Date   

Re: 7623A Storage problem

Tom Lee
 

There are also notorious Chinese knock-offs which contain low-power (2N2222?) dice in what appear to be period-authentic packages. They'll pass the standard multimeter diode test, but don't survive actual use. The ft test that Brad T. suggests is a very good way to identify non-genuine 3055s.

--Tom

--
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
http://www-smirc.stanford.edu

On 10/4/2020 12:42, Brad Thompson wrote:
Thomas Garson wrote on 10/4/2020 3:09 PM:

If your 2N3055s are in aluminum packages, they are likely Motorola or Fairchild fab, and will be epitaxial (high gain). If they are in steel alloy cans, they could be RCA, which would be hometaxial, or slower and lower gain. There were a lot of smaller fabs making 2N3055 because that part number had become ubiquitous. Most, perhaps all, used hometaxial process, and steel cans. Possibly those foundries had acquired obsolete lines which had been surplussed out by the bigger operations when they changed over to epitaxial.
<snip>

Hello--

In addition to deliberate process changes, some manufacturers reportedly labeled
their parametric rejects as 2N3055s. The rejects met or exceeded the 2N3055's
registered specs which were relatively relaxed to begin with.
I haven't searched the web, but a basic and easily duplicated fT measurement
setup would be helpful for smoking out the too-fast "2N3055"s.

73--

Brad  AA1IP




Re: 7623A Storage problem

Brad Thompson
 

Thomas Garson wrote on 10/4/2020 3:09 PM:

If your 2N3055s are in aluminum packages, they are likely Motorola or Fairchild fab, and will be epitaxial (high gain). If they are in steel alloy cans, they could be RCA, which would be hometaxial, or slower and lower gain. There were a lot of smaller fabs making 2N3055 because that part number had become ubiquitous. Most, perhaps all, used hometaxial process, and steel cans. Possibly those foundries had acquired obsolete lines which had been surplussed out by the bigger operations when they changed over to epitaxial.
<snip>

Hello--

In addition to deliberate process changes, some manufacturers reportedly labeled
their parametric rejects as 2N3055s. The rejects met or exceeded the 2N3055's
registered specs which were relatively relaxed to begin with.
I haven't searched the web, but a basic and easily duplicated fT measurement
setup would be helpful for smoking out the too-fast "2N3055"s.

73--

Brad  AA1IP


OFF TOPIC QUESTION Fluke/Philips PM3350A scope

ken chalfant
 

Greetings,

On Friday last I was at the local surplus store, which is giving up after 30 years, and ran across a Fluke/Philips PM3350A scope in fantastic condition. I bought it for a modest $40.00.

I have downloaded a User's Manual but it is rather silent surrounding my question. Perhaps I have overlooked the information I seek.

It’s silly - all of the analog and digital functions of this scope seem properly functional. Of course, I need to play with it and learn its menus, but it appears to be in excellent condition.

The one exception is the “Scale illuminator”. Turning the knob does nothing and out of all the features and functions of this scope that is surprising. To the best of my knowledge the User’s Manual is silent on the scale illuminator except to mention its location.

Does anyone know if the illuminator only works under certain settings or conditions which I haven’t stumbled across yet?

Is it a side illuminated graticule like 500 series Tek scopes employing little lamps, or a CRT flood gun similar to the old HP 180 series?

As long as I am asking for your indulgence for my off topic questions does anyone have an original printed User’s Manual for this scope which you no longer need?

You are most welcome to PM me.

Thanks for you time and consideration.

Regards,

Ken


Re: 7623A Storage problem

Thomas Garson
 

If your 2N3055s are in aluminum packages, they are likely Motorola or Fairchild fab, and will be epitaxial (high gain). If they are in steel alloy cans, they could be RCA, which would be hometaxial, or slower and lower gain. There were a lot of smaller fabs making 2N3055 because that part number had become ubiquitous. Most, perhaps all, used hometaxial process, and steel cans. Possibly those foundries had acquired obsolete lines which had been surplussed out by the bigger operations when they changed over to epitaxial.

