HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kopackm@lonex.rl.af.mil (Michael A. Kopack)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,sci.environment
Subject: Re: F22 Air Force purchases.
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:12:26 GMT
Organization: RL

In article <1992Sep02.111237.649@bmerh85.bnr.ca> viking@bmerh66.bnr.ca writes:
>I was skimming a military mag at the store (I know, I shouldn't be so cheap and
>just buy it) and they had an article on the future of the various American armed
>forces.  What caught my eye was a statement that the Air Force is buying about 600
>F22 Lightning II's.  Anyone know the time frame for when they go operational?
>Also, considering the high-tech nature of these beasties, will they be sold to
>"friendly nations" as an export item?  What's happening with Naval air now that
>the A12 has been cancelled?  Last I heard, they were thinking of Hornet/Tomcat
>upgrades but has the F23 been definitely ruled out as a successor?
>
>By the way folks, keep the Aurora discussion going.  That is truly one of the
>most fascinating open secrets going in aviation.
>--
>Harold Henriksen                    Bell-Northern Research
>email: viking@bmerh694.bnr.ca       Ottawa,Ontario,Canada
>
>Pillaging and plundering were more fun than programming!
>(Opinions are not my employer's and sometimes not mine)

The F-22 Lightning II's are projected to be made operational around 1998-99.
They will be produced in large quantities and delivered in large numbers
durring 2000. 

I highly doubt that the YF-23 will be chosen as a successor to the F-14.
It would require a MAJOR reworking of the langing gear system, the addition
of an arrestor hook, and various other modifications to make it carrier qualified.
Add to that the sheer size of the plane! 

With the cancellation of the A-12 project, it has been reported that the
Navy is finalizing plans to upgrade the F-14, is doing overhauls of the A-6
Intruder's wings and avionics systems, and the F/A-18 will get another upgrade
around 1996. 

I agree, KEEP THE AURORA INFORMATION COMMING!!!!!!!!

Hope this helps,
Mike Kopack

-- 
Mike Kopack                         | Sex, Drugs, Rock & Roll and my Amiga,
Internet : gt6758b@prism.gatech.edu | what more could anyone want?
           kopack@bugs.rl.af.mil    \              -- Me 
           kopackm@lonex.rl.af.mil   -------------------------------------------
From: raymond@jupiter.ame.arizona.edu (Raymond Man)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: supersonic B-52's??
Date: 4 Sep 92 19:30:49 GMT
Distribution: usa,local
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson

I would venture to guess the person meant B-58 Hustler. 

I have seen on film how the long wings of the B-52 flap like
that of a bird in flutter. While it may not be impossible(707,747
have done it), going supersonic for B-52 must be a pretty
dramatic event and not a routine business.
-- 
Just call me `Man'. 
"And why take ye thought for "    --   Matt. 6:28
raymond@jupiter.ame.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,rec.aviation
From: ggr@koonda.acci.com.au (Greg Rose)
Subject: Re: How to land a 727 (summary)
Organization: Australian Computing and Communications Institute
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 00:46:21 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.034451.7972@cactus.org> rdd@cactus.org (Robert Dorsett) writes:
>From ... let's call him Abe:
>> They told me that the reason this odd procedure is needed, is because the
>> CG, and therefore the center of rotation, is in a position, so as to
>> pull the gear higher as the nose rotates higher

Translated, this means that the main gear is forward of the Centre of
Gravity. If this were true, the 727 would give a whole new meaning to
the term "tail dragger" :-)
--
Greg Rose                 Australian Computing and Communications Institute
ggr@acci.com.au                                              +61 3 282 2532
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: 747 VS. AURORA
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 18:40:39 GMT

Quoted Text re: an "Miss" I heard about yesterday:
-------------------------------------------------^L

From: skeffing@maize.rtsg.mot.com (John F. Skeffington)
To: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu
Subject: Re: AM I CRAZY OR WAS THERE A 'SCREW UP' YESTERDAY
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group

You are not crazy and did not hear about it in a dream (unless we 
both had the same dream).  I heard yesterday on the local news here
in Chicago. They stated that there was a near miss with a commercial 
flight (I don't remember if they gave a type) and an unidentified
aircraft.  Controllers reported that it did not show up on thier
radar which lead to speculation that it was some type of spy plane
that had drifted out of military airspace.  They said that the
DOD denied that report.  It happened some where near LA.

