HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)
Subject: 50 Years Ago: Monday, 20 July, 1942
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:22:21 GMT


From military@att.att.com (Bill Thacker)

Monday, 20 July, 1942

Moscow reports the recapture of Germany's Don River bridgeheads 
at Voronezh.

American bombers attack Tobruk harbor, while the Royal Navy bombards Mersa
Matruh.

The RAF continues its fighter sweeps over northern France; 200 Spitfires
overfly the continent, with one fighter lost after striking a tree.

Soviet bombers hit Axis airfields in Norway.

--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--	--
Bill Thacker			            military@att.att.com
Send submissions for "50 Years Ago" to military-request@att.att.com

"We were met by fierce light flak of a new type.  This came up vertically.
It was white and looked like rockets." - unidentified RAF pilot, describing
anti-aircraft fire from German warships off the French coast
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: John Lerchey <jl4l+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Rifled Barrels was Re: Civil War firsts
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:13:39 GMT


From John Lerchey <jl4l+@andrew.cmu.edu>

Excerpts from netnews.sci.military: 10-Jul-92 Rifled Barrels was Re:
Civi.. Michael Lanham@fritz.cat (1663)

> I remember reading about rifled barrels during the revolutionary war (the US's
> that is).  They were rifled muskets, granted, but deffinetly(sp) rifled.  They
> still used round shot and it took the riflemen muchlonger to reload then
> musketmen, but because of their accuracy, they were used as mid to long range
> snipers and sharpshooters.

This is true.  It should also be noted that the British Rifle Regiments
(95th and 60th) in the Napoleonic wars used rifles muskets.  They had a
slow rate of fire due to the soldier having to ram the "bullet" into the
gun, often involving hammering.  I read somewhere, long ago, that the
Americans used a grease pouch during the war of 1812 which allowed them
to load rifled muskets much faster than the British soldiers of the same
period.  Guess this wasn't an American Civil War first after all. :)

John K. Lerchey
Carnegie Mellon University
jl4l@andrew.cmu.edu

"Do you _really_ think that anyone else would take credit for _these_
opinions?"



Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Neil A Kirby <nak@archie.att.com>
Subject: Re: Water Injection
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:47:02 GMT


From Neil A Kirby <nak@archie.att.com>

In article <1992Jul28.130755.25502@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller) writes:
>From geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
>In article <1992Jul26.181112.28919@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> gnb@bby.com.au 
>(Gregory N. Bond) writes:
>
>>Military engines cannot run high-bypass because that puts a limit on
>>high speed performance (eventually, the fan stops helping and starts
>>causing drag).  So they inject water into the hot exhaust which cools
>>and slows the exhaust, giving better thrust.
>
>Not exactly.  High performance military jets -- fighters, specifically --
>tend to use either turbojets or low-bypass turbofans for two reasons:
>(1) they have a smaller frontal area than high-bypass fanjets, which
>allows a slimmer fuselage, and therefore less drag; and (2) high-bypass 
>engines are more efficient and lower altitudes, which isn't of overriding 
>concern for an interceptor or air superiority fighter (although it would be
>important for a strike or ASW aircraft).
>

THis got hashed out here some time in the past.  The most efficient way to
operate is to have the exhaust stream velocity exactly match the forward
airspeed.  For subsonic operation, this points to a high bypass turbo-fan.
The ultimate case being a turbo prop.  Above the mach and you want a
turbojet.

Neil Kirby
From: bspain@zeus.calpoly.edu (Bradley K Spain)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: propeller planee's anti-torque problem
Keywords: engine torque, helicopters, jets
Date: 28 Jul 92 13:08:33 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


From bspain@zeus.calpoly.edu (Bradley K Spain)

In article <1992Jul26.180428.27983@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> asp+@pitt.edu (Anandeep Pannu) writes:
>
>All planes have this torque problem.... 
>By the way my friend who went on to fly Mig-21s for the IAF told me that 
>they had to use rudder to counterbalance all that whirling turbine torque
>too !
>So it happens to jets too !
>
>

	However, in new jet and turbine engines (such as those driving
the later model helicopters like the Blackhawk and the Apache) there are
four sets of turbine fins.  The first two rotate in one direction, the
second two rotate in the opposite direction.  This cancels out the 
torque problem WRT the engines.  
	As with helicopters, additional torque is applied from the main
rotor, necessitating an anit-torque or tail rotor.


***********************************************************
bspain@hypnos.calpoly.edu            Bradley K. Spain

BlackHawk 26          Fixed wing pilots merely fly, but,
			  Chopper drivers beat the air into
			  submission!!  ;-{)
***********************************************************
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Why execute spies?
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:36:04 GMT


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

>From sun330!ur-guh.com!smith@uunet.UU.NET(Russ Smith)
>Why is there a "tradition" of executing spies caught during
>wartime? What makes a spy sufficiently different from any other
>soldier that the spy should be killed?

