What does that mean? Did you graduate early? If you were smart enough to complete a three year course in 18 months you ought to be smart enough to be able to say so explicitly.
So they sent you on an undemanding training course, and were nice enough to apologise when you aced it in half the regular time.
IBM and EMI Central Research did apply for patent on things that might work. Most employers are more sensible. I got my third patent at Cambridge Instruments which was less interested in building up a stock of dubious patents for patent swaps.
One of my lots-of-patents friends made his money out of a patent on a idea which Tektronix had provisionly patented three weeks earlier. Happily they didn't carry it through and my friend eventually made about $A12 million out of it (that's roughly $US 8 million).
Several companies did, when I was younger, and I do seem to know more about real world patents than you do, not that you've got enough sense to notice.
He did not say he graduated early. He did not say he completed a three year course in 18 months. It appears your negativity gets in the way of your understanding. You have something to contribute. I wish you would, instead of your continual negative posts.
He said that he got promoted early. I didn't say that he graduated early. In fact I asked him what his claim meant, with early graduation as a tentative hypothesis.
He did say that he "tested out" and promptly got promoted unusually early. That strikes me as a claim that he'd learned all that they needed to teach him unusually fast.
The last line of the post to which I was replying was "Typical of your stupidity, many companies in the United states are the ones to apply for patents for things do at work. Not that anyone expects you to know anything about the real world. It's no wonder why no one would hire an idiot, like you."
It's not positive. It's Mike Terrell's negativity that's primary problem here. I'm just reacting appropriately,
I do make what strike me as positive contributions from time to time. I even get some occasional credit for it. Quite a lot of the people who post here don't. Your name isn't one that springs to mind as an example - but "ehsir" doesn't look much like a real name. But then again I don't have any trouble remembering "whit3rd" as a frequently positive contributor.
Read it again. I tested out of the course. I never went to the school, at all. My score on the test was higher than most students that did attend for three years. It was rhe hardest Elecronics school in the US Army, with a very high dropout/failure rate. I was the only one to ever test out of that course.
Sure you do. Keep lying to yourself. I've had the fun of dealing with patent disputes. We had to sue Scientific Atlanta for infringement. (Now known as Cisco) They took one of our designs, ignored our patents and went into production. We won in court, but part of the settlement was to build their knockoff to finish a government contract. I had the fun of maintaining the poorly designed SATE system, and selecting better components, since their version was built with cheaper, or then obsolete parts.
OI also wrote test procedures, I designed and built test fixtures. I certified new components/vendors. I removed some vendors from our AVL, due to unresolved quality issues. I dealt with every part of the company, except accounting. Work that only an Engineer did.
Tabby is an anonymous troll. I post under my real name. I do spend a certain amount of time being rude to trolls like him, but I have my constructive moments too, not that Tabby knows enough to recognise them.
Tabby - about Don Lancaster - "He and his ilk created a hugely successful phenomenon."
He's now denying that he made that fatuous claim.
Silly question. If Tabby had a bit more sense, he'd realise that I go after twits like him because I.m confident that I do know what I'm talking about and equally confident that he doesn't. As it is, he think he can get away with a pop psychology put down which merely emphasises that he doesn't realise what an obvious twit he is.
Mike Terrell must be thinking of Tabby. or John Larkin. That sort of claim could only work if Mike could point to an unsubstantiated claim that I'd made. and that's quite beyond him.
He's seeing something that doesn't exist, because that's what he wants to see.
I see you as a clone of 'Always Wrong'. A pathetic troll, with nothing but hatred in his life. A loser who can never answer a direct question. Tell us, how much test equipment you have, and that you actually know how to use. I currently have over 150, and I have multiple workbenches in my 1200 square foot shop. You have no imagination. For instance, I see al kinds of 'projects' for electronic locks using microprocessors, or a fist full of logic IC's. 30 years ago I used a non matrix keypad, (16 button with a single common) along with a 4017 IC, a few capacitors, resistors and a pass transistor. You could have up to a 10 digit code. It had a five second delay, if you entered the wrong code. Pressing any key after it was unlocked, locked it.
Trivia: Skolnik was the surname of one of the characters in the movie, 'Revenge of the Nerds'.
Around 1990, I was buying and repairing 4 GHz LNAs. I built a modulated signal generator to tes them, and to repair C band satellite receivers. A little imagination provided a noise source to test the LNAs on the bench. A standard 4 foot Florescent lamp generates noise well past 4GHz, so waving an LNA/LNB past one would show as an increase in the video level on a receiver.
Have you ever seen Merrill Skolnik's 'RADAR Handbook'? It is the reference for microwave design. Of course, you would never pay $200 for a book, like that. That's just as well, becaue you wouldn't understand it.
