That's My Boy, Steve...

... and from the other TVs in the room, you have restored quite a few. That is an impressive TV and impressive restoration story. Good work. I enjoyed following you progress and looking at the pictures, etc. I'd love to find one like yours to restore too.

Carl

Well done Lad! I can imagine the feeling of accomplishment when you watch this television. Thanks for sharing it with us, looks great.

Cripes, man! This thing has more tubes, a bigger picture, and a bigger power transformer than my 21-CT-55. And it's OLDER!

It's a beast, VERY HEAVY and would make a great space heater once all the tubes get humming. The two things it needs before I call it finished is repainting the two rusty transformer tops and get the mirrors re-silvered. This TV was (and still is!) a technological terror. I'm most impressed with how much more of a picture you see compared to a round 10" TV of the same time. Having a square picture right to the edge really makes a big difference! In fact, I can't get over how much of the picture gets cut-off on my 10 RCA 730TV1 on a Side-by-Side test with the 8PCS41 set.

Steve

Awesome job. You must be as proud as a new Papa. And how did you learn about that New Yorker cover?

A while ago, I was contacted by a guy in the Midwest who has a Scott projection set for sale. My ears pricked up until I discovered that he runs some kind of audiophool-business-slash-glorified-pawnshop. He never gave me a specific price. His parting email was a sarcastic crack about not needing any lowball offers, so I clicked Delete and that was the end of Mr. Pawn Star.

Phil Nelson

I have a friend that collects periodicals, he knew of my interest in these old sets and found the magazine cover for me.

Steve

And a shot of the 45 degree right angle flat mirror that throws the image to the Fresnel viewing lens (Note how clouded with oxidization it is, down right deplorable!) I'm surprised at how well the set is working with the mirror looking like this.



Shot from the top looking down at the picture tube optical drum. 28,000 volts be down there

With resilvered mirrors, it might rival a modern hi-def set!

If after resilvering the mirrors the picture is not quite right (certain details blurred over, looks sort of out of focus, sharp edges blurred, artifacts around sharp edges, etc.), you should consider doing a sweep alignment of the IF strip.

If you feed the green compoment out from a DVD player or cable box in to the set just past the video detector, and tweak the deflection oscilators to run at the proper frequencies. You could make it display HD video....

Just a thought.

Tom C.

If you Google "First Surface Mirror" or "Front Surface Mirror" there are a lot of suppliers of new mirrors. Can you get a front surface mirror re-silvered? Usually they do the rear surface.
Don

Yes, there are many outfits doing front surface refinishing for telescope mirrors (My other hobby). I plan to take the mirrors to one of them for refinishing.

Steve

Steve and all:

I tried a variety of new, available front surface mirrors in my Scott 6-T-11 and the brightness of the picture ranged from Dim to nota. The Original is in and works real good

There was some discussion here on the Forum of who does high reflectance mirrors a few years ago.

Maybe after you perfect your mirrors you will provide us some information?

As I am to understand re-silvering is a toxic and complicated process. The reflective material deposited is expensive to make it as close to 100% as possible.

Fortunately in the Protelgram optics used in the Scott, everything but the final mirror is in a sealed box.

In the Scott the mirror is open to being cleaned by grandma with Windex and a Brillo pad.

Rather than watching TV this 4th of July weekend, I plan to be at the Grand Canyon with a 5” Meade telescope.

Jim

Here is a frighting article concerning these sets...

Rœntgen rays, also commonly called X-rays, are produced when high-speed electrons strike metal surfaces. The only possible X-ray sources I know of offhand that an electronics restorer would encounter are old projection televisions and certain vintage colour televisions. Televisions that produced X-rays during operation will be clearly marked with multiple warning labels on the device itself (like the international ionizing-ray symbol), in addition to detailed cautionary notices in the service literature. There is no need for alarm, however, if you find such a television, as the manufacturer should have incorporated all necessary radiation shielding precautions into the design of the set. I don't know what the laws are for other countries, but I know consumer electronic equipment had to meet certain X-ray emissions limits to be sold in the US even as far back as the mid-forties. The danger comes only in the servicing. When servicing projection or colour televisions, always refer to the service literature, as it will delineate any special precautions that should be taken. As a general rule, all metal shields present in televisions are there for a reason and the television should never be operated with any removed!

Big Projection Television

To satiate the curious who might attempt such an idiotic stunt, I came across a posting in an antique television forum by a fellow who (doubting the seriousness of such radiation notices) wanted to determine "just how radiation [his vintage tube-type projection television] makes." From the fellow's descriptions, his television was apparently one of the big projection-CRT models once used in theaters like the one shown to the left. Don't ask me where he came across such a remarkable find—I haven't a clue! These projection televisions use a small but extremely bright CRT in an efficient Schmitt reflective optical system, which use a curved mirror to enlarge and focus the image. The high brightness is obtained by using very high anode voltages, which can be as much as 100 kV for projection-televisions using the 7WP4 picture tube, providing enough brightness for a 15×20 ft picture. Picture tubes like the 7WP4 use a unique ribbed envelope design, like that of HV transmission line insulators, to handle such extremely high voltages.