John Skeffington
Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group
Arlington Heights, IL 60004

-------------end-----------

Did anyone hear about this? I looked in my local LA paper (ORANGE COUNTY
actually).."The Register"...and saw nothing about it..<nor did i look good>

Anyone
--
Generic Signature:
Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way
yaW ykliM - htraE - ASU - ainrofilaC - hcaeB notgnitnuH - namlreP lahsraM
                                                        :erutangiS cireneG
From: john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: Beer commercial
Date: 26 Aug 92 03:07:49 GMT
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In <1992Aug25.013953.4488@geovision.gvc.com> pt@geovision.gvc.com writes:
> > > I saw a  beer commercial on TV this weekend and it featured what
> > > appeared to be one of the cranked arrow configured F-16's.

> It's a Saab Draken.  It appeared to be real, rather than R/C.
> I'd say it was probably one retired by the Swedish AirForce (those things
> are _old_, inspite of how neato they look), that is used for racing.

I saw this plane just yesterday parked on the ramp at Indianapolis
International airport.  It was back in the air cargo and corporate jet
area, next to the regional FAA office.  There happened to be a large
mound of dirt next to the fence (a sound barrier), so I was able to get
a nice photo of the plane despite the fact that it was behind a fence.
The plane is painted black, and has gold colored Miller Genuine Draft
markings.

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,sci.environment
From: reynolds@panix.com (Brian Reynolds)
Subject: Re: Birds getting sucked.
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:16:43 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <Btv8oD.KrE@news.larc.nasa.gov> mark@cmb00.larc.nasa.gov (Mark Flanagan) writes:

>This reminds me of a story my father used to tell me.
[story of firing frozen chicken from a chicken gun]

This reminds me of a story told to me by a shop teacher while I was a
student at Aviation High School in NYC.  This teacher moonlighted at
Fairchild while the A-10 was still in production (it has been a while
since I was at AHS).  Supposedly one Thanksgiving someone loaded a
frozen turkey in the chicken gun (I can't remember what the official
name is) and fired it at an A-10 canopy.  Much to everyone's
surprise(?)  the turkey went straight through the canopy (which was
apparently tested before mounting on the airframe).  Needless to say
management was pretty annoyed.  They didn't condone extra-curricular
use of the chicken gun, but they also didn't like the fact that the
canopy failed the test.  According to my teacher the turkey was
approved as an official test round and new canopies had to survie
turkey hits.

Makes you wonder how low they really fly those things.  :)

Brian Reynolds
Aviation High School - Class of 1983

-- 
Brian Reynolds
reynolds@panix.com -or- reynolds@pilot.dmg.ml.com
NAR# 54438
IPMS# 30162
From: zap@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (ZaP!)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: Auto engines for aeroplanes
Date: 27 Aug 92 15:19:17 GMT
Organization: The UCSC Irregular Rocketeers
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


>Eric Paulsen  
was discussing the relative merits of auto and aircraft, liquid and air cooled
engines.

Liquid cooled engines have been used with great success on aircraft
since early in aviation history.  The Rolls Royce Merlin and it's use
in in the Spitfire and Mustang is probably the most famous, but the 
the names Daimler-Benz and Hispano-Suiza as well as Curtiss, Bentley
and Allison played roles in liquid cooled aircraft engine development.

Air cooled engines, with thier obvious advantages in light weight and
simplicity (ie no cooling plumbing or radiators) developed at the same time.
In time, they became the preferred power plant.  The U.S. Navy preferred them
for maintenece reasons, while the Army originally preffered liquid cooling
and only reluctanty followed the Navy's lead.  After WWII, most if all 
reciprocating aircraft engines were aircooled, in part because they had been 
developed to such a high degree.  (Compare the P&W R-4360 to the Merlin V1650:
3500 hp vs 1520 hp)

However, the liquid cooled engine still has a trick that the aircooled
cannot easily mimic:  It is far easier to streamline.  Not every designer
is Kurt Tank (designer of teh Fock-Wulf Fw-190, which had one of the most
streamlined radial engine installations anywhere) so its a less taxing job
to fair in a powerful in line engine.  And this is half of the reason that
a brand new, and very fast airplane is using Nissan auto racing engines.
The plane is called the Pond Racer (after it's backer) and designed by
Burt Rutan.  At last years Reno Air Races, it exceeded 400Mph.  

