On 2025-11-29, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
Why would anyone want one of these drives? It sure isn't for storage capacity.
There are many things from the past, but show me anyone who has any real use for
them. I mean, I do not collect wheels, covered wagons, model T Fords, and >> certainly not an RA82 drive.
Because some people care about how we got to where we are today.
Around Europe, there are carefully preserved and some maintained
historical train locomotives that are many decades old. Some are
over a century old.
On 2025-11-29, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
Why would anyone want one of these drives? It sure isn't for storage capacity.
There are many things from the past, but show me anyone who has any real use for
them. I mean, I do not collect wheels, covered wagons, model T Fords, and >>> certainly not an RA82 drive.
Because some people care about how we got to where we are today.
Around Europe, there are carefully preserved and some maintained
historical train locomotives that are many decades old. Some are
over a century old.
The RA81 and RA82 are not Model T Fords. They are Maxwells, prone to breaking down and leaving people stranded in the middle of the road.
When we were running many of them, we had a DEC FE who was on site a
couple days a week replacing heads, and without that support I would
not want to be running them.
There are many devices that should be preserved in working condition so that new generations should see how they worked when they were new and experience them working. The RA81 should be left in the rack broken, so that new generations can see how they were when they were new.
On 12/1/2025 1:02 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 2025-11-29, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
Why would anyone want one of these drives? It sure isn't for storage capacity.
There are many things from the past, but show me anyone who has any real use for
them. I mean, I do not collect wheels, covered wagons, model T Fords, and >>>> certainly not an RA82 drive.
Because some people care about how we got to where we are today.
Around Europe, there are carefully preserved and some maintained
historical train locomotives that are many decades old. Some are
over a century old.
The RA81 and RA82 are not Model T Fords. They are Maxwells, prone to
breaking down and leaving people stranded in the middle of the road.
When we were running many of them, we had a DEC FE who was on site a
couple days a week replacing heads, and without that support I would
not want to be running them.
There are many devices that should be preserved in working condition so that >> new generations should see how they worked when they were new and experience >> them working. The RA81 should be left in the rack broken, so that new
generations can see how they were when they were new.
RA81's and RA82's on a 8650.
The RA82's were okay, but the RA81's crashed frequently. DEC field
service knew that site very well.
I have been told here that there were a manufacturing problem with
RA81's and when the problem got fixed they stopped crashing all the
time.
=?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
On 12/1/2025 1:02 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 2025-11-29, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
Why would anyone want one of these drives? It sure isn't for storage capacity.
There are many things from the past, but show me anyone who has any real use for
them. I mean, I do not collect wheels, covered wagons, model T Fords, and
certainly not an RA82 drive.
Because some people care about how we got to where we are today.
Around Europe, there are carefully preserved and some maintained
historical train locomotives that are many decades old. Some are
over a century old.
The RA81 and RA82 are not Model T Fords. They are Maxwells, prone to
breaking down and leaving people stranded in the middle of the road.
When we were running many of them, we had a DEC FE who was on site a
couple days a week replacing heads, and without that support I would
not want to be running them.
There are many devices that should be preserved in working condition so that
new generations should see how they worked when they were new and experience
them working. The RA81 should be left in the rack broken, so that new
generations can see how they were when they were new.
RA81's and RA82's on a 8650.
The RA82's were okay, but the RA81's crashed frequently. DEC field
service knew that site very well.
I have been told here that there were a manufacturing problem with
RA81's and when the problem got fixed they stopped crashing all the
time.
You've got the RA81 and RA82 backwards. We had RA81s on a CI cluster at Stanford, and they were pretty solid.
RA82s were not available for the 36 bit systems, but we heard about them from our DEC FEs.
=?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
On 12/1/2025 1:02 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
There are many devices that should be preserved in working condition so that
new generations should see how they worked when they were new and experience
them working. The RA81 should be left in the rack broken, so that new
generations can see how they were when they were new.
RA81's and RA82's on a 8650.
The RA82's were okay, but the RA81's crashed frequently. DEC field
service knew that site very well.
I have been told here that there were a manufacturing problem with
RA81's and when the problem got fixed they stopped crashing all the
time.
You've got the RA81 and RA82 backwards. We had RA81s on a CI cluster at Stanford, and they were pretty solid.
RA82s were not available for the 36 bit systems, but we heard about them from our DEC FEs.
On 12/1/2025 6:56 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
=?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
On 12/1/2025 1:02 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
There are many devices that should be preserved in working condition so that
new generations should see how they worked when they were new and experience
them working. The RA81 should be left in the rack broken, so that new >>> generations can see how they were when they were new.
RA81's and RA82's on a 8650.
The RA82's were okay, but the RA81's crashed frequently. DEC field
service knew that site very well.
