Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Kristling Ravenwing <kristling@*******.CROSSWINDS.NET>
Subject: Arrow
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 21:31:25 -0500
Hey, Gang
1) Welcome back Erik.

2) Anyone mind if I have the Ravenwing International gang (sans krist, of
cours, I'm postin' why tomorrow unless anyone else in the storyline has any
input) find the rumoured to be saved from destruction Averal Arrow?

The Averal was on of the most advanced airplanes of its time. It was
discontinued by the (defunct in SR) Canadian government of the day. It'd just
be cool, since one of Ravenwing's cronies is a rigger with a REAL interest in
arronautic history.
>>>>>["That? That's a carp. I have a cow in orbit I can call down at
will.
Now, what was that about sigs should be allowed on TK?"
Reach me at kristling@*******.crosswinds.net
ICQ UIN: 6642462
www.crosswind.com/toronto/~kristling/ holds my weekly updated
webpage.]<<<<<
--Kristling (the Weird) Ravenwing, Aka Daniel Sauve (say "SO-
vey"!), Josha Dube, Ken masters, D, Samson Primal, Josha the Strange, Dexter,
Ricochet..... </>
Message no. 2
From: Jeffrey Mach <mach@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 18:54:27 -0800
On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Kristling Ravenwing wrote:

> 2) Anyone mind if I have the Ravenwing International gang (sans krist, of
> cours, I'm postin' why tomorrow unless anyone else in the storyline has any
> input) find the rumoured to be saved from destruction Averal Arrow?
>
> The Averal was on of the most advanced airplanes of its time. It was
> discontinued by the (defunct in SR) Canadian government of the day. It'd just
> be cool, since one of Ravenwing's cronies is a rigger with a REAL interest in
> arronautic history.

What is it? I mean finding an old WWII fighter at the bottom of a lake is
one thing (they actually recovered a P-38 a few years ago IIRC), but
having runners wandering about in a Concord is quite another matter. And
how would they find it? I assume the "rumored to be saved from
destruction" means that it was never seen to auger in, but nobody knows if
it still exists or was scrapped. "Advanced _____ of its time" is highly
relative. The crossbow was the most advanced personal weapon of its time,
and the SR-71 Blackbird was (arguably, is) the most advanced aircraft of
its time.

--My two yen

Jeff
Message no. 3
From: Bruce Ford <shaman@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 22:19:18 -0700
On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Kristling Ravenwing wrote:

> 2) Anyone mind if I have the Ravenwing International gang (sans krist, of
> cours, I'm postin' why tomorrow unless anyone else in the storyline has any
> input) find the rumoured to be saved from destruction Averal Arrow?
>
> The Averal was on of the most advanced airplanes of its time. It was
> discontinued by the (defunct in SR) Canadian government of the day. It'd just
> be cool, since one of Ravenwing's cronies is a rigger with a REAL interest in
> arronautic history.

Now there is a bitter pill from past Canadian history and Diefenbaker's
betrayal as he buckled to pressures from certain other parties.
Considering that everything that could possibly be found by government
agents was destroyed including the prototype, it might be a bit difficult
to do.

However, there is a current ongoing project right now by volunteers for
the Arrow 2000 Project where they are attempting to build a completely
working model of the original Avro Arrow to scale using items taken by
workers when the order for destruction was passed down and the knowledge
of those workers that are still alive today.

Based on the original prototype's performance, it was believed and still
is by the people that had built and flown the prototype that it would have
outperformed craft that are currently in use even today and into the next
century.

I could see quite easily if this Project succeeds which I have no doubt
that it will, that an aeronautics company attempts to rebuild the
full-scale prototype once more and that in turn having some of the same
political pressures that were brought to bear upon the original Avro Arrow
and caused it to be destroyed happening again except this time instead of
destruction, the government while appearing to cooperate hides the
prototype and then in the upheaval of the Awakening and the Indians
reclamation of their lands that the records of its existance are lost.

<Shrug> Sorry for rambling, my grandfather was one of the workers on the
prototype so it's hard not to start up after hearing so much and looking
into it on my own because I happen to follow aeronautical history some.