A spy is not a soldier, legally.  The crucial difference is that a spy
is trying to pass himself off as a loyal citizen.  Soldiers' uniforms and
insignia declare their affiliation openly, if not always conspicuously.

In practice, there isn't always as much difference as you might think.
Surrendering is a high-risk operation; it is much safer to surrender in
a large group or to a high-ranking officer, if you can.  Individual
POWs often quietly disappear, especially if the capturing unit is in
a hurry or angry about something.  People have estimated the mortality
rate involved in surrendering as high as 50%.
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: billb@is.rice.edu (William Stenson Blackwell)
Subject: Re: Muskets and Archery
Organization: Rice University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:18:56 GMT


From billb@is.rice.edu (William Stenson Blackwell)

The use of bows in the military continues today.  The 2em Regimente Etrangere
(i.e. the French Foreign Legion) still have crossbows as general issue weapons.
They have found them particularly useful in the jungles of South America where
they want a noiseless sniping weapon that still has comparable range and power 
to a more traditional weapon.  
[I could be wrong, I got this out of a book called "Special Forces of the World"]

-- 


********************************************************************************
* Bill Blackwell         |  Nothing says "get out of my house!" quite like the *
* Richardson College     |  <clack> <clack> of a round being chambered.        *
* Rice University        |  Nothing says "NOW!" quite like a laser sight on    *
* Houston, TX            |  your groin.                                        *
* billb@owlnet.rice.edu  |  My opinions are mine, no one else is that stupid.  *
********************************************************************************

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: wehumble@iastate.edu (Ed Humble)
Subject: Re: Tracers
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:46:23 GMT


From wehumble@iastate.edu (Ed Humble)

In article <1992Jul26.181003.28502@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>, viking@iastate.edu
(Dan Sorenson) writes:
> 
>	[Phalanx stuff deleted]
>
> 	The material is depleted uranium, one of the densent metals known.
> It is _not_ radioactive to any extent, despite what some sailors might
> tell the new seaman loading the gun in a fit of mislead humor.

	The AMMO may not be radioactive, but the uranium definitely is.  In 'Triumph
Without Victory' by US News and World Report, damage done to enemy vehicles
could be confirmed as coming from an M1A1 firing DU rounds from the residual
radioactivity around the holes.  That's how the identified most of the ground
friendly fire incidents, by the radioactive holes tanks shot in Bradleys.

> 
> <Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
> <z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
> <viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
> < ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >
> 

========================================================================
Ed Humble                |   Iowa State University   -  Moo!          
wehumble@iastate.edu     |   Dept. of Aerospace Engineering
                         |    Grad (Professional) Student
========================================================================
  "`Ecrasez l'infame.'  I looked it up.  What infamous thing do you want to
erase?"

  "What infamous thing have you got?"
========================================================================

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)
Subject: Tanker's Jacket
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:36:17 GMT


From cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton)





Does anybody know where I can get tanker's jackets mail-order?  I'm referring
to the Army style tanker's jacket, not the AirForce MA-1 type jacket.  I'm
looking for OD, woodland, or small leaf, or black.  I used to have a ROK Army
reversible black/small leaf jacket, but it's long since given up the ghost.
Any help would be appreciated.


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

"Well whose opinions did you THINK these were...?" 
------------------------------------------------------------------  

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)
Subject: Re: Marines, are they needed?
Organization: Cornell University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:18:20 GMT


From wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Thomas Schoene)

In article <1992Jul17.191204.28021@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM>,
frank@toadflax.ucdavis.edu (Jeremy Frank) writes: 
> The former Soviet Union had Naval Infantry, which isn't quite like our
> Marines.  I think their mission was to attack ports (i.e. cities) rather
> than beaches.  I think they did have a "traditional" (in our sense) Marines
> unit.  I also played a wargame in which the Poles (!) had a Marine unit,
> but have no sources to back that claim up.  The same game system supposes
> that the Iranians have a Marine brigade or two, again no backup.  Now that I
> think about it, it also supposes that the Italians and French have Marines
> as well.  Of course no backup.
I don't think that the Soviets field a seperate Marine force aside from the
Naval Infantry which is fiarly heavily equiped for amphibious ops (Tanks and
so on) but maybe not more so than the USMC.  The Poles also field a similar
type unit (or used to).   No idea on the Iranians but the Italians do have the
San Marco Marines a battaliion scale Army unit for amphibious ops.  The French
have the Fusiliers de la Marine  which sounds like an amphibious force but I
understand it to be more of a Colonial Duty unit than one with extensive
amphibious training.
>   
> The British have the SBS (Special Boat Service), which is probably closer to
> the Green Berets than the Marines, but I'd guess from the name that they
> tend to engage in water-related activities more often.  I have no idea 
> whether or not British military doctrine calls for them to serve
> as a landing force prepratory to Army landings as the Marines are (or
> were) used for.  (Didn't they do something during the Falklands/Malvinas 
> conflict?  Darn, don't remember.)
The SBS is the British equivalent to the SEAL Teams.  They are drawn from the
ranks of the Royal Marines, who have the same mission, in large, as the
U.S.M.C.   Like the Corps the RM are organized as an expeditionary force with
special training in amphibious assault (albeit only in Brigade strength with
little heavy firepower and almost no aviation assets). 
They also train for Mountain and Artic Warfare and one battalion (at least) was
tasked to the North Flank of NATO. 
    Almost all of 3 Commando Brigade (the main element of the RM) went to the
Falklands and did very well (much better than their British Army Guards
companions).