I have been told here that there were a manufacturing problem with
RA81's and when the problem got fixed they stopped crashing all the
time.
You've got the RA81 and RA82 backwards. We had RA81s on a CI cluster at Stanford, and they were pretty solid.
RA82s were not available for the 36 bit systems, but we heard about them from
our DEC FEs.
I could easily remember it wrong - it has been a long time.
But a search in c.o.v confirmed that it was the RA81's.
2003 post:
<quote>
The problem with the RA81's wasn't that the drives were really flaky --
there were some early data and noise problems ECO's out under warranty
early on -- but that the glue that held the HDA filter was substituted without a close look at the specifications of the glue.
The substituted glue on HDA's at Rev F (IIRC) would liquify at warm temperatures and flow to the bottom of the HDA and crash head 13
into the bottom platter every time.
</quote>
2021 post:
<quote>
The early RA81s had a problem where the heads would "unglue" from the actuator and totally trash the disk.
DEC actively hunted out and replaced those original drives. The
replacement RA81s were good and ran forever.
</quote>
=?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
But a search in c.o.v confirmed that it was the RA81's.
2003 post:
<quote>
The problem with the RA81's wasn't that the drives were really flaky --
there were some early data and noise problems ECO's out under warranty
early on -- but that the glue that held the HDA filter was substituted
without a close look at the specifications of the glue.
The substituted glue on HDA's at Rev F (IIRC) would liquify at warm
temperatures and flow to the bottom of the HDA and crash head 13
into the bottom platter every time.
</quote>
2021 post:
<quote>
The early RA81s had a problem where the heads would "unglue" from the
actuator and totally trash the disk.
DEC actively hunted out and replaced those original drives. The
replacement RA81s were good and ran forever.
</quote>
Odd. That's exactly what I remember about the RA82!
=?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
On 12/1/2025 6:56 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
=?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=C3=B8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
On 12/1/2025 1:02 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
There are many devices that should be preserved in working condition so that
new generations should see how they worked when they were new and experience
them working. The RA81 should be left in the rack broken, so that new >>>>> generations can see how they were when they were new.
RA81's and RA82's on a 8650.
The RA82's were okay, but the RA81's crashed frequently. DEC field
service knew that site very well.
I have been told here that there were a manufacturing problem with
RA81's and when the problem got fixed they stopped crashing all the
time.
You've got the RA81 and RA82 backwards. We had RA81s on a CI cluster at >>> Stanford, and they were pretty solid.
RA82s were not available for the 36 bit systems, but we heard about them from
our DEC FEs.
I could easily remember it wrong - it has been a long time.
But a search in c.o.v confirmed that it was the RA81's.
2003 post:
<quote>
The problem with the RA81's wasn't that the drives were really flaky --
there were some early data and noise problems ECO's out under warranty
early on -- but that the glue that held the HDA filter was substituted
without a close look at the specifications of the glue.
The substituted glue on HDA's at Rev F (IIRC) would liquify at warm
temperatures and flow to the bottom of the HDA and crash head 13
into the bottom platter every time.
</quote>
2021 post:
<quote>
The early RA81s had a problem where the heads would "unglue" from the
actuator and totally trash the disk.
DEC actively hunted out and replaced those original drives. The
replacement RA81s were good and ran forever.
</quote>
Odd. That's exactly what I remember about the RA82!
On 29/11/2025 23:33, Dave Froble wrote:
On 11/9/2025 9:55 AM, bill wrote:Have you tried VMS on X86?
On 11/8/2025 11:10 PM, Dennis Boone wrote:
>
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/legendary-windows-pinball-
developer-rescues-200lb-magnetic-disc-drive-from-the-1980s-requires-
a-scissor-lift-to-move-it-only-has-622-mb-of-storage
Everyone should have something in their home that has 80 amp inrush
for a few seconds at startup.
I used to have a bunch of RAs. Picked them up in NJ and carried
them home in two trips in my Volvo Station Wagon. Never ran more
than two at a time and each had its own circuit. Still dimmed
the house lights on startup even only starting one at a time.
bill
Ok, help me out here ...
Why would anyone want one of these drives? It sure isn't for storage
capacity. There are many things from the past, but show me anyone who has any
real use for them. I mean, I do not collect wheels, covered wagons, model T >> Fords, and certainly not an RA82 drive.
Ok, I do have some VAX systems, one running right now, a couple of Alpha
systems, and even an itanic, only one Alpha running, and haven't accessed it >> for months. Am I answering my own question?
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 65 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 05:12:57 |
| Calls: | 862 |
| Files: | 1,311 |
| D/L today: |
921 files (14,318M bytes) |
| Messages: | 264,602 |