SUBJECT: SONIC BOOMS AND UFOs FILE: UFO928 067/071 02 May 90 12:10:48 From: shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu!jrblack@sci To: All Subj: Sonic Booms & UFOs Attr: ------------------------------------------------ From: shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu!jrblack@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM Date: 1 May 90 19:50:21 GMT Message-ID: <4106@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> Newsgroups: info.paranet From: James Roger Black I am neither an engineer nor a physicist, but I have read that it is possible to suppress sonic booms (as well as reduce drag) in at least two ways: (1) use a porous wing that sucks air in along the wing surface and vents it out the back; (2) emit microwaves along the wing surface to break up the laminar flow of the air. I have also been told that the USAF has sponsored a lot of MHD and plasma research that somehow relates to this problem. Unfortunately, I lack the technical credentials to evaluate all this, and for all I know it could be pure BS. If anybody knows for sure, I would be glad to hear it. Speculation: I am told that the F-117A (i.e., the Stealth fighter) is subsonic. Could this be a cover story for the fact that even when flying supersonic it doesn't generate a sonic boom? --- ConfMail V4.00 * Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's most important computer network (1:30163/1 PATH: 30163/150 0 268/102 070/071 02 May 90 12:10:50 From: athertn!Atherton.COM!alex@scicom.Al To: All Subj: Re: Paranet Newsletter 211 Attr: ------------------------------------------------ UFGATE newsin 1.27 From: athertn!Atherton.COM!alex@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM Date: 2 May 90 17:17:33 GMT Message-ID: <4119@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM> Newsgroups: info.paranet From: alex@atherton.com (Alex Leavens) Regarding Sonic Booms... There's been a fair bit of research done on avoiding sonic booms; most of it, unfortunately, is classified, so we can't get at it. However, a few interesting things are known--most of them have to do with imparting a failry (er, that's _fairly_) serious electrical charge to the object (The reason much of this is classified is because it has applicability to missile nose-cones (ie nuclear warheads) during the re-entry phase of flight). The principal here seems to be that if you impart a charge to the object in the proper fashion, you can get the air molecules ahead of the object to 'move out of the way' on their own accord. So basically you're creating a hole in the air in advance of the object (be it missile nose cone or whatever) getting there; since the actual object is never running into air and shoving it aside at some huge rate, you don't get a sonic boom. (The NSA is hereby encouraged to point out any defects in my summarization, ) Regarding the Nevada Aerial Research Newsletter... I'm not even going to try to summarize what's in it; it's just too weird. If you're interested, you can pick up copies of the current issue from Arcturus Book Service, (404)-297-4624 (note, I have no connection with Arcturus other than as a satisified customer). --alex --- ConfMail V4.00 * Origin: Paranet(sm) - The world's most important computer network (1:30163/1 PATH: 30163/150 0 268/102 093/105 03 May 90 10:00:00 From: Jim Delton To: Jim Speiser Subj: Re: Sonic Booms & UFOs Attr: ------------------------------------------------ If the UFO's are surrounded by some sort of "field" as many have speculated, it is also easy to speculate that the "field" has the side benefit of eliminating sonic booms as was explained by someone in regard to rocket nosecones having a strong charge, or whatever to help in reducing heat build up. --- QuickBBS v2.61 [EVALUATION] * Origin: -==- ParaNet Zeta-Reticuli Scottsdale, AZ (1:114/37.0) PATH: 114/37 268/102 ********************************************** * THE U.F.O. BBS - http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo * **********************************************