China's stealth jet -J-20

[mike]

http://www.washingtontimes.com Inside the Ring
news.google.com

China's stealth jet

The Pentagon is scrambling to explain what appears to be an
intelligence failure after Internet photos made public recently showed
a faster-than-estimated advance of China's new fifth-generation
warplane.

U.S. intelligence estimates previously concluded the jet, dubbed the
J-20, will not be deployed until 2020.

Vice Adm. David Dorsett, director of Naval Intelligence, told a group
of defense reporters on Wednesday that the new Chinese fighter program
was not a surprise, but "the speed at which they are making progress …
we underestimated."

"Across a broad array of weapons systems, they are making progress,"
the three-star admiral said.

Progress on the J-20 is among several other Chinese military
developments that U.S. intelligence agencies have been accused of
missing over the past decade. Others include the failure to detect a
new class of Chinese submarine called the Yuan and shortcomings
related to Beijing's long-range cruise missiles and a new anti-ship
ballistic missile.

Pentagon spokesman Marine Col. Dave Lapan confirmed to Inside the Ring
that recent photos of a new Chinese jet show "taxiing tests" on a
prototype aircraft apparently photographed by people who saw it pass
by.

"This is evidence that a fifth-generation fighter program is
proceeding," Col. Lapan said.

"However, progress appears to be uneven: Open-source reports show that
China has been seeking jet engines for its fourth-generation fighter
from Russia, indicating that they are still encountering some
difficulties in working toward fifth-generation capabilities," he
said.

The faster development of the J-20 was first discussed by Chinese Gen.
He Weirong, deputy commander of the Chinese air force last year. He
predicted deployment as earlier as 2017.

The jet is expected to rival the U.S. F-22 superfighter whose
production was canceled by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates after 187
jets were built. In scrapping the F-22, Mr. Gates stated publicly that
one reason for his decision was that the Chinese would not deploy a
comparable jet until 2020, thus more F-35 jets would be built instead
of the more capable F-22.

Richard Fisher, a military analyst with the International Assessment
and Strategy Center who was among the first to spot the J-20 photos
months ago, said the aircraft is manufactured by the Chengdu Aircraft
Co.

"Chengdu's goal is to beat the F-22 and then build their own F-35 when
the 18-ton thrust engine is ready. It is a full challenge to the U.S.
strategy for air power," Mr. Fisher said.

Both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations are to blame for not
continuing production of the F-22, which is needed if there is ever a
conflict with China over Taiwan, he said.

"Absent a better combat aircraft, this constitutes one of the most
serious U.S. intelligence and leadership failures since the end of the
Cold War," Mr. Fisher said.

Mr. Fisher said the images of the jet reveal that China is advancing
rapidly toward fielding a credible and competitive fifth-generation
fighter. The photos show a large fighter with radar-evading stealth
features, an advanced electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and
"supercruise" — the ability to fly at supersonic speed for long
distances using less fuel, he said.

"With refueling, this fighter can carry the fight out to Guam," Mr.
Fisher said.

As for the Pentagon's claim that the Chinese are having problems
developing an advanced engine for the jet, Mr. Fisher said China is
ground-testing a new, more powerful jet engine and, as a result, could
deploy the new jet by 2017.

"If the United States wishes to remain an Asian power capable of
deterring Chinese aggression, or preventing future generations from
becoming victims of China's dictates, it is essential that an improved
version of the F-22 be put into crash development, as well as putting
a sixth-generation fighter into formal development," Mr. Fisher said.

[Keith Willshaw[_3_]]

"Ray O'Hara" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>
>>
>> No, I don't think that. I'm pretty sure the J-20 program exists, because
>> credible people say so. As to whether the program will produce some
>> quantities of very capable flying fighters in the '20's, I consider it
>> unrealistic to assess the Chinese as being technologically primitive, so
>> I give them 50% chance of doing so. I suspect you rate the chances of
>> J-20 success as 0% for the rest of the 21st century.
>>
>> AHS
>
> the OP was talking as if it already exists,
> you are putting your spin on what he said ands what I said.
>
> when they produce the protype get back to me.
> lots of projects exist, some even come to fruition.
> but as they say. don't count your chickens until they hatch.
>

On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
is that its hard to know when they have produced a
prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
spotters than western natons.

Keith

[John Szalay[_2_]]

Kerryn Offord > wrote in

> Didn't the original research for stealth come out of Russia (or at
> least was done by Russian mathematicians...

