Featured
Latest
Share:
Notifications
Clear all

Forum 135

Philips tx

21 Posts
4 Users
0 Reactions
2,304 Views
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

Are the Philips tx FST range sutable doners for a replacement tube for my broken mullard in my Ferguson 51A2
David

 
Posted : 28/05/2013 11:24 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Hi Ferg,

As I recall the Philips 'TX' range was a B&W TV series, so I wonder if you are confusing chassis/models ?

The smaller FST Philips such as the late model 51 cm 2A (FST version) and the 51cm CP90 may well fit in the Fergy 51A2, but as we have said on here many times the Thorn TX100 chassis used quite a variety of Crt's and with that in mind I probably wouldn't consider buying another set on the off chance it may fit.

It would only really be viable if you knew for definite the donor sets tube was an exact match.
At one time I used to know what could be fitted to what, but it is now sadly all forgotten.

Good luck! :thumbl:

 
Posted : 29/05/2013 12:17 am
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

it was easyer with the tx 10 tat used the 30AX type tube
the tx 100 used i think 45AX in large screen models and other tube types with bonded coils for the smaller ones if you set dose use 30AX or 45AX tube then they are quite common if you have got the philips set look at the scan coils if they are the same and the tube is the same size you are on a winner
rob t

 
Posted : 29/05/2013 1:07 am
Doz
 Doz
(@doz)
Posts: 1535
Prominent Member Registered
 

Would any of this lot be of any use?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/5-TV-job-lot- ... 1115829892

No relation to the seller... was just browsing. Always suspicious when stuff is pre-wrapped like that. There was a scam round these parts a few years back whereby unscrupulous individuals would sell these sets, at usually too good to be prices, from the back of a white van. The same sets would walk through the door the following day, with wrong chassis in, or worse still just a CRT and an aerial socket...

... but if all you're after is a tube ...

 
Posted : 29/05/2013 8:23 pm
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

Would any of this lot be of any use?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/5-TV-job-lot- ... 1115829892

No relation to the seller... was just browsing. Always suspicious when stuff is pre-wrapped like that. There was a scam round these parts a few years back whereby unscrupulous individuals would sell these sets, at usually too good to be prices, from the back of a white van. The same sets would walk through the door the following day, with wrong chassis in, or worse still just a CRT and an aerial socket...

... but if all you're after is a tube ...

:wink: Thanks but ill be weary just in case.ive ask for pics and more deatails

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 1:05 am
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Out of that lot of five,

The 2 Philips are 110 degree models 24" with A59 glass, the 24CE3271 being a CP110 chassis, the 24CE3558 may be a typo as this model is not listed in any of my data and may in fact be a 24CE3588 which is also a CP110 chassis.

The Ferguson's are as follows: A51N is an ICC7 (not sure if this has a 90 or 110 degree 51cm tube*), the 51K3 being a TX99 with a 90 degree tube, and of course the 51H3 is a TX100 Fst with a 90 degree tube also.

*Some of the 51cm Thomson ICC ranges used a 110 degree Videocolour tube.

I hope this helps.

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 1:43 am
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

(.( forgive my ignorance but what is the chassis angle on my 51A2

David

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 4:33 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

(.( forgive my ignorance but what is the chassis angle on my 51A2

David

90 degree, :thumbl:
all of the smaller 20" or 51cm TX100's were 90 degree tubes, the 51 XX models being FST, the 20 XX models being non-FST, confusingly perhaps the actual tube numbers for this size all start as A51 XXX X.

The tube numbers are the actual dimensions measured diagonally corner to corner and given in cm, eg. a A56 540X is a 22" tube and is a 110 degree non-FST, the A66 version of this tube is a 26" version.

In general (in this context) any tube 22" and over is a 110 degree, 20" and below is usually 90 degree, this is the deflection angle, one exception was some of the 21" or 51 cm tubes used in some of the Thomson/Ferguson ICC ranges used a 110 degree tube at this small size.

Other makes such as B&O also used a small (51cm) 110 degree tube in some models, as this gave the advantages of the so-called slimline models.

