User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/30/2014 12:42:54 PM EDT
[#1]
Next tube up ! Tell me what you guys think. I already did this tube in 2012 so a search should make it easy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2014 12:46:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#2]
We will get to this one too ! |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 6/30/2014 8:40:31 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
http://imageshack.com/a/img856/6461/hr87.jpg Next tube up ! Tell me what you guys think. I already did this tube in 2012 so a search should make it easy. im gonna guess at this one, its sorta stumped me and I didnt find the old thread couldnt really find much by searching anything from the tube mx 10160 date code should put it at omni VI thin film autogated |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2014 12:38:42 PM EDT
[#4]
Here's one I just picked up from ebay:
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2014 1:51:35 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Here's one I just picked up from ebay: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5593/14616063850_7b8a7e8242_c.jpg Nice tube and I will add it to my list ! L3 filmless autogated tube. But you already probably knew that. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2014 3:28:56 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2014 4:09:21 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bobweaver:
http://i946.photobucket.com/albums/ad308/bobweaver/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsfffff193.jpg Made in 2004. MX-10160C from my records. Does the tube whine when powered up ? I have it listed as autogated for that power supply but I like to confirm. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2014 4:39:21 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Made in 2004. MX-10160C from my records. Does the tube whine when powered up ? I have it listed as autogated for that power supply but I like to confirm. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By bobweaver:
http://i946.photobucket.com/albums/ad308/bobweaver/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsfffff193.jpg Made in 2004. MX-10160C from my records. Does the tube whine when powered up ? I have it listed as autogated for that power supply but I like to confirm. Yes, autogated. Air Force tube pulled from ANVIS? What OMNI number and do you have any idea about spec minimums? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2014 4:58:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bobweaver:
Yes, autogated. Air Force tube pulled from ANVIS? What OMNI number and do you have any idea about spec minimums? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bobweaver:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By bobweaver:
http://i946.photobucket.com/albums/ad308/bobweaver/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsfffff193.jpg Made in 2004. MX-10160C from my records. Does the tube whine when powered up ? I have it listed as autogated for that power supply but I like to confirm. Yes, autogated. Air Force tube pulled from ANVIS? What OMNI number and do you have any idea about spec minimums? Most likely Omni VI. CJ7Hawks Omni chart stickied at the top of the NVF page will give you all the specs (link below). Back then civvies didn't have autogated tubes so I knew it was milspec. Unfortunately without a contract number I can't tell you much more. I am fairly confident from the tube manufacture date it is Omni 5 to 6 performance. Keep in mind these tubes are designed to be used in pairs for aviation goggles so just like the MX-10160A tubes they all perform about the same. Nice tubes ! Some will always perform better than others and that is why people match tubes on dual tube sets. In milspec aviation goggles you frequently see sequential tube serial numbers because they were matched at the factory. But tubes are changed sometimes so not all will have sequential numbers. http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_18/317705_.html |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/2/2014 8:00:24 PM EDT
[#10]
This is a awesome idea Dino! And another vote to sticky this, so guys like myself can do their own homework instead of pm'ing Dino and CJ7hawk
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2014 12:50:47 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
OK, let us do this tube. This is going to be harder. Still, we have clues ! (One of my tubes I sold a few years back) We have already learned it has a L3 power supply due to the pigtail design. We can assume it is a L3 MX-11769 tube but it does not look factory and is missing numbers. What is going on here ? These type of tubes are the absolute hardest to decipher. I bought this tube new for a comparison test I did awhile back. I know what it is but had it just came out of the blue I would have a VERY hard time telling you what it is. I got close up shots of the pigtail because I want to see if the pigtail design looks different from L3 autogated tubes to L3 non gated or DC power supplies. This tube is not autogated. http://imageshack.com/a/img708/5192/gen3pinnacle005.jpg http://imageshack.com/a/img502/2229/gen3pinnacle007.jpg I have already found out who designed and made the pigtail. http://www.lenthor.com/ Awesome thread! Thank you for posting this. Here's a tube out of an Armasight PVS-14 Bravo: 
Looks to be an L3 AEO tube based on the pigtail and the information from your post above, however this one appears to be autogated. It produces a fairly loud whine when powered up, but then becomes much quieter once it's running. The whine is much more subtle than the filmless tube I have and it took a while for me to notice it. This was a pleasant surprise to me since I assumed that AEO tubes would be non-gated. I think I read somewhere that the ITT SELA tubes all have DC power supplies because once the tube modules fail milspec they see no reason to put autogated power supplies on them. Any idea why the L3 AEO tubes would be different? Here's a thread where it is mentioned that all AEO tubes are autogated: http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=6&f=18&t=379185 Also, were you able to figure out how to tell the difference between the pigtail designs on gated vs. non-gated L3 tubes? If so, could you explain? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2014 6:53:26 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DevilWillCry:
This is a awesome idea Dino! And another vote to sticky this, so guys like myself can do their own homework instead of pm'ing Dino and CJ7hawk I like deciphering tubes ! It is not a bother at all...  It is fun to see tubes that I am not familiar with and solve the mystery. I wish the manufacturer's would just make a list so all this is not necessary but I doubt they ever will. No profit in it for them to do so. ITT is better than the rest as far as tube information. They do post limited information.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2014 7:03:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#13]
Ok, let us give them a look. First one is your tube that you say is gated.
