SANTA is still using vacuum tubes to navigate his sleigh

snipped-for-privacy@myshop.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

That just means that he is less likely to fall out of the sky in the event that an EMP occurs. Some russian jets have the same old school hardware in them.

The Soviet jets designed in the 60s and 70s had some tube avionics probably just because Soviet solid state device manufacturing/performance at the time sucked balls. EMP-resistance just a side-benefit

bitrex wrote in news:LbgUD.84116$ snipped-for-privacy@fx08.iad:

I did not say they used it just for that purpose. And their chip fabs still suck. They use COTS just like the rest of the world for the new stuff.

Soviet Solid State manufacturing/performance *still* sucks.

I assume that you are referencing the MiG-25 that defected to Japan in

electronics certified at that time.

I would not have been surprised, if the old Vulcan bombers that bombed the Falkland Islands in 1982 would have had some tube equipment.

Assuming they were still using germanium transistors in the mid.1960s, those are nary with maximum junction temperatures below 100 C.Getting away with the heat is a real problem. For a high attitude fighter, the surrounding air density is quite low, requiring a pressurized electronics compartment and some fans.

What was the fT of transistors of that era, hardly sufficient even for VHF aviation radios ?

I agree with that. If EMP resistance was the only reason for using tubes, it might make sense to use tubes in the first RF-amplifier, which can take several kilovolt punishment without permanent damage, protecting the next stages. While the stage fails to operate _during_ the EMP, but after that it happily continues to operate,

Most if the EMP has a lot of energy at lower frequencies and hence causes harm to electronics connected to long wires and hence the EMP scare of the 1970's. At VHF and up, there is not that much energy and having an antenna with low frequency grounded path, such as a folded dipole, reduces the damage risk even further.

The US military at least would've had access to good-quality silicon transistors in the early 60s surely; the Minuteman 1 guidance system circa 1960 was entirely transistorized using Fairchild-produced silicon transistors, 2N697. The Minuteman I didn't have a radar or anything AFAIK though.

All the US bombers and fighters designed in the 50s had lots of tubes in the avionics (not just for radar/RF-related), B-47, B-52, Convair B-58 Hustler, F-105, F-8 Crusader, A-6, etc.

Not sure exactly what the first US warplane to have fully transistorized avionics was, it might have been the F-111 introduced in the late 60s.

If they could've used all solid-state avionics in the Mig-25 they likely would have. Being exposed to EMP is an unlikely scenario, the jets were probably expected to carry out other missions besides a nuclear war situation one.

Being shot down because the enemy has a more sophisticated avionics package that can spot you and fire before you spot them much more common risk

See my post to this group a couple of years ago:

Unfortunately the image links no longer work.

bitrex wrote in news:kwjUD.105853$ snipped-for-privacy@fx47.iad:

The very first IC went into a missile. Fairchild semi.

bitrex wrote in news:icmUD.274582$_35.264006 @fx46.iad:

NONE of which were "victories" for the Iraqi air force.

And no, I also think this account is in error, because I watched it live, and I watched as we gained air superiority. It did not even take two days.

So, the tard that posted this to wikipedia is likely wikifucked in the head. The Iraqi air force AND Saddam were 100% pussified in this area.

Thank u for your service

bitrex wrote in news:5XmUD.274583$ snipped-for-privacy@fx46.iad:

That was twelve years prior.

That there's at least one tough-talker on the group who served in the military is, in fact, surprising to me. I thought everyone got bone-spur deferments too