You didn't specify what collector current your tester operates at. I suspect its in the low ma range. At 10 ma, hometaxial parts would show hFE close to your 30 & 34. hFE maxes out at about 70 at 3a. I wouldn't use the part with hFE of only 12, or the high gain part.

I think that when RCA was killed by GE, their power devices were still primarily (exclusively?) hometaxial. The RCA 40436 speced identical to the 3N3055. I used a number of them in one off power amps and linear supplies during the early 1970s. Another RCA option would be 2N3772.

I agree that it is not a good idea to install newer epitaxial devices in a circuit whose design hails from before about 1975. There is a good chance the part will not behave nicely. As the unwashed might say: "Magic smoke may appear".

Somewhere, I've got a bag of old, but mostly unused, 2N3055s, should it become an issue. All the ones I just found in a Google search were planar epitaxial, which work fine in newer designs that expect the higher speed.

Anecdote: 1972. To get cheap high power for small time rock bands, I would take 2 Peavey PA120, which was a 2 ohm capable 1ch power map entirely built on a 5u rack panel. PA120 used house branded 2N3055 equivalent devices. Circuit probably copied from RCA Transistor Manual. I put two of them in one cabinet, back to back with end to end fan added, configured for bridged mono operation: Easy 500w.r.m.s into 4 ohms. If one blew up (not easy), I used RCA 2N3055s as replacement devices. They were very reliable.

Thomas Garson
Aural Technology, Ashland, OR
By my calculation, the dynamic range of the universe is roughly 679dB,
which is approximately 225 bits, collected at a rate 1.714287514x10^23 sps.

On 10/4/20 8:26 AM, Colin Herbert via groups.io wrote:
Thanks for that, guys. I have three old 2N3055 in my "junk box". One doesn't have a manufacturer's name but is also labelled 3055H and has (using my MK-328 transistor tester) what I assume is a beta ("B") of 30, another labelled ITT has a beta of 34 and one marked RS has beta of 12. Which of these would be appropriate, if any? I also have a newer one with a much higher beta, which I assume is not good in this application. Please forgive my ignorance on this.
TIA, Colin.
-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Tom Lee
Sent: 04 October 2020 12:12
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem
As David Partridge says, it's risky to pop in a modern replacement. It's
not just a matter of gain (I assume you meant beta). The original 2N3055
was made by a now-extinct "hometaxial" fabrication process, which
produced surprisingly rugged, inexpensive, and very slow devices. Modern
planar versions of the 3055 are much, much faster, but also less rugged.
The higher speed is not always a virtue -- it can provoke wild and not
infrequently destructive oscillations in circuits that rely upon the
slowness of original 3055s for stability. It is often possible to add
capacitances to make modern devices slower in the right ways, but it's
an ugly circuit-specific kludge that doesn't fully reproduce the
glorious sluggishness of the original.
-- Tom


Re: 475 repair question

Tom Lee
 

Hi Jeff,

I took a quick look at the schematics. There's nothing in the circuit that demands extreme properties of Q1338, so a 2N2222 should function as a sub, although I'd probably use a 2N3904, myself. This particular circuit is relatively insensitive to Q1338's ft, but somewhat sensitive to output capacitance (unblanking speed will be slower with the 2222).  A 3904 looks a lot like a 2222 of one-third size, with correspondingly lower output capacitance. So if you happen to have a 3904 in your junk box, I'd choose it over the 2222 in this case. If you don't have one handy, no problem. Q1338 has to be replaced for you to proceed, and the 2222 will certainly function.

I think you're close to finding and fixing the problem. You've got working HV, you've found a bad transistor in a part of the circuit that could cause what you're seeing. Let's see where things stand after you pop in a new transistor.

Happy hunting!