(The other half of using the auto engines is that Mr. Pond did not want to
see any more irreplacable WWII vintage aircraft engines blow up under the
stresses of racing.)


-Ford					Internet: zap@ucscb.ucsc.edu
					UUCP    : zap@gorn.santa_cruz.ca.us

[Insert tautology here.]
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Subject: Re: F22 Air Force purchases.
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:21:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.141226.10203@lonex.rl.af.mil>, kopackm@lonex.rl.af.mil (Michael A. Kopack) writes:
>In article <1992Sep02.111237.649@bmerh85.bnr.ca> viking@bmerh66.bnr.ca writes:

Stuff that's totally irrelevent to sci.environment.  Please pay attention to
the newsgroups in this thread.  Thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: 31
Followup-To: sci.aeronautics
Date: 25 Aug 1992 22:29:59 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <l9jhckINN61c@aludra.usc.edu> augustho@aludra.usc.edu 
(August Horvath) writes:

>I was snooping around some hangars and found two Draakens, one complete 
>and apparently airworthy and the other disassembled.  Both were in original 
>Swedish colors.  I never found out who owns them or where they are now, and
>they have been conspicuously absent from the warbird-enthusiast magazines.

I've never seen a word printed about Drakens in this country, either.  
The one time I saw that commericial, I did a doubletake -- I thought 
I was hallucinating.  Although well known to aviation enthusiasts, the
Draken is pretty off the wall by mainstream advertising standards.

I saw a pair of Saab Lansens at Mojave back in the mid-Eighties, as well
as a pristine Hawker Hunter.  The Lansens hadn't been restored, but their
faded national insignia were still visible.  It's interesting how some
of these airplanes can escape the attention of the magazines.  A friend
of mine mentioned seeing a MiG-21 at Reno during the air races a few years 
back, and I've only seen them mentioned in the enthusiast press starting
fairly recently.  


Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller                    + + + + + + + +        Sun Microsystems
geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM  + + + + + + + +     Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,sci.environment
From: andrewt@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Birds getting sucked.
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 22:43:13 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Keywords: airports, FOD, noise, gulls

In article <17seiqINN3c5@agate.berkeley.edu> utidjian@remarque.berkeley.edu
(David M.V. Utidjian) writes:
> [list of possible way to avoid bird collisions at airports]
>
>I have heard mention of all of the above techniques...
>What is most successful for coastal airports?
>Are there some that I have missed?

Any approach should be tailored to the particular species. The best approach
is to determine what is attracting the birds to the airport and to remove
that attraction. Unfortunately this often is not possible and then a great
variety of techniques are used to deter birds. You mention most of
the common techniques but there are certainly others such as using
trained falcons.

Andrew Taylor
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: twh18@isuvax.iastate.edu (Phoenix)
Subject: Re: F16A Huds & Simulation
Reply-To: twh18@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 00:53:48 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.125335.3329@otago.ac.nz>, misdcc@otago.ac.nz (Chris Hinch) writes:
>F16's, HUD's and Simulation
>
>As part of a research project into flight simulation techniques
>I am developing a replica cockpit of a F16A (Block 15). 
>
>One of the areas that is 'interesting' is the HUD.  Diagrams and
>photos of early block (inc. Block 15) aircraft show a small HUD 
>with a prominent video camera.  However, a photo supplied by GD 
>of a F16A (no block number supplied) shows a larger HUD without 
>the camera, and various controls replaced by four 'thumb' wheels, 
>two either side of the panel.  It appears smaller than the 
>Marconi (?) HUD found in the later block aircraft (20+?).  Can 
>anyone id this HUD variant?  Was it ever installed on Block 15
>aircraft?
	Eh, I am not a professional engineer, forgive me if some of
you think my idea is ridiclous.  But... how about check out
Spctreme Holobyte's Falcon 2.2 on mac or Falcon 3.0 on IBM?  I know
they are just games, but SH makes good realism games, espcially 
Falcon.  So far, I haven't found the HUD in the game almost identical
to the real thing.  (of course I never had a chance to sitting in a
real F-16 before, just catched few glances on TV and videos)
	Just a suggestion, hope it helps a little.
			Ming
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: dnadams@nyx.cs.du.edu (Dean Adams)
Subject: Re: 747 VS. AURORA
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 12:36:53 GMT

mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal Perlman) writes:
 >>in Chicago. They stated that there was a near miss with a commercial 
 >>flight (I don't remember if they gave a type) and an unidentified
 >>aircraft.  Controllers reported that it did not show up on thier
 >>radar which lead to speculation that it was some type of spy plane
 >>that had drifted out of military airspace.  They said that the
 >>DOD denied that report.  It happened some where near LA.

 >Did anyone hear about this? 

YES.  You can read about it in the August 24 issue of AW&ST.

Here is the headline:

 UNITED 747 CREW REPORTS NEAR-COLLISION WITH MYSTERIOUS 
 SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT, by Michael A. Dornheim/Los Angeles.

-{ DA }-

From: ronk@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Ron King)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:09:36 GMT
Subject: Re: Simulator Flight Models (was Re: PC based simulators)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Greeley, CO
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics

  No, I have never seen or known of the IFR Simulator program for the Com-
madore.  I would be interested in getting a copy.  Does anyone out there know
where or how I can get one?
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: mtk3@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew T. Kenner)
Subject: Auto engines for aeroplanes...
Reply-To: mtk3@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew T. Kenner)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 19:05:15 GMT


   I realize that this subject might have been discussed many times on this 
bulletin board, but I am new to the forum.  

   I was just wondering what the feelings were out there on the idea of using
these engines and about any succeses or failures that anyone might have seen.
		Thanks, 
			Matt Kenner
-- 
Douglas's Law of Practical Aeronautics: | 5   5 | Matt Kenner         __|__
"When the weight of the paperwork equals|   5   |            __|__ *---o0o---*
the weight of the plane, the plane will | 5   5 |   __|__ *---o0o---*   
fly."  -Donald Douglas                  |=======|*---o0o---*  mtk3@po.CWRU.Edu
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,sci.environment
From: raveling@Unify.com (Paul Raveling)
Subject: Re: Birds getting sucked.
Organization: Unify Corporation (Sacramento)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 20:02:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.203641.12261@wdl.loral.com>, zeke@wdl50.wdl.loral.com (Solly Ezekiel) writes:
> 
> This one was told to me by a fellow who worked at Pratt, and is apparently a
> true story. ...

	Another Pratt versus human event happened in the early '60's,
	I think between 1960 and 1962, at LAX.  A Western Airlines
	mechanic stepped too close to a running engine on a 707;
	the engine sucked him in, the compressor stalled, and the engine
	spat him back out.  He was fortunate to come out without serious
	injuries.

	My memory's a bit foggy on this detail now, but I **think**
	this happened while they were trimming the engine.  In those
	days trimming a JT3D involved running at full throttle for
	5 minutes.


------------------
Paul Raveling
Raveling@Unify.com

Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
From: stevebu@bullwinkle.atc.ll.mit.edu (Steve Bussolari x5956 g41)
Subject: Re: Auto engines for aeroplanes
Reply-To: stevebu@atc.ll.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 41
Distribution: sci.aeronautics
Date: 27 Aug 92 09:41:20

Eric Eimal Paulsen <ep1a+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> I assume you're talking about high-performance racing engines. Nothing
> else would come even close. I suppose it's feasible, just not very
> practical, for the following reasons:The engineering concerns of auto
> engines and airplane (IC) engines are quite different, obviously.
> Cooling needs for instance. Auto's are predominantly watercooled,
[stuff deleted]

