Reply by krw April 14, 20152015-04-14
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 19:56:46 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 12:50:19 -0700 (PDT), George Herold ><gherold@teachspin.com> wrote: > >>On Sunday, April 12, 2015 at 8:33:46 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote: >>> On 4/12/2015 6:21 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >>> > Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 00.14.19 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: >>> >> On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs >>> >>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: >>> >>>>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>>>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy >>> >>>>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft >>> >>>>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise >>> >>>>>> missiles. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" >>> >>>>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in >>> >>>>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Yup. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were >>> >>>>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over >>> >>>>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun >>> >>>>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it >>> >>>>> was too late. >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Tim >>> >>>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze >>> >>>> is quite different from removing a fuse! >>> >>>> >>> >>> Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit >>> >> ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? >>> >> >>> > >>> > https://youtu.be/nnQ_pS4T0vI >>> > >>> > -LAsse >>> > >>> >>> Men's cologne and cow poop--there's a combination for the ages. ;0 >> >>Hmm, I'm thinking that is pretty common with the dairy farmers in my parts, >>out for a date on Saturday night. >>:^) >> > >We should drop barrel bombs on those ISIL creeps, full of cheap >perfume.
Bacon grease.
Reply by John Larkin April 13, 20152015-04-13
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015 12:50:19 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, April 12, 2015 at 8:33:46 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote: >> On 4/12/2015 6:21 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: >> > Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 00.14.19 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: >> >> On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs >> >>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: >> >>>>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >>>>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy >> >>>>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft >> >>>>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise >> >>>>>> missiles. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" >> >>>>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in >> >>>>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Yup. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were >> >>>>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over >> >>>>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun >> >>>>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it >> >>>>> was too late. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Tim >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze >> >>>> is quite different from removing a fuse! >> >>>> >> >>> Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. >> >>> >> >> >> >> After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit >> >> ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? >> >> >> > >> > https://youtu.be/nnQ_pS4T0vI >> > >> > -LAsse >> > >> >> Men's cologne and cow poop--there's a combination for the ages. ;0 > >Hmm, I'm thinking that is pretty common with the dairy farmers in my parts, >out for a date on Saturday night. >:^) >
We should drop barrel bombs on those ISIL creeps, full of cheap perfume. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply by George Herold April 13, 20152015-04-13
On Sunday, April 12, 2015 at 8:33:46 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> On 4/12/2015 6:21 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 00.14.19 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: > >> On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote: > >>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs > >>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: > >>>>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy > >>>>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft > >>>>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise > >>>>>> missiles. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" > >>>>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in > >>>>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Yup. > >>>>> > >>>>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were > >>>>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over > >>>>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun > >>>>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it > >>>>> was too late. > >>>>> > >>>>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". > >>>>> > >>>>> Tim > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze > >>>> is quite different from removing a fuse! > >>>> > >>> Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. > >>> > >> > >> After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit > >> ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? > >> > > > > https://youtu.be/nnQ_pS4T0vI > > > > -LAsse > > > > Men's cologne and cow poop--there's a combination for the ages. ;0
Hmm, I'm thinking that is pretty common with the dairy farmers in my parts, out for a date on Saturday night. :^) George h.
> > Cheers > > Phil Hobbs > > > -- > Dr Philip C D Hobbs > Principal Consultant > ElectroOptical Innovations LLC > Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics > > 160 North State Road #203 > Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 > > hobbs at electrooptical dot net > http://electrooptical.net
Reply by Lasse Langwadt Christensen April 13, 20152015-04-13
Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 02.33.46 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs:
> On 4/12/2015 6:21 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote: > > Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 00.14.19 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: > >> On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote: > >>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs > >>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: > >>>>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy > >>>>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft > >>>>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise > >>>>>> missiles. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" > >>>>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in > >>>>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Yup. > >>>>> > >>>>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were > >>>>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over > >>>>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun > >>>>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it > >>>>> was too late. > >>>>> > >>>>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". > >>>>> > >>>>> Tim > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze > >>>> is quite different from removing a fuse! > >>>> > >>> Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. > >>> > >> > >> After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit > >> ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? > >> > > > > https://youtu.be/nnQ_pS4T0vI > > > > -LAsse > > > > Men's cologne and cow poop--there's a combination for the ages. ;0 >
not only cologne, but cologne branded by celebrities it's got to take some very special persons to defuse a 500kg bombs by trial-and-error knowing that error result in, as he put it, "pink mist" -Lasse
Reply by Robert Baer April 13, 20152015-04-13
John Larkin wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 01:49:11 GMT, Ralph Barone > <address_is@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> John Larkin<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote: >>> http://www.st.com/web/en/resource/technical/document/datasheet/DM00047825.pdf >>> >>> Check the betas! >>> >>> >> >> >> hfe = 20. Am I missing something? Where's the bit deserving of the >> exclamation mark? > > At the rated peak collector current of 400 mA, the beta isn't > specified, but is probably around 2. > > The data sheet is sort of skimpy. > >
Yea; one could use some transfer curves, like Vce(sat) and Ic ...