Bruce.
Message no. 4
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 12:54:19 -0500
At 10:19 PM 3/4/98 -0700, you wrote:
>On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Kristling Ravenwing wrote:
>
>> 2) Anyone mind if I have the Ravenwing International gang (sans krist, of
>> cours, I'm postin' why tomorrow unless anyone else in the storyline has any
>> input) find the rumoured to be saved from destruction Averal Arrow?
>>
>> The Averal was on of the most advanced airplanes of its time. It was
>> discontinued by the (defunct in SR) Canadian government of the day. It'd
just
>> be cool, since one of Ravenwing's cronies is a rigger with a REAL
interest in
>> arronautic history.
>
>
If this plane is such hot sh*t, then I should think that a number of
players, both corporate and underworld might find it very interesting...

Of course, I have no idea what the hell this plane is. If it was so
special, why was it cancelled?

>Based on the original prototype's performance, it was believed and still
>is by the people that had built and flown the prototype that it would have
>outperformed craft that are currently in use even today and into the next
>century.
>
>
Well, if we are talking fighter craft, let's not forget the US project that
has been dubbed "Aurora." While it's name might be something totally
different, it's clear that the US Gov. has *some* sort of bleeding-edge jet
that it's been testing for several years now. Supposedly has the next
generation of stealth technology and uses (I hope I remember the term
right) "pulse detonation engines," whatever the hell that means. It's
rumored to be extremely fast. It's also rumored to be extremely loud
(something like a continuos sonic boom), and to cause a bizarre contrail of
a single line with a coil around that. Supposedly it triggered
seismographs and false earthquakes here in Southern California back in 92
or 93 or something (turns out that seismographs can tell you not only how
fast a craft was going, but what it probably is and the direction it's
head, *IF* you can give the computers enough data. As you might guess,
those false earthquakes I mentioned *were* caused by a supersonic aircraft
traveling off-shore, going north-south - and caused by an unknown aircraft
traveling at unclear speeds above the sound barrier.).

Of course, no one will admit to the Aurora project. My Dad (if you were on
RN last week, you know about the surveillance and wire tapping) claims to
know something about it, but refuses to say what. *I* suspect that with
his contacts in the defense industry, he knows there is such a jet, and
probably knows some basic stats, but that's it. This is a man that worked
in what was essentially a concrete-encased bank vault for a number of years
so that no one could spy on the projects he was working on for his company
- no windows, no outside phone connections, nothing. Must have been oh so
fun.

Erik J.
Message no. 5
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 18:00:36 +0000
In message <Pine.BSI.3.95.980304220541.27559A-100000@*******.com>, Bruce
Ford <shaman@*******.COM> writes
>On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Kristling Ravenwing wrote:
>
>Based on the original prototype's performance, it was believed and still
>is by the people that had built and flown the prototype that it would have
>outperformed craft that are currently in use even today and into the next
>century.

This got hammered out in rec.aviation.military a while ago...

The Arrow would have been an excellent interceptor, if everything
worked: but, for instance, the weapon it was designed to use (the
active-homing Sparrow II) was extremely ambitious and was cancelled in
1958. Aerodynamically, though, it was excellent, and plans were in hand
to use the SARH Sparrow III instead.

It was easily equal or superior to contemporary aircraft like the F-106,
Su-11, or Dassault Mirage: but comparing it to the F-15 or Su-27 is a
little optimistic :)

The design shows its age in, for instance, the weapons bay for internal
carriage of weapons (vice the conformal carriage preferred today), and
no consideration whatsoever for any air-to-ground role: but it was one
hell of an aircraft. Should have flown top cover for TSR.2...

