Topics

465M Flaky vertical height.


Phil (VA3UX) <phil@...>
 

At 03:40 PM 8/6/2001 -0600, you wrote:
I always wondered what happened to Telequipment.
That's what happened Doug. Tek bought Telequipment in late 1966 in order to capture some market share in the "low end" scope market - a market where Tek had no presence at that time. Telequipment made a decent quality no-frills scope at an affordable price. Their scopes certainly weren't up to the standards of the Tek line but they were a head-and-shoulders above the typical American service grade scopes (Hickok, Stark, Precision, Heathkit, etc). The Telequipment name carried on until some time in the early 70's until the name was dropped and the Tek name was put on the instruments. Telequipment instruments with the Tektronix name had model numbers that began with "T". Eventually, the whole product line was dropped and that was the end of Telequipment. Of all the good things Tek did, buying Telequipment was not one of them. In a small way, the scope market would have been better off if Telequipment had just been left alone.

Phil


I used a little Dual Trace Dual
Timebase Telequipment scope in college ~1975. It was a great scope. Stable, easy
to setup, and the dual/delayed timebase was was magic. After that one, I wouldn't
even consider it a scope without a dual/delayed timebase.
I don't even remember the model. Does anyone have a picture of a T900 so I could
see if that is the one I used?

Doug hale


"Phil (VA3UX)" wrote:

At 01:20 PM 8/6/2001 -0700, you wrote:
I find Don's story fascinating.

To start with, until very recently I thought that 465M is a 465, in a
funny
housing, but still 465. I never new that 465M traces lineage to T900.
That's what I thought too. That was an informative post.

I
believe that T900 were products acquired when Tektronix bought (British ?)
It was "Telequipment" from the UK

Tecelec; anyone, please, correct me if I am wrong on Tektronix/Tecelec
transaction. I have seen same housing and controls with both, Tecelec and
Sales guy complained how Air Force bought scopes from Kikutsi,
because of low price, while Kikutsi
Kikisui ??

Phil

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: donlcramer@cs.com [mailto:donlcramer@cs.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:49 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical
height.

Fascinating!

BTW, what was the reason for creating the 465M for the
government vs selling
the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some special features?
Was the 455 an
outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other way around?

I worked in Digital Service Instruments as a
production tech
in the late 70s,
which was a new group in Portables which began with
the 851
Digital Tester.
This was a product designed originally for Burroughs for
their first line
techs as a scope replacement. The instrument was
principally a clever
integration of DMM and counter/timer functions and
the idea
was that a tech
could follow a diagnostic tree and compare readings to
arrive at the fault,
without the need to be familiar with how a scope worked.
Anyway, we were
next to the T900 line and if DSI production was a bit
slow,
I would get to
work on T900 product. While not as nice as the "real"
portables, the top
line T935 wasn't a bad instrument (2x35MHz) as far as
functionality was
concerned.

About once a month our group got to either take a tour of
another area, or
had a guest in, as was common practice back then in
order to
get more
familiar with other parts of Tek. One time it was
the the
marketing product
manager for T900. As you know, the T900 line styling
was a
little odd, and
was derided for looking like an old Kerby cannister
vacuum
cleaner instead of
like a traditional portable scope. The gentleman, whose
name I've long since
forgotten, was quite a character. He told us he
wanted to
do an ad with a
photo of a field service tech holding a T900 in one
hand and
a vacuum cleaner
hose in the other hand with the line "Tektronix is
Going to
Clean Up in the
Low Cost Scope Business". But the idea was shot
down. We
had quite a laugh
over that, and he was an inspiration for the T900
team who
felt somewhat
second rate compared to the groups working on the more
expensive portables
and lab scopes. My recollection is that were a great
bunch
of people
regardless of what they worked on.

Don






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Phil (VA3UX) <phil@...>
 

At 01:47 PM 8/7/2001 -0700, you wrote:
Phil (VA3UX) wrote:

The Telequipment name carried on until some time in the
early 70's until the name was dropped and the Tek name was put on the
instruments. Telequipment instruments with the Tektronix name had model
numbers that began with "T". Eventually, the whole product line was
dropped and that was the end of Telequipment. Of all the good things Tek
did, buying Telequipment was not one of them. In a small way, the scope
market would have been better off if Telequipment had just been left alone.

Phil
Well, I concur with all of the above, except the following. I don't ever remember
the "Tek" name appearing on any Telequipment scope. The T900 series was a separate
engineering effort based in Beaverton, OR and had nothing whatsoever to do with
Telequipment, as far as I know. It was a low-cost effort and that is where the
similarity to Telequipment ends, to the best of my recollection.
I think I've confused the T900's with the TQ stuff as far as the Tek logo goes Stan. It appeared that the T900 series was born from the TQ line somehow - similar appearance etc. I figured the T900'd were TQ instruments with the Tek logo.

What really happened to Telequipment is that a decision was made by Tek management
to shut it down because customer satisfaction with the products was just too low.
What was saved in the cost of initial purchase was quickly spent in maintenance of
Telequipment scopes. When you save the cost of transistor sockets, for example,
you have to spend more to replace the transistor when it does go bad. The long
term economics of buying a low-cost scope is just not a good concept, in general,
especially for commercial customers.
A retired electronics tech from a local university remembers the TQ phase well. He said the (naive) customer expectations were that the TQ line was traditional Tek quality and engineering "all the way", but at suddenly bargain basement prices. This of course wasn't possible but many high-end users weren't quite thinking that way when they made their purchases. It's all hear-say for me; I was in grade school and junior high when all that was going on (sorry guys).