Reply by Phil Hobbs April 12, 20152015-04-12
On 4/12/2015 6:21 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
> Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 00.14.19 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs: >> On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote: >>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs >>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: >>>>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... >>>>>> >>>>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy >>>>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft >>>>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise >>>>>> missiles. >>>>>> >>>>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" >>>>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in >>>>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yup. >>>>> >>>>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were >>>>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over >>>>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun >>>>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it >>>>> was too late. >>>>> >>>>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". >>>>> >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>> >>>> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze >>>> is quite different from removing a fuse! >>>> >>> Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. >>> >> >> After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit >> ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? >> > > https://youtu.be/nnQ_pS4T0vI > > -LAsse >
Men's cologne and cow poop--there's a combination for the ages. ;0 Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 160 North State Road #203 Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net
Reply by David Eather April 12, 20152015-04-12
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 11:43:01 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>  
wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 21:08:56 -0500, "Tim Williams" > <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> wrote: > >> A 6V6GT has much higher hFE, is almost certainly much faster, and is >> capable of dissipating more power, too. I'm not feeling won over, here. >> ;-) >> Tim > > Not to worry. Vacuum tubes might be making a comeback in the form of > vacuum channel transistors: > <http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/devices/introducing-the-vacuum-transistor-a-device-made-of-nothing>
Amazingly self serving piece of soviet bashing in the introduction. For those not in the know, the MIG 25 foxbat was designed to intercept nuclear bombers during a full exchange of weapons. Originally it was intended as a counter to the XB-70 Valkyrie (a stunning and magnificent aircraft) which was canceled, but a Mach 3 aircraft is good for intercepting a lot of things and for photo reconnaissance. When considered in its intended role, EVERY one of the early criticisms of the MIG 25 turns out to be false, misleading or irrelevant. The MIG 25 is made of steel not titanium. Steel provides much greater protection from EMP effects of nuclear detonations which were expected to be both close and frequent. The MIG 25 uses valves not transistors for the same reason. It is not crude, but rather it is the best, and possibly the only workable solution to the problem. MIG 25 missile fire control is bizarre and locks out firing another volley of missiles for (originally IIRC) about 30 seconds - again this relates to an environment full of EMP's - it stops misfires due to EMP. The foxbat's engines have extremely short lives at MACH 3 power levels and a lifetime of a single mission at MACH 3.2, but then in a full scale nuclear exchange that is irrelevant. When war comes to Ukraine or Latvia or Lithuania or wherever Putin next desires (Putin is a pig who can't rein in his own desires - he will send the world to war just because of his ego), the US will have a few nasty shocks. For example in Vietnam the US started using SHRIKE to destroy missile air defenses, and it was effective until the operators figured out how to decoy it. So the US developed HARM which was the same thing but faster. In Yugoslavia one SAM site survived being targeted by over 200 (!!!) HARM missiles - by using the same tactics as the North Vietnamese. And HARM is still (!!) the first line air defense suppression weapon - talk about slow learners. rant done. i'll pass on battle field air support and mobile air defenses for now.
Reply by Lasse Langwadt Christensen April 12, 20152015-04-12
Den mandag den 13. april 2015 kl. 00.14.19 UTC+2 skrev Phil Hobbs:
> On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote: > > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs > > <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > > > >> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: > >>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message > >>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... > >>>> > >>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy > >>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft > >>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise > >>>> missiles. > >>>> > >>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" > >>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in > >>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yup. > >>> > >>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were > >>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over > >>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun > >>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it > >>> was too late. > >>> > >>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". > >>> > >>> Tim > >>> > >> > >> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze > >> is quite different from removing a fuse! > >> > > Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. > > > > After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit > ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? >
https://youtu.be/nnQ_pS4T0vI -LAsse
Reply by Phil Hobbs April 12, 20152015-04-12
On 4/12/2015 6:03 PM, krw wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs > <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >> On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: >>> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... >>>> >>>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy >>>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft >>>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise >>>> missiles. >>>> >>>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" >>>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in >>>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. >>>> >>> >>> Yup. >>> >>> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were >>> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over >>> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun >>> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it >>> was too late. >>> >>> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". >>> >>> Tim >>> >> >> 'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze >> is quite different from removing a fuse! >> > Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert. >
After it's done, sure. But the fuze-removal process can be a bit ticklish if the ordnance is armed already, no? Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics 160 North State Road #203 Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 hobbs at electrooptical dot net http://electrooptical.net
Reply by krw April 12, 20152015-04-12
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 00:50:58 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>On 4/12/2015 12:35 AM, Tim Williams wrote: >> "Phil Allison" <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:e7597f9e-9645-4fb2-ac51-45f559fdb2c8@googlegroups.com... >>> >>> ** The name "Kamikaze" was given to Japanese suicide attacks on US navy >>> vessels by manned aircraft late in WW2 while the only German aircraft >>> subjected to proximity fused shells over the UK were unmanned V1 cruise >>> missiles. >>> >>> Proximity fused shells were also used in the "Battle of the Bulge" >>> against German ground troops - having the shells explode while still in >>> the air increased their lethal range greatly. >>> >> >> Yup. >> >> As I recall, they were deployed in the Pacific on priority, but they were >> considered such a valuable secret that they didn't want to use them over >> open land, until late in the war. Evidently the Germans had indeed begun >> to piece them together once they were introduced there -- but by then it >> was too late. >> >> Also, for whatever reason, they gave them the technical term "fuze". >> >> Tim >> > >'Fuze' is the usual name in ordnance circles, I think. Removing a fuze >is quite different from removing a fuse! >
Not really. If either is removed, the widget is inert.