><Shrug> Sorry for rambling, my grandfather was one of the workers on the
>prototype so it's hard not to start up after hearing so much and looking
>into it on my own because I happen to follow aeronautical history some.
>
>Bruce.
Message no. 6
From: Bruce Ford <shaman@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 15:24:53 -0700
On Thu, 5 Mar 1998, Paul J. Adam wrote:

> >Based on the original prototype's performance, it was believed and still
> >is by the people that had built and flown the prototype that it would have
> >outperformed craft that are currently in use even today and into the next
> >century.
>
> This got hammered out in rec.aviation.military a while ago...
>
> The Arrow would have been an excellent interceptor, if everything
> worked: but, for instance, the weapon it was designed to use (the
> active-homing Sparrow II) was extremely ambitious and was cancelled in
> 1958. Aerodynamically, though, it was excellent, and plans were in hand
> to use the SARH Sparrow III instead.
>
> It was easily equal or superior to contemporary aircraft like the F-106,
> Su-11, or Dassault Mirage: but comparing it to the F-15 or Su-27 is a
> little optimistic :)

The prototype was scrapped in 1959 along with as much material as could be
confiscated. As to it being equal to or better then the F-15 and its ilk,
we'll never truly know as they only have the lab tests and the prototype's
performance but based on those results they believe it would have had a
better performance level for speed and maneuverability then anything
currently flying today.

Now, here I am conjecturing, if they were to have kept it and put in
production upgrading it with advanced technologies as the Russians often
did with several of their aircraft, most notably the Mig-21, the Avro
engineers claims may well have turned out to be true.

Unfortunately, that is question that will only be debated by arm-chair
theorists from this point forward and it's basically pointless to even try
to as each plane or vehicle must be judged based on what mission profiles
it was designed to accomplish.

Though I can remember some pretty good debates about which was better the
F-14 or F-15, I never really did come to terms with that one...I liked
them both way too much... :)

------
Bruce Ford aka Rendar, the educated Ork Street Samurai.

"The Shadows are your friend. Intelligence, your ally. Negotiation, your
companion. Violence, your lover...but frag, chaos is your wife!"
-Summary of the run's results to a Johnson.

E-mail: shaman@*******.com ICQ#: 4804267
Message no. 7
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 22:23:02 +0000
In message <3.0.3.16.19980305095119.0987f872@****.fbiz.com>, Erik
Jameson <erikj@****.COM> writes
>If this plane is such hot sh*t, then I should think that a number of
>players, both corporate and underworld might find it very interesting...

It was, in the late 1950s. Not many corporations fighting to find old
Sopwith Camels or Spad VIIs these days...

>Of course, I have no idea what the hell this plane is. If it was so
>special, why was it cancelled?

Politics and money.

>Well, if we are talking fighter craft, let's not forget the US project that
>has been dubbed "Aurora." While it's name might be something totally
>different, it's clear that the US Gov. has *some* sort of bleeding-edge jet
>that it's been testing for several years now.

The really neat thing is that this includes NASP, the X-31, the NASA
aerospike engine, and lots of other high-speed stuff...

There may be a hypersonic reconnaisance aircraft, it's been discussed
for some years: even here in the UK there are claims of sightings off
Scotland, of landings at Boscombe Down, et cetera.

>Supposedly has the next
>generation of stealth technology and uses (I hope I remember the term
>right) "pulse detonation engines," whatever the hell that means.

Gets around some of the inlet problems you run into at very high speeds.

>It's
>rumored to be extremely fast.

Mach 5 or thereabouts.

>Of course, no one will admit to the Aurora project. My Dad (if you were on
>RN last week, you know about the surveillance and wire tapping) claims to
>know something about it, but refuses to say what. *I* suspect that with
>his contacts in the defense industry, he knows there is such a jet, and
>probably knows some basic stats, but that's it.

Or he knows there's no such aircraft and is neither confirming nor
denying... pointless to speculate, with his background he knows not to
let anything slip.

>This is a man that worked
>in what was essentially a concrete-encased bank vault for a number of years
>so that no one could spy on the projects he was working on for his company
>- no windows, no outside phone connections, nothing. Must have been oh so
>fun.

Sheesh. Glad I only handle SECRET.
Message no. 8
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 18:37:19 -0500
At 10:23 PM 3/5/98 +0000, you wrote:

>>Of course, I have no idea what the hell this plane is. If it was so
>>special, why was it cancelled?
>
>Politics and money.
>
Mind elaborating a bit on this point? Was it simply too expensive and
politically unpopular, or was there something more?