Second pic is my tube that I know is not gated. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2014 7:10:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Ok, let us give them a look. First one is your tube that you say is gated. http://imageshack.com/a/img673/6573/wW2xq0.jpg Second pick is my tube that I know is not gated. http://imageshack.com/a/img502/2229/gen3pinnacle007.jpg Your pigtail is certainly newer by the date code. The part numbers are different and you said your tube makes the distinctive whine. I would say we can look at these two pigtails and with the slight differences tell which pigtail is used for gated and which for non gated tubes. AEO makes gated and non gated tubes. As far as ITT SELA tubes go some were as good as milspec and many probably exceeded most of the specs. Back in the SELA tube days autogated tubes were not available for civvies. So we got thin film tubes that were not autogated. Most of the good tubes were going to supply the military during time of war. SELA tubes were the best we could get. I would say most SELA tubes failed milpsec because they came with downgrade codes listed on the datasheet, I have never seen a SELA tube datasheet without a downgrade code. That does not mean it doesn't exist. Most downgrades were minor blemishes. Below is a picture of a ITT SELA tube data card. 
This tube had a 2145 FOM and was a 64 lp/mm tube. You can see from this card how good SELA tubes could be. I don't know what this downgrade code is but I do know many of them. I assume this code is for blemishes because the tube had a couple small spots in zone 3. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/3/2014 7:47:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#15]
I update every new tube we decipher and keep a list on my first post on page 1 .
The hope is we can have a comprehensive list that anyone can go to and decipher their tube. I would like folks to be able to do this themselves so they can determine value on used scope deals. Hundreds of different tubes are made but as time goes on we will have the best list in the night vision community. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/4/2014 10:31:43 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Your pigtail is certainly newer by the date code. The part numbers are different and you said your tube makes the distinctive whine. I would say we can look at these two pigtails and with the slight differences tell which pigtail is used for gated and which for non gated tubes. AEO makes gated and non gated tubes. As far as ITT SELA tubes go some were as good as milspec and many probably exceeded most of the specs. Back in the SELA tube days autogated tubes were not available for civvies. So we got thin film tubes that were not autogated. Most of the good tubes were going to supply the military during time of war. SELA tubes were the best we could get. I would say most SELA tubes failed milpsec because they came with downgrade codes listed on the datasheet, I have never seen a SELA tube datasheet without a downgrade code. That does not mean it doesn't exist. Most downgrades were minor blemishes. Below is a picture of a ITT SELA tube data card. http://imageshack.com/a/img849/3754/740ittdatacard.jpg This tube had a 2145 FOM and was a 64 lp/mm tube. You can see from this card how good SELA tubes could be. I don't know what this downgrade code is but I do know many of them. I assume this code is for blemishes because the tube had a couple small spots in zone 3. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Ok, let us give them a look. First one is your tube that you say is gated. http://imageshack.com/a/img673/6573/wW2xq0.jpg Second pick is my tube that I know is not gated. http://imageshack.com/a/img502/2229/gen3pinnacle007.jpg Your pigtail is certainly newer by the date code. The part numbers are different and you said your tube makes the distinctive whine. I would say we can look at these two pigtails and with the slight differences tell which pigtail is used for gated and which for non gated tubes. AEO makes gated and non gated tubes. As far as ITT SELA tubes go some were as good as milspec and many probably exceeded most of the specs. Back in the SELA tube days autogated tubes were not available for civvies. So we got thin film tubes that were not autogated. Most of the good tubes were going to supply the military during time of war. SELA tubes were the best we could get. I would say most SELA tubes failed milpsec because they came with downgrade codes listed on the datasheet, I have never seen a SELA tube datasheet without a downgrade code. That does not mean it doesn't exist. Most downgrades were minor blemishes. Below is a picture of a ITT SELA tube data card. http://imageshack.com/a/img849/3754/740ittdatacard.jpg This tube had a 2145 FOM and was a 64 lp/mm tube. You can see from this card how good SELA tubes could be. I don't know what this downgrade code is but I do know many of them. I assume this code is for blemishes because the tube had a couple small spots in zone 3. Thanks for the info! Those are some nice specs. So does ITT still make non-gated MX11769-style tubes for the US market anymore? Do they sell modules to AEO too? |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 8/6/2014 11:47:51 AM EDT
[#17]
Here`s an odd one, ENVIS tube 2003 model,