Geiger Counter

He whipped out his trusty Geiger-Müller counter and removed all the radiation shields from the HV section, then powered the television up. Holding the GM tube (Yes, in his hand!) one meter from the region that had been shielded, he said he measured three Rœntgens per hour with the television up and running! With the shields in place, radiation was not measurably above background levels. Duh, those shields are not there just for looks! I sent a copy of the posting to my father, an EE at Oconee Nuclear Site (which generates 40% of the electricity used by South Carolina and neighboring states). He was really shocked by the article, remarking, "Yow, three rem per hour, was he insane?!" To get an idea of what 3 R/hr means, in the nuclear power industry they have the following radiation classifications:

Anything 5 mR/hr above background levels is considered a "radiation area," and dosimeters must be worn. ("Dosimeters" measure a person's radiation "dose" and will generate an audible alarm if levels are too high.)
0.1 R/hr to 1. R/hr above background is a "controlled radiation zone" to which access is restricted. Protective clothing and gear must be worn at all times.
>1 R/hr to 100 R/hr is an "extreme radiation hazard" (also simply called "locked") of the sort that have in a designated, shielded enclosure with triple-redundant guards, shields, barricades, and massive failsafe locks which no one (except robots) is allowed to enter.
>100 R/hr is "grave," for obvious reasons. Even robots cannot survive radiation levels this high without shielding to protect them.

For comparison, in order to be licensed by the NRC to operate, nuclear power plants cannot emit more than 5 millirœntgens per year (0.00000057 R/hr), one-twentieth of the background levels, and several orders of magnitude less than that produced by bricks, granite, and living things (which contain carbon-13 and potassium-40)! Workers operating inside a nuclear plant may never be exposed to a "total body dose" of more than 5 Rœntgens per year under any circumstance (many plants, adopt even lower figures than that, for instance Oconee Nuclear Site uses 2 R/yr).

Noting I usually post the X-Ray warning when talking about projection sets:

X-Ray radiation is considered non-ionizing radiation and falls into the radio wave spectrum where as atomic particles are considered Ionizing radiation.

The theory goes “waves and particles are all the same” however.

This said, I wouldn't think a Geiger counter would see x-Rays or be any kind of valid test for X-Ray leakage from a TV.

They make testers for Microwave Ovens which may be able to detect X-Ray radiation.

I have a Scintillation Counter I keep operational and I will see if I pick up anything near my projection set.

I have the service manuals for the Protelgram projection system used if a few of the late 40’s projection TV’s and it warns about X-Ray dangers.

When the High Voltage gets up to 25,000 volts soft X-Ray’s are created usually where electrons impinge on an anode such as the high voltage rectifier or 6BK4 regulator in a color set. The CRT is too well shielded with the internal shadow mask and is not usually a risk.

In the projection set the likely X-Ray sources are well away from the viewing public, but when the thing is apart on the bench be careful.

I am a child of the shoe store fluoroscope era and still walk quite well

Jim

This morning I fired up my Scott 6T-11 projection set for morning news and turned on my old trusty Scintillation counter.

With the counter as near as I could get it to the high voltage supply and the CRT optical box I got nothing higher than the background count.

When I sat the counter down about four feet from where I keep a couple of known radioactive tubes of the 1940’s it pegged the meter.

I thought since a Scintillation counter uses a fluorescent crystal in front of a photo multiplier tube, X-Rays could fluoresce the crystal like the screen of a Fluoroscope.

This counter is all contained within a semi-sealed aluminum cabinet.

I don’t have a Geiger – Mueller counter but they are substantially less sensitive than a Scintillation counter.

Jim

Wow. All I can say is, wow. What a beautiful job, and what a great restoration story.

About 25 years ago, a friend of mine bought a house near mine, and in his garage was a 648PTK - looks like the same as your unit plus a 3-band radio. He didn't want it, so we put it on a cart and towed it to my house. Other than missing tubes, it seems to be complete, and although the cabinet is missing a 4-5" square of veneer, it's not too bad. The rolling doors are of particular interest. The radio faceplate is dented, though.

I've moved 3 times since than and it's been in my living rooms wherever I go. I have always dreamed of restoring it and doing what you've done to your set. However, after reading your account I now know I don't have the knowledge or even test equipment to take this on. I guess I'll see if there's any interest at Radiofest. *If* I can get some help moving it!

This is NOT my set, but it's in similar condition.

Keith

What are you hoping to get for it? I might be interested, please post some pictures it looks like a wonderful set. PM sent.

Steve

Steve, I'll take some pictures tonight when I get home and post them here. PM received and I'll wait til you see the pictures.