--Tom

--
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
http://www-smirc.stanford.edu

On 10/4/2020 10:25, jeff corey wrote:
My project as of late has been refurbing a 475 I picked up in non working condition. I recapped the power supply and got my -15 back up with no ripple, still had no trace at all. I have HV, but beamfinder shows nothing. I disconnected one end of cr1343 as per the troubleshooting Z axis steps and can get tp1364 to swing from +6 to +25 when pushing beam finder.

I started testing transistors and q1338 tests bad. it is listed as an ska6516, which i cant find anywhere. can i just sub in a 2n2222 npn transistor for it?

jeff corey
wb9kaz
microsystems development




Re: 475 repair question

Simon
 

One thing to try is to press the beam finder in a darkened room and see if there is a slight glow from the CRT. I had a bad Y output amplifier which put the spot way off the screen. It cannot be retrieved by the beam finder, which acts on earlier stages. You should also measure the voltage between the CRT grid and cathode using a plastic meter. There are a couple of test points for this under the metal HV section shield. It should be around -80V and vary with intensity and grid bias trimpot setting. You could also put a scope on the junction between CR1371, R1372 and CR1373 and see how it behaves with intensity and grid bias trimpot setting.
You might also put the scope on the X amplifier outputs (red and green wires going through a hole around position E8) to check that the horizontal section is OK.
You could also check the Y amplifier outputs by checking the voltages on the connections of the forward Y CRT pins at their junction with the resistive network R497. Treat R497 with care as it is not easy to replace ….
Simon


475 repair question

jeff corey
 

My project as of late has been refurbing a 475 I picked up in non working condition. I recapped the power supply and got my -15 back up with no ripple, still had no trace at all. I have HV, but beamfinder shows nothing. I disconnected one end of cr1343 as per the troubleshooting Z axis steps and can get tp1364 to swing from +6 to +25 when pushing beam finder.

I started testing transistors and q1338 tests bad. it is listed as an ska6516, which i cant find anywhere. can i just sub in a 2n2222 npn transistor for it?

jeff corey
wb9kaz
microsystems development


Re: Old ioTech software...

Steve Hendrix
 

At 2020-10-04 12:00 PM, Jean-Jacques DUCAMP via groups.io wrote:
On the KO4BB site, the Dos version of the IOTech Analyzer 488 software is the only one available.
I am looking for the Win 95/98 version, does anyone have it ?
I worked at IOtech from 1990 to 1992. I'm not sure that software was ever taken beyond DOS.

Steve HenDrix


Re: Old ioTech software...

Jean-Jacques DUCAMP
 

Hi All,
On the KO4BB site, the Dos version of the IOTech Analyzer 488 software is the only one available.
I am looking for the Win 95/98 version, does anyone have it ?
Regards. JJ


Re: 7623A Storage problem

Colin Herbert
 

Thanks for that, guys. I have three old 2N3055 in my "junk box". One doesn't have a manufacturer's name but is also labelled 3055H and has (using my MK-328 transistor tester) what I assume is a beta ("B") of 30, another labelled ITT has a beta of 34 and one marked RS has beta of 12. Which of these would be appropriate, if any? I also have a newer one with a much higher beta, which I assume is not good in this application. Please forgive my ignorance on this.
TIA, Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Tom Lee
Sent: 04 October 2020 12:12
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

As David Partridge says, it's risky to pop in a modern replacement. It's
not just a matter of gain (I assume you meant beta). The original 2N3055
was made by a now-extinct "hometaxial" fabrication process, which
produced surprisingly rugged, inexpensive, and very slow devices. Modern
planar versions of the 3055 are much, much faster, but also less rugged.
The higher speed is not always a virtue -- it can provoke wild and not
infrequently destructive oscillations in circuits that rely upon the
slowness of original 3055s for stability. It is often possible to add
capacitances to make modern devices slower in the right ways, but it's
an ugly circuit-specific kludge that doesn't fully reproduce the
glorious sluggishness of the original.