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2014 5:21:06 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Thanks for the info! Those are some nice specs. So does ITT still make non-gated MX11769-style tubes for the US market anymore? Do they sell modules to AEO too? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Ok, let us give them a look. First one is your tube that you say is gated. http://imageshack.com/a/img673/6573/wW2xq0.jpg Second pick is my tube that I know is not gated. http://imageshack.com/a/img502/2229/gen3pinnacle007.jpg Your pigtail is certainly newer by the date code. The part numbers are different and you said your tube makes the distinctive whine. I would say we can look at these two pigtails and with the slight differences tell which pigtail is used for gated and which for non gated tubes. AEO makes gated and non gated tubes. As far as ITT SELA tubes go some were as good as milspec and many probably exceeded most of the specs. Back in the SELA tube days autogated tubes were not available for civvies. So we got thin film tubes that were not autogated. Most of the good tubes were going to supply the military during time of war. SELA tubes were the best we could get. I would say most SELA tubes failed milpsec because they came with downgrade codes listed on the datasheet, I have never seen a SELA tube datasheet without a downgrade code. That does not mean it doesn't exist. Most downgrades were minor blemishes. Below is a picture of a ITT SELA tube data card. http://imageshack.com/a/img849/3754/740ittdatacard.jpg This tube had a 2145 FOM and was a 64 lp/mm tube. You can see from this card how good SELA tubes could be. I don't know what this downgrade code is but I do know many of them. I assume this code is for blemishes because the tube had a couple small spots in zone 3. Thanks for the info! Those are some nice specs. So does ITT still make non-gated MX11769-style tubes for the US market anymore? Do they sell modules to AEO too? ITT still makes non gated tubes as far as I know. I had a MX-10160A milspec tube with a 2013 production date. As far as I know AEO mostly buys L3 modules and warranty returns. They could get into ITT tubes but I have not seen any as of yet. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2014 5:23:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1paintball:
Here`s an odd one, ENVIS tube 2003 model, http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd453/nvphotos4u/ENVIStube-text.jpg I honestly don't know what happened with that tube. It is certainly strange. I don't know why a hole would be drilled in that spot. Thank you for the photos and I added your tube to the list ! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2014 3:11:36 PM EDT
[#20]
I have a bunch of interesting tube pictures I'll have to find and post up. I already know what they are, but it will make a fun guessing game.
Here is one. CJ and Deano are barred from answering! 
I'll try to post some more this evening. I have some interesting 10130 pics I'll go find. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 8/11/2014 11:03:50 PM EDT
[#21]
ITT Night Quest / Enforcer 150/160
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 8/11/2014 11:11:26 PM EDT
[#22]
The ENVIS tube I posted has a surface mount resistor under the rubber plug in the extra hole, I think it`s an MX-11796 power supply on an ANVIS tube.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 9:15:27 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1paintball:
ITT Night Quest / Enforcer 150/160 Yep, also known as a glass to glass tube for folks who are learning. Odd tube with a power supply not internally contained in the tube. A weakness with these tubes are poor insulation in the wires. A common issue is arching between the tube and power supply. Nice entry level tubes if all is working good. Downside is a VERY limited housing choice. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 9:41:51 PM EDT
[#24]
the tube info is taken from this thread
NSN 5855-01-444-3916 SERIAL 39XXXX CAD 9951 MFR 13567 ID NO 80063-A3256350 Contract:DAAB07-96-C-J209 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2014 9:55:21 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130: Yep, also known as a glass to glass tube for folks who are learning. Odd tube with a power supply not internally contained in the tube. A weakness with these tubes are poor insulation in the wires. A common issue is arching between the tube and power supply. Nice entry level tubes if all is working good. Downside is a VERY limited housing choice. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130: Originally Posted By 1paintball: ITT Night Quest / Enforcer 150/160 Yep, also known as a glass to glass tube for folks who are learning. Odd tube with a power supply not internally contained in the tube. A weakness with these tubes are poor insulation in the wires. A common issue is arching between the tube and power supply. Nice entry level tubes if all is working good. Downside is a VERY limited housing choice. I thought we were barred from answering about the tube LoL! :) Anyway, that's one of the few modern US tube designs in which you can see the MCP through the photocathode. Regards David
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/14/2014 4:12:44 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cj7hawk:
I thought we were barred from answering about the tube LoL! :) Anyway, that's one of the few modern US tube designs in which you can see the MCP through the photocathode. Regards David Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cj7hawk:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By 1paintball:
ITT Night Quest / Enforcer 150/160 Yep, also known as a glass to glass tube for folks who are learning. Odd tube with a power supply not internally contained in the tube. A weakness with these tubes are poor insulation in the wires. A common issue is arching between the tube and power supply. Nice entry level tubes if all is working good. Downside is a VERY limited housing choice. I thought we were barred from answering about the tube LoL! :) Anyway, that's one of the few modern US tube designs in which you can see the MCP through the photocathode. Regards David heck no, someone has to tell us if we are right or wrong about our tube guess 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2014 12:41:52 PM EDT
[#27]
[size=2][font=Arial]How about this one?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2014 1:31:28 PM EDT
