Vintage Radio Construction 1955

[Geaney]

I found this clip very interesting. Not only were the radios assembled in US, all of the components were sourced in the US. How times have changed!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKln6zTy4C8

Cheers, John
Apologies to those averse to the three legged beasties!

[pwdrive]

I wonder if that Regency is the same one as has been credited as the worlds first transistor radio?

Lawrence.

[Yorkie]

Fascinating John - it's another indication of just how far things have progressed in such a short space of time.

Obviously when that promotional film was made they thought that it was a huge quantum leap in progress from the valve era, as indeed it was, but it's quite quaint now to hear the narrator referring to 'these minute transistors'. 'Minute' is a relative term, but when you think that the chips in a cellphone - never mind about a computer - have millions of transistors on them, it gives a sense of perspective as to the relativity of the term 'minute'. He also referred to the tiny battery needed for the transistor radio, showing a PP3 in his hand, but consider how many hours an i-pod, (which fits in the palm of the hand, is no larger than an 'After Eight Mint' and will store thousands of songs) will run for on its rechargeable lithium battery.

It's reached a stage at which people are no longer astonished by even breathtaking achievements.

Consider the recent Mars landing, which was flawless, and the ongoing experiments and research by the 'robot' on Mars. It hardly featured on TV news or in the press in the UK, especially in the tabloids, mainly written for the 'hard of thinking' with short attention spans, only interested in trivial gossip about so called 'celebrities'. The distance from Earth to Mars varies from 34 million to 250 million miles as both planets orbit the sun in an elliptical orbit, they can be sort of "close" and then later, they can be "distant" from one another. They're closest when they are on the same side of the orbit on the near side of Mars orbit, when Mars is closest to the Sun. They are farthest away when on opposite sides of the sun.

What an amazing feat of engineering and planning to send a space module that far, from one orbiting planet to another, land it where planned, and to receive signals back and transmit instructions to it. Yet the media paid little heed to it, while covering such things as the Olympics in the minutest detail. Nothing was too trivial to not be worthy of a mention, yet a landing on Mars? Less important than Beach Volleyball and jingoisitic hype about ‘Team GB’. What was that all about? There’s no such country as ‘Great Britain’ - it’s the ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland’ normally shortened to 'UK'. Our driving licences simply say ‘United Kingdom’ and our passports 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland’ but in their desire to hype up the term ‘Great’ (the origin of which was simply distinguish between Brittany and Britain), the media and the Olympics seems to have erased Northern Ireland from the map. That's not very nice is it? Well I don't think so.

Pedantic rant over, back on topic!

Isn’t it strange the way that Americans always seem to pronounce ‘solder’ as ‘sodder’, losing an ‘l’ and gaining a ‘d’. Same with soldering – ‘soddering’. Intriguing to note the rudimentary ‘sodder bath’ in the film, with it’s slowly revolving wheel of printed circuit boards being dipped in and out to ‘sodder’ all the connections. It was a production line of sorts, but still quite labour intensive - not too far removed from pre-war assembly lines of valve radios. I wonder how many of those transistor radios were made, and how many have survived? It’s a tad ironic that many radio collectors and restorers dislike transistors and dismiss them as ‘modern’ when they’ve been around for fifty years or more – longer than some restorers themselves have been around! I bought my first transistor radio in Switzerland in 1959 – a Hitachi, which cost me £10.00 - the equivalent of £190 today. I used for several years and haven’t a clue as to what happened to it.

Dribbled and waffled Yorkie

[Geaney]

It's reached a stage at which people are no longer astonished by even breathtaking achievements.

Hi David,

Fully agree. I was online (NASA TV) nice and early to watch the Curiosity landing - what an achievement. I had watched the press sessions the day before and, when I saw what they were proposing to do, I thought there were so many things that could go wrong that this would another botched landing. All credit to the team for the result - flawless.

Similarly I was online for the announcement at CERN recently about the Higgs field - to me another major advancement in our knowledge as a species. One of my favourite YouTube channels is sixtysymbols run by Nottingham University Physics Dept. They gave the CERN event lots of coverage.

As you say, these seem to no longer be newsworthy for the general public which is a great shame.

On the subject of sodder versus solder one of my American colleagues queried why we don't pronounce the 'l' in words like salmon and yet we do for solder. Fair point I guess. As the man said - two nations separated by a common language.

What struck me about the transistor radio video was how just about all those jobs are now gone East. All the components and a great deal of the assembly are no longer generating wealth in western countries. It's one reason why I'm sure that my kids would be well advised to learn to speak Mandarin, and for their kids it will be an absolute necessity!

I found this LSE lecture given by Jon Moynihan, the head of PA Consulting, to be one of the best in terms of the realistic future that lies before us. It's not very encouraging but I believe it's very important for our kids to understand so they can have the best chance at a quality of life at least similar to ours.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-y2aqYwOQ0

Cheers, John

[Skywave]

Re: the first video. I noted the commentator's remark " Probably half the nation's workforce have contributed to the final production of these radios". Although that might be an exaggeration, it certainly indicates the huge and tenuous chain of supply - from basic, raw material right through to the finished article.
Of course, these days, "the nation's workforce" is out in the Far East.