Phil



Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com





To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Peter Florance
 

This one has bothered me for a while. Sometimes the height will be about 50%
of normal on either channel. Very intermittent. If I put the unit in chop
and run the other channels position to very high or low on the screen, the
offending channel will 'pop' back to correct size. At one point I could tap
around the funny heatsinked hybrid in the vertical section and get it to
fail. Removed IC and cleaned the contacts with Qtip and Deoxit and it worked
for a while but then came back. Has classic symptoms of bad connection but I
can't seem to get it to fail often enough yet. Any shortcuts?
Note this scope appears to be quite different from 465 regular-flavor (at
least vert section).
Thanks

Peter Florance


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

Hi Peter,

I have fixed quite a few 455's with intermittants and the 465M is very similar
in construction. I have found both of the mother board connectors that the
vertical and horizontal modules plug into to be intermittant. I would remove
both modules, clean the board contact area with something like alcohol, and then
apply a light coating of De-Oxit on the board contact area.

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Peter Florance wrote:

This one has bothered me for a while. Sometimes the height will be about 50%
of normal on either channel. Very intermittent. If I put the unit in chop
and run the other channels position to very high or low on the screen, the
offending channel will 'pop' back to correct size. At one point I could tap
around the funny heatsinked hybrid in the vertical section and get it to
fail. Removed IC and cleaned the contacts with Qtip and Deoxit and it worked
for a while but then came back. Has classic symptoms of bad connection but I
can't seem to get it to fail often enough yet. Any shortcuts?
Note this scope appears to be quite different from 465 regular-flavor (at
least vert section).
Thanks

Peter Florance


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

Dear Stan:

Not directly related to 465 problems. I was wandering whether De-Oxit is a
contact lubricant in addition to being contact protectant. Above all, where
one can buy De-Oxit and whether there are other brand names for same thing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
[mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 12:54 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky vertical height.

Hi Peter,

I have fixed quite a few 455's with intermittants and the
465M is very similar
in construction. I have found both of the mother board
connectors that the
vertical and horizontal modules plug into to be
intermittant. I would remove
both modules, clean the board contact area with something
like alcohol, and then
apply a light coating of De-Oxit on the board contact area.

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Peter Florance wrote:

> This one has bothered me for a while. Sometimes the height
will be about 50%
> of normal on either channel. Very intermittent. If I put
the unit in chop
> and run the other channels position to very high or low on
the screen, the
> offending channel will 'pop' back to correct size. At one
point I could tap
> around the funny heatsinked hybrid in the vertical section
and get it to
> fail. Removed IC and cleaned the contacts with Qtip and
Deoxit and it worked
> for a while but then came back. Has classic symptoms of
bad connection but I
> can't seem to get it to fail often enough yet. Any
shortcuts?
> Note this scope appears to be quite different from 465
regular-flavor (at
> least vert section).
> Thanks
>
> Peter Florance
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Peter Florance
 

Deoxit is an contact oxidizer not to be confused with contact cleaner. It works really well on switches and has some lube qualities.
Suppliers like MCM sell the 5% spray and 100% in the vial (I use both)
Deoxit is made by Caig http://www.caig.com/
I've used their products since 1980.
We work on audio mostly and when you spray a switch or relay you can actually see the THD drop when it works.

Note the less you use the better it works and sometimes needs to work in for a while.
For fader and pot lubrication, their MCL (moving contact lube) is a better choice.

Cheers
Peter Florance CET/CSM
Audio Services
544 Central Drive
Suite 101
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
757.498.8277
757.498.9554 Fax
email: mailto:audserv@exis.net
http://www.audio-services.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Miroslav Pokorni [SMTP:mpokorni@camintonn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 12:03 PM
To: 'TekScopes@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky vertical height.

Dear Stan:

Not directly related to 465 problems. I was wandering whether De-Oxit is a
contact lubricant in addition to being contact protectant. Above all, where
one can buy De-Oxit and whether there are other brand names for same thing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
[mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 12:54 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky vertical height.

Hi Peter,

I have fixed quite a few 455's with intermittants and the
465M is very similar
in construction. I have found both of the mother board
connectors that the
vertical and horizontal modules plug into to be
intermittant. I would remove
both modules, clean the board contact area with something
like alcohol, and then
apply a light coating of De-Oxit on the board contact area.

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Peter Florance wrote:

> This one has bothered me for a while. Sometimes the height
will be about 50%
> of normal on either channel. Very intermittent. If I put
the unit in chop
> and run the other channels position to very high or low on
the screen, the
> offending channel will 'pop' back to correct size. At one
point I could tap
> around the funny heatsinked hybrid in the vertical section
and get it to
> fail. Removed IC and cleaned the contacts with Qtip and
Deoxit and it worked
> for a while but then came back. Has classic symptoms of
bad connection but I
> can't seem to get it to fail often enough yet. Any
shortcuts?
> Note this scope appears to be quite different from 465
regular-flavor (at
> least vert section).
> Thanks
>
> Peter Florance
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

Thank you, Peter. Information on MCL would be handy one day, too.

