[Boatanchors] 6146 vs 6146A vs 6146B or 6146W

[Mahlon Haunschild]

Absolutely true.   That's how Government procurement specs work.  But I 
was only commenting on the Tung Sol construction differences.  Again, 
for all I know they built their "civvie" tubes the same way.

Here's a science project: collect up a variety of 6146 
types/manufacturers, put 'em in a rack, load 'em up to max DC ratings 
and subject them to the MIL-STD-810D shock/vibe tests.  Anyone got a 
spare Ling shaker & servo amp sitting around collecting dust?  Maybe I 
can sweet-talk someone into giving me the acoustic profile of the B-52H 
outside rear pylon station (that's hovering around 170 dBa. the G's were 
even louder with water injection!) and, using four Mesa Boogie 
dual-rectifier amps with matching 4 x 12" speaker cabs, we'll throw that 
at the test rack too!


On 7/5/2011 7:15 PM, Carl wrote:
> Mahlon, W meant they had to survive certain tests such as would be found
> in military use. The spec did not mandate any specific way to do it.
>
> Sylvania has long been my favorite brand followed by TungSol.
>
> Carl
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mahlon Haunschild"
> <mahlonhaunschild at cox.net>
> To: <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 6:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] 6146 vs 6146A vs 6146B or 6146W
>
>
>> Carl,
>>
>> That depends. I have a whole box of Tung Sol 6146Ws (date coded 6943 or
>> thereabouts) and their internal structure is like no other 6146 I've
>> ever seen, W or otherwise. Spot welded plates, metal centering springs
>> on the top mica, double instead of single getter, etc. The odd part is
>> that they're not triple mica.
>>
>> By contrast, I have a couple of Sylvania 6146Ws (1987 contract, probably
>> the last ones ever bought by the Government) that look for all the world
>> like any other GE 6146B.
>>
>> Then again, maybe the differences in this case are just because Tung Sol
>> built better tubes than anyone else. For all I know Tung Sol built
>> their "civilian" 6146s the same way.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Mahlon - K4OQ
>>
>> On 7/5/2011 1:05 PM, boatanchors-request at mailman.qth.net wrote:
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 7
>>> Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 14:04:47 -0400
>>> From: "Carl"<km1h at jeremy.mv.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Boatanchors] 6146 vs 6146A vs 6146B or 6146W
>>> To: "Richard Knoppow"<1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>,
>>> <pulsarxp at embarqmail.com>, <boatanchors at mailman.qth.net>,
>>> <cemilton at aol.com>
>>> Message-ID:<85E6F7139A9540A2BB9082EABAD7D3FC at computer1>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>>> reply-type=original
>>>
>>> The W stands for ruggedized and the 6146W internal appearance is
>>> recognizable.
>>>
>>> Carl
>>> KM1H
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Boatanchors mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/boatanchors
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:Boatanchors at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
>> ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com **
>>
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3746 - Release Date: 07/05/11
>>
>
>
>