[#28]
Scored a really nice deal on this one:
L3 M890AV-Infinity (MX-10160B Filmless Aviation tube) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2014 9:45:29 PM EDT
[#29]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2014 10:30:17 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cj7hawk:
I thought we were barred from answering about the tube LoL! :) Anyway, that's one of the few modern US tube designs in which you can see the MCP through the photocathode. Regards David Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cj7hawk:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By 1paintball:
ITT Night Quest / Enforcer 150/160 Yep, also known as a glass to glass tube for folks who are learning. Odd tube with a power supply not internally contained in the tube. A weakness with these tubes are poor insulation in the wires. A common issue is arching between the tube and power supply. Nice entry level tubes if all is working good. Downside is a VERY limited housing choice. I thought we were barred from answering about the tube LoL! :) Anyway, that's one of the few modern US tube designs in which you can see the MCP through the photocathode. Regards David LOL, I forgot I posted that...kind of left it hanging there! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/11/2014 3:07:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Pushrod_Paul]
[#31]
I've got a gen III pvs-7B unit. I'm not sure which tube is in it. Is it worth the effort to take apart and see or will I fuck it up? It has a small dark spot that I see when viewing that I would like to get rid of if its dirt. Is that enough of a reason to take it apart?
Last but not least, how do I disassemble it? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2014 4:32:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: UNV_Rich]
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Pushrod_Paul:
I've got a gen III pvs-7B unit. I'm not sure which tube is in it. Is it worth the effort to take apart and see or will I fuck it up? It has a small dark spot that I see when viewing that I would like to get rid of if its dirt. Is that enough of a reason to take it apart? Last but not least, how do I disassemble it? I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 
Picture of the housing and label: 
Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2014 7:06:23 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Originally Posted By Pushrod_Paul:
I've got a gen III pvs-7B unit. I'm not sure which tube is in it. Is it worth the effort to take apart and see or will I fuck it up? It has a small dark spot that I see when viewing that I would like to get rid of if its dirt. Is that enough of a reason to take it apart? Last but not least, how do I disassemble it? I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply Yeah, I got it opened. The tube doesn't have any of the markings shown in this thread. I guess the pvs-7's have different type tubes? I did clean it up and got rid of a spot of dust. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:29:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3919/15218548545_41d9bc7ff5_c.jpg Picture of the housing and label: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3904/15032128069_52079902a3_c.jpg Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Originally Posted By Pushrod_Paul:
I've got a gen III pvs-7B unit. I'm not sure which tube is in it. Is it worth the effort to take apart and see or will I fuck it up? It has a small dark spot that I see when viewing that I would like to get rid of if its dirt. Is that enough of a reason to take it apart? Last but not least, how do I disassemble it? I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3919/15218548545_41d9bc7ff5_c.jpg Picture of the housing and label: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3904/15032128069_52079902a3_c.jpg Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply Well, I am stumped and that does not happen often. This is a very interesting tube and with markings I have not seen. I have some emails out to friends to see if we can learn more. Appears to be an EXTREMELY early MX-11769. One I have never seen. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 10:57:12 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Well, I am stumped and that does not happen often. This is a very interesting tube and with markings I have not seen. I have some emails out to friends to see if we can learn more. Appears to be an EXTREMELY early MX-11769. One I have never seen. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By rich20730:
I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3919/15218548545_41d9bc7ff5_c.jpg Picture of the housing and label: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3904/15032128069_52079902a3_c.jpg Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply Well, I am stumped and that does not happen often. This is a very interesting tube and with markings I have not seen. I have some emails out to friends to see if we can learn more. Appears to be an EXTREMELY early MX-11769. One I have never seen. Here are some more pictures I took after removing the tube from the scope. Based on the dates listed on the pigtail (DC3012 and 06Jun11) it seems to have been manufactured fairly recently. I suppose someone could have replaced the pig tail, but the solder connections look very clean so I'm not sure that what's happened here. I no longer think it's an AEO tube as it doesn't have a vertical serial number carved into the side of the case. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 12:54:31 PM EDT
[#36]
Rich, I got a email out to Ed with your pics. It might be the new Everest tube. If Ed does not know we are in trouble because I am out of options. It does seem like a new tube on second look. The very low serial number had me baffled at first. Ed will know !