I went to Caig's web site and they are running a promotional, 6 vials of
products for $10.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Florance [mailto:audserv@exis.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 9:46 AM
To: 'TekScopes@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky vertical height.

Deoxit is an contact oxidizer not to be confused with
contact cleaner. It works really well on switches and has some lube
qualities.
Suppliers like MCM sell the 5% spray and 100% in the vial (I
use both)
Deoxit is made by Caig http://www.caig.com/
I've used their products since 1980.
We work on audio mostly and when you spray a switch or relay
you can actually see the THD drop when it works.

Note the less you use the better it works and sometimes
needs to work in for a while.
For fader and pot lubrication, their MCL (moving contact
lube) is a better choice.

Cheers
Peter Florance CET/CSM
Audio Services
544 Central Drive
Suite 101
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
757.498.8277
757.498.9554 Fax
email: mailto:audserv@exis.net
http://www.audio-services.com




-----Original Message-----
From: Miroslav Pokorni [SMTP:mpokorni@camintonn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 12:03 PM
To: 'TekScopes@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky vertical height.

Dear Stan:

Not directly related to 465 problems. I was wandering
whether De-Oxit is a
contact lubricant in addition to being contact protectant.
Above all, where
one can buy De-Oxit and whether there are other brand names
for same thing.

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths
[mailto:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 12:54 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky
vertical height.

Hi Peter,

I have fixed quite a few 455's with
intermittants and the
465M is very similar
in construction. I have found both of the
mother board
connectors that the
vertical and horizontal modules plug into to
be
intermittant. I would remove
both modules, clean the board contact area
with something
like alcohol, and then
apply a light coating of De-Oxit on the
board contact area.

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Peter Florance wrote:

> This one has bothered me for a while.
Sometimes the height
will be about 50%
> of normal on either channel. Very
intermittent. If I put
the unit in chop
> and run the other channels position to
very high or low on
the screen, the
> offending channel will 'pop' back to
correct size. At one
point I could tap
> around the funny heatsinked hybrid in the
vertical section
and get it to
> fail. Removed IC and cleaned the contacts
with Qtip and
Deoxit and it worked
> for a while but then came back. Has
classic symptoms of
bad connection but I
> can't seem to get it to fail often enough
yet. Any
shortcuts?
> Note this scope appears to be quite
different from 465
regular-flavor (at
> least vert section).
> Thanks
>
> Peter Florance
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an
email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an
email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


dhuster@...
 

Peter, I agree with Stan about the intermittent tendancies of the
vertical and horizontal module connectors. The FAA bought the 465M
in droves, and since their main depot is in Oklahoma City, I got to
see most of the warranty work. The 455 and 465M are
really "upgraded" T900-series and weren't the best contribution to
the Tek product line. If you don't have the scope in its case, the
traces will be pretty noisy, so don't try troubleshooting THAT
little "problem".

As a side note regarding the FAA, the government makes for odd
equipment. The FAA used/uses a modified 535/545 scope for aligning
their VOR/TACAN system sites (those funny little low white buildings
you see around the country with the big bowling pin in the center).
The modified scope (and this was a special Tek production mod) had a
hole in the side of the scope cover with clear plastic cover ofer the
hole so that a slide switch could select normal scope operation or
direct access to the vertical deflection plates. They needed the mod
so that they could bypass the vertical amplifier and view the high
frequency of the TACAN. Of course, the 500-series was obsolete and
the FAA was getting tired of spending $1000+ per instrument for
refurbishment through Tek to keep the old girls going.

Well, of course, since the 545, scope bandwidths have improved a lot,
and the late Harold Drain, the OKC sales rep, and I went out to one
of the FAA's sites to demonstrate how an inexpensive, modern Tek
scope could easily and simply be used for this procedure without
having to mess with the cost of a special modification. A new scope
was going to cost them less than their typical 545 refurbishment.
They were delighted and and Harold and I figured that he was going to
be into bonus money with all the sales of new high-bandwidth scopes
this was going to generate.

Ha! We forgot that we were dealing with the U.S. Government.
Instead, they ordered a whole slew of 2213's with the identical
direct deflection plate access production modification that the old
500-series had. Seems that they figured that it was better to do
that than it was to modernize and rewrite the adjustment procedure
and retrain the old dogs that maintained the systems. So if any of
you out there ever get hold of a 2200-series scope on the surplus
market with a Plexiglas-covered hole in the left side of the case,
that's the history of the abortion setting in front of you.

Dean


donlcramer@...
 

Fascinating!

BTW, what was the reason for creating the 465M for the government vs selling
the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some special features? Was the 455 an
outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other way around?

I worked in Digital Service Instruments as a production tech in the late 70s,
which was a new group in Portables which began with the 851 Digital Tester.
This was a product designed originally for Burroughs for their first line
techs as a scope replacement. The instrument was principally a clever
integration of DMM and counter/timer functions and the idea was that a tech
could follow a diagnostic tree and compare readings to arrive at the fault,
without the need to be familiar with how a scope worked. Anyway, we were
next to the T900 line and if DSI production was a bit slow, I would get to
work on T900 product. While not as nice as the "real" portables, the top
line T935 wasn't a bad instrument (2x35MHz) as far as functionality was
concerned.

