vehicular

iTrader: (3)

This feels like a trick question, but yeah, I'd love to.

Full_Tilt_Boogie

iTrader: (1)

Id really love a big CRT monitor. I miss them, a lot.

Anybody know what kind of resolution was possible with large CRTs? Not anything exotic, something I may be able to find? I figure they must have made some with some resolution before LCDs took over.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

I am very seriously tempted to buy you a plasma TV. On the other hand, it just occurred to me that people are selling off used 16:9 triple-gun rear projectors on eBay for very little money, and I may well go that route.



Mine does 1080i, and that seems to be the case for all of them that I have seen. There's no technical reason why they couldn't also do 1080p (it's supported by component as well as analog VGA), but I can't recall having found any that actually list it as a supported mode.

Full_Tilt_Boogie

iTrader: (1)

I didnt realize you could get that kind of res through VGA.
Is that uncommon?
Like could I use a VGA to DVI adapter, hook a pretty typical CRT monitor up, and up the resolution that high?

I really miss the way those monitors looked, I feel like it would be useful to me for editing photos, but not if the resolution is so low that I have no space to work.

RyanRaduechel

iTrader: (10)

Imagine trying to get laid in the backseat of that thing. "Hey babe, after the movie do you wanna go park somewhere?"

TurboTim

iTrader: (9)

OSHA's nightmare.

I couldn't stop imagining him getting sucked into one of those flywheels. christ man. Or hitting his ***** on the yellow hand crank on the first green flywheel.

EDIT: ahh ok, that thing folds in. It's safe. Pass him another beer.

jeff_man

iTrader: (7)

120zh led lcd or nothing

VGA will work over 1360x768 but you can tell it looks like crap vs a DVI or HDMI Cable above that resolution.

sturovo

same principle?

vehicular

iTrader: (3)

You're welcome to it if you want it. It would cost seven fortunes to ship it to California from here, though..

RyanRaduechel

iTrader: (10)

How is that the same principle?

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

My question is why does a thrust based rocket have a tachometer on the gauge cluster?

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

VGA is an analog format, and thus, there is no prescribed maximum limit on either its resolution nor its refresh rate. At home, for instance, I have used VGA to drive a monitor at 1920 x 1200 and, to be honest, it looks virtually indistinguishable from HDMI even at that resolution.


I assume that your video card has only DVI out and your CRT only VGA in?

In most cases, yes. I suppose that by now somebody has probably started to produce video cards which no longer support analog VGA through their DVI ports, but for most cards, any resolution which can be generated internally can be output on any of the ports, be they VGA, HDMI, DVI or DisplayPort.

The monitor itself is usually the limiting factor. Even though CRTs themselves have no native resolution, the electronics within the monitor must be able to synchronize to the incoming signal. (Having never studied a monitor schematic, I assume that they use one or more PLL or VCXO circuits to regenerate the sync pulses internally.)

NTSC televisions (and the early computer monitors derived from them by Apple, Commodore, TRS, etc) could only sync to an NTSC-style signal, being 525 scanlines at 29.97 / 30 Hz, yielding a horizontal scanrate of ~15.75 Khz.

Early VGA monitors (back when VGA meant one specific thing) also supported only a few specific resolutions, typically 800 x 600, 640 x 480, etc. Some were even locked to one specific resolution. It is noteworthy that these resolution limitations actually applied only to the number of horizontal lines (called the vertical resolution) and the scanrate, so a monitor which was "fixed" at 640 x 480 would also theoretically be able to support arbitrary horizontal resolutions such as 517 x 480, 747 x 480, etc. In practice, the horizontal resolution was limited only by the standards-compliance of the video card.

Later, the so-called "MultiSync" monitors (originally a trademark of NEC) had the ability to support many different resolutions and scanrates. There was still typically a finite list of supported resolutions, however it was greatly expanded relative to older monitors and typically also involved the storage (in nonvolatile memory within the monitor) of the various presets and adjustments which had been made in the different modes. So once the user had configured the various parameters relevant to the 800x600 mode (pincushion, trapezoid, Hsize, Vsize, etc) the monitor would recall these and apply them automatically anytime that mode was encountered. Prior to this, monitors typically used a number of analog potentiometers at the front panel (just like an old TV set) to adjust these parameters, and they had to be re-set any time the display mode was changed.