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 4:55 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Just to add to the above post^^

Thorn, in general, and up to a point, (where the TX100 is concerned, and about this timeframe) used imperial model numbers for non-FST tubes, given in inches, eg. 22A2, this used a 56cm tube (non-FST) and was a 22" model with the 'A' being the cabinet styling, the '2' being the 'feature list', in this case 2 meaning remote control non-text, 3 for text sets, 1 for manual or non remote, and 4 (sometimes 5) being stereo text.

So a 51A3 model was classed as a FST 21" model with text, a 20A3 being non-FST 20" model also text, using the same cabinet styling as the FST model given previously.

Part of the anomaly given the sizing ie. the non-FST being a 20" model and the FST being classed as a 21" inch model was partly down to marketing reasons, and partly due to the change (with FST) to measuring the actual visible viewing area, both models used an A51 XXX X tube, obviously one was FST and one not.

As always with Thorn there are exceptions to this general rule, and the model numbers don't always match this general rule.
This numbering scheme was mainly used on the Ferguson models, the Radio Rentals, Baird branded models used different numbering schemes, and all used differing numbering schemes at different times depending on the timeframe.

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 5:30 pm
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

(.( Thanks :???: Ill go and have a lie down abd then have a retake on all those variants :lol:

David

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 6:41 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Another slight clue to the deflection angle used on the TX range is the chassis designation number, which holds good up until the advent of the TX100.

The TX9, TX90, TX98 and TX99 all used 90 degree tubes, the 9 in the TX number being the clue, this follows the TX10 being a 110 degree chassis, this then all changed with the TX100, as Thorn introduced this chassis as being a 'universal' chassis which was designed from the outset as being capable of driving both 90 and 110 degree tubes 20" upwards.
This chassis was later modified in production to accept the various FST versions in all sizes of the tubes.

Thorn did some strange things in that the TX90 logically followed on from the TX9 for the portables and up to 20" sets, and then went into reverse producing first the TX85 (14D1, 14D2 14J1 and 14J2) then the TX86 (14L1, 14L2 and 14M1) and finally the TX 89 (14M2 and 36K2)chassis for the portables, while also going into reverse for the 20" models first with some overlap with the TX100 (20XX and 51XX) models, followed by the TX99 (51J7, 51J8 ,51K2 and 51K3) and lastly the TX98 (51P7) chassis for the basic 20 inch models, with a couple of portable versions of the TX99 (41H2 and 41H3) and TX98 (36K3) thrown in just to confuse things even more!
Some of the production of all of these various chassis and models overlapped to an extent.

At about this time the Thomson takeover started, and there was a few portables and 20" models using the IKC2 chassis (41P3 and A51F respectively), and confusingly Thomson also introduced a TX90 chassis, this Thomson designed TX90 was designated by us as a TX90E to stop us being confused with the earlier and very different Thorn set.
This latter 20" version of the TX90E (B49F) did not use an FST tube and used a A49 XX X tube!
Even more confusing was the Thomson A51 models, the A51F used a IKC2 chassis, Whilst the A51N used a ICC7 chassis!

Things became even more confusing later with the various versions of the TX92, and TX91 Thomson chassis, the various versions which could drive tube sizes from 14" up to 33" in both 90 and 110 degree tubes.
Also followed by the various ICC models and TX805 and TX807 chassis!, all bets were off at this point. ;)
:~

I think I need a lie down now! lol ::::)

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 7:50 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Another point to bear in mind with the rather confusing post above, although the metrication of the model numbers with the TX100 coincided with the introduction of FST tubes (which does hold good up to a point), is there were more than likely other reasons for this further down the line too.

One possible reason was probably political, as Thorn was being at the point taken over by French owned Thomson, and also traditional imperial measures were probably being phased out too, TBH I cannot recall if this was the case at the time, but it surely would have been the case sooner or later in any event, maybe Thorn decided that the introduction of the FST tubes was a good point at which to make the change ?, who knows ?

Another thing while looking through the model/chassis lists for the earlier post I noticed the 'metric' TX100 FST models go from 51 models to 59 and 66 model series with no metric model number equivalent for the 22" models, ie. no 56 model series.
There is of course imperial 22 model numbers (22A2 for example), does anyone know if that range was discontinued when the changes were made ?

It would sort of make sense having 51, 59 and 66 ranges being roughly 21" 24" and 26" models respectively, where as in the non-FST range we had 20" 22" and 26" ranges, but to be honest I cannot recall seeing an FST version of the 22", I wonder if this range was replaced by the 24" A59 series of tubes ?, this was something I had not really noticed before.