There are many aircraft that have flown and are flying with
water-cooled piston engines.  Take a look at an illustrated history of
aviation.  Today, supplemental type certificates exist for installing
automobile V-6 engines in light aircraft.  These engines go on the
airplane with no substantial modifications.  There are efforts
underway to certify new aircraft with liquid-cooled automobile engines
(as in the Porche-powered Mooney).  A significant advantage to liquid
cooling is the ability to control engine component temperature more
precisely than with air cooling - permitting closer tolerances and
better performance.  As for the notion that aircraft engines are
somehow more sophisticated than automobile engines, it is simply not
true in the case of light aircraft.  If you pull the cowling from a
1992 Mooney or Bonanza, you will find an engine that is not
significantly different in technology from that of a 1946 Piper Cub.  
Fuel injection and turbocharging have been added, but autos have had
those for years.  You'll not find anything like electronic ignition or
engine control that are in auto engines.  The simplified reason for
this is the difficulty and expense of engine certification for aircraft.
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics,sci.environment
From: mmf@evolving.com (Mark Frazier)
Subject: Re: Birds getting sucked.
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 22:51:13 GMT
Organization: Evolving Systems, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) writes:
: That explains the development of the 'chicken gun', a device that shoots
: (dead, thawed) chicken onto plane windshields. Makes for a messy cleanup
: but is a required part of aviation life. 

The version I've always heard was that plane ENGINES have to pass the chicken
test. That is, ingest a chicken and still keep going. Of course this brings
up the common dilemna in defense spending. You can't spend billions on a 
weapon that can be defeated by millions (or thousands, or one bird).

MMF
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics
Subject: Re: Auto engines for aeroplanes...
From: misdcc@otago.ac.nz (Chris Hinch)
Date: 28 Aug 92 09:30:33 +1300
Organization: Dunedin City Council, Dunedin, NZ

In article <1992Aug26.190515.21767@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, mtk3@po.CWRU.Edu (Matthew T. Kenner) writes:
> 
>    I realize that this subject might have been discussed many times on this 
> bulletin board, but I am new to the forum.  
> 
>    I was just wondering what the feelings were out there on the idea of using
> these engines and about any succeses or failures that anyone might have seen.
> 		Thanks, 
> 			Matt Kenner
> -- 

I beleive that there was (amongst others) a successful auto engine conversion
done for the Fighter Escort Wings P51D replica.  Called the Javelin conversion,
it was based on the Ford V4 and V6 engines.  A Javelin V6 conversion flew
several thousand hours in a Cessna in the mid-late eighties, and was on show
at Oshkosh in 85 or 86.  For info, contact Jim Kerr at FEW, Santo Paulo (Santa
Paula?) Airport in Orange County, California, USA.

The above is all from memory, so apologies for any errors or inaccuracies.

Chris Hinch

-- 
Chris Hinch                <misdcc@otago.ac.nz>
PC Administrator
Dunedin City Council                      DUNEDIN. It's all right here!
Dunedin, New Zealand                                        ~~~~~
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors)
Subject: Re: Cratering rate estimates.
Reply-To: martin@space.ualberta.ca (Martin Connors)
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:19:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.024348.28018@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>  
cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain) writes:
> 	I just received the excellent update by Hartmann of his "Moons
> and Planets" and note that he has about two pages of references for
> his chapter 10 on Planetary surfaces: petrology, primative surfaces
> and cratering.  

I figured 'Moons and Planets' would be the best place to start. You  
presumably have the 3rd edition which just appeared. Can you give us the  
price, etc.?

Martin Connors
University of Alberta
From: rushford@novax.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: LGS observation request........
Date: 25 Aug 92 22:45:13 GMT

I would like to ask if anyone has the ability to operate the weather sattalites
in the visable spectrum at night for a view of the east San Francisco bay?

 If you can then please look tonight 12-4 AM 8/26-28/92 for a yellow 1500 watt
 CW laser beam heading into space... Further info and launch dates and times
 can be gotten using < finger rushford@128.115.45.27 >

Could you send me an image?

Michael C. rushford@novax.llnl.gov      or      michae1222@aol.com

office 	(510) 423-2037
BBS 	(510) 443-6146 5-9PM PST and durring LGS events


















Newsgroups: sci.astro