>There may be a hypersonic reconnaissance aircraft, it's been discussed
>for some years: even here in the UK there are claims of sightings off
>Scotland, of landings at Boscombe Down, et cetera.
>
Heard of those; some guy on an oil rig off the coast of Scotland who was
trained by the British Gov to recognized aircraft saw an air tanker (or
something similar I think), with an unknown triangular shaped craft flanked
on both sides by F-15s. Some people claim that the unknown triangular
shaped plane is the Aurora. But since no one is talking, who knows?

>>Supposedly has the next
>>generation of stealth technology and uses (I hope I remember the term
>>right) "pulse detonation engines," whatever the hell that means.
>
>Gets around some of the inlet problems you run into at very high speeds.
>
Erm, so? Again, mind going into a bit more depth on this? I'm highly
non-technical (drives my Dad absolutely bonkers), so please keep it to
layman's terms.


>Or he knows there's no such aircraft and is neither confirming nor
>denying... pointless to speculate, with his background he knows not to
>let anything slip.
>
Entirely possible. He jokes that he'll tell his secrets at the death bed -
my mom's deathbed that is. That way he knows his secrets won't be going
anywhere.

>>This is a man that worked
>>in what was essentially a concrete-encased bank vault for a number of years
>>so that no one could spy on the projects he was working on for his company
>>- no windows, no outside phone connections, nothing. Must have been oh so
>>fun.
>
>Sheesh. Glad I only handle SECRET.
>
He doesn't work in that vault anymore. Same company, but he does more
stuff along the lines of sysadmin and sysop type stuff right now. At
least, that's what he tell us. There were years when all he could say was
that he worked for *insert company name here*, but not what he was doing.
We found out later he's been on all sorts of projects, ranging from NORAD
style command and control centers to mobile radar units like the
Firefinder. Of course, he didn't say anything to us until the whole world
knew about the project.

My uncle is convinced my dad is a spy like Arnold was in the movie "True
Lies"...the damn thing is, while we know that isn't true, it's real hard
coming up with concrete evidence...

Anyway, I think I've drifted enough off-topic for today.

Erik J.

"Oh, the silent helicopters and men in black fatigues? They're just my
carpool to work son."
Message no. 9
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowtk@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 00:36:17 +0000
In message <3.0.3.16.19980305153153.3817bc70@****.fbiz.com>, Erik
Jameson <erikj@****.COM> writes
>At 10:23 PM 3/5/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>Politics and money.
>>
>Mind elaborating a bit on this point? Was it simply too expensive and
>politically unpopular, or was there something more?

The US saw it as a threat. On paper (the only judgement available) it
was superior to anything the US had. For instance, had the Arrow been
available to NATO, Lockheed would have sold many fewer Starfighters, and
the RAF might have chosen the Commonwealth CF-105 over the US F-4.
Considerable political pressure was exerted to cause Canada to drop the
project. The F-101 sale was pushed hard as being cheaper and less risky.

There are similar claims about the TSR-2 being seen as a threat to the
TFX program and the F-111; when TSR-2 was cancelled, the UK nearly
bought the F-111K, before joining Panavia to develop the Tornado.

>>Gets around some of the inlet problems you run into at very high speeds.
>>
>Erm, so? Again, mind going into a bit more depth on this? I'm highly
>non-technical (drives my Dad absolutely bonkers), so please keep it to
>layman's terms.

I'm not totally sure myself, so be gentle :) Basically, above Mach 1
flow regimes change quite dramatically, and you get shock waves forming
off every projection. The SR-71's engines work damn hard to keep the
shockwave from the inlet cone from popping out of the duct, because that
dumps the airflow and stalls the engine.

One reason 1960s aircraft like the F-4 could pull Mach 2.2, while
today's F/A-18 Hornet can only manage Mach 1.8, is because the inlets on
the newer aircraft are not optimised for high-speed flight but for
subsonic manoevering: high-Mach flight is so rare that the cost and
weight penalty of variable inlets isn't worthwhile.