About once a month our group got to either take a tour of another area, or
had a guest in, as was common practice back then in order to get more
familiar with other parts of Tek. One time it was the the marketing product
manager for T900. As you know, the T900 line styling was a little odd, and
was derided for looking like an old Kerby cannister vacuum cleaner instead of
like a traditional portable scope. The gentleman, whose name I've long since
forgotten, was quite a character. He told us he wanted to do an ad with a
photo of a field service tech holding a T900 in one hand and a vacuum cleaner
hose in the other hand with the line "Tektronix is Going to Clean Up in the
Low Cost Scope Business". But the idea was shot down. We had quite a laugh
over that, and he was an inspiration for the T900 team who felt somewhat
second rate compared to the groups working on the more expensive portables
and lab scopes. My recollection is that were a great bunch of people
regardless of what they worked on.

Don


Peter Florance
 

I noticed the 465M is quite different from 465.
Is the 465 a better scope?

Thanks for all the help
Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: dhuster@pb.k12.mo.us [mailto:dhuster@pb.k12.mo.us]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 8:22 AM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical height.


Peter, I agree with Stan about the intermittent tendancies of the
vertical and horizontal module connectors. The FAA bought the 465M
in droves, and since their main depot is in Oklahoma City, I got to
see most of the warranty work. The 455 and 465M are
really "upgraded" T900-series and weren't the best contribution to
the Tek product line. If you don't have the scope in its case, the
traces will be pretty noisy, so don't try troubleshooting THAT
little "problem".

As a side note regarding the FAA, the government makes for odd
equipment. The FAA used/uses a modified 535/545 scope for aligning
their VOR/TACAN system sites (those funny little low white buildings
you see around the country with the big bowling pin in the center).
The modified scope (and this was a special Tek production mod) had a
hole in the side of the scope cover with clear plastic cover ofer the
hole so that a slide switch could select normal scope operation or
direct access to the vertical deflection plates. They needed the mod
so that they could bypass the vertical amplifier and view the high
frequency of the TACAN. Of course, the 500-series was obsolete and
the FAA was getting tired of spending $1000+ per instrument for
refurbishment through Tek to keep the old girls going.

Well, of course, since the 545, scope bandwidths have improved a lot,
and the late Harold Drain, the OKC sales rep, and I went out to one
of the FAA's sites to demonstrate how an inexpensive, modern Tek
scope could easily and simply be used for this procedure without
having to mess with the cost of a special modification. A new scope
was going to cost them less than their typical 545 refurbishment.
They were delighted and and Harold and I figured that he was going to
be into bonus money with all the sales of new high-bandwidth scopes
this was going to generate.

Ha! We forgot that we were dealing with the U.S. Government.
Instead, they ordered a whole slew of 2213's with the identical
direct deflection plate access production modification that the old
500-series had. Seems that they figured that it was better to do
that than it was to modernize and rewrite the adjustment procedure
and retrain the old dogs that maintained the systems. So if any of
you out there ever get hold of a 2200-series scope on the surplus
market with a Plexiglas-covered hole in the left side of the case,
that's the history of the abortion setting in front of you.

Dean




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Peter Florance
 

Thanks Stan
I'll give that a try.
I always like to ID the problem to insure I fixed it, but in this case it's probably too intermittant to hope for that.

Peter Florance CET/CSM
Audio Services
544 Central Drive
Suite 101
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
757.498.8277
757.498.9554 Fax
email: mailto:audserv@exis.net
http://www.audio-services.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan or Patricia Griffiths [SMTP:w7ni@easystreet.com]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2001 3:54 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] 465M Flaky vertical height.

Hi Peter,

I have fixed quite a few 455's with intermittants and the 465M is very similar
in construction. I have found both of the mother board connectors that the
vertical and horizontal modules plug into to be intermittant. I would remove
both modules, clean the board contact area with something like alcohol, and then
apply a light coating of De-Oxit on the board contact area.

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com

Peter Florance wrote:

This one has bothered me for a while. Sometimes the height will be about 50%
of normal on either channel. Very intermittent. If I put the unit in chop
and run the other channels position to very high or low on the screen, the
offending channel will 'pop' back to correct size. At one point I could tap
around the funny heatsinked hybrid in the vertical section and get it to
fail. Removed IC and cleaned the contacts with Qtip and Deoxit and it worked
for a while but then came back. Has classic symptoms of bad connection but I
can't seem to get it to fail often enough yet. Any shortcuts?
Note this scope appears to be quite different from 465 regular-flavor (at
least vert section).
Thanks

Peter Florance


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

I find Don's story fascinating.

To start with, until very recently I thought that 465M is a 465, in a funny
housing, but still 465. I never new that 465M traces lineage to T900. I
believe that T900 were products acquired when Tektronix bought (British ?)
Tecelec; anyone, please, correct me if I am wrong on Tektronix/Tecelec
transaction. I have seen same housing and controls with both, Tecelec and
Tektronix names on it. I never new that T900 were built in Beavertron, I
thought that all of them came out of UK plant.

With my newly acquired insight into 465M, I find story told to me by local
former Tektronix sale guy a bit funny (local: Orange County, Ca, former:
circa 1982). Sales guy complained how Air Force bought scopes from Kikutsi,
because of low price, while Kikutsi could not deliver a scope to meet
performance specification. I wander how much of performance would have been
met by 465M.


Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: donlcramer@cs.com [mailto:donlcramer@cs.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:49 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical
height.

Fascinating!

BTW, what was the reason for creating the 465M for the
government vs selling
the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some special features?
Was the 455 an
outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other way around?

I worked in Digital Service Instruments as a production tech
in the late 70s,
which was a new group in Portables which began with the 851
Digital Tester.
This was a product designed originally for Burroughs for
their first line
techs as a scope replacement. The instrument was
principally a clever
integration of DMM and counter/timer functions and the idea
was that a tech
could follow a diagnostic tree and compare readings to
arrive at the fault,
without the need to be familiar with how a scope worked.
Anyway, we were
next to the T900 line and if DSI production was a bit slow,
I would get to
work on T900 product. While not as nice as the "real"
portables, the top
line T935 wasn't a bad instrument (2x35MHz) as far as
functionality was
concerned.

About once a month our group got to either take a tour of
another area, or
had a guest in, as was common practice back then in order to
get more
familiar with other parts of Tek. One time it was the the
marketing product
manager for T900. As you know, the T900 line styling was a
little odd, and
was derided for looking like an old Kerby cannister vacuum
cleaner instead of
like a traditional portable scope. The gentleman, whose
name I've long since
forgotten, was quite a character. He told us he wanted to
do an ad with a
photo of a field service tech holding a T900 in one hand and
a vacuum cleaner
hose in the other hand with the line "Tektronix is Going to
Clean Up in the
Low Cost Scope Business". But the idea was shot down. We
had quite a laugh
over that, and he was an inspiration for the T900 team who
felt somewhat
second rate compared to the groups working on the more
expensive portables
and lab scopes. My recollection is that were a great bunch
of people
regardless of what they worked on.

Don







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Phil (VA3UX) <phil@...>
 

At 01:20 PM 8/6/2001 -0700, you wrote:
I find Don's story fascinating.

To start with, until very recently I thought that 465M is a 465, in a funny
housing, but still 465. I never new that 465M traces lineage to T900.
That's what I thought too. That was an informative post.


I
believe that T900 were products acquired when Tektronix bought (British ?)
It was "Telequipment" from the UK

Tecelec; anyone, please, correct me if I am wrong on Tektronix/Tecelec
transaction. I have seen same housing and controls with both, Tecelec and
Sales guy complained how Air Force bought scopes from Kikutsi,
because of low price, while Kikutsi
Kikisui ??


Phil


Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: donlcramer@cs.com [mailto:donlcramer@cs.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:49 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical
height.

Fascinating!

BTW, what was the reason for creating the 465M for the
government vs selling
the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some special features?
Was the 455 an
outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other way around?

I worked in Digital Service Instruments as a production tech
in the late 70s,
which was a new group in Portables which began with the 851
Digital Tester.
This was a product designed originally for Burroughs for
their first line
techs as a scope replacement. The instrument was
principally a clever
integration of DMM and counter/timer functions and the idea
was that a tech
could follow a diagnostic tree and compare readings to
arrive at the fault,
without the need to be familiar with how a scope worked.
Anyway, we were
next to the T900 line and if DSI production was a bit slow,
I would get to
work on T900 product. While not as nice as the "real"
portables, the top
line T935 wasn't a bad instrument (2x35MHz) as far as
functionality was
concerned.

About once a month our group got to either take a tour of
another area, or
had a guest in, as was common practice back then in order to
get more
familiar with other parts of Tek. One time it was the the
marketing product
manager for T900. As you know, the T900 line styling was a
little odd, and
was derided for looking like an old Kerby cannister vacuum
cleaner instead of
like a traditional portable scope. The gentleman, whose
name I've long since
forgotten, was quite a character. He told us he wanted to
do an ad with a
photo of a field service tech holding a T900 in one hand and
a vacuum cleaner
hose in the other hand with the line "Tektronix is Going to
Clean Up in the
Low Cost Scope Business". But the idea was shot down. We
had quite a laugh
over that, and he was an inspiration for the T900 team who
felt somewhat
second rate compared to the groups working on the more
expensive portables
and lab scopes. My recollection is that were a great bunch
of people
regardless of what they worked on.

Don






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Doug Hale <DougHale@...>
 

I always wondered what happened to Telequipment. I used a little Dual Trace Dual
Timebase Telequipment scope in college ~1975. It was a great scope. Stable, easy
to setup, and the dual/delayed timebase was was magic. After that one, I wouldn't
even consider it a scope without a dual/delayed timebase.
I don't even remember the model. Does anyone have a picture of a T900 so I could
see if that is the one I used?

Doug hale


"Phil (VA3UX)" wrote:

At 01:20 PM 8/6/2001 -0700, you wrote:
I find Don's story fascinating.

To start with, until very recently I thought that 465M is a 465, in a funny
housing, but still 465. I never new that 465M traces lineage to T900.
That's what I thought too. That was an informative post.

I
believe that T900 were products acquired when Tektronix bought (British ?)
It was "Telequipment" from the UK

Tecelec; anyone, please, correct me if I am wrong on Tektronix/Tecelec
transaction. I have seen same housing and controls with both, Tecelec and
Sales guy complained how Air Force bought scopes from Kikutsi,
because of low price, while Kikutsi
Kikisui ??

Phil

Regards

Miroslav Pokorni



-----Original Message-----
From: donlcramer@cs.com [mailto:donlcramer@cs.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:49 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical
height.

