Vacuum Transistors

[Irvrobinson]

For the geeks in the group. Vacuum transistors. Very cool, and a well-written article.

Introducing the Vacuum Transistor: A Device Made of Nothing - IEEE Spectrum

 

[3db]

For the geeks in the group. Vacuum transistors. Very cool, and a well-written article.

Introducing the Vacuum Transistor: A Device Made of Nothing - IEEE Spectrum

I hate it when truth gets skewed. One of the biggest reasons why the Russians remained with tubes in their avionics is tubes are impervious to an EM pulse caused by a nuclear explosion. That same EM pulse would cause a severe failure rate of all semiconductors and hence your avionics.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I hate it when truth gets skewed. One of the biggest reasons why the Russians remained with tubes in their avionics is tubes are impervious to an EM pulse caused by a nuclear explosion. That same EM pulse would cause a severe failure rate of all semiconductors and hence your avionics.

How did the truth get skewed? Here is the last paragraph from the article:

Admittedly, a great deal of work remains to be done before we can begin to envision commercial products emerging. But when they eventually do, this new generation of vacuum electronics will surely boast some surprising capabilities. Expect that. Otherwise you might end up feeling a bit like those military analysts who examined that Soviet MiG-25 in Japan back in 1976: Later they realized that its vacuum-based avionics could withstand the electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear blast better than anything the West had in its planes. Only then did they begin to appreciate the value of a little nothingness.

 

[mtrycrafts]

How did the truth get skewed? Here is the last paragraph from the article:

Admittedly, a great deal of work remains to be done before we can begin to envision commercial products emerging. But when they eventually do, this new generation of vacuum electronics will surely boast some surprising capabilities. Expect that. Otherwise you might end up feeling a bit like those military analysts who examined that Soviet MiG-25 in Japan back in 1976: Later they realized that its vacuum-based avionics could withstand the electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear blast better than anything the West had in its planes. Only then did they begin to appreciate the value of a little nothingness.

Would that realization mean that before 1976 we didn't know about the tubes resistance to EM?

 

[3db]

How did the truth get skewed? Here is the last paragraph from the article:

Admittedly, a great deal of work remains to be done before we can begin to envision commercial products emerging. But when they eventually do, this new generation of vacuum electronics will surely boast some surprising capabilities. Expect that. Otherwise you might end up feeling a bit like those military analysts who examined that Soviet MiG-25 in Japan back in 1976: Later they realized that its vacuum-based avionics could withstand the electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear blast better than anything the West had in its planes. Only then did they begin to appreciate the value of a little nothingness.

Thanks Irv.. I missed that part while glossing over the article. I'm glad they mentioned very important part. The Soviets left their avionics in tube technology for that one reason alone.

 

[Rickster71]

...... I'm glad they mentioned very important part. The Soviets left their avionics in tube technology for that one reason alone.

Yes, that one reason was important.
Though there were many more reasons that tube were left in the past. That one thing just wasn't worth them hanging their hat on.

Tubes were inefficient and didn't work well in switching, were susceptible to vibration. They consumed a great deal of power and gave off too much heat.
That heat led them to them being unreliable, with a high failure rate. A failure rate I can personally attest to.
IMHO, not a fan.

 

[3db]

Yes, that one reason was important.
Though there were many more reasons that tube were left in the past. That one thing just wasn't worth them hanging their hat on.

Tubes were inefficient and didn't work well in switching, were susceptible to vibration. They consumed a great deal of power and gave off too much heat.
That heat led them to them being unreliable, with a high failure rate. A failure rate I can personally attest to.
IMHO, not a fan.

I'm not arguing the merits of tubes verses solid state although most microwaves are still tube based and ideal for switching. All I'm stating is Russians used tubes for EM reasons and not because they did not have the technology in solid state to do the same thing.

 

[Rickster71]

I'm not arguing the merits of tubes verses solid state although most microwaves are still tube based and ideal for switching. All I'm stating is Russians used tubes for EM reasons and not because they did not have the technology in solid state to do the same thing.

Understood and agree.
It just struck me as funny that with all the faults of tubes back them. They found that one thing as a reason to keep tubes.
One reason (in retrospect) that never really came to fruition.

 

[3db]

Understood and agree.
It just struck me as funny that with all the faults of tubes back them. They found that one thing as a reason to keep tubes.
One reason (in retrospect) that never really came to fruition.

