Londo Molari
Junior Member
I think Eurofighter also uses CRTs.
Any truth to the saying that LCDs can get screwed up at high G's?
Any truth to the saying that LCDs can get screwed up at high G's?
New J-10 thread II
- Thread starter wlchang
- Start date
- Status
Hard to say. LCDs does have some liquid inside them, and it may be affected by G forces. Another issue is that CRTs might be brighter and clearer under sunlight, and less prone to glare. But then again, LCDs save a lot of space, weight and power compared to CRTs.
This is an old (1995) article:
Early applications capitalise on the advantages of the liquid-crystal display (LCD) over the cathode-ray tube (CRT): in helicopters, lower weight; in fighters, sunlight readability; in transports, increased reliability.
Simply put, LCDs weigh 40% less, occupy 40% less space and consume 40% less power than CRTs. In military-aircraft applications, the mean time between failure (MTBF) is likely to exceed 5,000h, compared with 1,000-1,500h for a CRT. Other advantages include improved display readability in direct sunlight and the capability to present sophisticated graphics.
There are disadvantages, but these are being overcome with the rapid advance in LCD technology, driven by the market for commercial displays in applications such as lap-top computers. Colours are still not as rich as those produced by CRTs and the viewing angle remains limited. While not a problem in the confines of a fighter cockpit, cross-cockpit viewing in a transport has required the development of sophisticated optical coatings.
Space and weight in a fighter cockpit is premium, so I suppose the LCD has an edge here. But the military cannot simply replace a CRT with LCD when the CRT has been throughly tested to military specifications. The military tends to be more conservative with new technologies and would prefer something that is proven and works, versus new unproven gadgets.
Early applications capitalise on the advantages of the liquid-crystal display (LCD) over the cathode-ray tube (CRT): in helicopters, lower weight; in fighters, sunlight readability; in transports, increased reliability.
Simply put, LCDs weigh 40% less, occupy 40% less space and consume 40% less power than CRTs. In military-aircraft applications, the mean time between failure (MTBF) is likely to exceed 5,000h, compared with 1,000-1,500h for a CRT. Other advantages include improved display readability in direct sunlight and the capability to present sophisticated graphics.
There are disadvantages, but these are being overcome with the rapid advance in LCD technology, driven by the market for commercial displays in applications such as lap-top computers. Colours are still not as rich as those produced by CRTs and the viewing angle remains limited. While not a problem in the confines of a fighter cockpit, cross-cockpit viewing in a transport has required the development of sophisticated optical coatings.
Space and weight in a fighter cockpit is premium, so I suppose the LCD has an edge here. But the military cannot simply replace a CRT with LCD when the CRT has been throughly tested to military specifications. The military tends to be more conservative with new technologies and would prefer something that is proven and works, versus new unproven gadgets.
Last edited:
Thanks again ... but also here !! ... only a [x] !
I think that picture isn't compatible with my PC or with me
Cheers, Deino
PS: maybe a last attempt at the Key-forum ??? PLEASE
Deino, if you need help (ich könnte Dir das Bild ggf. als e-mail Datei schicken):china:PS: that's even more strange !!
Thanks again, Deino :china:
Quickie
Colonel
PS: that's even more strange !!
Thanks again, Deino :china:
I am facing the same things as you. I guess it has to do with the browsers' version.
- Status