In a-round-about way,

According to Ben Rich's book, the original formulas were from a scottish
physicist James Maxwell,developed a century ago, later refined by a german
electromagnetics expert Arnold Sommerfeld, then put in a paper by a
russian radio engineer scientist named Pyotr Ufimtsev ,paper was called
"Method of edge waves in the physical theory of diffraction"
that paper was ignored for 9 years until translated and discovered
by a Skunk Works mathemation named Denys Overholser.
once he understood the theory, stealth came into being.

REF:
Skunk Works" by Ben Rich & Leo Janos.
page 19

IMHO:
One Hellofa read, well worth having on your book shelf.

[Dennis[_6_]]

Mike wrote:

> http://www.washingtontimes.com Inside the Ring
> news.google.com
>
> China's stealth jet
>
> The Pentagon is scrambling to explain what appears to be an
> intelligence failure after Internet photos made public recently showed
> a faster-than-estimated advance of China's new fifth-generation
> warplane.

Yes, but does it work at all???

> U.S. intelligence estimates previously concluded the jet, dubbed the
> J-20, will not be deployed until 2020.

Which is a while yet.

Dennis

[Kerryn Offord[_3_]]

On 1/8/2011 3:40 PM, John Szalay wrote:
> Kerryn > wrote in
>
>> Didn't the original research for stealth come out of Russia (or at
>> least was done by Russian mathematicians...
>
> In a-round-about way,
>
> According to Ben Rich's book, the original formulas were from a scottish
> physicist James Maxwell,developed a century ago, later refined by a german
> electromagnetics expert Arnold Sommerfeld, then put in a paper by a
> russian radio engineer scientist named Pyotr Ufimtsev ,paper was called
> "Method of edge waves in the physical theory of diffraction"
> that paper was ignored for 9 years until translated and discovered
> by a Skunk Works mathemation named Denys Overholser.
> once he understood the theory, stealth came into being.
>
> REF:
> Skunk Works" by Ben Rich& Leo Janos.
> page 19
>
> IMHO:
> One Hellofa read, well worth having on your book shelf.


That's sort of what I remember reading..

[Kerryn Offord[_3_]]

On 1/8/2011 3:51 PM, Dennis wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
>> http://www.washingtontimes.com Inside the Ring
>> news.google.com
>>
>> China's stealth jet
>>
>> The Pentagon is scrambling to explain what appears to be an
>> intelligence failure after Internet photos made public recently showed
>> a faster-than-estimated advance of China's new fifth-generation
>> warplane.
>
> Yes, but does it work at all???
>
>> U.S. intelligence estimates previously concluded the jet, dubbed the
>> J-20, will not be deployed until 2020.
>
> Which is a while yet.
>
> Dennis

.... how long after the F-22 first flew before it was deployed?

[Paul A. Suhler]

On 1/8/2011 3:40 PM, John Szalay wrote:
> Kerryn > wrote in
>
>> Didn't the original research for stealth come out of Russia (or at
>> least was done by Russian mathematicians...
>
> In a-round-about way,
>
> According to Ben Rich's book, the original formulas were from a scottish
> physicist James Maxwell,developed a century ago, later refined by a german
> electromagnetics expert Arnold Sommerfeld, then put in a paper by a
> russian radio engineer scientist named Pyotr Ufimtsev ,paper was called
> "Method of edge waves in the physical theory of diffraction"
> that paper was ignored for 9 years until translated and discovered
> by a Skunk Works mathemation named Denys Overholser.
> once he understood the theory, stealth came into being.
>
> REF:
> Skunk Works" by Ben Rich& Leo Janos.
> page 19
>
> IMHO:
> One Hellofa read, well worth having on your book shelf.

Check out Ed Lovick's "Radar Man: A Personal History
of Stealth." Ed invented some of the original techniques
during the work on the A-12. It predates the computational
work based on Ufimtsev's paper. His is -- as far as I know --
only the third memoir by a Skunk Worker.


Ed helped me a good bit with my book, "From RAINBOW to GUSTO."