-- Tom

--
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
http://www-smirc.stanford.edu

On 10/4/2020 03:28, Colin Herbert via groups.io wrote:
This may be a little premature, but if the problem is a failed Q1195, it looks as if it a Tektronix-made 2N3055-family NPN power transistor. Tek show its part-number as 151-0140-00. The question I have is, can I just put any 2N3055 in there? I recall there being some differences between old-style and new-style 2N3055s, in terms of gain, if I remember correctly. How might this affect my choice of replacement?
TIA, Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Miguel Work
Sent: 25 September 2020 21:13
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I remember that is mounted in the HV metallic shield/box



-----Mensaje original-----
De: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] En nombre de Colin Herbert via groups.io
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de septiembre de 2020 18:47
Para: TekScopes@groups.io
Asunto: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I have found that F814 (2A) on the LV power supply was blown and continues to do so, possibly because of a failure of Q1195 or C1198 (47uF). My question is how can I get to either of these components? I can see from the Manual that C1198 is on the HV board and that I might have to get in there to look at it. But Q1195 isn't on the HV board because it is heatsinked, but where is it located? I have a transistor checker and can thus check it out, if I can locate it.
Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Roger Evans via groups.io
Sent: 23 September 2020 14:43
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

Colin,

I had the afterthought about low voltages since the regulation of the power transistor Q1195 relies on +5V, +15V and +130V being OK. The components I mentioned are all on the low voltage side of the transformer T1199 and can be checked with the power off. Q1195 is attached by a plug and socket so it can effectively be tested out of circuit, Q1190 can be checked as a pair of diodes for open circuit / short circuit. The two capacitors are likely to be short circuit if they have failed and L1198 will be open circuit if the fuse didn't do its job in time.

At least you don't have to wait 30 minutes for the high voltage to leak away!

Regards,

Roger






















Re: 7623A Storage problem

Tom Lee
 

As David Partridge says, it's risky to pop in a modern replacement. It's not just a matter of gain (I assume you meant beta). The original 2N3055 was made by a now-extinct "hometaxial" fabrication process, which produced surprisingly rugged, inexpensive, and very slow devices. Modern planar versions of the 3055 are much, much faster, but also less rugged. The higher speed is not always a virtue -- it can provoke wild and not infrequently destructive oscillations in circuits that rely upon the slowness of original 3055s for stability. It is often possible to add capacitances to make modern devices slower in the right ways, but it's an ugly circuit-specific kludge that doesn't fully reproduce the glorious sluggishness of the original.

-- Tom

--
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
http://www-smirc.stanford.edu

On 10/4/2020 03:28, Colin Herbert via groups.io wrote:
This may be a little premature, but if the problem is a failed Q1195, it looks as if it a Tektronix-made 2N3055-family NPN power transistor. Tek show its part-number as 151-0140-00. The question I have is, can I just put any 2N3055 in there? I recall there being some differences between old-style and new-style 2N3055s, in terms of gain, if I remember correctly. How might this affect my choice of replacement?
TIA, Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Miguel Work
Sent: 25 September 2020 21:13
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I remember that is mounted in the HV metallic shield/box



-----Mensaje original-----
De: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] En nombre de Colin Herbert via groups.io
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de septiembre de 2020 18:47
Para: TekScopes@groups.io
Asunto: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I have found that F814 (2A) on the LV power supply was blown and continues to do so, possibly because of a failure of Q1195 or C1198 (47uF). My question is how can I get to either of these components? I can see from the Manual that C1198 is on the HV board and that I might have to get in there to look at it. But Q1195 isn't on the HV board because it is heatsinked, but where is it located? I have a transistor checker and can thus check it out, if I can locate it.
Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Roger Evans via groups.io
Sent: 23 September 2020 14:43
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

Colin,

I had the afterthought about low voltages since the regulation of the power transistor Q1195 relies on +5V, +15V and +130V being OK. The components I mentioned are all on the low voltage side of the transformer T1199 and can be checked with the power off. Q1195 is attached by a plug and socket so it can effectively be tested out of circuit, Q1190 can be checked as a pair of diodes for open circuit / short circuit. The two capacitors are likely to be short circuit if they have failed and L1198 will be open circuit if the fuse didn't do its job in time.