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 1:16:16 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Here are some more pictures I took after removing the tube from the scope. Based on the dates listed on the pigtail (DC3012 and 06Jun11) it seems to have been manufactured fairly recently. I suppose someone could have replaced the pig tail, but the solder connections look very clean so I'm not sure that what's happened here. I no longer think it's an AEO tube as it doesn't have a vertical serial number carved into the side of the case. https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5585/15258558795_6c017073ac_c.jpg https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5576/15071987087_a5b0ca77e6_c.jpg https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3880/15258555185_ed2c20fdaa_c.jpg https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3869/15265123881_6fd1624fd3_c.jpg Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rich20730:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By rich20730:
I always open mine up as soon as I get them. I think of it as an exciting surprise, kind of like unwrapping a present on Christmas morning. Often times, probably more so with older units, some dirt/dust/hair will make its way onto the phosphor screen and appear as a spot when viewed through the scope. A can of air duster, rubbing alcohol, and some q-tips can help a lot. I'm not as familiar with PVS-7's as I am with 14's, but I believe you just unscrew the objective lens. I just got a new tube today that has me a little stumped. It's an MX-11769-style tube which has markings from ITT, but it doesn't have the typical KM or ITT power-supply model numbers or date code. There was part of a blank black label on the tube that someone had partially peeled up, presumably in order to reveal the ITT markings underneath. I removed the rest of the label which uncovered the serial number. The markings read: ITTNV-5052A-X3C S/N 1312 01 219 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3919/15218548545_41d9bc7ff5_c.jpg Picture of the housing and label: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3904/15032128069_52079902a3_c.jpg Other notes: Single battery model, no noticeable autogating whine. My best guess would be an AEO tube with an ITT module and power supply Well, I am stumped and that does not happen often. This is a very interesting tube and with markings I have not seen. I have some emails out to friends to see if we can learn more. Appears to be an EXTREMELY early MX-11769. One I have never seen. Here are some more pictures I took after removing the tube from the scope. Based on the dates listed on the pigtail (DC3012 and 06Jun11) it seems to have been manufactured fairly recently. I suppose someone could have replaced the pig tail, but the solder connections look very clean so I'm not sure that what's happened here. I no longer think it's an AEO tube as it doesn't have a vertical serial number carved into the side of the case. https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5585/15258558795_6c017073ac_c.jpg https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5576/15071987087_a5b0ca77e6_c.jpg https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3880/15258555185_ed2c20fdaa_c.jpg https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3869/15265123881_6fd1624fd3_c.jpg Rich it is the new ITT Everest tube ! Sweet tube ! Below is what Ed mailed me back. "Hello Dean, Nice to hear from you again. Yes, you are correct it is the newest Everest F9815SLG. Underneath the potting is a glass window. A special IR signalling device / test set is used to adjust the gain thru that window, no more pots to tweak with. A note you may want to pass out on the Forums is that the manual gain function will not work when using the older dual AA Batteries and that these tubes should only be used along with the newer single AA battery housings. I hope that you find this information useful, Ed" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 3:26:49 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Rich it is the new ITT Everest tube ! Sweet tube ! Below is what Ed mailed me back. "Hello Dean, Nice to hear from you again. Yes, you are correct it is the newest Everest F9815SLG. Underneath the potting is a glass window. A special IR signalling device / test set is used to adjust the gain thru that window, no more pots to tweak with. A note you may want to pass out on the Forums is that the manual gain function will not work when using the older dual AA Batteries and that these tubes should only be used along with the newer single AA battery housings. I hope that you find this information useful, Ed" Wow, that is awesome. Such a random find on ebay. I was the only bidder since it was listed as a PV14. Too bad I won't get a chance to play around with it some more since I just sold it yesterday. The buyer should be pretty happy when he reads my email with a link to this thread . I assumed it wasn't gated since I didn't hear any whine, but I guess that's probably what the "A" on the NV5025A stands for. Anyway, really nice looking tube. The cleanest I've seen blemish-wise.
Again, awesome thread. Thank you for taking the time to investigate and figure this one out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2014 1:29:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TheHorta]
[#39]
Just picked up my ninth PVS-14 for a steal -- it came in as part of a deal filled with a plethora of "unmentionable" highly-coveted Class III layzurish stuff.