Thank God it never came to fruition... Military strategy has also changed big time since then obsoleting the need for aircraft with tubes. Now they just use ........

 

[Swerd]

Ah yes, those Soviet vacuum tubes. In those Cold War days it was common to attribute all kinds of abilities and prowess to the the big bad Bear. And most of it wasn't quite as stated in that article.

Yes, those vacuum tubes may have been a bit less perturbed by the EM pulse from a nuclear explosion, but that probably was not the reason why the Soviets used them. They simply didn't have a solid state electronics industry. The Soviets at the time lacked any ability to create sophisticated miniaturized electronics. Instead, they shrank the size of vacuum tubes – 1930's technology. Why do you think the west was flooded with cheap vacuum tubes in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed? They were all made in vacuum tube factories in Russia, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and China. (Hint, they weren't making them for all the audiophiles behind the Iron Curtain.)

Their radar, avionics, missile guidance, communications techniques were all similarly far behind what we were learning how to do with modern solid state electronics. So that article was misleading in the sense that it implied that the Soviets had an advantage over us because of their vacuum tubes.

Some of that "misleading" was deliberate because it was to our advantage to hide what we really knew. Another reason was that Congress responded well to threats about "advanced Soviet technology" by increased funds to our military. The truth was that the Mig-25 was a failed design, that was abandoned by the Soviets. It may have flown very fast (for a very short time) but it was essentially deaf, dumb, and blind when it came to electronic capabilities.

Yes, it would have been a mistake to underestimate the Soviets; they were smart, motivated, and able. But it was probably more common in the West, especially in the western press, to overestimate them.

 

[slipperybidness]

From everything I hear, if you are a modern-day tube fan, then the Soviet tubes are the ones you want!

But they aren't cheap!

 

[Irvrobinson]

Ah yes, those Soviet vacuum tubes. In those Cold War days it was common to attribute all kinds of abilities and prowess to the the big bad Bear. And most of it wasn't quite as stated in that article.

Yes, those vacuum tubes may have been a bit less perturbed by the EM pulse from a nuclear explosion, but that probably was not the reason why the Soviets used them. They simply didn't have a solid state electronics industry. The Soviets at the time lacked any ability to create sophisticated miniaturized electronics. Instead, they shrank the size of vacuum tubes – 1930's technology. Why do you think the west was flooded with cheap vacuum tubes in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed? They were all made in vacuum tube factories in Russia, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and China. (Hint, they weren't making them for all the audiophiles behind the Iron Curtain.)

Their radar, avionics, missile guidance, communications techniques were all similarly far behind what we were learning how to do with modern solid state electronics. So that article was misleading in the sense that it implied that the Soviets had an advantage over us because of their vacuum tubes.

Some of that "misleading" was deliberate because it was to our advantage to hide what we really knew. Another reason was that Congress responded well to threats about "advanced Soviet technology" by increased funds to our military. The truth was that the Mig-25 was a failed design, that was abandoned by the Soviets. It may have flown very fast (for a very short time) but it was essentially deaf, dumb, and blind when it came to electronic capabilities.

Yes, it would have been a mistake to underestimate the Soviets; they were smart, motivated, and able. But it was probably more common in the West, especially in the western press, to overestimate them.

Agreed, there was a lot of over-positioning of Soviet capabilities going on after their early space program successes, IMO. Later it was revealed that the Soviet population and GNP estimates were exaggerated too. History also tends to get creatively retold when reasoning is communicated, so we may never really know why tubes got into jet fighters. Since the Soviets had been known to reverse-engineer IBM mainframes for defense purposes, I suspect that they had solid state electronics capabilities, or at least access to sources for them.

I actually thought this was just an interesting and readable article. I wasn't thinking the Soviet angle to this concept at all; I saw it as a side-bar to "popularize" the article for non-experts.

 

[Swerd]

I actually thought this was just an interesting and readable article. I wasn't thinking the Soviet angle to this concept at all; I saw it as a side-bar to "popularize" the article for non-experts.

And thanks for that .

Yes, the Soviets could and did copy and reverse-engineer whatever they could. But their electronics industry, during the 1960s and 70s (when I had first-hand info about that) was conservatively estimated to be at least 20 years behind ours.

