Data General/Rolm milspec systems
useddec at gmail.com
Fri Sep 6 20:11:51 CDT 2019
RAF Chicksands, and to Ops building probably couldn't withstand anything
bigger than a AK 47 or M16 hit.
The RAF commander couldn't ever get into our building. I think he was in
charge of grounds keeping, Etc.
USAFSS , before they changed the command name = NSA.
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 1:10 PM Jeffrey S. Worley via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 10:03:54 -0400
> From: "Craig M." <cmook1968 at gmail.com>
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> Subject: ROLM - Dat general 1602 - AN/UYK-19 computers.
> CAD1aQJ5FnQDS7i+iLeh-+zBSBrzaqV9-f61Q76XgEbz=fSN+nw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> Good Morning,
> Have you ever come across a document called the
> I/O Designers Guide?" I am working with some developers trying to
> out the data words and how they work on a Navy AN/UYK-19 computer.
> I have some sticktime on the Eclipse machines. In going to boot camp
> getting my MV4000/DC I ran into some interesting characters. One was
> with DG on military sales, was visiting Groton? or another base where a
> test was being conducted. The computer was suspended on wires in a
> hangar and, while running, was subjected to simultaneous blows from
> heavy pendulums on either side. The noise was teriffic and my friend
> asked the same question, why on earth, to which the cryptic reply was
> two words: Depth Charges.
> Probably your USAF machine, corn field kept though it was, was designed
> for service in another kind of silo, the missile kind. Those would be
> projected to survive near-direct hits from megaton thermonuclear
> weapons. Not to mention that no air force property is immune from
> attack by all sorts of ordinance, nuclear or otherwise.
> Another note, saw an old query on the "Rolm Computers: 1602, 1602A,
> 1666, MSExx (was Data General Nova Star Trek)" thread about breaking
> the military system designations. This website may help if you never
> got an
> earlier answer:
> Thank you!
> Craig Mook
More information about the cctech