Another point to note was after the TX100 production had ceased (and presumably by then under Thomson influence), the metric model numbers did not always point to exclusively FST tubes, the B49 version of the TX90E being one case in point, this was not really a 20" set but was just called that 'colloquially' by us it was really approximately a 19" model.

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 9:27 pm
malcscott
(@malcscott)
Posts: 1580
Prominent Member Registered
 

Out of all of the Thomson crap i liked the ICC6 the best. Cool running set with few problems. The Videocolour 90deg crt lasted well. The IKC2 being about the worst. I remember Mastercare workshop had these Thomson sets stacked like army blankets awaiting a brave engineer to come forward!! :O

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 9:36 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Ha Malc!

I did not mind the IKC2 at all, it was a cross between the ICC5 and ICC7, my least liked Thomson chassis from this era was the IDC2 (apart from the bloody FV30 series of VCR PSU's :| ), it used the ITT digi chipset (surface mount) with typical weird Thomson circuitry and very poor access, the worst possible combinations of the two worlds 8))

I repaired a large number of all of the ICC series, more of the ICC5, ICC7/8 and ICC9's than any others, but quite a few ICC17/ICC19 and ICC20's as well.

I did not see that many ICC6's now you come to mention it! :thumbl:

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 9:53 pm
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

I still have a 22G2 :grin: which was bought by my Aujust prior to us getting the new 51A3

 
Posted : 30/05/2013 10:31 pm
malcscott
(@malcscott)
Posts: 1580
Prominent Member Registered
 

Dixons/Currys must have bought a huge number of the ICC6 chassis. Most problems we had were the (Eldor) LOPTX. The ICC5 would have been a much better set if more thought had gone into the E/W circuit, Malc.

 
Posted : 31/05/2013 12:24 am
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Hi Malc,

The IKC2, I had most problems with the lopt (flashover/arcing) usually damaging the two protection transistors and/or the op-amp associated with the thyristor(similar to the ICC5) frame output stage leading to odd tripping faults, of course the Psu could also a PITA on that chassis too, especially if it had blown up! requiring a large amount of silicon replacement.
This chassis was a 'crossover design' being a mix of ICC5 and ICC7 technologies, with possibly the worst bit's of both, and being a sort of stop gap inbetween the two. ;)

The ICC17 also had reliability issues with the lopt, and this more often than not took with it the surface mount 'jungle chip' as it damaged the EW parabola output from this chip.

The ICC5, as you say most faults initially were with the EW stage, also DJ's in the lopt and PSU (including the heat sinks as these were earth returns) area caused more than there fair share of problems early on, later dry joints literally everywhere, the ICC5 must have had a fairly long production run.
I thought they were fairly reliable overall, it was just I saw a huge amount of these as we were about the only ones buying them in quantity ex-rental (virtually nobody else would buy them!), and then most other shops tended to knock the repairs back on these sets (so a lot of these came to me that way), I found them ok to be honest, they were certainly an acquired taste however, and not many engineers liked them (unfairly IMO).
I got to know this chassis very well with all it's quirks and foiliables, you really needed to know how this set worked to be able to fault find it properly.
Of course as these sets aged the possibilities of faulty component (and faults list) grew almost exponentially as the 'weirdies' and one off failures started to creep in.
The French built IMC versions probably being the most complex and difficult to access of this chassis type.
I think this chassis was probably disliked due to it being one of the first to use of SM components, and also the way it worked was a bit strange, it probably came as a culture shock at the time (although far worse was to follow)

The ICC 7/8, I also got to know fairly well, you could get some strange faults on these too, although the circuitry was far more normal and conventional than most of the other ICC chassis apart from maybe the ICC17 which was also mostly normal apart from certain aspects of the Psu.

