the china, and
destroy the missile. 
(Toronto Globe and Mail - date forgotten)
From: gunter@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Gunter Ahrendt)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: .50 Caliber Handguns
Date: 17 Apr 92 01:10:20 GMT
Organization: AT&T


From gunter@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Gunter Ahrendt)

In regard to the posting of the person who said that a .50 Caliber gun was
nonexistant and unhandable...

The following are available for purchase:

American Derringer Model 1
	Double Barrel .50 Caliber
	>$375.oo

American Derringer Model 4
	Single Shot .50-70 Caliber
	$495.oo

Desert Eagle .50 Magnum
	8-shot Automatic Handgun
	$1,189.oo

also known as 'Hand Cannon's' :)
From: Steven.Schultz@mixcom.mixcom.com (Steven.Schultz)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker
Date: 14 Apr 92 00:49:09 GMT
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.


From Steven.Schultz <Steven.Schultz@mixcom.mixcom.com>

I have no information on the ground-attack version, but I will post
here if I learn something. My sincere apoligies for the mixup. I
really should have been more careful. It is McDD that makes the F-15E
Strike Eagle.

-- 
Steven.Schultz@mixcom.com
Leader, Military and Arms topic, Hobbies Conference, Exec-PC BBS (414)789-4210

"Eternal peace lasts only until the next war."-Old Russian Proverb
From: cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US Navy's request for Beretta M9 cancellation...
Date: 15 Apr 92 04:11:24 GMT
Followup-To: sci.military
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH


From cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)

As quoted from <1992Apr13.033837.4956@cbnews.cb.att.com> by davidg@interop.com (David Gimpelevich):

> >The FBI selected the 10mm as their new official weapon. According to
> >their tests, it packs the same power as the .45 and the 9mm doesn't.
> >There is suspicion that they selected the 10mm instead of the .45
> >because they didn't want the .45 afficianados saying "told you so" to
> >the 9mm people.
> 
> The caliber FBI picked was not the "10", but the .41 S&W.  It is a much
> wimpified 10mm, with muzzle energy about equal to the .45.  The 10mm is 
> really in the magnum class, and (congecture - no actual data in yet) can
> probably stop a manas well as a .41 Mag - they have about the same ballistics.

This is incorrect.  The FBI DID adopt the 10mm loaded to lower velocity.  The
.41S&W Magnum is a rimmed revolver cartridge developed for the Model 57 and 
Model 58 revolvers.  The .40S&W is a shortened version of the 10mm.  It roughly
duplicates the ballistics of the FBI 10mm load.  The principle advantage of
the .40S&W is that it can be chambered in 9mm size handguns.  Not everybody
can effectively utilize a gun the size of a S&W 1006/1066/1076.  I know I      
can't.  I CAN quite comfortably use a Glock 22/23 or S&W 4006 sized gun.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------  

"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?" 
------------------------------------------------------------------  
"It's 11:59pm, do you know where your congressman's checkbook is?"
------------------------------------------------------------------ 
Christopher Morton
{uunet|backbone}!ncoast.org!cmort                      cmort@ncoast.org
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: janm@London.docs.uu.se (Jan Mattsson)
Subject: Re: Mriya
Organization: UDAC, Uppsala, Sweden
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 01:44:38 GMT
Keywords: Mriya, big plane, Su-29


From janm@London.docs.uu.se (Jan Mattsson)

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

	[stuff deleted]
>which there was a thread here some months back. They also intend to
>bring at least one Su-29 (the one that does the "cobra" maneuver) and,

You mean the Su-27.

>Last year they were selling 15 minute flights in the fighter for $10K.
>One fellow who took them up on this said it was well worth it.

If I spent $10K on a 15 minute flight, I would say that too.
--
Jan Mattsson                    janm@student.docs.uu.se
Computer Science student, Uppsala University, Sweden
From: tek@pram.CS.UCLA.EDU (Ted Kim (Random Dude))
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Launching torpedoes at depth
Date: 8 Apr 92 01:02:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnews.1992Apr8.010201.16540
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department


From tek@pram.CS.UCLA.EDU (Ted Kim (Random Dude))

In article <1992Apr7.034829.6669@cbnews.cb.att.com> Tony.Buckland@mtsg.ubc.ca writes:
> A recent posting claims that torpedoes can be launched only at
> moderate depths because of the problem of forcing them out of the
> tubes.   
> ...
> I would have thought the problem of using compressed air to fire
> torpedoes could easily be solved by using water instead (i.e. flood
> _behind_ the torpedo and either use a pump or let the torpedo use
> its own screw slowly until clear of the tube).

This is pretty much correct. US submarines have not used compressed
gas for sometime. Instead, they use water pulse ejection (ie pump
water to eject torpedoes). It solves the pressure problem and is less
noisy. 