As the speed rises, the shockwaves become more and more acute and the
problems of intake design for steady flow become greater. By going to a
pulse-detonation engine - one which takes a "gulp" of air and fuel and
then expels it - you can tolerate variations in airflow into the engine
better than a steady-flow system. It gives you a noisy engine and one
with a very "bumpy" thrust profile, though.
Message no. 10
From: Jeffrey Mach <mach@****.CALTECH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Arrow
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 19:25:07 -0800
On Thu, 5 Mar 1998, Paul J. Adam wrote:

> >Well, if we are talking fighter craft, let's not forget the US project that
> >has been dubbed "Aurora." While it's name might be something totally
> >different, it's clear that the US Gov. has *some* sort of bleeding-edge jet
> >that it's been testing for several years now.
>
> The really neat thing is that this includes NASP, the X-31, the NASA
> aerospike engine, and lots of other high-speed stuff...

Huh? What does the defunct National Aerospace plane, a thrust-vector
test-aircraft (already obsolete--see the VISTA F-16 or ACTIVE F-15
projects if you want to get closer to SotA), and Rocketdyne's engine have
to do with Aurora?

> There may be a hypersonic reconnaisance aircraft, it's been discussed
> for some years: even here in the UK there are claims of sightings off
> Scotland, of landings at Boscombe Down, et cetera.

Normally, I am a cynic when it comes to conspiracy theory, but I have seen
the data on sightings of "Aurora" (even though the name has been traced to
belonging to the Tier 3- Darkstar scout drone) and I am quite convinced
something "is out there." Fact is the F-117 was kept a secret for about a
decade, hell, I was even later relieved to find out about them after a
dark and silent triangular shape flew over my house a few months before
the press conference (my house is on Beale AFB's flight-path, the guy was
probably on the way to a KC-130). Fact is, seismographic sensors have
detected high-frequency pulsed detonations traveling over the Southern
California desert at many times the speed of sound. Caltech tried to ask
the USAF what it was, since it was bugging their seismographic sensors and
were brushed off. Fact is, around the time, weird contrails were
photographed and even videotaped. They look like a straight contrail with
doughnut shaped "puffs" around them. Best guess as to what could cause
it: pulse-detonation ramjet. Paul's already adressed that. Manned or
unmanned, reconnaisance vehicle or hypersonic testbed, nobody either knows
or is willing to tell.

Only comment on what Paul had to say was that the SR-71 hedges the
supersonic intake problems a bit by having the "cones" at the fronts of
its engine nascelles be retractile, to keep the shockwaves at bay, as well
as allow the engines to convert from turbojets to ramjets once up to
speed. They had to simply because the engines couldn't survive being run
as turbo-jets at the speeds that they wanted the Blackbird to cruise at.
Of course in all the pictures you see of the Blackbird, the cones are out
because at speed, the only aircraft that can easily photograph a Blackbird
is another Blackbird. =) Of course if you look at the pictures closely,
in many of them, the wings of the SR look "wet." That's fuel. Since the
frame heats up so much when the aircraft is at speed (to the point that if
you land right after a full-speed run, you can't get out of the aircraft
right away, the aircraft is too hot) that they had to design the fuel
tanks with gaps that would seal as the metal expanded. Why do I know so
much, see above Beale AFB comment. The SR's basically the main reason I
am getting my Master's in Aerospace Engineering. Now _there_ is a plane
that was ahead of its time.

> >It's
> >rumored to be extremely fast.
>
> Mach 5 or thereabouts.

I've heard claims that the propulsion system should be good to about Mach
8, but the body probably isn't. Trying to survive the incredible pressure
and worse thermal stresses on an aircraft at these speeds is a _major_
materials problem. A seriously hot topic right now. Since the problems
geometrically increase the faster you want to go. Reentry is bad enough,
but you typically don't spend much time in the hypersonic regime, and at
least in the case of the shuttle you end up replacing quite a bit after
you get done with a few flights. Now, you want to cruise at these speeds?
Good luck.

--Catch you later

Jeff

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Arrow, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!