At least you don't have to wait 30 minutes for the high voltage to leak away!

Regards,

Roger





















Re: 7623A Storage problem

 

You want an old slow (low Ft) non-epitaxial 2N3055 for the HT inverter.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Colin Herbert via groups.io
Sent: 04 October 2020 11:28
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

This may be a little premature, but if the problem is a failed Q1195, it looks as if it a Tektronix-made 2N3055-family NPN power transistor. Tek show its part-number as 151-0140-00. The question I have is, can I just put any 2N3055 in there? I recall there being some differences between old-style and new-style 2N3055s, in terms of gain, if I remember correctly. How might this affect my choice of replacement?
TIA, Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Miguel Work
Sent: 25 September 2020 21:13
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I remember that is mounted in the HV metallic shield/box



-----Mensaje original-----
De: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] En nombre de Colin Herbert via groups.io
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de septiembre de 2020 18:47
Para: TekScopes@groups.io
Asunto: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I have found that F814 (2A) on the LV power supply was blown and continues to do so, possibly because of a failure of Q1195 or C1198 (47uF). My question is how can I get to either of these components? I can see from the Manual that C1198 is on the HV board and that I might have to get in there to look at it. But Q1195 isn't on the HV board because it is heatsinked, but where is it located? I have a transistor checker and can thus check it out, if I can locate it.
Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Roger Evans via groups.io
Sent: 23 September 2020 14:43
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

Colin,

I had the afterthought about low voltages since the regulation of the power transistor Q1195 relies on +5V, +15V and +130V being OK. The components I mentioned are all on the low voltage side of the transformer T1199 and can be checked with the power off. Q1195 is attached by a plug and socket so it can effectively be tested out of circuit, Q1190 can be checked as a pair of diodes for open circuit / short circuit. The two capacitors are likely to be short circuit if they have failed and L1198 will be open circuit if the fuse didn't do its job in time.

At least you don't have to wait 30 minutes for the high voltage to leak away!

Regards,

Roger


Re: 7623A Storage problem

Colin Herbert
 

This may be a little premature, but if the problem is a failed Q1195, it looks as if it a Tektronix-made 2N3055-family NPN power transistor. Tek show its part-number as 151-0140-00. The question I have is, can I just put any 2N3055 in there? I recall there being some differences between old-style and new-style 2N3055s, in terms of gain, if I remember correctly. How might this affect my choice of replacement?
TIA, Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Miguel Work
Sent: 25 September 2020 21:13
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I remember that is mounted in the HV metallic shield/box



-----Mensaje original-----
De: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] En nombre de Colin Herbert via groups.io
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de septiembre de 2020 18:47
Para: TekScopes@groups.io
Asunto: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

I have found that F814 (2A) on the LV power supply was blown and continues to do so, possibly because of a failure of Q1195 or C1198 (47uF). My question is how can I get to either of these components? I can see from the Manual that C1198 is on the HV board and that I might have to get in there to look at it. But Q1195 isn't on the HV board because it is heatsinked, but where is it located? I have a transistor checker and can thus check it out, if I can locate it.
Colin.