The ICC9 was IMO the least reliable of the lot, I wonder if Thomson had a dodgy batch of SM transistors, as I had just about every single one fail at some point or other, these read ok when faulty, and could give some seriously mind blowing perplexing faults, fault finding could be extremely difficult on this chassis, I found this chassis much harder work to fix than just about all of the other ICC's combined ! even with the excellent technical documentation I obtained from Thomson Tech., which believe it or not had the symbol for a bomb (complete with fizzing fuse! I kid you not!) associated with a pin of the jungle chip, warning that if you should attempt to measure this pin whilst the set was running you would completely wreck the Psu and Line stage. this sort of tells you all you needed to know about this chassis! :O .
One of the quirks with this chassis was that you set the HT line (U sys) Voltage in software via the service mode !, not one of Thomson's better ideas I think.

The ICC10/11, I saw less than a handful of, and so have no real comment on.

The ICC 19, again I saw little of these sets, and most were stock type faults and reasonably easy to fix.

The ICC20/21 and the very similar ETC210 chassis, was probably the most complex of the lot, but fortunately most faults being confined to the combined line and power board, with the technical documentation from Thomson it was possible to repair most of them, you could get some strange shutdown symptoms from this chassis, and this was far harder to pin down than the ICC5.
This chassis had a fair amount of software used with it, probably more than any other ICC chassis, but probably not more than the earlier IDC2 chassis.

And now on to my least favourite chassis, the dreaded IDC2, this had two densely populated 'Digi daughter boards' with the SM ITT chipset on, and the pro-logic version was even more complex, this chassis suffered the same SM transistor problems to a similar extent as the ICC9, but access to components was far worse for fault finding purposes, and without extension leads (which I didn't have) the two Digi boards are all but impossible to access with the set running, this leads to 'guessing games' and or block component replacement, added in the dry joints problems (double sided print with plated through holes on the two Digi boards), and intermittent faults, and typically weird circuits and a miserable time was spent on these sets.
As I said, the worst of both worlds ! ITT Digi hell mixed with typically complex Thomson circuitry.
Fortunately this was a chassis that was not very prevalent (and fairly short-lived), and I saw very few of these (but enough!).

The ICC6 was a fairly late arrival, and apart from the odd tuner/IF problems, no sound, dropping a gun and as you say lopt, I never saw a large amount of these sets, but probably more than the ICC10/11 and 19's as well as the IDC2's put together, but not more than the ICC5/7/8/9/17/20 and 21's individually.

I saw a fair few of the later Thomson TX's too mainly the TX92 usually lopt failure with the burnt resistors and on-off switches (that piddly little one!), not so much of the other TX's the TX91, TX805,and 807, I saw comparatively few of these compared to the TX92.

Another chassis I wasn't particularly keen on was the Thomson TX90E, this was also not the most reliable chassis, and access was fairly difficult with a large amount of components wedged in a small space made fault finding difficult.

A right old trip down memory lane there. :O

 
Posted : 31/05/2013 2:10 am
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

The feruson 51H3 has a ferguson crt made in japam AXM53-001 8)) Dont think is will do as a replacement for the Mullard in the 51A2?

David

 
Posted : 02/06/2013 11:38 pm
Red_to_Black
(@red_to_black)
Posts: 1748
Prominent Member Banned
 

Hi Ferg,

I found a partial parts list for the TX100 chassis (A,B and C model types), but not the later models such as the G and H series of cabinet styles, it is an earlier parts listing shown as issue 2 and is dated September 1986.

Anyway the 51A2 is listed and uses two possible tubes (there may be more types added in a later issue), which AFAIK are not interchangeable and will probably use two different tubes bases amongst other component changes.
One tube is I think made by Toshiba, the other by Mullard, going by the mounting bosses listed, unfortunately the listing does not say which tube is which but the way they are listed appears to suggest that the Toshiba Tube is first and the Mullard tube is second.

the Tubes are listed as follows:

51 cm 90 degree FST mini-neck CRT (A51JAR50X01) Thorn P/N: 00V0-764-0001

51 cm 90 degree FST CRT (A51EALZ0X0L) Thorn P/N: 00V9-771-001

Edit: A look at a later circuit diagram dated 1988, confirms that the first Tube listed is indeed by Toshiba and the second by Mullard and both use different tube bases.

 
Posted : 08/06/2013 3:41 pm
Anonymous
(@anonymous)
Posts: 16853
Group Deactivated Account
Topic starter
 

This is the one i need to replace.Neadless to say i didnt go after those on ebay as i didnt think thet were suitable for donner parts.

 
Posted : 09/06/2013 2:52 am
Page 1 / 2
Share: