User Panel
[#1]
Edited. Don't really believe he will stop but what the hell I'll try.....
|
|
[#2]
Quoted:
To be perfectly honest, no. Everyone on this board has been wrong at one point or another and I no longer take anyone’s word as gospel View Quote Anyways... Let me apologize first to everyone who just comes here to get some information and knowledge on night vision and associated technologies and has to get sucked into the totally unnecessary "he said, she saids" and the extremely high noise to signal ratio in the night vision market in general. The NV industry is actually pretty small, and in the past, it's attracted a lot of unsavory characters who saw low customer education and high returns, especially in the earlier days. There are a lot of buried bodies and a lot of skeletons in closets, some of which are beginning to come to light now. This is why it's always been one of TNVC's core missions to educate and inform first before making sales, and why each of our technical staff comes from the end-user community first, not from a sales or marketing background. This can also sometimes bring with it some abrasiveness in certain situations, but that's neither here nor there. The thing is, there are not that many actual "independent" vendors out there. Obviously everyone's tubes ultimately come from the same couple of places, but there are really only a few companies that deal direct with the manufacturers, the rest are downstream dealers, and some of these larger distributors have been known to cut off smaller dealers who "dare" to go outside of their little fiefdom and/or don't toe the company line of their "Night Vision Daddy." Now, regarding the topic at hand, we've been hearing this claim get passed around for a while now--and with renewed vigor in the last few months, attributed to sources other than USNV as well, though they've been smart not to commit it to writing that I've seen. It was so common at SHOT that it became a "guessing game." Someone would come to the booth wanting to know about unfilmed tube technology and degradation, and I'd ask "let me guess, you were told [spurious claim not worth repeating], and you heard it from [dealer/dealer description]." It is what it is. As I've said before, whether we're talking about used market goods or dealers--there's a lot of good guys out there in the market and the industry, but there's also a lot of people out there willing to exploit others through a variety of means for their own benefit. ::shrug:: Once again, the claim is bunk, and seems to originate from a desire to move non-L3 tubes, but the claim is not to my knowledge originating from Elbit Systems (Harris, ITT, etc.). Needless to say, they've certainly never used it as a sales pitch on us, and we do a lot of volume on high end tubes, and have never experienced it in our many years of working with modern unfilmed tubes, nor heard of it from any of our customers or contacts ranging from folks placed in USSOCOM, AWG, and even foreign MODs, and all users of unfilmed tube technology, despite the many other skeletons we've heard about, some of which we're not at liberty to discuss. We deal in both L3Harris and Elbit tubes, but in the end, our commitment is to the end-user, both professional and recreational, and providing the best education and most accurate information possible, as well as the best customer support we can, and hoping that that's enough for some customers to send business our way when they're ready to open up the wallet, but full well knowing that it won't always be, and that not everyone is going to end up buying from us. ~Augee |
|
[#3]
Quoted: I guess I'm just curious as to why you would believe an official statement any more at that point, then. ~Augee View Quote |
|
[#5]
Quoted:
Because this is the internet and I can say whatever I want and add someone’s official name and contact info at the bottom too. Not suggesting that’s what happened at all, in fact I’m willing to bet that’s as close to an official statement from L3 on the matter as I’ll get. I’ve seen first hand, in this forum, misinformation originate from TNVC staff. Whatever, mistakes happen. There’s also a far cry from deliberately lying to customers to make a sale and not always being right, but both are misinformation regardless of intent. So I take the “Trust but verify” approach to everyone now. View Quote ~Augee |
|
[#6]
Interesting to hear that it came from USNV since they are a Elbit dealer. When I inquired a couple years ago with them, I did not hear anything about tube life, and let’s just say they took me to SHOT before, but I still have L3 UF WP.