Fascinating!

BTW, what was the reason for creating the 465M for the
government vs selling
the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some special features?
Was the 455 an
outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other way around?

I worked in Digital Service Instruments as a production tech
in the late 70s,
which was a new group in Portables which began with the 851
Digital Tester.
This was a product designed originally for Burroughs for
their first line
techs as a scope replacement. The instrument was
principally a clever
integration of DMM and counter/timer functions and the idea
was that a tech
could follow a diagnostic tree and compare readings to
arrive at the fault,
without the need to be familiar with how a scope worked.
Anyway, we were
next to the T900 line and if DSI production was a bit slow,
I would get to
work on T900 product. While not as nice as the "real"
portables, the top
line T935 wasn't a bad instrument (2x35MHz) as far as
functionality was
concerned.

About once a month our group got to either take a tour of
another area, or
had a guest in, as was common practice back then in order to
get more
familiar with other parts of Tek. One time it was the the
marketing product
manager for T900. As you know, the T900 line styling was a
little odd, and
was derided for looking like an old Kerby cannister vacuum
cleaner instead of
like a traditional portable scope. The gentleman, whose
name I've long since
forgotten, was quite a character. He told us he wanted to
do an ad with a
photo of a field service tech holding a T900 in one hand and
a vacuum cleaner
hose in the other hand with the line "Tektronix is Going to
Clean Up in the
Low Cost Scope Business". But the idea was shot down. We
had quite a laugh
over that, and he was an inspiration for the T900 team who
felt somewhat
second rate compared to the groups working on the more
expensive portables
and lab scopes. My recollection is that were a great bunch
of people
regardless of what they worked on.

Don







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

Thank you, Phil; it is only now when I saw your writing that I remembered
that 'Tecelec' was a French rep firm (represented C&K switches, among
others) while Telequipment is what I should have said.
As for "Kikutsi', whatever you say. That was my blind stab, I can not even
get myself to pronounce their name, let alone to spell it.

As for Doug Hale's talk about Telequipment and dual time base, I think that
delayed base came from Tektronix and Telequipment just carried that idea on.
I can relate to what Doug says about not being willing to go back to a scope
without delayed base. You need it once in a blue moon, but when you have to
have it, there is no substitute. I cut my teeth on a 454A; after few months
had a design problem, I think it was some racing condition and as a result
had a nasty dog tooth on an edge, Delayed base saved my neck and after that
I just would not touch any scope without dual time base. Actually, I became
Tektronix snob, would not touch anything else. Back in 1977, company that I
worked for bought a nice storage hp (company was in underwater acoustics, so
storage is very helpful), but trigger was a true hp, very hard to adjust and
would quickly drift to instability. I never touched that hp scope, except
when I needed storage, and even than image would bloom on me. I guess, that
was my subconscious attempt to say that nothing short of Tektronix can work
right.


Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil (VA3UX) [mailto:phil@vaxxine.com]
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:21 PM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical
height.

At 01:20 PM 8/6/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I find Don's story fascinating.
>
>To start with, until very recently I thought that 465M is a
465, in a funny
>housing, but still 465. I never new that 465M traces
lineage to T900.

That's what I thought too. That was an informative post.


> I
>believe that T900 were products acquired when Tektronix
bought (British ?)

It was "Telequipment" from the UK

>Tecelec; anyone, please, correct me if I am wrong on
Tektronix/Tecelec
>transaction. I have seen same housing and controls with
both, Tecelec and
> Sales guy complained how Air Force bought scopes from
Kikutsi,
>because of low price, while Kikutsi

Kikisui ??


Phil


>Regards
>
>Miroslav Pokorni
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: donlcramer@cs.com
[mailto:donlcramer@cs.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 2:49 PM
> To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [TekScopes] Re: 465M
Flaky vertical
>height.
>
> Fascinating!
>
> BTW, what was the reason for creating the
465M for the
>government vs selling
> the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some
special features?
>Was the 455 an
> outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other
way around?
>
> I worked in Digital Service Instruments as
a production tech
>in the late 70s,
> which was a new group in Portables which
began with the 851
>Digital Tester.
> This was a product designed originally for
Burroughs for
>their first line
> techs as a scope replacement. The
instrument was
>principally a clever
> integration of DMM and counter/timer
functions and the idea
>was that a tech
> could follow a diagnostic tree and compare
readings to
>arrive at the fault,
> without the need to be familiar with how a
scope worked.
>Anyway, we were
> next to the T900 line and if DSI
production was a bit slow,
>I would get to
> work on T900 product. While not as nice
as the "real"
>portables, the top
> line T935 wasn't a bad instrument
(2x35MHz) as far as
>functionality was
> concerned.
>
> About once a month our group got to either
take a tour of
>another area, or
> had a guest in, as was common practice
back then in order to
>get more
> familiar with other parts of Tek. One
time it was the the
>marketing product
> manager for T900. As you know, the T900
line styling was a
>little odd, and
> was derided for looking like an old Kerby
cannister vacuum
>cleaner instead of
> like a traditional portable scope. The
gentleman, whose
>name I've long since
> forgotten, was quite a character. He told
us he wanted to
>do an ad with a
> photo of a field service tech holding a
T900 in one hand and
>a vacuum cleaner
> hose in the other hand with the line
"Tektronix is Going to
>Clean Up in the
> Low Cost Scope Business". But the idea
was shot down. We
>had quite a laugh
> over that, and he was an inspiration for
the T900 team who
>felt somewhat
> second rate compared to the groups working
on the more
>expensive portables
> and lab scopes. My recollection is that
were a great bunch
>of people
> regardless of what they worked on.
>
> Don
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have
been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an
email to:
> TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