I received a letter from the FCC on a Friday. It wanted to know how we were monitoring the tower lights at an unmanned site. If we didn't have a system in place, they listed a couple approved units that were in the thousands of dollars. When I got home that day, I went t my shop and built a system. I used a 1.024 MHz crystal oscillator, followed by a divide by 1000 circuit. This gave a stable, 1024 Hz square wave. That twas fed through a low pass filter. Then I used a current transformer to monitor the current fr the lights. This was rectified and used too gate the audio signal, which was fed into a spare audio channel on the STL. At the new site, the audio was detected, and used to drive a LED at Master Control. It was inverted, so that the LED was lit when the tower lights were off. This did two things. It verified the system was working, as well as display when the beacons started flashing. Iff even one tower light failed, it stayed lit.
I drew the schematics, and listed the components. I described the operation, and sent it with the letter back to the FCC. My design was grandfathered, since it was in operation when I mailed the letter the following Monday.
You couldn't begin to build a TV station from scratch. You couldn't deal with all the rules and regulations with the FCC,the FAA, zoning, building inspectors, and everything else.
I was the 'Engineer of Record' for the original Ch 58 TV station in Destin, Florida.
In the mid '80s, I was given the specs to connect two incompatible Cable TV Community loops to proved a private channel to a large school system.. It was a textbook design that someone with no imagination would dream up. It was also over $30,000 It required two receivers, two modulators It then fed audio and video between the pairs. It would have required a secure building at the interconnect site.
I tossed it in the trash. I used a single Hetrodyne Signal processor, and a weather tight NEMA box I got permission from the Electric utility to pole mount the box. It was about six cubic feet. It had power and two coaxial cables entering it. Inside, I used two splitters. One system was sub split, the other was standard mid split for the return channels. Ours was standard. CATV systems used two pilot carriers to set the system AGC. Typically, they use two video carriers for this. We used Ch 2 and 12. They used Ch 2 as a return channel, so it went trough one splitter, and into their system. We used Ch T10, for our return, so I used the HSP to down convert their Ch 12 signal to T10. and the other splitter to feed it to our Head End. I pre-built the package, and our two channel Community Loop headend. Once it was installed, it was less than 1/4 dB from the specified signal level, on initial power up. The pole mounted interface was under $3,000 and it didn't need any further attention.
I didn't have a C-band Spectrum Analyzer, but the receivers used a 70 MHz IF, I just fed that to the test TV in our shop, to verify if the front end was working. I was repairing Rockwell/Collins SVR-4F receivers that no one in the country would touch, outside the factory. They had a six month turnaround time. The only thing that I couldn't repair was the 4 GHz LO module, because they no longer had the custom, stud mounted custom transistors. Te would make a batch of 25, but the price was exorbitant since they were used in a military version of that receiver.I could by a new Microdyne 1100LPR for about the same price as one transistor, and the Microdyne had a much cleaner output.
These SVR-4F were listed as incompatible with the Videochiper descramblers, so I modifed them rther than spend $10,000 for new equipment. It cost us about 25 cents, if it was in for other work.
I had some of our other systems ship me all their dead receivers for repair. The manager was bragging that they were unrepeatable, so he could buy new equipment. They at arrived on a Friday. 13 of them. I shipped out six on Monday and he was pissed! The other seven had dead LO Modules, so I used them for parts mules. I still have some of the aluminum, rack mount chassis, for project boxes..
My supervisor at Microdyne asked me to keep an eye out for a 10MHz distribution Amplifier for our in house Reference. I told him I had something in my truck, that I'd picked up over the weekend. It was a A/B switch for RGB monitors for two mainframe computers. It used relays to select the computer the user wanted. I srtipped out the relays, and turned it into a 0ne in, 32 output DA in under a half hour. I then traded it for some Tektronix video test equipment that I was going to give to a local Vocational Electronics teacher. I was on his advisory board, so I spent some afternoons in the classroom. I let the students come to my shop on the weekends to use my collection of data and reference books for their projects. I also gave away some parts I would guide them to relevant information, but I wouldn't do their designs. I would point out mistakes, but not explain what was wrong.
I also taught Electronics at my high school, during my Senior year.
I also find it amusing that you are a chemist who couldn't find a job.
Now, you'll reply with another lame and repetitive troll, ignoring everything while trying to look relevant. Of course,,you'll fail because you have no imagination.
Decadent Linux User Numero Uno didn't fit that description, and neither do I. Krw - who labelled him "always wrong" is a much closer fit.
Nothing much. There's a small digital voltmeter, and an equally small LCR bridge. There's some software on my home computer that lets me use the audio port as a slow oscilliscope. I do know how to use all of them, and quite a lot more beside.
You live in the boondocks and can afford that kind of space. I live in the centre of Sydney where space is more expensive.
There are couple of patents that say otherwise.
If I needed that I could buy it.
So what?