What makes this strange is the tube warranty expiration date of JUN11, which is VERY late for the Contract ID (Omni VI, if I have that correct). I know the "Omni Game" doesn't really tell the full story, and that tubes from different Omni Contracts can quite frequently perform much higher. Using a dual PVS-14 bridge adapter I stuck this unit next to a genuine VII equipped unit, swapping eyes back and forth just to be sure I had it right. This particular VII unit is my personal "Chosen One" because it's proven to be something special. It has a little more resolution and obvious S/N than any other VII units I own. What blew me away is that this supposed VI unit, from everything I can tell after three hours of comparisons, is actually a hair BETTER! I'm a numbers dork and usually put way too much emphasis on them when it comes to this kinda stuff. So, I guess my question is, will / can / does a manufacturer label a tube with a "lower" Omnibus contract ID even if it meets or exceeds ALL of the specs of a "higher" ID? Here is the tube in question: 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2014 12:40:36 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheHorta:
Just picked up my ninth PVS-14 for a steal -- it came in as part of a deal filled with a plethora of "unmentionable" highly-coveted Class III layzurish stuff.
What makes this strange is the tube warranty expiration date of JUN11, which is VERY late for the Contract ID (Omni VI, if I have that correct). I know the "Omni Game" doesn't really tell the full story, and that tubes from different Omni Contracts can quite frequently perform much higher. Using a dual PVS-14 bridge adapter I stuck this unit next to a genuine VII equipped unit, swapping eyes back and forth just to be sure I had it right. This particular VII unit is my personal "Chosen One" because it's proven to be something special. It has a little more resolution and obvious S/N than any other VII units I own. What blew me away is that this supposed VI unit, from everything I can tell after three hours of comparisons, is actually a hair BETTER! I'm a numbers dork and usually put way too much emphasis on them when it comes to this kinda stuff. So, I guess my question is, will / can / does a manufacturer label a tube with a "lower" Omnibus contract ID even if it meets or exceeds ALL of the specs of a "higher" ID? Here is the tube in question: http://huntsvillebible.com/images/biff/PVS_14_Tube_09.JPG Horta as you know it is a Omni VI tube made by ITT for the US Army. It is a autogated Pinnacle. A Omni V or VI and maybe even a special Omni IV can easily outperform a Omni VII. Tube specs are MINIMUM specs. The tubes all perform at and usually higher than the min specs. When they make tubes specs between batches can be significantly higher on a good run of tubes. Milspec tubes are tested individually to make sure each one performs above min levels which is why they need no data sheet. The Gov does not care which soldier gets what as long as it performs at a certain level. Some commercial tubes that don't have data cards can be batch tested which I assume is cheaper to do. They may test a few tubes in a run of tubes to get a general idea and these don't come with individual data sheets, only a batch test sheet (how it was explained to me). Some big box night vision guys buy entire batches of tubes. In any given run of tubes you can have really high performers and sometimes duds which get sold off cheaper. Omni VI and VII tubes are very close in performance and one can easily outperform the other. I have a Omni IV that beats my Omni VII in all but high light performance because one is gated and the other not. Dino |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2014 1:55:31 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Horta as you know it is a Omni VI tube made by ITT for the US Army. It is a autogated Pinnacle. A Omni V or VI and maybe even a special Omni IV can easily outperform a Omni VII. Tube specs are MINIMUM specs. The tubes all perform at and usually higher than the min specs. When they make tubes specs between batches can be significantly higher on a good run of tubes. Milspec tubes are tested individually to make sure each one performs above min levels which is why they need no data sheet. The Gov does not care which soldier gets what as long as it performs at a certain level. Some commercial tubes that don't have data cards can be batch tested which I assume is cheaper to do. They may test a few tubes in a run of tubes to get a general idea and these don't come with individual data sheets, only a batch test sheet (how it was explained to me). Some big box night vision guys buy entire batches of tubes. In any given run of tubes you can have really high performers and sometimes duds which get sold off cheaper. Omni VI and VII tubes are very close in performance and one can easily outperform the other. I have a Omni IV that beats my Omni VII in all but high light performance because one is gated and the other not. Dino Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By TheHorta:
Just picked up my ninth PVS-14 for a steal -- it came in as part of a deal filled with a plethora of "unmentionable" highly-coveted Class III layzurish stuff.
