Can't find it either in any of the X-ref lists I have. As you know already,
1854 are usually NPN transistors, but around these numbers I see mostly
Darlingtons in my collection. So maybe that's what you have, and why the
junctions would test weird.
Marc
> On Oct 15, 2018, at 10:21 PM, Josh Ders
Forgot to mention, I have a 2382A that works (affectionately known as the
"Munchkin" terminal). I could measure some stuff in mine for comparison if that
could help out.
For the HP curious, the 2382A makes an appearance at the end of one of my
videos:
https://youtu.be/GLkhcDAOVPo?t=19m50
It is
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018, Warren Toomey wrote:
All, I received this request from Matthew who isn't subscribed to either
the TUHS or cctalk lists. He knows how to read the lists archives. Many
thanks for any help you can provide.
Cheers, Warren
See
https://ifctfvax.superglobalmegacorp.com/releases/UN
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Josh Dersch wrote:
Got an HP 2382A terminal I'm attempting to resurrect. I get no video, no
heater, no high voltage. What I believe to be the horizontal output
transistor appears to be bad, but I'm not sure if this thing contains
internal diodes that might be throwing off m
Previously: Manual for Documation TM200 punched card reader
Restoration of the mechanics of my TM200 punch card reader progresses.
There's a writeup here:
http://everist.org/NobLog/20180922_data_in_holes.htm#tm200
Currently I'm machining a mold to cast new pinch rollers - and there's the rub
(o
The 9816 uses a BUZ45 - might be the same as the 2382?
David Collins
+61 424 785 131
> On 16 Oct 2018, at 3:24 pm, Curious Marc via cctech
> wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention, I have a 2382A that works (affectionately known as the
> "Munchkin" terminal). I could measure some stuff in mine for comp
Guy said
> Restoration of the mechanics of my TM200 punch card reader progresses.
> There's a writeup here:
> http://everist.org/NobLog/20180922_data_in_holes.htm#tm200
Very interesting page, thanks
> Obviously too much 'squish' is undesirable since the roller would get
> permanently deformed wh
Get a cleaning cartridge ... it's the easiest way.
In theory the head is slightly recessed behind the polished plate that
establishes the airflow near the media; remember, the media deforms and
rises toward the head, making contact with the polished plate but not
touching the head. So maybe a su
Den tis 16 okt. 2018 kl 11:52 skrev Guy Dunphy via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org>:
> Previously: Manual for Documation TM200 punched card reader
>
> Restoration of the mechanics of my TM200 punch card reader progresses.
> There's a writeup here:
> http://everist.org/NobLog/20180922_data_in_holes.
DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of a
number of square tapes...
See DLT on Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Linear_Tape
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Paul Winalski
To: Clem Cole
Cc: The Eun
Thanks, all, for the responses! The way it measures out makes it look like
it may be an MJ10006 or similar. I think it's probably ok.
I poked around a bit more this morning and it's looking like part of the
flyback is shorted out -- we have a 2382 at the museum and I popped it open
just now and
> On Oct 16, 2018, at 1:23 PM, William Pechter via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
> The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of a
> number of square tapes...
>
> See DLT on Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Linear_T
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 1:49 PM Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 2018, at 1:23 PM, William Pechter via cctalk
> > wrote:
> >
> > DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
> > The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of
> > a number of square tapes...
> >
Update:
I've received good clear photos of the roller pairs, from which I can work out
a sufficiently accurate
diameter for the pinch roller. Thanks David and Ed.
My guess of 27.5 WAS quite a bit off. Preliminary working from the photo gives
a roller Dia of 27.2 mm,
ie only just touching. But t
> From: Guy Dunphy
> The mechanics has no adjustment or spring tension on the pinch roller
> positions. ... all the spring is in the rubber of the rollers.
> But how much squish?
> ...
> I'm hoping someone might have some knowledge of how much punch card
> reader pinch
At 07:21 PM 16/10/2018 -0400, you wrote:
>> From: Guy Dunphy
>
>> The mechanics has no adjustment or spring tension on the pinch roller
>> positions. ... all the spring is in the rubber of the rollers.
>> But how much squish?
>> ...
>> I'm hoping someone might have some know
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM Josh Dersch wrote:
> Thanks, all, for the responses! The way it measures out makes it look
> like it may be an MJ10006 or similar. I think it's probably ok.
>
> I poked around a bit more this morning and it's looking like part of the
> flyback is shorted out --
On 10/15/18 1:00 PM, cctech-requ...@classiccmp.org wrote:
From: Michael Brutman
Hi Eric,
I have working 10MB and 20MB units here being driven by a PC XT with the
Iomega specific card for them.
I've had to puts lots of effort into cleaning the heads on them. I'm not
sure if there is an oxide
> On Oct 16, 2018, at 7:28 AM, David Schmidt via cctech
> wrote:
>
> On 10/15/18 1:00 PM, cctech-requ...@classiccmp.org wrote:
>> From: Michael Brutman
>> Hi Eric,
>> I have working 10MB and 20MB units here being driven by a PC XT with the
>> Iomega specific card for them.
>> I've had to puts
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 12:57 PM Paul Winalski
wrote:
> The block size is almost certainly 512 bytes.
>
Which is what I said - the block siize is set by the HW.
But ... the issue is trying to get the TK-50 to stream. Hence the
traditional unix: dd ibs=64K obs=XXX | tar xvfp - trick.
This will
On 10/15/18, Clem Cole wrote:
> #$%^ - they >>weren't<< like DECtape from a reliability standpoint ...
> ᐧ
The original DECtape was extremely reliable. Not so the TK50.
Calling it "DECtape II" was an insult to the original DECtape. The
problem wasn't so much the drive itself, but the controller.
But Paul's comment is still right on - the controller for both was a 1MHz
i8085 and just could not keep up.
I hated both .. its' too bad DEC refused to use QIC. They did eventually
use 4mm DAT on an SCSI (and actually OEM'ed the drive from HP it turns
out). The 8mm [Exabyte Unit] was from CSS a
On 10/16/18, William Pechter wrote:
> DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
> The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of a
> number of square tapes...
>
> See DLT on Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Linear_Tape
>
My mistake. Yes, I was thinking o
On 2018-10-16 20:37, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 16, 2018, at 1:23 PM, William Pechter via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
>> The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of a
>> number of square tapes...
>>
>> See DLT o
24 matches
Mail list logo