-- 
Tom Schoene
wwo@cornella.cit.cornell.edu  -or- wwo@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Whenever you're holding all the cards why does everyone else turn
out to be playing chess?"

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: gt6511a@prism.gatech.edu (COCHRANE,JAMES SHAPLEIGH)
Subject: Tracers/SAW
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:35:37 GMT


From gt6511a@prism.gatech.edu (COCHRANE,JAMES SHAPLEIGH)


     From what I have seen/used, tracers are not that uncommon for the M16... 
The tracers used with the M16A1 are designated the M196.  Not only are they used
for night fire, platoon/squad/section leaders have been known to use them to
mark targets for their unit... The manual for the M16 recommends a ball-to-tracer ratio of at least 1:1... Anything greater will supposedly damage the barrel.
I have also heard of the trick of loading the last few rounds of a magazine with
tracers to warn the firer he/she is running out of ammo... The best use I have 
seen of tracers was to demonstrate the difference between semi- and auto- fire...  Nice show... 5.56 tracers seem to run about $.50 a round at gun shows around
the area (Alabama and Georgia).
     The SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon) (M249) is a light machine gun firing the 
M855 5.56 mm ball round...  It usually feeds from either a 250 round box or 30
round magazines.  Fieldstripping it is similar to fieldstripping an M60... From
what I understand, it is even MORE finicky than an M16 when it comes to
cleanliness and proper function... We don't get SAW's, so I haven't gotten to
fire/mess with one yet...

My $.02 worth...

                                   James S. Cochrane
                                   Cadet    USAR
                                   Georgia Tech AROTC

Disclaimer: If my superiors knew what I was doing, they would disown me and deny
my actions at the same time... My views do not represent this institution, Cadet
Command, the US Army, or official US policy... Drive on!



Newsgroups: sci.military
From: thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)
Subject: Re: Using Heat Seeing Missles
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:46:31 GMT


From thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)

In article <1992Jul29.130435.22856@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:
>
>From ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
>
>In article <1992Jul26.181019.28593@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> andy@sail.stanford.edu (Andy Freeman) writes:
>
>>How does one avoid fratricide (not own-goals) with heat-seekers?
>
>
>The two fighters in an element must keep in contact. There is a
>code word that a pilot says before he sets off a heat seeker and
>his wingman is supposed to get out of the way ASAP. I think its
>"Fox Two" (Fox One was for a Sparrow) but I'm probably wrong. Ran-
>dy Cunningham wrote about this.
>

No, you are right about this.  The only correction, and it is a slight but
important one, is that 'Fox Two' is the call AS the missile is fired, not
before.

TH



Newsgroups: sci.military
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Brass cartridge cases? (Re: some civil war firsts.)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:29:12 GMT


From ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)


Well, how about the use of brass cartridge casesfor small arms? Were they 
used in any previous war?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: liats3@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (LIANG TIAN)
Subject: Re: Tracers
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:19:20 GMT


From liats3@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (LIANG TIAN)

ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib) writes:

>Are there such things as "infrared tracers"? Tracers that would be 
>visible in the infrared but not normally?

>An interesting application of "tracers" would be the Phalanx.. I
>read somewhere that the fire control radar can "see" the outgoing
>projectiles and adjust the gun's aim accordingly.

  The radar of the Phalanx will detect the reflection of radar off
the rear end of the outgoing projectiles(they are flat at the rear
end). It can thus determine where the projectiles are going and with
tracking on the target as well, decide if the projectiles are going
to hit the target. If not, it will shift fire accordingly. This is
known as 'closed-loop'(?) targeting or something like that.

  Don't know about IR tracers though, I would think that since the
bullets are pretty hot(from the explosion and friction from the barrel
and air), IR goggles would pick them up without special IR tracers.
I am merely making a guess. Does anyone have any info on this?