Paul

[Peter Stickney[_2_]]

On Fri, 07 Jan 2011 22:26:49 -0800, Paul A. Suhler wrote:

> On 1/8/2011 3:40 PM, John Szalay wrote:
>> Kerryn > wrote in
>>
>>> Didn't the original research for stealth come out of Russia (or at
>>> least was done by Russian mathematicians...
>>
>> In a-round-about way,
>>
>> According to Ben Rich's book, the original formulas were from a
>> scottish physicist James Maxwell,developed a century ago, later
>> refined by a german electromagnetics expert Arnold Sommerfeld, then put
>> in a paper by a russian radio engineer scientist named Pyotr
>> Ufimtsev ,paper was called "Method of edge waves in the physical theory
>> of diffraction" that paper was ignored for 9 years until translated and
>> discovered by a Skunk Works mathemation named Denys Overholser. once he
>> understood the theory, stealth came into being.
>>
>> REF:
>> Skunk Works" by Ben Rich& Leo Janos. page 19
>>
>> IMHO:
>> One Hellofa read, well worth having on your book shelf.
>
> Check out Ed Lovick's "Radar Man: A Personal History of Stealth." Ed
> invented some of the original techniques during the work on the A-12.
> It predates the computational work based on Ufimtsev's paper. His is --
> as far as I know -- only the third memoir by a Skunk Worker.

There were other pre-Blackbird stealth efforts as well. the
Wright Air Development Center covered a T-33 in RAM in the
mid-50s, and achieved significant signature reduction.

--
Pete Stickney
Failure is not an option
It comes bundled with the system

[Jim Wilkins]

On Jan 7, 9:40*pm, John Szalay <john.szalay.at.att.net> wrote:
> Kerryn Offord > wrote in
>
> > Didn't the original research for stealth come out of Russia (or at
> > least was done by Russian mathematicians...
>
> In a-round-about way,
>
> According to Ben Rich's book, the original formulas were from a scottish
> physicist James Maxwell,developed a century *ago, later refined by a german
> electromagnetics expert Arnold Sommerfeld, then put in a paper *by a
> russian radio engineer scientist *named *Pyotr Ufimtsev ,paper was called *
> "Method of edge waves in the physical theory of diffraction"
> that paper was ignored for 9 years until translated and discovered
> by a Skunk Works mathemation named Denys Overholser.
> once he understood the theory, *stealth came into being.
>
> *REF:
> Skunk Works" *by Ben Rich & Leo Janos.
> page 19

Oliver Heaviside's work on transmission line theory clearly showed
what was needed to absorb radar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside

[J[_2_]]

On Jan 7, 2:59*pm, "Keith Willshaw" > wrote:

> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
> spotters than western natons.

Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
the Chinese
to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
aircraft fully
as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
computers)?

Cheers . . . J.

[Orval Fairbairn[_2_]]

In article
>,
J > wrote:

> On Jan 7, 2:59*pm, "Keith Willshaw" > wrote:
>
> > On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
> > is that its hard to know when they have produced a
> > prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
> > spotters than western natons.
>
> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
> the Chinese
> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
> aircraft fully
> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
> computers)?
>
> Cheers . . . J.

They have some very good engineers who could come up with some real
innovations.

That said, if they depend on stolen information, it would be very easy
to plant deliberate misinformation in places they can hack (with some
effort). That is the flaw in stealind information.

[William Black[_2_]]

On 01/11/2011 11:06 AM, J wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2:59 pm, "Keith > wrote:
>
>> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
>> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
>> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
>> spotters than western natons.
>
> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
> the Chinese
> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
> aircraft fully
> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
> computers)?

The fundamental physics isn't a secret, it's to do with transmission
line theory.

After that it's just engineering.

--
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.

[Dan[_12_]]

On 1/11/2011 12:24 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> In article
> >,
> > wrote:
>
>> On Jan 7, 2:59 pm, "Keith > wrote:
>>
>>> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
>>> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
>>> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
>>> spotters than western natons.
>>
>> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
>> the Chinese
>> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
>> aircraft fully
>> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
>> computers)?
>>
>> Cheers . . . J.
>
> They have some very good engineers who could come up with some real
> innovations.
>
> That said, if they depend on stolen information, it would be very easy
> to plant deliberate misinformation in places they can hack (with some
> effort). That is the flaw in stealind information.

Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

Dan wrote:

> On 1/11/2011 12:24 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
>> In article
>> >,
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 7, 2:59 pm, "Keith > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
>>>> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
>>>> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
>>>> spotters than western natons.
>>>
>>>
>>> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
>>> the Chinese
>>> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
>>> aircraft fully
>>> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
>>> computers)?
>>>
>>> Cheers . . . J.
>>
>>
>> They have some very good engineers who could come up with some real
>> innovations.
>>
>> That said, if they depend on stolen information, it would be very easy
>> to plant deliberate misinformation in places they can hack (with some
>> effort). That is the flaw in stealind information.
>
>
> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
> get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Reverse engineering. Ever heard of it?
;-)

[Daryl Hunt[_3_]]

On 1/11/2011 12:57 PM, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote:
> Dan wrote:
>
>> On 1/11/2011 12:24 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> >,
>>>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 7, 2:59 pm, "Keith >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
>>>>> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
>>>>> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
>>>>> spotters than western natons.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is
>>>> possible for
>>>> the Chinese
>>>> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
>>>> aircraft fully
>>>> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
>>>> computers)?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers . . . J.
>>>
>>>
>>> They have some very good engineers who could come up with some
>>> real
>>> innovations.
>>>
>>> That said, if they depend on stolen information, it would be
>>> very easy
>>> to plant deliberate misinformation in places they can hack
>>> (with some
>>> effort). That is the flaw in stealind information.
>>
>>
>> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it
>> can be remotely commanded to cause major system failure.
>> Essentially one could get the Red Chinese to construct an
>> airplane with a built in bomb.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Reverse engineering. Ever heard of it?
> ;-)

Yah, ask Toyota, Nissan and Honda how well that went when they
stole Chrysler blind on the throttle. It made Chrysler have to
recall a couple of hundred thousand cars just to make sure that
their system was good. It was.

Toyota and other Japanese companies bought the same equipment
from the same suppliers. The problem was, the control unit was
stupid and they had to reverse engineer the coding. They blew
it. In the Chrysler, there is a build in system where if
something goes wrong with the controller it disengages the
throttle. And if you tap the brake, it disengages the throttle.
Guess what, they left out those last two items and them lied to
the public and Congress about it. Yes, let them reverse engineer
that way there is more likelihood that they will screw the pooch.

[Andrew Swallow]

On 11/01/2011 18:53, Dan wrote:
{snip}

>
> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
> get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

The danger with that one is that our own aeroplanes have the save flaw.

Andrew Swallow

[Schiffner]

On Jan 11, 12:27*pm, Juergen Nieveler
> wrote:
> Dan > wrote:
> > * *Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
> > remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
> > get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>
> One that lets a plane fly into a building by accident?

No you are thinking of the chipsets in the entire airbus fleet. 8^)

[Dan[_12_]]

On 1/11/2011 4:42 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:
> On 11/01/2011 18:53, Dan wrote:
> {snip}
>
>>
>> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
>> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
>> get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> The danger with that one is that our own aeroplanes have the save flaw.
>
> Andrew Swallow

Not if done right. Letting the bad guys assume you use it doesn't
mean you have to actually do so. Think of the phantom army Patton ran
prior to Overlord. The Nazis assumed it existed.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Schiffner]

On Jan 11, 12:57*pm, "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." >
wrote:
> Dan wrote:
> > On 1/11/2011 12:24 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
> >> In article
> >> >,
> >> * > *wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 7, 2:59 pm, "Keith > *wrote:
>
> >>>> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
> >>>> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
> >>>> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
> >>>> spotters than western natons.
>
> >>> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
> >>> the Chinese
> >>> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
> >>> aircraft fully
> >>> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
> >>> computers)?
>
> >>> Cheers . . . J.
>
> >> They have some very good engineers who could come up with some real
> >> innovations.
>
> >> That said, if they depend on stolen information, it would be very easy
> >> to plant deliberate misinformation in places they can hack (with some
> >> effort). That is the flaw in stealind information.
>
> > * Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
> > remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
> > get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>
> > Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Reverse engineering. *Ever heard of it?
> ;-)

You obviously haven't...**** eating trolls like you and the nazi's
around here need to **** off.