Swimout (having the torpedo leave under its own power) apparently
requires a tube larger than the torpedo. This approach will be used in
the one Seawolf submarine with its eight 30" tubes (and the standard
21" torpedoes). (One LA class also has a 30" tube for R&D work.) The
technique's main advantage is that is quieter than water pulse
ejection. 

Reference: "World Naval Developments", Apr 89 USNI Proceedings

-ted

--
Ted Kim                           Internet: tek@pram.cs.ucla.edu
UCLA Computer Science Department  UUCP:     ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek
3804C Boelter Hall                Phone:    (310) 206-8696
Los Angeles, CA 90024             FAX:      (310) 825-2273
From: gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Miniguns and Vulcans
Date: 13 Apr 92 04:07:06 GMT
Organization: Ham Radio Operator, Houston Tex.


From gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy)

OOPS!

I forgot one other weapon in this family that someone asked about. 
There is a three barrel version of the "vulcan" 20mm cannon known 
as the XM-197, first used on the AH-1J SeaCobra. They were first 
used in service in 1971. This gun was refered to as a "light 
weight" version of the M-61 "Vulcan" and had a rate of fire of 
about 750 rounds per minute. This is the same basic design now 
used on most all remaining Cobra models and is mounted in the 
"chin" turret.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
             Gene Kennedy - Ham Radio Operator, N5ABI -
                         gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: chf0@newshost.gte.com (Curtis Fennell)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re:  Low Altitude Training
Date: 11 Apr 92 00:27:58 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA


From chf0@newshost.gte.com (Curtis Fennell)


>From my experience with Marine air crews, I know that the rules and
the reality of US Military flying are often two different things. For
example, on most of the low-level training routes in the eastern US,
the minimum altitude is 500 ft AGL (above ground level).  This is more
for the protection of the local populace than for the protection of
the aircraft and pilots.  Pilots do frequently break this rule.

In many designated military training areas, such as bombing ranges, there
is no minimum altitude and I've seen crews make night bombing runs at
less than 200 ft.

Out west, the story is different. There are a number of designated
military low-level training routes that have no "real" minimum
altitude (other that staying high enough to avoid "snake-strike"). I
don't remember if they have any official minimum, but most of the
pilots ignore it anyway and no one says anything.  

Zipping across the desert at 400+kts at 40-50 ft is something everyone
should get to try.

-- 
============================================================
Curt Fennell    [   "Get DOWN off that cross, honey!       ]
chf0@gte.com	[    Somebody needs the wood!"             ]
============================================================
From: ccicpg!cci632.cci.com!jvz@uunet.UU.NET (John V. Zambito)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: US SMG
Date: 15 Apr 92 23:29:33 GMT
Organization: [Computer Consoles, Inc., Rochester, NY


From ccicpg!cci632.cci.com!jvz@uunet.UU.NET (John V. Zambito)

>>> a general issue 9mm SMG, like most of the NATO forces have.
>>What do US forces use for an SMG at present ?
>   Last I heard, the US military did not have a standard issue SMG.  There are

I find these articles about SMG interesting, but they would be more 
interesting if I knew what SMG stood for. Please define an acronym
the first time it is used. 

[mod.note: Point well taken.  SMG stands for "submachinegun." - Bill ]
From: dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk (Codesmiths)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Dirty Secrets ? (aluminium burning)
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:15:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnews.1992Apr7.031532.29877
Organization: AT&T


From Codesmiths <dingbat@cix.compulink.co.uk>


> Modern warships are increasingly using steel superstructure because aluminum
> does have problems with structural integrity when subjected to other things
> which are burning.  

And because of the corrosion problems, caused by having a mixed-metal
structure in a salt-water environment.
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: the .50 cal single shot pistol.no way!
Date: 17 Apr 92 01:12:28 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.


From fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)

>From EACZ02XE%GRTHEUN1.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu
>
>in reply to mlong@uconnvm.uccon.edu 's search for a .50 cal pistol:
>are you serious?altough technically can exist i do not think anyone will
>built it.the reasons are:
>
>     -BRUTUS (rem X-100 in 458 winchester)barrel 13 in. / 6.5 pounds
>      .458 winchester  500grains / 2070 fps / 4850 foot-pounds
>BRUTUS is the most powerfull pistol i know of.recoil is HARD:!

Seems reasonable...

>REASONS:find an action.no action made that can handle the .50 cal.either
>you make one or use one from a rifle which is ILLEGAL

Well, there are .50's and there are .50's.

Somebody in the U.S. makes a single-action revolver in .45-70, which is
certainly excessive.

Last winter, I saw their latest effort...another single-action revolver
in .50-70.  Not being bothered with bison in my back yard vegetable
garden, well...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------