What makes this strange is the tube warranty expiration date of JUN11, which is VERY late for the Contract ID (Omni VI, if I have that correct). I know the "Omni Game" doesn't really tell the full story, and that tubes from different Omni Contracts can quite frequently perform much higher. Using a dual PVS-14 bridge adapter I stuck this unit next to a genuine VII equipped unit, swapping eyes back and forth just to be sure I had it right. This particular VII unit is my personal "Chosen One" because it's proven to be something special. It has a little more resolution and obvious S/N than any other VII units I own. What blew me away is that this supposed VI unit, from everything I can tell after three hours of comparisons, is actually a hair BETTER! I'm a numbers dork and usually put way too much emphasis on them when it comes to this kinda stuff. So, I guess my question is, will / can / does a manufacturer label a tube with a "lower" Omnibus contract ID even if it meets or exceeds ALL of the specs of a "higher" ID? Here is the tube in question: http://huntsvillebible.com/images/biff/PVS_14_Tube_09.JPG Horta as you know it is a Omni VI tube made by ITT for the US Army. It is a autogated Pinnacle. A Omni V or VI and maybe even a special Omni IV can easily outperform a Omni VII. Tube specs are MINIMUM specs. The tubes all perform at and usually higher than the min specs. When they make tubes specs between batches can be significantly higher on a good run of tubes. Milspec tubes are tested individually to make sure each one performs above min levels which is why they need no data sheet. The Gov does not care which soldier gets what as long as it performs at a certain level. Some commercial tubes that don't have data cards can be batch tested which I assume is cheaper to do. They may test a few tubes in a run of tubes to get a general idea and these don't come with individual data sheets, only a batch test sheet (how it was explained to me). Some big box night vision guys buy entire batches of tubes. In any given run of tubes you can have really high performers and sometimes duds which get sold off cheaper. Omni VI and VII tubes are very close in performance and one can easily outperform the other. I have a Omni IV that beats my Omni VII in all but high light performance because one is gated and the other not. Dino Thanks Dino! Via other posts of yours I had become familiar with much of that info. This specific tube compelled me to ask for more. I was out again with it last night, and quite frankly I've never had one this good. No discernible blemishes either. I have an open six "car" garage that gets so dark in the back that unaided NODs, no matter how good, just can't make out any detail, but these are able to resolve much more detail and see much more deeply into the shadows than anything else I have (aside from thermal, of course). I didn't think there could be this much of a difference between what is a genuine Omni VII spec tube and something higher. Is there anyone who has the diagnostic equipment that can test this tube to get accurate numbers on it? Or is this just something that boils down to it being more than just a sum of its parts? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2014 1:03:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Dino1130]
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheHorta:
Thanks Dino! Via other posts of yours I had become familiar with much of that info. This specific tube compelled me to ask for more. I was out again with it last night, and quite frankly I've never had one this good. No discernible blemishes either. I have an open six "car" garage that gets so dark in the back that unaided NODs, no matter how good, just can't make out any detail, but these are able to resolve much more detail and see much more deeply into the shadows than anything else I have (aside from thermal, of course). I didn't think there could be this much of a difference between what is a genuine Omni VII spec tube and something higher. Is there anyone who has the diagnostic equipment that can test this tube to get accurate numbers on it? Or is this just something that boils down to it being more than just a sum of its parts? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheHorta:
Originally Posted By Dino1130:
Originally Posted By TheHorta:
Just picked up my ninth PVS-14 for a steal -- it came in as part of a deal filled with a plethora of "unmentionable" highly-coveted Class III layzurish stuff.
What makes this strange is the tube warranty expiration date of JUN11, which is VERY late for the Contract ID (Omni VI, if I have that correct). I know the "Omni Game" doesn't really tell the full story, and that tubes from different Omni Contracts can quite frequently perform much higher. Using a dual PVS-14 bridge adapter I stuck this unit next to a genuine VII equipped unit, swapping eyes back and forth just to be sure I had it right. This particular VII unit is my personal "Chosen One" because it's proven to be something special. It has a little more resolution and obvious S/N than any other VII units I own. What blew me away is that this supposed VI unit, from everything I can tell after three hours of comparisons, is actually a hair BETTER! I'm a numbers dork and usually put way too much emphasis on them when it comes to this kinda stuff. So, I guess my question is, will / can / does a manufacturer label a tube with a "lower" Omnibus contract ID even if it meets or exceeds ALL of the specs of a "higher" ID? Here is the tube in question: http://huntsvillebible.com/images/biff/PVS_14_Tube_09.JPG Horta as you know it is a Omni VI tube made by ITT for the US Army. It is a autogated Pinnacle. A Omni V or VI and maybe even a special Omni IV can easily outperform a Omni VII. Tube specs are MINIMUM specs. The tubes all perform at and usually higher than the min specs. When they make tubes specs between batches can be significantly higher on a good run of tubes. Milspec tubes are tested individually to make sure each one performs above min levels which is why they need no data sheet. The Gov does not care which soldier gets what as long as it performs at a certain level. Some commercial tubes that don't have data cards can be batch