|
|
[#7]
Quoted:
Ion poisoning... If it gets to EOL. Electrons hit gas molecules in the tube, and they become ions and travel to the photocathode where they burrow in and poison it. Gas can dissolve into the glass they make the MCP from, and this is slowly released over time, especially with electron impacts. They can die from other causes too. PSU failure, Exceeding shock limits, Insulation breakdown, Fire, Mechanical damage, Photocathode burn, Image burn-in (fixed pattern noise) and other causes, but if taken care of, generally many Gen3 will eventually die of ion poisoning. That's what the film and/or autogating and/or better degassing is intended to slow down... Without some kind of protection, GaAs doesn't last long at all. Gen2 tends to be more linear, but over 10000 hours, they lose about half, and then over another 10000 hours, another half, etc. So you can probably get more than 20,000 hours from a good Gen2. Gen3 tends to hold on a little longer - So will decay slower than Gen2, though not enough to sway a decision about which you should get, and then suddenly dies at the end of life. It will decay to worthless in a very short period of time. Maybe less than 100 hours. But you should get your original 10,000 hours out of it. The term for a tube that decays 20% in the first 500 hours? "Faulty"...Or maybe just sub-standard. Not sure what might lead to that, unless you're using on full moon nights all the time with a DC PSU. That would probably do it, but it will hurt filmed and filmless equally. Well, Filmless does tend to have good autogating. I've never heard anyone talk about Filmless decaying 20% in 500 hours though... Just what is the claimed mechanism? As others mentioned, I can't see a tube that does that giving 10,000 hours. David. View Quote Quoted:
From Mark Horning The brain at L3Harris. Straight from the horses mouth. I hope this quashes all the rumors you guys have been hearing about unfilmed Tech. It is amazing tech and and continues to improve as the years go on. Sam, The engineers we sent to SHOT were hearing similar BS. 1) As you know, we are required to run sample units on lifetime reliability. The reliability requirement is 1500 hours on “accelerated reliability”. The accelerated profile is supposed to represent 10x acceleration over typical real-world use. This is possibly one source of mis-information. Each hour on the test box is supposed to be equivalent to ~10 hours of “real world” use. The profile is in the various MIL-PRFs. Note: the US Army designed the test, not the manufacturers. I pulled the last three months of complete data for the unfilmed product. On average, gain INCREASED 18% at 1500 hours, and SNR went down 1.2%. That’s only 15 tubes, because we only run 5 a month, and even the accelerated test takes around 3 months to complete. Next time you or anyone else from TNVC is in the factory, I will be happy to show you the equipment, as well as share some of the performance graphs. Now, the original unfilmed tubes from the late 90s early 2000s had serious lifetime issues. I remember ITT built some that lasted around 200 hours. The early Litton/L-3 ones were better, but honestly not by much. I’m told we got 500 hours, but the yield to get there was terrible. That was 15-20 years ago though. The tech is completely different now, and has been for many years. Also, the US Air Force would not have given us a $93 million contract for high-FOM unfilmed tubes if they had lifetime reliability problems. Contracts are public record, but just in case you need a link here is a news article: tube info Mark E. Horning Sr. Engineer – Integrated Vision Solutions Electron Tube Operations COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS / L3HARRIS TECHNOLOGIES 1215 S. 52nd St / Tempe, AZ 85281/ USA View Quote Quoted:
I would imagine there's more to the contract than just 'drop ship us 15,424 tubes', but I guess I should feel lucky we don't pay $6030/tube... well I guess we do, outta our taxes EDIT: "The contract also accommodate requests for the high-field-of-merit tubes from other U.S. Department of Defense customers." oh yeah... so nevermind. EDIT2: Searching here is fun when you put in 5855 for PSC. $3-4M to Optics1 for SWIR COSIs each of the last 2 years - didn't realize there were that many out there. Definitely some familiar faces on the list besides the big guys - good to see others winning contracts too. View Quote |
|
[#8]
Lol, I already posted "why" they last as long as they do. That letter from L3 was just corporate speak. Tell that dude next time he wants to drop some wisdom, use specific reasons please bc he used a lot of words to say nothing.