During the years I had a clearance (1971-75), the Soviet military was still using Morse code for radio communication, plus the various teletype gear we had given them during WWII . And this was on high priority missions.

And as far as reverse engineering stuff like IBM mainframes… We deliberately gave them that stuff knowing they would spend great efforts copying it. That was better than daring them to develop their own independent R & D that could design such stuff from scratch.

 

[Swerd]

From everything I hear, if you are a modern-day tube fan, then the Soviet tubes are the ones you want!

But they aren't cheap!

For some time now, there have been no vacuum tubes made in the west. If those Iron Curtain tube factories hadn't discovered a market in guitar amps and overpriced audio amps, they'd have been shut down a long time ago.

 

[3db]

Ah yes, those Soviet vacuum tubes. In those Cold War days it was common to attribute all kinds of abilities and prowess to the the big bad Bear. And most of it wasn't quite as stated in that article.

Yes, those vacuum tubes may have been a bit less perturbed by the EM pulse from a nuclear explosion, but that probably was not the reason why the Soviets used them. They simply didn't have a solid state electronics industry. The Soviets at the time lacked any ability to create sophisticated miniaturized electronics. Instead, they shrank the size of vacuum tubes – 1930's technology. Why do you think the west was flooded with cheap vacuum tubes in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed? They were all made in vacuum tube factories in Russia, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and China. (Hint, they weren't making them for all the audiophiles behind the Iron Curtain.)

Their radar, avionics, missile guidance, communications techniques were all similarly far behind what we were learning how to do with modern solid state electronics. So that article was misleading in the sense that it implied that the Soviets had an advantage over us because of their vacuum tubes.

Some of that "misleading" was deliberate because it was to our advantage to hide what we really knew. Another reason was that Congress responded well to threats about "advanced Soviet technology" by increased funds to our military. The truth was that the Mig-25 was a failed design, that was abandoned by the Soviets. It may have flown very fast (for a very short time) but it was essentially deaf, dumb, and blind when it came to electronic capabilities.

Yes, it would have been a mistake to underestimate the Soviets; they were smart, motivated, and able. But it was probably more common in the West, especially in the western press, to overestimate them.

I worked for Lockheed on the military side of things and I was very aware of the Soviet capabilities and I tell you that their capabilities were better than you are making them out to be.

 

[Swerd]

I worked for Lockheed on the military side of things and I was very aware of the Soviet capabilities and I tell you that their capabilities were better than you are making them out to be.

I worked for the Navy and the NSA in radio communication – theirs not ours. We intercepted Russian submarines on the radio, decrypted the messages, and ran high frequency direction finding to locate them. We also did the same for their long range bombers (Tu-95 Bears) when they flew anti-shipping missions. By that time those planes carried missiles that threatened our carriers and didn't seem to work as long range nuclear bombers. My clearance gave me direct knowledge of only that. But I was aware of just how well their radar and command and guidance communications worked.

It is likely that your clearance gave you a narrow window into aviation developments, as narrow as mine was in communications. The Russians designed and built very good airplanes, but their electronic systems were lacking. I also become aware of just how much the US along with its UK, Canadian, Australian, and other NATO allies had the Soviet Union surrounded and out-gunned. The best explanation of Soviet behavior I've ever come across was just that. They knew very well how surrounded and out-gunned they were – their paranoia came from real conditions. And we did our best to press their paranoia buttons whenever we could.

This many years after the Cold War, I'm still amazed at how long it went without ever becoming a direct hot war. We had many "limited wars" that were disastrous for Koreans, Vietnamese, and Afghans, among others. But there was no nuclear exchange. I'm extremely thankful for that.

 

[3db]

This many years after the Cold War, I'm still amazed at how long it went without ever becoming a direct hot war. We had many "limited wars" that were disastrous for Koreans, Vietnamese, and Afghans, among others. But there was no nuclear exchange. I'm extremely thankful for that.

You and me both

 

[Adam]

Yeah, well...I've seen Hunt for Red October, and I'm telling you - they had some pretty advanced stuff in the 90s.

Well, and apparently fairly thick Scottish accents.

 

[stanley77]

Irvrobinson, It is true written in the article and as far as speed is concerned I believe the vacuum tubes are the best option instead of the semiconductor devices as the biggest problem with the vacuum tubes is the large power consumption.