An observation which neatly leads me on the the second lecture on World Economics.

I found that lecture very insightful. However I will make one observation: a key element of his lecture was about 'growth': growth of the economies of various countries and, in particular, the relative growth amongst them. I would submit that a key component of that growth - and the problems associated with it - are linked to the sum total of the world population and its inexorable growth. This topic he didn't address - which since it is such a delicate and sensitive topic, didn't surprise me. Nevertheless, considering the detail and depth that he did cover, a disguised reference to it would not have gone amiss - in my opinion.

Al.

[Geaney]

Hi Al,


Good point though I guess the issue is more that the growing populations are in countries that have not participated in global modernisation until recently, i.e. the BRIC countries. Hence the rapidly rising demand for energy and resources of all types.

There is at least some light at the end of the tunnel. Without wishing to drift unduly off topic, one of my favourite guru's on statistics is this guy - a numbers based assertion on future maximum world population:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezVk1ahRF78

Cheers, John

[Yorkie]

Two excellent thought provoking talks John by erudite and enthralling speakers, each with a dry sense of humour, and in their own unique style, able to get across serious points in an entertaining way. Looking at the audience, at first sight the topic of the talk by Hans Rosling didn't just seem controversial, but positively incendiary. Not so as it happened - very well received, and if his hypothesis is correct, quite reassuring for our kids and grandkids.

As you say, drifting well off topic, and really something for the 'Lounge', but there we go - we try not to be too fastidious about going off on a frolic.

[Skywave]

As you say, drifting well off topic, and really something for the 'Lounge', but there we go - we try not to be too fastidious about going off on a frolic.

Quite so, David, quite so: but "frolic"? We are all mature, educated & intelligent people here and although these topics are not strictly radio-related, they are eminently suitable for stimulating the ol' grey matter! And unlike some so-called 'Social Networking Sites' that I could name, we like to go in for the heavyweight stuff! Cogito ergo sum.

Al.

[Skywave]

Yes, an interesting lecture by Hans Rosling. However, I think it was somewhat over-simplified by his choice of topic: religion and population growth; the relationship between them. There are many other factors that will determine population growth, such as the population density in any given region; the anticipated (and actual) change in the economic performance of any given region; the effects of war, famine, pestilence and the influence and interference of other countries, to name just a few. His arguments were valid: but far too narrow in the determining factors that he chose - of which he chose only one: religion.

Just my hap'worth, FWIW.

Al.

[Yorkie]

Yes, an interesting lecture by Hans Rosling. However, I think it was somewhat over-simplified by his choice of topic: religion and population growth; the relationship between them. His arguments were valid: but far too narrow in the determining factors that he chose - of which he chose only one: religion.

Just my hap'worth, FWIW.

Al.

The basis of his talk was to debunk the widely held myth that there's a strong correlation between certain religions and the number of babies that women have. In other words, there is no relationship between religion and population size. Secondly, the erroneous belief that the population would continue to grow inexorably, it having more than doubled since 1960 from 3 billion to 7 billion now, and predicted to be 10 billion by 2020.

At the outset, he asked the question how many children on average would women have in 2020 - would it be 4,3,2 or 1?

His conclusions were that there are four factors that have a bearing on the number of children that women have, and that they have fewer children when:

1) Children survive into adulthood.
2) Many children are not needed for work to support the family.
3) Women get educated and join the labour force.
4) Family planning is available.

The statistics he showed, with the decline in birth-rate over recent years almost all over the world were startling. His prediction, based on factual data, is that in 2020, the average number of children per woman would be 2. Bearing in mind that not all of those children will survive to adulthood, and not all of them will form relationships and have children of their own, the outcome - which we see already in the developed world, will be an aging population, with few younger children to support themselves and the elderly.

As he put it - 'Peak Oil' may still be with us, but 'Peak Population' will not.

As to wars, famine and disease, the Rev Thomas Malthus has become widely known for his theories about population and its increase or decrease in response to various factors. In his ‘Essay on the Principle of Population’ from that late 1700s – early 1820s he observed that sooner or later population gets checked by famine and disease, which – as a clergyman - he saw as divinely imposed to teach virtuous behaviour, concluding:

“Must it not then be acknowledged by an attentive examiner of the histories of mankind, that in every age and in every State in which man has existed, or does now exist”:

That the increase of population is necessarily limited by the means of subsistence,

That population does invariably increase when the means of subsistence increase, and,

That the superior power of population is repressed, and the actual population kept equal to the means of subsistence, by misery and vice.

It’s easy to see how he formed these views, but they’ve proved to be ill-founded. He made the mistake of assuming that the future would be just like the past. The means of subsistence in the developed world are now so bountiful that not only is famine non existent – the reverse is so – obesity is commonplace. Yet the population has been kept in check not by’ misery and vice’ by a whole range of socio-economic factors that he could never have foretold.

Malthus was highly regarded and even today his views are thought provoking and will find support in many circles, so I certainly wouldn’t dismiss him out of hand. The problem of staring into crystal balls has always been that we see more balls than crystal, and that of course applies to Hans Rosling too. I’ll count myself lucky if I’m still around in 2020 to see if his predictions come true!