The reason is significantly less voltage on the PC, which is bae and really good problem solving on their part. Still gonna degrade faster since it's GaAs vs MA but that's just how it be cuz it do. MA is the better choice for larping with friends, GaAs for science and those that take it out once or twice a year with gloves on and baby them. I mean, nvg is best for looking up at the stars and nothing beats filmless for that, but they lost the nvg game and are putting window dressings on mediocrity now. I'd suspect their testing methods are two dimensional. I mean, it's L3, like they have any credibility. Tell him to post the testing machine or I'm calling no balls. Not the mil spec of what the test should be, but their setup. I want to seeeeeee. I'll also settle for doing it in person if they don't want to post it. I mean, it can't be as bad a setup than the NIJ labs that look like crack houses. I mean 1500x10 is what, like at least as old as the sun and they gaining out here. It must be a pact w the devil. Harris has this white paper tho: https://www.harris.com/sites/default/files/the-gen-3-advantage-white-paperv3.pdf And u can Google up test machines for accelerated testing, so which one they using? |
|
[#9]
Quoted:
Lol, I already posted "why" they last as long as they do. That letter from L3 was just corporate speak. Tell that dude next time he wants to drop some wisdom, use specific reasons please bc he used a lot of words to say nothing. The reason is significantly less voltage on the PC, which is bae and really good problem solving on their part. Still gonna degrade faster since it's GaAs vs MA but that's just how it be cuz it do. MA is the better choice for larping with friends, GaAs for science and those that take it out once or twice a year with gloves on and baby them. I mean, nvg is best for looking up at the stars and nothing beats filmless for that, but they lost the nvg game and are putting window dressings on mediocrity now. I'd suspect their testing methods are two dimensional. I mean, it's L3, like they have any credibility. Tell him to post the testing methods or I'm calling no balls. Not the mil spec of what the test should be, but their setup. I want to seeeeeee. I'll also settle for doing it in person if they don't want to post it. I mean, it can't be as bad a setup than the NIJ labs that look like crack houses. I mean 1500x10 is what, like at least as old as the sun and they gaining out here. It must be a pact w the devil. View Quote |
|
[#10]
That's the best you're going to get Matthew, I doubt very much L3Harris wants to give away everything. If you want to stick with MA photocathodes which have Electron affinity then by all means step back into the dark ages, literally.
That said I am going to take a tour of the Production facility in a few months and I might have some tidbits of info to sprinkle out there. |
|
[#11]
Quoted:
That's the best you're going to get Matthew, I doubt very much L3Harris wants to give away everything. If you want to stick with MA photocathodes which have Electron affinity then by all means step back into the dark ages, literally. That said I am going to take a tour of the Production facility in a few months and I might have some tidbits of info to sprinkle out there. View Quote ETA: we're gonna ignite the tube wars again with that first paragraph, lol. :) Happy Friday friend! EETA: more info on power supplies please, where it was during ITT vs now, where they plan to take it from here, stuff like that to really fill in the gaps, if you can. Also new chemistry (be vague, I mean if it's really new I'm sure they can't say) and how they really feel about putting Mayo on french fries. |
|
[#12]
Quoted: It was so much nicer when you were banned. Please keep the GD in GD. View Quote Fuck it, what do I know? I'm just a hobbyist and BE Meyers pulses their lasers. Lol. We just want transparency. The whole ITAR thing was overblown and used to cover deficiencies in actual facts. Now, we can get facts and that's important to everyone because it keeps us honest. I've been wrong before, not intentionally wrong, but when the facts present, we move forward from there. That's the best part of these forums, besides the vendors always fighting w each other. Yikes. Feel free to add anything that can help the discussion. |
|
[#13]
The term for a tube that decays 20% in the first 500 hours? "Faulty"...Or maybe just sub-standard. Not sure what might lead to that, unless you're using on full moon nights all the time with a DC PSU. That would probably do it, but it will hurt filmed and filmless equally. Well, Filmless does tend to have good autogating
Can someone shed more light on what cj7hawk/David wrote above. I assume DC PSU means Dedicated power supply unit and does that mean hardwired? Not sure how someone runs NV that way but it made me curious. Now I realize he was tying the use of NV while under full moons with this DC PSU, but it made me wonder if using NV in and around LED based IR security cameras can shorten the life of a tube. Example: You are inside a building that has exterior mounted LED based IR security cameras that are facing fields and woods around the building. So you are not looking directly at the LED based illuminators, just at what they covering. So will using NV every night under these circumstances lessen the life of a tube? Thanks |
|
[#14]
Here is some facts to close this anti L3 sales thread.
Fact, I said to everyone when this thread came NSFJojo would be in here. Fact, the vendor in question does not offer L3 tubes any longer, they've been cut off for monies owed Fact, another dealer (we won't mention names) continues to tell every customer not to purchase L3 tubes for this reason that they fail early and easily. Several of us at Shot Show fielded question after question of false claims. This does not include the repeated phone calls from our customer base stated the same dealer claims. Fact, we train here for a living and have what I call some of the best NV trainers in the world from the special operations community whom have more time under NODS than 95% of us along with more than 500hrs under L3 unfilmed tubes. Fact, each one of my trainers, (including other staff) have more than 500hrs on their L3 unfilmed and not a single set of dozens of tubes including rental sets have ever shown any type of degradation claimed from this company along with a certain dealer. Fact, (and in closing) these claims are and continue to this day (I personally fielded a call yesterday for a13K L3 unfilmed goggle order) and the customer also contacted the said dealer who stated he needed to go with a Harris/Elbit system as he and his friend would be seeing "substantial performance issues with the L3 unfilmed tubes as they use them". Fact, these false claims are for ONE reason, and one reason only, and that is to sell Elbit tubes to the majority as these said companies portfolio's make up 90 to 100% of these tubes. I have instructed my staff not to comment any further in this motive driven thread that has started for the motives I laid out. We said our peace and our customers love their best of the best L3 unfilmed tubes and so does our men and women in uniform whom have never experienced a 20% tube degradation after 500 hours. And yes we sell Elbit tubes and lots of them as well. They are good tubes as well but do not perform like L3 unfilmed tubes, which are the best of the best. Edit, to add one point. Yes we are a direct distributor for both L3 and Elbit, we do not deal with a middle man for tubes and build everything in-house for some who may not know this. -out- |
|
[#15]
Quoted:
Lol, I already posted "why" they last as long as they do. That letter from L3 was just corporate speak. Tell that dude next time he wants to drop some wisdom, use specific reasons please bc he used a lot of words to say nothing. The reason is significantly less voltage on the PC, which is bae and really good problem solving on their part. Still gonna degrade faster since it's GaAs vs MA but that's just how it be cuz it do. MA is the better choice for larping with friends, GaAs for science and those that take it out once or twice a year with gloves on and baby them. I mean, nvg is best for looking up at the stars and nothing beats filmless for that, but they lost the nvg game and are putting window dressings on mediocrity now. I'd suspect their testing methods are two dimensional. I mean, it's L3, like they have any credibility. Tell him to post the testing machine or I'm calling no balls. Not the mil spec of what the test should be, but their setup. I want to seeeeeee. I'll also settle for doing it in person if they don't want to post it. I mean, it can't be as bad a setup than the NIJ labs that look like crack houses. I mean 1500x10 is what, like at least as old as the sun and they gaining out here. It must be a pact w the devil. Harris has this white paper tho: https://www.harris.com/sites/default/files/the-gen-3-advantage-white-paperv3.pdf And u can Google up test machines for accelerated testing, so which one they using? View Quote |
|
[#16]
Not so veiled insinuations aside, my first post in this thread said clearly that I disagreed with the "20% in 500 hours" non sense.
As to what USNV said- I can't tell you WTF they are telling people, I don't buy NV from them. We sell Harris/Elbit, L3 and Photonis tubes in units. |
|
[#17]
Quoted:
It’s not a typo, I just bought two 3000 fom thin filmed Elbit tubes. I know of my two, this tube and one other that are 3000 fom or close made in the last few months. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
3000 FOM filmed unit? Is that a typo? Or is he just full of sh*t? 3000 FOM isn’t even the norm for the best filmless tubes being delivered to the guys on the other side of the fence on McKeller’s Road... 3000 FOM tubes are at the bleeding edge of what the industry is capable of producing at its absolute top tier. I’m not even sure I’ve ever even heard of a filmed Omni tube exceeding 2000 FOM, much less 3000. I’m certainly happy with my L3 tubes, but I field a lot of questions from guys at the range and this was news to me that the thin film stuff seemed to have caught up. |
|
[#18]
This is all speculation/opinion without actual filmless users who experienced this coming forward, or legitimate real-world examples/proof that modern L3 filmless tubes lose their performance faster than thin filmed. I find it hard to believe considering how widespread they have become in the military and having to meet those requirements, not to mention how widely used in the civilian market. Repeat something enough times and even people you'd consider to be experts will repeat the same thing, but do they actually know for a fact or seen it with their own eyes.
Just for some clarity of the extent of gen 3 degradation compared to gen 2. I have a 24 year gen 3 10160 tube that's Omni III or IV with who knows how many hours on it and it's brightness is similar to a brand new 11769 Photonis Echo that I used to have. The Echo's resolution was better obviously being 67 res/31snr compared to Omni III-IV specs from 1996 (51-64 res / 19-21 snr). |
|
[#19]
Quoted: Assuming specs are identical between a pair of L3 filmless and a set of Elbit thin-filmed, what other differences might one notice in performance/image/durability/lifespan/etc/etc? Sounds like the filmless no longer hold the spot as 'the only way to get high FoM tubes’ unless there’s some other spec that wasn’t discussed that would make the Elbits with films perform worse. (That’s not a direct quote or anything, just what seemed to be the common idea until hearing about these high spec filmed Elbits) Anything about just the fact that there’s a thin film in place that would hurt the image to perform worse than the spec sheet says? I’m certainly happy with my L3 tubes, but I field a lot of questions from guys at the range and this was news to me that the thin film stuff seemed to have caught up. View Quote |
|
[#20]
Quoted: Another thing to add. What are the average specs or the spec range (minimums and maximums) of these Elbit XLSH tubes? These seem to be the only Elbits that are achieving these high FOM numbers from what I've seen. Is it similar to L3 1800 series with a bottom but an unlimited top, etc. etc.? I've asked a few places and got only one response with limited info. View Quote |
|
[#21]
Can someone with access to both recent production high FOM Elbit thin-filmed and L3 filmless tubes please post pics so we can all ogle and argue over an unscientific, subjective comparison on the interwebz? Tanks!
|
|
[#22]
Quoted: XLSH has pretty crappy minimums and no maximum specs. I had previously been seeing them come in really consistent in the WP models at 2000 FOM, 2200 photocathode, and around 1.0 EBI and Halo. These were with the Harris spec sheets. Then I got the one that was 2700 FOM and started hearing about the other super spec ones. No idea if it’s a fluke or trend, but they were already pumping out decent tubes for money IMO. View Quote Can you share the minimums? |
|
[#23]
Quoted:
The term for a tube that decays 20% in the first 500 hours? "Faulty"...Or maybe just sub-standard. Not sure what might lead to that, unless you're using on full moon nights all the time with a DC PSU. That would probably do it, but it will hurt filmed and filmless equally. Well, Filmless does tend to have good autogating Can someone shed more light on what cj7hawk/David wrote above. I assume DC PSU means Dedicated power supply unit and does that mean hardwired? Not sure how someone runs NV that way but it made me curious. Now I realize he was tying the use of NV while under full moons with this DC PSU, but it made me wonder if using NV in and around LED based IR security cameras can shorten the life of a tube. Example: You are inside a building that has exterior mounted LED based IR security cameras that are facing fields and woods around the building. So you are not looking directly at the LED based illuminators, just at what they covering. So will using NV every night under these circumstances lessen the life of a tube? Thanks View Quote I wouldn't worry about the lights. That's nowhere near the same overall light entering the tube compared to a full/bright Moon. |
|
[#24]
Quoted:
Can someone with access to both recent production high FOM Elbit thin-filmed and L3 filmless tubes please post pics so we can all ogle and argue over an unscientific, subjective comparison on the interwebz? Tanks! View Quote Attached File |
|
[#25]
|
|
[#27]
|
|
[#29]
Quoted:
Can someone with access to both recent production high FOM Elbit thin-filmed and L3 filmless tubes please post pics so we can all ogle and argue over an unscientific, subjective comparison on the interwebz? Tanks! View Quote Edit - I don’t think my sarcasm was clear enough |
|
[#30]
|
|
[#31]
I have the 720nm IR cut off lenses on all nine of mine, so no problems whatsoever.
In fact, the image quality actually went up 20% during the first 500 hrs from not having any non-IR photons hitting the gallium arsenide. |
|
[#32]
|
|
[#33]
I didn't even know this was a thing I just use the stuff and don't worry about numbers so much. I've seen 27-2800 fom tubes, rarely look through anything under 2k fom and even still can't tell a difference.
I think unless you have both at the same time to compare with, you probably won't be able to see much of a difference either. |
|
[#34]
Quoted:
https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/92237/HarrisBNVD-1226983.jpg Harris/Elbit WP HP+ tube in a BNVD Single gain. SN 32 https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/92237/l3UL-1226982.jpg L3 filmless in an Ultralight BNVD Single gain SN 35 Same night, middle of the woods, 20 or so miles from nearest city. Nearest street light/telephone pole close to a 1/2 mile away. Time- about a minute apart, just long enough to transfer the cheap little Iphone adapter from one unit to the next. View Quote |
|
[#35]
Quoted:
Awesome comparison pics Robert, how common are the spec you listed for the Harris/Elbit tubes is your company getting in? View Quote |
|
[#36]
Quoted: We just audited some data sheets for White and Green phosphor. I'm trying to catch up with this big stack of them by my desk. I post them on my EE listing for the PVS14. That always helps give a little idea of current specs of actual units that are shipping. View Quote ETA: @Lowdown3 Actually, after checking the WHP specs on NVD’s site, it looks like the spot spec allows more spots than the HP+ but as we found out on a different thread, NVD may not have updated their website. Is the WHP spot spec the same as the HP+? |
|
[#37]
Quoted: Was just checking the specs out on the WHPs and they’re hitting the same higher specs. Some nice #’s for sure. I’d prefer the WHP over the XLSH due to the better spot specs. ETA: @Lowdown3 Actually, after checking the WHP specs on NVD’s site, it looks like the spot spec allows more spots than the HP+ but as we found out on a different thread, NVD may not have updated their website. Is the WHP spot spec the same as the HP+? View Quote |
|
[#38]
Quoted: It shows as slightly different between the HP green and white. I'll see if I can get an official statement on that. The WP HP+ I've seen I would say have damn near same spot spec. I'll try to get some pics of a current unit and post them. View Quote Per website HP+ Zone 1 0 spots Zone 2 0 spots Zone 3 1x .006-.009 and 2x .003-.006 WHP Zone 1 0 spots Zone 2 1x .006-.009 and 2x .003-.006 Zone 3 1x .006-.009 and 2x .003-.006 |
|
[#39]
Quoted:
The term for a tube that decays 20% in the first 500 hours? "Faulty"...Or maybe just sub-standard. Not sure what might lead to that, unless you're using on full moon nights all the time with a DC PSU. That would probably do it, but it will hurt filmed and filmless equally. Well, Filmless does tend to have good autogating Can someone shed more light on what cj7hawk/David wrote above. I assume DC PSU means Dedicated power supply unit and does that mean hardwired? Not sure how someone runs NV that way but it made me curious. Now I realize he was tying the use of NV while under full moons with this DC PSU, but it made me wonder if using NV in and around LED based IR security cameras can shorten the life of a tube. Example: You are inside a building that has exterior mounted LED based IR security cameras that are facing fields and woods around the building. So you are not looking directly at the LED based illuminators, just at what they covering. So will using NV every night under these circumstances lessen the life of a tube? Thanks View Quote Tube life is based on estimated usage, not real hours. So there's a model where they assume X number of hours of use in starlight, and Y number of hours in moonlight, and that's how they arrive at lifespan. Or at least they used to. Now they run tubes on-spec and they replace them when they get really crappy and they measure lifespan as accelerated wear and check to make sure the tubes don't drop specification too quicky. The PVS-14 tube ( MX11769 ) current spec tries to do something like this in around 1500 hours... So about 8 hours continuous usage every night for 6 month's worth... And if tubes drop below S/N of 21, they are considered as failed, so a tube would have to be a major failure to drop that much and still meet the spec. And during those 1500 test hours, they give around 5FC of light for 3 seconds every 11 minutes, and the rest of the time it's around starlight levels, eg, 0.00001 FC, so it averages out a little below moonlight levels in the end I think, with some harsh switching. If we use that as a baseline, then around high intensity IR lights, you might expect that a typical PVS-14 tube would probably last around 1000 hours before degradation was very noticeable. And maybe die before 1500 hours. An Autogated tube should handle it much better, but it will still experience a degraded lifespan... Significantly. But tubes are tools. Like a beer at the bar. If you are too scared of drinking it fast for fear of it going too quickly, and nurse it all night, you're going to end up leaving the bar at the end of the night with most of your beer still in the glass... Tubes should be enjoyed like a good beer. Just keep drinking at the rate you want to drink at, and when the glass is empty, buy another PVS-14. You should also use this analogy to explain to other people why you have too many PVS-14's. David |
|
[#40]
How has no one replied after the reply by @cj7hawk ?!
You're saying regardless of film: Starlight only use = 10,000 hours approx. Heavy IR use (IR light bars, helmet illuminators, LAMs using illum/pointer (civ or full power), etc = 1,000-1,500 hours approx. Why only current MX11769 spec? You don't know the 10160 spec..or..? |
|
[#41]
Quoted:
How has no one replied after the reply by @cj7hawk ?! You're saying regardless of film: Starlight only use = 10,000 hours approx. Heavy IR use (IR light bars, helmet illuminators, LAMs using illum/pointer (civ or full power), etc = 1,000-1,500 hours approx. Why only current MX11769 spec? You don't know the 10160 spec..or..? View Quote Given that they had to drop from 2500 hours lifespan to 1500 hours lifespan under accelerated ( high light ) testing, from Omni VII to Omni VIII, that kind of tells you something right there about yields. It's not really that surprising. Most of the experience on the board would be familiar with this. And it's not "Starlight" only, it's a predermined mix of starlight and moonlight - ie, Typical Use. They even used to have charts and tables for that kind of stuff back in the Gen2 era, when lifetimes were only around 2000 hours for typical use and aviation was a primary use consideration. Light causes photo-electron emissions, which leads to positive ion generation in proportion to electrons ( and electron energy ) and this results in photocathode poisoning, which is mostly what determines tube life... So it makes a lot of sense when you consider it that way. It's rare I get right into Milspecs and the quirks around them, because even 7500 hours under Omni VIII is a very long time. I doubt many civilians are going to hit it, but yeah, if you do a lot of work around high intensity IR sources, especially if you're seeing things like fixed-pattern noise all the time, then your tube life is going to be a lot shorter... But even if we think 1000 hours, at $3500 per system, and let's say $2500 of that is tube cost, well that's just $2.50 an hour... How many rounds of ammunition is that? How many bottles of water? How much petrol and oil for the engines that drive the vehicles with all those lights? Night vision is still cheap and is still your best bang for your buck.... :) And if anyone seriously manages to put 1000 hours in high-intensity IR light situations under NODS in less than 5 years, you have my respect. For all practical purposes, 10,000 hours is still used as a typical example... Some tubes still even specify 15,000 hours. So depending on what you buy and who you buy from, and whether it's Milspec or otherwise, you might get different results. But generally I take tube lifetimes with a grain of salt, no matter where they come from. It's only ever nominal. And lasers? No big deal. As long as they don't cause PC damage, they aren't usually a problem with respect to lifespan, because the total light increase is small. Helmet lights might, but generally aren't too bright for tactical reasons. Torch use is usually intermittent due to IR discipline and if you get better use from your nod from some accelerated wear, it's no biggie. Vehicle lights? Building lights? Yeah, that stuff can cause issues. It's just bright all the time. If you're encountering that stuff a lot, I'd definitely get a good autogating tube. But even then, the Milspec accelerated testing should be taking that into consideration since it also tests other failure modes, such as the PSU and PC damage. And I reckon it would be well possible to go past the accelerated wear curve if you constantly used your NOD in high-light situations. David. |
|
[#42]
Just to add quickly, Under Omni IX, the lifespan is back to 12,500 typical, 2,500 accelerated once again*...
*. Not ratified yet... |
|
[#43]
Quoted:
Just to add quickly, Under Omni IX, the lifespan is back to 12,500 typical, 2,500 accelerated once again*... *. Not ratified yet... View Quote 1600 to 2376 FOM is a huge jump. Glad to see the US military is getting the quality they deserve. Ever since I got my 2440+ filmless WP tubes I’ve been a broken record about how much better these kind of high specs are. Once this becomes standard it’ll be pretty cool to see what will become the “new” high specs you might come across. I love it! Pretty good for “old” analog technology that’s soon to be replaced by digital, lol |
|
[#44]
Take away: If someone gets a decent Gen 3 option (from Harris or L3), the the performance and longevity of both filmless and thin filmed units is negligible. Is this an accurate assessment?
|
|
[#45]
Quoted: 1600 to 2376 FOM is a huge jump. Glad to see the US military is getting the quality they deserve. Ever since I got my 2440+ filmless WP tubes I’ve been a broken record about how much better these kind of high specs are. View Quote |
|
[#46]
|
|
[#47]
|
|
[#48]
Quoted: Because this is the internet and I can say whatever I want and add someone’s official name and contact info at the bottom too. Not suggesting that’s what happened at all, in fact I’m willing to bet that’s as close to an official statement from L3 on the matter as I’ll get. I’ve seen first hand, in this forum, misinformation originate from TNVC staff. Whatever, mistakes happen. There’s also a far cry from deliberately lying to customers to make a sale and not always being right, but both are misinformation regardless of intent. So I take the “Trust but verify” approach to everyone now. View Quote |
|
[#49]
|
|
[#50]
Quoted:
Here is some facts to close this anti L3 sales thread. Fact, I said to everyone when this thread came NSFJojo would be in here. Fact, the vendor in question does not offer L3 tubes any longer, they've been cut off for monies owed Fact, another dealer (we won't mention names) continues to tell every customer not to purchase L3 tubes for this reason that they fail early and easily. Several of us at Shot Show fielded question after question of false claims. This does not include the repeated phone calls from our customer base stated the same dealer claims. Fact, we train here for a living and have what I call some of the best NV trainers in the world from the special operations community whom have more time under NODS than 95% of us along with more than 500hrs under L3 unfilmed tubes. Fact, each one of my trainers, (including other staff) have more than 500hrs on their L3 unfilmed and not a single set of dozens of tubes including rental sets have ever shown any type of degradation claimed from this company along with a certain dealer. Fact, (and in closing) these claims are and continue to this day (I personally fielded a call yesterday for a13K L3 unfilmed goggle order) and the customer also contacted the said dealer who stated he needed to go with a Harris/Elbit system as he and his friend would be seeing "substantial performance issues with the L3 unfilmed tubes as they use them". Fact, these false claims are for ONE reason, and one reason only, and that is to sell Elbit tubes to the majority as these said companies portfolio's make up 90 to 100% of these tubes. I have instructed my staff not to comment any further in this motive driven thread that has started for the motives I laid out. We said our peace and our customers love their best of the best L3 unfilmed tubes and so does our men and women in uniform whom have never experienced a 20% tube degradation after 500 hours. And yes we sell Elbit tubes and lots of them as well. They are good tubes as well but do not perform like L3 unfilmed tubes, which are the best of the best. Edit, to add one point. Yes we are a direct distributor for both L3 and Elbit, we do not deal with a middle man for tubes and build everything in-house for some who may not know this. -out- View Quote Can you publish the results for us? What were your testing parameters? What was your control? Please, educate an ignorant plebe. In fact you should probably offer that service. Tell customers how much their tube has degraded and by how much! I’ll send my L3 unfilmed tube in first! |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
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.