On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 1:16 PM, [Traveller_TNE]
>
> Even in 1992 we knew that the only way to rationalize their large size was
> immense amounts of hand-waving about interfaces and work stations,
> cooling, peripherals and back-up capabilities, surge protectors and UPS,
> etc. But mostly it was to keep some internal continuity with the LBB
> computers.
>
In 1992 as I recall the beefiest space rated cpu was something like a 10 or
15 Mhz 486 produced by thick film printed with a minimum trace percentage
over 50%. My now ex-wife worked in a plant that that specialized in space
rated electronic components then. Couple that to the discussions of
multiple core CPUs at the time it was pretty easy to see the numbers in
TNE. Size is one of the big issues in Space rated electronic components the
smaller you build the higher the error and outright failure ratios go up.
--
Evyn
>
> Even in 1992 we knew that the only way to rationalize their large size was
> immense amounts of hand-waving about interfaces and work stations,
> cooling, peripherals and back-up capabilities, surge protectors and UPS,
> etc. But mostly it was to keep some internal continuity with the LBB
> computers.
>
In 1992 as I recall the beefiest space rated cpu was something like a 10 or
15 Mhz 486 produced by thick film printed with a minimum trace percentage
over 50%. My now ex-wife worked in a plant that that specialized in space
rated electronic components then. Couple that to the discussions of
multiple core CPUs at the time it was pretty easy to see the numbers in
TNE. Size is one of the big issues in Space rated electronic components the
smaller you build the higher the error and outright failure ratios go up.
--
Evyn