tested which I assume is cheaper to do. They may test a few tubes in a run of tubes to get a general idea and these don't come with individual data sheets, only a batch test sheet (how it was explained to me). Some big box night vision guys buy entire batches of tubes. In any given run of tubes you can have really high performers and sometimes duds which get sold off cheaper. Omni VI and VII tubes are very close in performance and one can easily outperform the other. I have a Omni IV that beats my Omni VII in all but high light performance because one is gated and the other not. Dino Thanks Dino! Via other posts of yours I had become familiar with much of that info. This specific tube compelled me to ask for more. I was out again with it last night, and quite frankly I've never had one this good. No discernible blemishes either. I have an open six "car" garage that gets so dark in the back that unaided NODs, no matter how good, just can't make out any detail, but these are able to resolve much more detail and see much more deeply into the shadows than anything else I have (aside from thermal, of course). I didn't think there could be this much of a difference between what is a genuine Omni VII spec tube and something higher. Is there anyone who has the diagnostic equipment that can test this tube to get accurate numbers on it? Or is this just something that boils down to it being more than just a sum of its parts? Some places have high end test equipment called a Hoffman tester. Then can give you exact specs on a tube. I believe AEO has this but testing is like 200 bucks. One of my very best tubes ever came out of a Envis scope and had no data card. Hell, it was not even gated. You can always get that rare diamond in the rough ! I got one in a cheap Envis deal. Best tube I ever owned by FAR to this day was made in the 90's. It will still kick the shit out of the best tube I own. It was a 25mm tube. The famed Gen 3+1 in a PVS-4 observation scope. I gave the tube to a good friend (who knew what is was and would treasure it) because the real thrill for me was finding it. Once I gave it away the thrill starts all over again. We can make super tubes in this country. Cost and standardization is why we don't do it anymore. Omni VII is junk compared to what we can do if cost was not an issue. Military orders rule the land and pays the bills. That is what they are geared toward. Making the best is not a huge consideration except maybe for special forces or high level Gov agencies. Years ago I was like you Horta. I spared no expense to find the very best. I bought more night vision than anyone. I learned it was a waste and Omni IV is plenty good enough for me. I just look for good performers now. I don't care if it is the best as I know mostly only a sophisticated machine can really tell the difference. I bought a filmless tube from Vic and he knew it had a couple spots but performed good. Vic knew I did not care if it was perfect.
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 10/12/2014 10:16:07 PM EDT
[#43]
I guess from the info you've provided, it's an autogated AOE, thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2014 11:36:23 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By travis1975:
https://www.dropbox.com/sc/4c1bskzvoir17hz/AACWy6uAKhNe4hzGkiCBHsDMa https://www.dropbox.com/sc/tempbfvt5phrfqh/AADjMXwl1kP10PeCiLbmzGGaa I guess from the info you've provided, it's an autogated AOE, thanks. Your pics did not load. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:06:59 AM EDT
[#45]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 3:16:38 PM EDT
[#46]
I got some tube deciphering students running around here somewhere. I will give them first crack at it. Being a milspec tube it is a easy one.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 3:20:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TheHorta]
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Melvin_Johnson:
What about this old girl? <a href="http://smg.photobucket.com/user/tokarev/media/Mobile%20Uploads/KIMG0856_zpsad2b2fbd.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/tokarev/Mobile%20Uploads/KIMG0856_zpsad2b2fbd.jpg</a> Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Omni III contract tube. Non-filmed/gated. Min 51lp/mm. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/23/2014 10:47:33 PM EDT
[#48]
L3 is the Cage code, but how did you get the approximate age, and therefore contract? I'm still learning and I must be missing something.
|
|
|
|
FIN
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 6:38:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: murtis]
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DevilWillCry:
L3 is the Cage code, but how did you get the approximate age, and therefore contract? I'm still learning and I must be missing something. The CAD says 9711, 1997, 11:th week. The NSN or Contract num should return you the solicitation if you search for it |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2014 11:29:11 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DevilWillCry:
L3 is the Cage code, but how did you get the approximate age, and therefore contract? I'm still learning and I must be missing something. Murtis explained what the CAD means on a tube. Not all tubes have a CAD. I then research the contract numbers and determine when the contract first came about and other details. I also have some secret squirrel files I am not allowed to post with serial numbers I can use to somewhat get in the ballpark of when a tube was made. If I am feeling frisky I sometimes just call ITT or L3 on a tube I am unsure of. I usually get told to pound sand or get shuffled around on the endless transfer call gizmo but once in a blue moon I get a nice person who takes two seconds and pulls it up on their computer and tells me. Don't call them with milspec tubes though or even send them to them unless you know what to say. I only use that as a LAST resort and give them limited information. Not that I believe anything is stolen but I don't want the hassle. I have no issue bugging them with commercial tubes and in fact I rather enjoy it. (if I am bored that day).
|
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