[Dan[_12_]]

On 1/11/2011 1:57 PM, Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote:
> Dan wrote:
>
>> On 1/11/2011 12:24 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>>
>>> In article
>>> >,
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 7, 2:59 pm, "Keith > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On of the problems when dealing with a socity like China
>>>>> is that its hard to know when they have produced a
>>>>> prototype. They tend to look less tolerantly on plane
>>>>> spotters than western natons.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Keith, this ignorant civilian would like to know if it is possible for
>>>> the Chinese
>>>> to have a good understanding of what is needed to develop this
>>>> aircraft fully
>>>> as a result of stealing the information (i.e., hacking military
>>>> computers)?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers . . . J.
>>>
>>>
>>> They have some very good engineers who could come up with some real
>>> innovations.
>>>
>>> That said, if they depend on stolen information, it would be very easy
>>> to plant deliberate misinformation in places they can hack (with some
>>> effort). That is the flaw in stealind information.
>>
>>
>> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
>> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one
>> could get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> Reverse engineering. Ever heard of it?
> ;-)

Ever heard of getting a degree from a university that teaches reading
for comprehension?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Schiffner]

On Jan 6, 9:48*pm, Mike > wrote:

You trust the ****ing times? Damn you are gullible. ;^) I think it's a
wonderful thing that they have FINALLY built a stealth fighter and are
catching up to the 21st century. sheesh, the better their stuff the
less likely they are to get stupid.

[Jim Wilkins]

On Jan 11, 2:57*pm, "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." >
wrote:
> >
> Reverse engineering. *Ever heard of it?
> ;-)-

Ever done it?

I have, for training as a semiconductor R&D tech. The good stuff is in
the software.

[Jim Wilkins]

On Jan 11, 5:42*pm, Andrew Swallow > wrote:
> On 11/01/2011 18:53, Dan wrote:
> {snip}
> > Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
> > remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
> > get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>
> > Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
> The danger with that one is that our own aeroplanes have the save flaw.
>
> Andrew Swallow

This is a good example of modern tech:
http://www.xilinx.com/products/virtex6q/index.htm
You draw a schematic or specification, simulate it, then compile it
into a configuration file that (you hope) turns the generic Xilinx
chip into a circuit that implements your design. It's like a computer
program done in hardware. The configuration file is -seriously-
encrypted and loads at power-up, and is lost when the power shuts
off.

The individual elements of the ones I used were composed of 5-input
gates that could duplicate any logic function or Karnaugh map (they
actually used look-up tables) followed by master-slave D-type flip-
flops. If you know how to design computer logic that's all you need to
do anything.

When the first try didn't work because the Air Force radio it
controlled didn't meet its own specs, I needed only 10 minutes to fix
it.

Seriously, if you have the program manager's confidence that's how
fast and easy it can be to fix problems. Had it been deployed I could
have E-mailed the files out, like a Windows Update or BIOS upgrade to
a computer.
..

[Malcolm[_2_]]

In article >, Andrew Swallow
> writes
>On 11/01/2011 18:53, Dan wrote:
>{snip}
>
>>
>> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
>> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
>> get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>>
>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>The danger with that one is that our own aeroplanes have the save flaw.
>
>Andrew Swallow

Not necessarily. Remember Concorde and Concordski? There were strong
rumours that the Russians had agents who acquired plans/details for
Concorde. The two aircraft were certainly fairly similar. The UK
and/or French got wind of it and fed in some duff data. Hence the crash
and demise of Concordski.

Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. When
new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
--
Malcolm

[Jim Wilkins]

On Jan 12, 8:31*am, Malcolm > wrote:
> ...
> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. *When
> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
> --
> Malcolm

That sounds like an old shortwave antenna, not one for VHF or UHF
aircraft or military bands.
http://www.hamuniverse.com/shortwaveantenna.html

jsw

[Malcolm[_2_]]

In article
s.com>, Jim Wilkins > writes
>On Jan 12, 8:31*am, Malcolm > wrote:
>> ...
>> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
>> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. *When
>> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
>> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
>> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
>> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
>That sounds like an old shortwave antenna, not one for VHF or UHF
>aircraft or military bands.
>http://www.hamuniverse.com/shortwaveantenna.html
>
>jsw

You are probably right.

I have an update anyway - spoke to my neighbour about an hour ago and
mentioned this thread. He told me that after a visit from some security
people they said they thought likely that it dated from WWII. The BAC
works at Filton were of course involved in producing the Bristol
Blenheim and Bristol Beaufighters as well as repairing damaged aircraft
so it is quite possible that the aerial was something to do with
espionage then. Who knows.
--
Malcolm

[Daryl Hunt[_2_]]

On 1/12/2011 12:24 PM, Malcolm wrote:
> In
> s.com>, Jim > writes
>> On Jan 12, 8:31 am, > wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
>>> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. When
>>> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
>>> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
>>> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
>>> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
>>> --
>>> Malcolm
>>
>> That sounds like an old shortwave antenna, not one for VHF or UHF
>> aircraft or military bands.
>> http://www.hamuniverse.com/shortwaveantenna.html
>>
>> jsw
>
> You are probably right.
>
> I have an update anyway - spoke to my neighbour about an hour ago and
> mentioned this thread. He told me that after a visit from some security
> people they said they thought likely that it dated from WWII. The BAC
> works at Filton were of course involved in producing the Bristol
> Blenheim and Bristol Beaufighters as well as repairing damaged aircraft
> so it is quite possible that the aerial was something to do with
> espionage then. Who knows.

