[Milsurplus] Milsurplus Digest, Vol 235, Issue 43

[W2HX]

I think this thread has lost its original purpose. The reason that when it was sold and not when it was invented is important, is because it appeared as a prop in a movie during WW2 and the OP was questioning the veracity of that prop. For it to be period-accurate, it would have had to be more than just invented.


73 Eugene W2HX
Subscribe to my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@w2hx/videos

From: milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net <milsurplus-bounces at mailman.qth.net> On Behalf Of Jim Whartenby via Milsurplus
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 5:55 PM
To: milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Milsurplus Digest, Vol 235, Issue 43

Well, that is a half truth since the NIXIE was indeed sold for several years by others who made slight improvements in the design.  That the original inventor, Hans P. Boswau, didn't market it means little.  He was still the inventor and deserves the credit.  Assuming that patent protection was then for 18 years, the Boswau patent would have expired around 1952 so he was indeed well ahead of his time.

This would not be the only time that a practical solution was well ahead of the perceived need.  Julius Edgar Lilienfeld was another who invented the field effect transistor in 1925.  That materials science was not even a thing then but it has caught up nicely.  Now the FET is the most produced transistor ever with 171 million per square millimeter of silicon.
Amazing stuff,
Jim

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.  Murphy


On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 03:22:28 PM CST, Brooke Clarke via Milsurplus <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net<mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>> wrote:


Hi Ray:

While patent 2142106 does describe the Nixie tube it was never brought to market.
https://prc68.com/I/NCR.shtml#Pat

PS the discussion about Oppenheimer & Nixie appeared on the tubecollectorsassociation at groups.io<mailto:tubecollectorsassociation at groups.io> starting July 21, Subject: [tubecollectorsassociation] Tube anachronism in "Oppenheimer"?

--

Have Fun,



Brooke Clarke

https://www.PRC68.com

axioms:

1. The extent to which you can fix or improve something will be limited by how well you understand how it works.

2. Everybody, with no exceptions, holds false beliefs.
-------- Original Message --------

Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 19:48:42 +0000 (UTC)

From: Jim Whartenby <old_radio at aol.com><mailto:old_radio at aol.com>

To: "'milsurplus at mailman'" <milsurplus at mailman.qth.net><mailto:milsurplus at mailman.qth.net>

Subject: Re: [Milsurplus] Oppenheimer and the BC-348

Message-ID: <739059156.9241863.1701200922671 at mail.yahoo.com><mailto:739059156.9241863.1701200922671 at mail.yahoo.com>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"



Ray, it's older then you think.Patent 2,142,106, Signaling System and Glow Lamps Therefor,was filed on May 9, 1934 and awarded on January 3, 1939. The inventoris listed as Hans P. Boswau from Galion, Ohio. (Mr. Boswau appears tohave been the chief engineer of the Lorain County Radio Corporationand the Lorain Telephone Company during the 1930s.)





Regards,Jim

Logic: Method used to arrive at the wrong conclusion, with confidence.? Murphy



    On Tuesday, November 28, 2023 at 01:33:08 PM CST, Ray Fantini <rafantini at salisbury.edu><mailto:rafantini at salisbury.edu> wrote:





Unlike the kids here at work I refuse to watch a movie on a telephone! The wife and I prefer to get the Blu-ray and watch on the fifty inch. So, the Oppenheimer move just became available over the holiday and we got to watch that. As usual everyone wants to complain about the radios they used and the accuracy of that depiction. First problem for me is the Nixie Tube count down timer. I going to go out on a limb and say that I do not believe that technology existed until the sixties, may be wrong but don?t think so and second why are they using a BC-348 as a ground net receiver? Would think that they had to have several networks at Trinity for timing and all that sort of stuff and maybe they were radio but why would they have an aircraft radio that?s 28-volt DC and not something that makes more sense like a BC-342 that works from AC power? Ok, so maybe AC power was not available so then something like a BC-312 but not a BC-348 Don?t get me wrong the BC-348 is maybe my favorite

  WW2 radio and any time it?s on screen that?s good, just wanted to complain. Also have to say the movie had a lot of flesh in it!



 ?



Ray F/KA3EKH

______________________________________________________________
Milsurplus mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20231128/981d25f3/attachment-0001.html>