Why would I want to?
I've got two texts on Microwave design ISBN 0-471-91277-8 and 0-412-34160-3, which I bought i the UK about 35 years ago for about 20 pounds each I got them for project that used 500psec wide pulses and we were looking at getting that down to 100psec, but it wasn't radar.
Seems a bit indirect. Pointing a photodector at the lights would be more direct. Use a micro to look at the photodector output and to tell site local area network what the photodetector is seeing.
Dividing down from 1.024 MHz to get a 1024 Hz square wave is extravagant. Dividing a 32768 Hz watch crystal oscillator by 32 would have got you exactly the same result more cheaply and consumed less current.
<snipped the rest of the boasting>
I was never unemployed from the day I graduated as Ph.D. chemist in 1970 until I got made redundant by Cambridge Instrument in 1991 - and I was back in work within ten days of that. I was working as fairly high powered electronic engineer for most of that time, supervising technicians who were quite a bolshy as you are. Because I had the capacity to fix stuff that they couldn't, I did earn some respect.
The worst example of that was when I'd designed in an analog multiplier with X and Y offsets that had to be trimmed out with two trimpots. I could do it in ten minutes, following the procedure I'd written. They couldn't, after trying for hours. I promptly wrote a mod replacing the cheap analog multipier with it's more expensive laser trimmed version - the difference in price was more than ten minutes work, even at my hourly rate, but I wasn't always available when the shop floor needed me.
Why on earth would I bother to try and look "relevant" to you? If you had any imagination you'd realise how silly that prediction is.
No, you are closer in that you love to piss everyone off.
That doesn't surprise my, because you wouldn't take 10 minutes to protype abd test an idea.
Skolnik's work inspired many of the early Satellite TV designs. They were a far cry from the IEEE's predicted 100 foot dishes that used a diode mixer at the feedhorn.
No, I had 25 of the modules on hand. I would have had to order a crystal, and waited at least a week. That would have put me past the deadline, an a single crystal plus shipping was much higher than a 50 cent surplus oscillator module.
You have no concept of tower lighting A 300 foot tower ha about 20 steady and strobe lights mounted on all four sides, and many were not visible from the tower base.Your method is total crap, because you woud need a detector at every lamp. The FAA must be notified as soon as possible when any of the lighs fail, because most towers are in at least one flight path.
Typical of your lack of thought. There weren't Local Area Networks in 1987. There wasn't even a phone line sat the site so you couldn't use a computer to call long distance. The 7 GNz link was already in place, ad the third audio channel was for the studio to talk to Master Control at the tower site.
The new tower was 1700 feet, and the top was often hidden by clouds. At times, the top of the 300 foot tower was hidden, as well.
I had the EEs come to me to ask questions about some older products, and the newest test equipment. They could walk 600 fet to my area, or spend hours digging through old records, and equipment manuals.
Oh, sure. One board that combined the video from two Telemetry receivers would maintain a constant video level as weak signals faded between to antennas.
I designed a new test fixture for a video processing board. It had 16 Salen-Key LP filter, that were selected by software. The original fixture took 7,5 hours per board. My new design reduced the average test time to 17 minutes. Another fixture was computer controlled, I took the unfinished software from an ET who had walked away from the project, and not only finished it, but I turned it into an expert system that gave pointers for each possible failure. It took longer to plug the board into three fixture than to test a good board.
I was given the jobs that other couldn't finish, or just didn't want to do. I wrote ECOs to eliminate the common problems. I also consulted with our Metrology lab to troubleshoot the digital sections of a lot of HP equipment.
I certainly don't irritate everybody, and while certain right wing lunatics do take offense at being corrected, I don't do it because I want to piss them off - I just want to point out that what they are posting is factually incorrect. As you are here.
Only if you had a collection of the relevant junk, and even then all you could put togehter would be a proof of principle experiment - no potential customer would see it as any kind of prototype.
I'm sure that it was relevant to that business. It's not one that I was ever paid to take an interest in.
Why should I?
But your scheme didn't offer that. A solid cheap state photo detector looks just like a LED (and you can use LED as photodetector. though they are pretty insensitive).
One per light would be perfectly affordable.
There were lots
formatting link
goes back to 1968. I got a job on 1979 because I'd read the special issue of the Proceedings of the IEEE on the subject from cover to cover.
Sounds primitive.
So what?
<snipped more irrelevant boasting>
Didn't we all? At Cambridge Instruments we called them modifications, rather than equipment change orders. The technicians used to churn them out and the engineers had to review them and either chuck them out - half the time the technicians didn't like the proper setting up procedure and had improvised their own which didn't work, and then wanted the equipment changed in a way that they thought would make their lame setting up procedure work.
Other change orders changed the design to use parts that we could buy when the original parts had gone obsolete. Some of them got quite interesting.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.