-----Original Message-----
From: TekScopes@groups.io [mailto:TekScopes@groups.io] On Behalf Of Roger Evans via groups.io
Sent: 23 September 2020 14:43
To: TekScopes@groups.io
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 7623A Storage problem

Colin,

I had the afterthought about low voltages since the regulation of the power transistor Q1195 relies on +5V, +15V and +130V being OK. The components I mentioned are all on the low voltage side of the transformer T1199 and can be checked with the power off. Q1195 is attached by a plug and socket so it can effectively be tested out of circuit, Q1190 can be checked as a pair of diodes for open circuit / short circuit. The two capacitors are likely to be short circuit if they have failed and L1198 will be open circuit if the fuse didn't do its job in time.

At least you don't have to wait 30 minutes for the high voltage to leak away!

Regards,

Roger


Re: 465B Horizontal Trace Issues - Help requested

Tom Lee
 

There's not much point experimenting with other fixed resistors. Wait until you obtain the replacement pot. My philosophy is to minimize the amount of (re)soldering, to reduce the risk of damaging the pc board. Hold off on doing a cal until you've replaced all the parts you're going to replace.

--Tom

--
Prof. Thomas H. Lee
Allen Ctr., Rm. 205
350 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-4070
http://www-smirc.stanford.edu

On 10/3/2020 22:23, gary@pincus4.com wrote:
Raymond: The X1 pot is the pot that is bad. I left it in place an added a 390 ohm resistor, to correct a severely collapsed trace (less than 2 divisions).

pdxareaid: i can experiment with other resistors to expand the trace to 11 divisions or should i leave it as is?

Regarding calibration, I some, but not all of the items specified for cal. I may at some point try this, but probably not until after a future re-cap (tants and lytics). I am in the process of creating a BOM for these parts and sourcing them.

Gary




Re: 465B Horizontal Trace Issues - Help requested

@Sabrefencer
 

Raymond: The X1 pot is the pot that is bad. I left it in place an added a 390 ohm resistor, to correct a severely collapsed trace (less than 2 divisions).

pdxareaid: i can experiment with other resistors to expand the trace to 11 divisions or should i leave it as is?

Regarding calibration, I some, but not all of the items specified for cal. I may at some point try this, but probably not until after a future re-cap (tants and lytics). I am in the process of creating a BOM for these parts and sourcing them.

Gary


Re: 465B Horizontal Trace Issues - Help requested

 

On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 05:26 PM, pdxareaid wrote:


The A sweep is frequently 11 divisions, not 10.
The A sweep should be more than 10 divisions; it's not critical and normally reaches beyond the left and right edge (so, wider than the screen's width) after correct adjustment of the 'scope.
If the only thing you've changed (by putting in a fixed resistor) is this pot, the only thing you possibly have to readjust after putting in a new pot is the horizontal gain (X1, X10, two pots), no full calibration necessary, unless you'd like the 'scope fully calibrated.

Raymond


Re: T912 F782

Glydeck
 

T912 F782 — picture of unlisted fuse - 1 photos · Updated Oct 2

https://groups.io/g/TekScopes/photo/254490/0?p=Created,,,20,2,0,0

On Oct 3, 2020, at 8:37 AM, tekscopegroup@miwww.com wrote:

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 08:16 AM, Mitchel Rought wrote:
I put a picture in the photo album if you want to look at it
thanks
Can you please post a link to the album?





Re: Tektronix CG5010 & CG5011 Rotary Encoder 260-2500-00

Sergey Kubushyn
 

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020, David Sidrane wrote:

I would also want to purchase one. Where is it supposed to be ordered from?
Who sells those?

Hi Chris,

Did you ever order any of the 260-2500-00? I would like one purchase one.

David
---
******************************************************************
* KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. *
* Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. *
******************************************************************


Re: Tektronix CG5010 & CG5011 Rotary Encoder 260-2500-00

David Sidrane
 

Hi Chris,

Did you ever order any of the 260-2500-00? I would like one purchase one.

David


Re: Ot 345kv substation walkthrough

Greg Muir
 

It wasn't, John. I saw the Seattle report. That was Seattle in 2014. This one I was st was Denver in 1973 at the convention center helipad.

Greg

7561 - 7580 of 179392