/***********************************************************/
				Liang Tian Soon
				liats3@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au
/***********************************************************/
From: nick@iagu.itd.adelaide.edu.au (Nick Falkner)
Subject: The Correct Material for Bullets
Keywords: bullets, lead, thanks
Organization: Cthuloid Genetic Research Team
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:18:46 GMT


From nick@iagu.itd.adelaide.edu.au (Nick Falkner)



Many thanks to all those who responded to my question about what you should make
bullets out of if you have no lead.

Some other points were raised while the original question was answered and I also
wish to thank those who took the time to collate their thoughts or do a little 
research.

Anyone interested in a complete set of the answers can mail to me and I'll
forward it to them.

Nick.

================================================================================
This is THE Nick Falkner          E-Mail:  nick@iagu.itd.adelaide.edu.au
================================================================================
                                 Deal with it.
================================================================================
 

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)
Subject: Re: B52 Question
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:41:28 GMT


From thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)

In article <1992Jul17.192501.29673@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> van-bc!mdavcr.mda.ca!faubert@uunet.UU.NET (David M. Faubert) writes:
>
>From van-bc!mdavcr.mda.ca!faubert@uunet.UU.NET (David M. Faubert)
>
>
>I was reading this book about bombers which said something along the lines:
>"A B52 taking off under full water injection." It's probably something simple,
>but the book did not elaborate. At any rate, someone please indulge my
>curiosity as to what this means. Any extra info about B52 engines would be
>interesting too.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dave Faubert


Dave,

Many jet engines, the ones on the B-52 and F-105 for example, have a water
injection system whereby water is actually pumped into the engine to provide
more mass in the exhaust.  In the 'every action has an equal and opposite
reaction' principle, the more mass that is expelled by the engine, the greater
the forward reaction (thrust).  Simple, but effective.  Under some high load
or temperature conditions, unavailability or loss of water injection was a
'no-go' factor.

TH

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: rray@lookout.it.uswc.uswest.com (Randy J. Ray)
Subject: proposal for rec.models.misc
Organization: US WEST Communications, Inc. -- Denver, CO
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:59:40 GMT


From rray@lookout.it.uswc.uswest.com (Randy J. Ray)

I have submitted a call for discussion for a new group to discuss scale 
modeling. I have crossposted it to this group, because many people I know
who are enthusiasts about military history and technology also enjoy the
hobby. Please take some time to read it if you are interested. The modeling
discussions, while not limited to military modeling, are usually weighed 
heavily towards military.

Randy
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Randy J. Ray -- U S WEST IT/CSD         rray@{lookout,uswat}.it.uswc.uswest.com
I'd rather talk religion with Charles Manson than discuss ethics with Congress.
     -me                                                   Phone: (303)595-2852
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Mike Bishop <mvs.sas.com!SNOMCB@mcnc.org>
Subject: Military insignia
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:12:27 GMT


From Mike Bishop <mvs.sas.com!SNOMCB@mcnc.org>

 
  Can anyone tell me where I might be able to find the insignia
  for the 116th Infantry Division from WW I ? I have checked
  the local libraries but no luck.
 
 
Mike


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: gnb@bby.com.au (Gregory N. Bond)
Subject: Water Injection
Organization: Burdett, Buckeridge & Young, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 18:11:12 GMT


From gnb@bby.com.au (Gregory N. Bond)

Top-of-the-head explanation for water injection into jet engines:

- Turbines are most efficient at high speed and high mass flow rate.
- "Jet" propulsion is most efficient when the exhaust speed closely
  matches airspeed (so the turbine is most like a propeller); this is
  from conservation of momentum.

-> At takeoff, jets are relativly inefficient as the turbine is running
   flat out but the airspeed is low.  What is needed is a way to
   increase the mass flow at a lower velocity.

On commercial jets, the high-bypass fans do this by acting as a
propeller; the mixing in the exhaust slows (and cools) the turbine
output which increases low-speed efficiency.

Military engines cannot run high-bypass because that puts a limit on
high speed performance (eventually, the fan stops helping and starts
causing drag).  So they inject water into the hot exhaust which cools
and slows the exhaust, giving better thrust.

Am I close?
--
Gregory Bond <gnb@bby.com.au> Burdett Buckeridge & Young Ltd Melbourne Australia
"Take my archetypes - please!" - Henny Jungman (geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM)

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: jac54@cas.org
Subject: "Why we fight"
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:09:42 GMT


From jac54@cas.org


	The "Why We Fight" series has been generally available
	for a long time.  I saw the one about the Battle of
	Britain in 1966 or 1967 and the whole series has been
	shown several times on the A&E cable network.  I think
	the whole series is even available on VHS>

	Alec Chambers