Around this same time, the physical VGA interface was upgraded to support very limited data communication between the monitor and video card, called VESA DDC. This was implemented on a couple of spare pins of the connector, and allowed for handshaking between the monitor and graphics card, whereby the monitor identified itself to the graphics card and conveyed some basic information as to what video modes it was capable of supporting. Within Windows, you can see this by going into Display Properties -> Settings. Windows uses the information gathered from the monitor to limit the screen resolutions and refresh rates presented to the user to only that subset of the graphics card's possible resolutions which the monitor has identified itself as being able to support.




So, yeah. As a general rule, any "typical" CRT monitor can be used to display pretty much any resolution which would be considered "typical" for a display of that size. What may seem counter-intuative is the fact that many CRT monitors also allowed you to run them at resolutions which were MUCH HIGHER than you would expect by today's standards.

A typical 19" widescreen LCD monitor from today's lineup, for instance, probably has a maximum vertical resolution of 768 or 900 lines (as in 1366 x 768 or 1440 x 900.) By comparison, a bargain-basement 17" CRT monitor of 10 years ago would probably support vertical resolutions of at least 1024 lines (eg: 1280 x 1024) and a higher-quality 19" CRT from a company such as Viewsonic or NEC monitor might support 1600 x 1200, 1920 × 1440, etc. I remember my old NEC Multisync would allow me to run resolutions which were so high that you couldn't even read the text on it.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

It is clearly labeled "Fuel Pump RPM."

As liquid-fueled rockets do have fuel pumps, and fuel pumps (as a general rule) do contain rotating parts which exhibit angular velocity that can be expressed in RPM, I see no problem here.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

While I realize that this is a subjective measurement (eg: beauty is in the eye of the beholder), I can express one counterpoint.

At home, I have a 28" LCD monitor with a native resolution of 1920 x 1200. It has HDMI and VGA inputs, but no DVI. When I first built the PC, I bought a cheap video card with an HDMI output, and connected the two via HDMI.

Recently, I installed a high-end nVidia graphics card which has only DVI outputs, and while it supported HDMI through the DVI port, I didn't have the correct adapter on-hand. I did, however, have an old DVI-VGA adapter lying around from several video cards ago. Thus, I connected the monitor via VGA, and ordered the correct DVI-HDMI adapter cable from Monoprice.com.

I honestly had a really hard time telling the difference between HDMI and VGA. If I painted up a screen which had a high-contrast test pattern (such as the old Indian-Head camera cards from the 1950s) then I could discern a little bit of fuzz in the really high-pitch areas, but for general-purpose use (eg: web surfing, gaming) I found VGA to be essentially indistinguishable from HDMI.

triple88a

iTrader: (2)

Btw guys on the redneck go cart. The green motor is only there to start up the yellow one so i guess its like a starter... only a lot more redneckish.

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

Da fuq?????? I'm clearly retarded.


That's a hell of a fuel pump!

pusha

iTrader: (5)

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Here's one of the "main" fuel pumps used in the Rocketdyne F-1 engine that powered the first stage of the Saturn V. A secondary pump of centrifugal design was used to deliver the oxidizer, and mated with this one such that both were driven by a common motor:



Here it is in context:




That little sucker moved nearly 258 gallons per SECOND at full throttle.

czubaka

iTrader: (3)

Apparently they're using a hybrid rocket for the Bloodhound SSC. Solid fuel, liquid oxidizer. I'm curious to know how the pump is powered. Usually on a liquid fueled rocket, they inject fuel/oxy into a separate combustion chamber to spin the pump turbine.

That F1 engine is a beast and a half. 1.5 million pounds of thrust, from one motor! The biggest liquid motors I'm aware of today only put out half that power. The injector face had a surface designed to keep the pressure waves sweeping across it from snuffing out the combustion. They blew up a lot of motors trying to figure that one out.

sturovo

For starting, instead of a green engine they are using a Cosworth v12