Phil (VA3UX) wrote:

At 03:40 PM 8/6/2001 -0600, you wrote:
I always wondered what happened to Telequipment.
That's what happened Doug. Tek bought Telequipment in late 1966 in order
to capture some market share in the "low end" scope market - a market where
Tek had no presence at that time. Telequipment made a decent quality
no-frills scope at an affordable price. Their scopes certainly weren't up
to the standards of the Tek line but they were a head-and-shoulders above
the typical American service grade scopes (Hickok, Stark, Precision,
Heathkit, etc). The Telequipment name carried on until some time in the
early 70's until the name was dropped and the Tek name was put on the
instruments. Telequipment instruments with the Tektronix name had model
numbers that began with "T". Eventually, the whole product line was
dropped and that was the end of Telequipment. Of all the good things Tek
did, buying Telequipment was not one of them. In a small way, the scope
market would have been better off if Telequipment had just been left alone.

Phil
Well, I concur with all of the above, except the following. I don't ever remember
the "Tek" name appearing on any Telequipment scope. The T900 series was a separate
engineering effort based in Beaverton, OR and had nothing whatsoever to do with
Telequipment, as far as I know. It was a low-cost effort and that is where the
similarity to Telequipment ends, to the best of my recollection.

What really happened to Telequipment is that a decision was made by Tek management
to shut it down because customer satisfaction with the products was just too low.
What was saved in the cost of initial purchase was quickly spent in maintenance of
Telequipment scopes. When you save the cost of transistor sockets, for example,
you have to spend more to replace the transistor when it does go bad. The long
term economics of buying a low-cost scope is just not a good concept, in general,
especially for commercial customers.

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

donlcramer@cs.com wrote:

Fascinating!

BTW, what was the reason for creating the 465M for the government vs selling
the 465? Was it a cost issue? Or some special features? Was the 455 an
outgrowth of the 465M or was it the other way around?
It could have been a cost issue, but it was not a "price" issue. In the 1978 Tek
catalog, for example, you see the 465 at $2295 and the 465M at $2345, or $50
MORE. In spite of the higher price, I suspect the 465M was cheaper to build than
the 465 and certainly an inferior instrument to the 465. (That's just my
opinion, folks. There are differing opinions, I am sure.)

The 465M did meet a mil spec that was not advertised for the 465 and it was
completely provisioned through the U.S. Goverment Supply Depots.

The 455 was in the Tek Catalog before the 465M was and I suspect that it was
found that the normal 455 made much more than its advertised 50 MHz bandwidth.
With just a little engineering effort, it could be upgraded to 100 MHz and then
it would qualify for some large government procurements. I don't have the inside
story from the "horse's mouth", but I would bet money on what I have related
here. Makes sense to me knowing how Tek operated in those years . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com


Stan or Patricia Griffiths <w7ni@...>
 

Peter Florance wrote:

I noticed the 465M is quite different from 465.
Is the 465 a better scope?

Thanks for all the help
Peter
In my opinion, yes, the 465 is superior to the 465M. But that's only one
opinion . . .

Stan
w7ni@easystreet.com


dhuster@...
 

I'm not sure I've figured out how to reply on this forum yet. I'd
replied previously to the #445 OP as I am now "465M Flaky vertical
height" figuring that it would end up in the queue at the end, but
somewhere, the reply got lost. It had to do with "is the 465M better
thean the 465?". I'll try again.

Phil, the T900's look nothing like any TQ scope. The T900-series is
a Beaverton development and TQ is completely European, and never do
the two meet. Like Stan, I never remember the Tek name or logo ever
appearing on a TQ product.

Someone mentioned a TQ that they used that had a horizontal layout.
I think that was the D75, but I remember the CRT in the center,
vertical on the left, horizontal on the right, but that's been a long
time ago .... I think that there was a CRT-over-electronics version
of the D75 ... maybe D85? I can't remember. But these were plug-in
scopes for which there were only the one plug-in that I know of for
each side. I did an April Fools Day Marketing Sales Release when I
was in the Dallas Service Center that said that TQ was coming out
with a sampling system plug-in for that scope, selling for $1500 or
some such, and was unusual in that it had TV trigger. One sales
engineer took it hook, line and sinker. I still have a copy of that
thing somewhere.


The entire T900-series product line:

T921: single channel, single timebase, 15 MHz
T922: dual channel, single timebase, 15 MHz
T922R: rack-mounted T922
T912: dual channel, bistable storage, 10 MHz
T932: dual channel, single timebase, 35 MHz
T935/A: dual channel, dual timebase, 35 MHz

As I recall, the T900-series was introduced in late 1975, early
1976. The T921 was used as the primary illustration in the
original "Basic Oscilloscope Operation" (1978), AX-3725-1 The T922
and T935A were also shown in cameo appearances.