The germans got ours before and during the war and we got thiers
after the war. Evens out.

[Andrew Swallow]

On 12/01/2011 18:11, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> On Jan 12, 8:31 am, > wrote:
>> ...
>> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
>> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. When
>> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
>> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
>> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
>> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
>> --
>> Malcolm
>
> That sounds like an old shortwave antenna, not one for VHF or UHF
> aircraft or military bands.
> http://www.hamuniverse.com/shortwaveantenna.html
>
> jsw

Shortwave can reach spy central near Moscow.

Andrew Swallow

[Daryl Hunt[_3_]]

On 1/12/2011 3:13 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 18:11, Jim Wilkins wrote:
>> On Jan 12, 8:31 am, > wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton
>>> and in an
>>> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the
>>> project. When
>>> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they
>>> started
>>> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio
>>> aerial
>>> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom...........
>>> One of the
>>> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
>>> --
>>> Malcolm
>>
>> That sounds like an old shortwave antenna, not one for VHF or UHF
>> aircraft or military bands.
>> http://www.hamuniverse.com/shortwaveantenna.html
>>
>> jsw
>
> Shortwave can reach spy central near Moscow.
>
> Andrew Swallow

Or just about anywhere else. I doubt if it was monitored then as
it is now looking for code words to trigger. I doubt they had
the capability unless there was a huge room full of people
involved each listing on a different freq.

[Jim Wilkins]

On Jan 12, 5:13*pm, Andrew Swallow > wrote:
> ..>
> Shortwave can reach spy central near Moscow.
>
> Andrew Swallow-

Try Switzerland. They used cutouts and communicated in English to mask
the source and destination.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Roessler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venona_project

As a kid I had a similar wire antenna (hidden in the closet, of
course) to receive Radio Moscow on my ancient Hallicrafters S-40B.
http://www.antiqueradio.org/halli02.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_Russia

I never believed them but it was interesting to see what they
considered important or not, and I like Russian music. The BBC World
Service had the best international news for events not involving
Britain.

_._ .... ._ __._ __._

[frank]

On Jan 12, 4:52*pm, Daryl Hunt > wrote:
> On 1/12/2011 3:13 PM, Andrew Swallow wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 12/01/2011 18:11, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> >> On Jan 12, 8:31 am, > wrote:
> >>> ...
> >>> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton
> >>> and in an
> >>> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the
> >>> project. When
> >>> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they
> >>> started
> >>> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio
> >>> aerial
> >>> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom...........
> >>> One of the
> >>> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.
> >>> --
> >>> Malcolm
>
> >> That sounds like an old shortwave antenna, not one for VHF or UHF
> >> aircraft or military bands.
> >>http://www.hamuniverse.com/shortwaveantenna.html
>
> >> jsw
>
> > Shortwave can reach spy central near Moscow.
>
> > Andrew Swallow
>
> Or just about anywhere else. *I doubt if it was monitored then as
> it is now looking for code words to trigger. *I doubt they had
> the capability unless there was a huge room full of people
> involved each listing on a different freq.

Used to be that way. Pfc's with a tape recorder were cheap.

[dott.Piergiorgio]

Il 12/01/2011 20:24, Malcolm ha scritto:

> I have an update anyway - spoke to my neighbour about an hour ago and
> mentioned this thread. He told me that after a visit from some security
> people they said they thought likely that it dated from WWII. The BAC
> works at Filton were of course involved in producing the Bristol
> Blenheim and Bristol Beaufighters as well as repairing damaged aircraft
> so it is quite possible that the aerial was something to do with
> espionage then. Who knows.

*Really* who knows... AFAIK, WWII brit radio counterintelligence was on
par with WWII radio intelligence, implying that if was actually a german
clandestine radio, surely ended rather short-lived, and not discovered
50 or so years later; I also strongly suspect that this "is a WWII
thing" official interpretation is much more of a CYA than a cover-up....

Best regards from Italy,
dott. Piergiorgio.

[Jeff[_15_]]

>
> I have an update anyway - spoke to my neighbour about an hour ago and
> mentioned this thread. He told me that after a visit from some security
> people they said they thought likely that it dated from WWII. The BAC
> works at Filton were of course involved in producing the Bristol
> Blenheim and Bristol Beaufighters as well as repairing damaged aircraft
> so it is quite possible that the aerial was something to do with
> espionage then. Who knows.

What makes you think it was a transmitting aerial??
It was very common in the early days of radio to have external aerials
for receivers, quite often down the garden, but also around a room,
often on the picture rail. It just sounds like a 'neat' installation
that was discovered.

Jeff

[William Black[_2_]]

On 01/12/2011 07:01 PM, Malcolm wrote:
> In >, Andrew Swallow
> > writes
>> On 11/01/2011 18:53, Dan wrote:
>> {snip}
>>
>>>
>>> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
>>> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one could
>>> get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in bomb.
>>>
>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>> The danger with that one is that our own aeroplanes have the save flaw.
>>
>> Andrew Swallow
>
> Not necessarily. Remember Concorde and Concordski? There were strong
> rumours that the Russians had agents who acquired plans/details for
> Concorde. The two aircraft were certainly fairly similar. The UK
> and/or French got wind of it and fed in some duff data. Hence the crash
> and demise of Concordski.
>
> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. When
> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.

There were a host of stories about Eastern European/Russian spying in
the late 'seventies/early 'eighties.

The one I remember best was the one about the house inhabited by Russian
construction workers that overlooked the Baldock DTI (Now Ofcom) radio
station and where they are supposed to have found a ton of clever
equipment when the occupiers decamped one dark night.

As the site has no intelligence function it seems a strange target when
RAF Chicksands and the 'elephant cage' was just up the road...

Oh, no proof of anything was ever published...

--
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.

[William Black[_2_]]

On 01/13/2011 04:22 AM, Daryl Hunt wrote:

I doubt they had the capability
> unless there was a huge room full of people involved each listing on a
> different freq.

SIGINT agencies used to employ thousands of radio operators...

--
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.

[Peter Stickney[_2_]]

On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:31:00 +0000, Malcolm wrote:

> In article >, Andrew Swallow
> > writes
>>On 11/01/2011 18:53, Dan wrote:
>>{snip}
>>
>>
>>> Let them steal a chip design with a built in flaw such that it can be
>>> remotely commanded to cause major system failure. Essentially one
>>> could get the Red Chinese to construct an airplane with a built in
>>> bomb.
>>>
>>> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>>
>>The danger with that one is that our own aeroplanes have the save flaw.
>>
>>Andrew Swallow
>
> Not necessarily. Remember Concorde and Concordski? There were strong
> rumours that the Russians had agents who acquired plans/details for
> Concorde. The two aircraft were certainly fairly similar. The UK
> and/or French got wind of it and fed in some duff data. Hence the crash
> and demise of Concordski.

Uhm, no - not even close.
The Tu 144 has a configuration closer to the Lockheed L-2000 design for the
U.S. funded SST than the Concorde.
The Tu-144 loss at the Paris Air Show was due to maneuvering the airplane
outside of its known limits, leading to both a loss of control and engine
stall/stagnation due to the airflow through the inlet system being disturbed.
( Whether the airplane was being maneuvered too aggressively by the
pilot to put on a good show or to avoid an Armee de l'Air Mirage is in
some dispute, but is ultimately irrelevant.)
What led to the Tu 144 being dropped out of what passed for commercial
service in the U.S.S.R was its poor operating economy.

>
> Not sure how true it is BUT I live about a mile from Filton and in an
> area where there were a lot of people who worked on the project. When
> new neighbours moved in next door about ten years ago they started
> stripping wallpaper and found a thin wire similar to a radio aerial
> running round the picture rail of a back bedroom........... One of the
> previous owners was an aircraft engineer.

Why would the Soviets try to steal secrets about the (Very nice but never
viable - much too short ranged for proper international airline use)
Concorde when there was much better supersonic cruise technology
to go after? (XB-70, A-12/SR-71, SCAT, LES)


--
Pete Stickney
Failure is not an option
It comes bundled with the system