Stan, in the field, transistor sockets were some of the handiest
things for us service technicians. Suspect a bad transistor? Just
pluck it out, pop it in the curve tracer and check it. I think
that's where you're coming from when you lamented the lack of such
sockets in the T900-series (the TQ stuff had sockets). However,
transistor and IC sockets were the one greatest source of warranty
work, repairs and intermittents in the field. When Tek got rid of
the sockets (RAM and expensive ICs still had sockets) and most of the
ribbon cable connectors, intermittents plummeted. At the bench, you
might have a dead circuit. You'd pluck out a transistor, check it,
it was good, put the transistor back, the scope started working. An
intermittent. So, you had to replace the socket AND the transistor
to insure that you weren't going to be sending an intermittent back
out in the field. Sockets didn't save Tek any money. It cost more
to buy and install them and it cost more on the repairs and callbacks.
I believe that the 455, T900-series, TM500-series and the 5000-series
and later the 465M were the first Tek products to not use sockets.

It looks like later posts already mentioned the reasons for the 465M
coming into existance, the pre-existance of the 455, the fact that
the 455 is a T900 in lineage, etc.

Dean


Miroslav Pokorni <mpokorni@...>
 

As much as I like sockets, I must agree with Dean. It is sure handy to be
able to remove and replace components easily, but that should be confined to
prototyping. The first Tektronix scope that I repaired, and that was the
first ever broken Tektronix that I saw, was a 422 with one transistor lead
being clear out of socket, two other leads bent. One could argue that lead
pulling happened during disassembly, but that was the only fault with the
scope, fixing pulled transistor fixed the scope. Arguing that socket had a
bad contact to start with and disassembly dislodged transistor in bad socket
would be a big stretch. The 422s were small portable scopes banged around by
service people and it must have been shock in handling and transport that
pulled transistor lead.

Failure that I described is quite rare in occurrence, but is a kind of 2X4
to use against sockets. I was at a test conference in early 80s and one of
speakers stated: ' there is no place for a socket in modern electronics
board'. He was referring to both, an inability to test socketed components
on a bed-of-nails tester and intermittent faults caused by sockets. To my
mind, using a low contact pressure socket (the most common type of socket)
in a production unit is begging for trouble.


Regards

Miroslav Pokorni

-----Original Message-----
From: dhuster@pb.k12.mo.us [mailto:dhuster@pb.k12.mo.us]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 7:39 AM
To: TekScopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [TekScopes] Re: 465M Flaky vertical height.

I'm not sure I've figured out how to reply on this forum
yet. I'd
replied previously to the #445 OP as I am now "465M Flaky
vertical
height" figuring that it would end up in the queue at the
end, but
somewhere, the reply got lost. It had to do with "is the
465M better
thean the 465?". I'll try again.

Phil, the T900's look nothing like any TQ scope. The
T900-series is
a Beaverton development and TQ is completely European, and
never do
the two meet. Like Stan, I never remember the Tek name or
logo ever
appearing on a TQ product.

Someone mentioned a TQ that they used that had a horizontal
layout.
I think that was the D75, but I remember the CRT in the
center,
vertical on the left, horizontal on the right, but that's
been a long
time ago .... I think that there was a CRT-over-electronics
version
of the D75 ... maybe D85? I can't remember. But these were
plug-in
scopes for which there were only the one plug-in that I know
of for
each side. I did an April Fools Day Marketing Sales Release
when I
was in the Dallas Service Center that said that TQ was
coming out
with a sampling system plug-in for that scope, selling for
$1500 or
some such, and was unusual in that it had TV trigger. One
sales
engineer took it hook, line and sinker. I still have a copy
of that
thing somewhere.


The entire T900-series product line:

T921: single channel, single timebase, 15 MHz
T922: dual channel, single timebase, 15 MHz
T922R: rack-mounted T922
T912: dual channel, bistable storage, 10 MHz
T932: dual channel, single timebase, 35 MHz
T935/A: dual channel, dual timebase, 35 MHz

As I recall, the T900-series was introduced in late 1975,
early
1976. The T921 was used as the primary illustration in the
original "Basic Oscilloscope Operation" (1978), AX-3725-1
The T922
and T935A were also shown in cameo appearances.

Stan, in the field, transistor sockets were some of the
handiest
things for us service technicians. Suspect a bad
transistor? Just
pluck it out, pop it in the curve tracer and check it. I
think
that's where you're coming from when you lamented the lack
of such
sockets in the T900-series (the TQ stuff had sockets).
However,
transistor and IC sockets were the one greatest source of
warranty
work, repairs and intermittents in the field. When Tek got
rid of
the sockets (RAM and expensive ICs still had sockets) and
most of the
ribbon cable connectors, intermittents plummeted. At the
bench, you
might have a dead circuit. You'd pluck out a transistor,
check it,
it was good, put the transistor back, the scope started
working. An
intermittent. So, you had to replace the socket AND the
transistor
to insure that you weren't going to be sending an
intermittent back
out in the field. Sockets didn't save Tek any money. It
cost more
to buy and install them and it cost more on the repairs and
callbacks.
I believe that the 455, T900-series, TM500-series and the
5000-series
and later the 465M were the first Tek products to not use
sockets.

It looks like later posts already mentioned the reasons for
the 465M
coming into existance, the pre-existance of the 455, the
fact that
the 455 is a T900 in lineage, etc.

Dean



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TekScopes-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/