its 2024 why do millitary radios still look like a giant brick?ive noted this with a lot of millitary gear it tends to be very oversized and too heavy for it's purpose.cant they fit the same electronics in a nokia 3310 form factor? that thing was already indestructible
power output needed
>>62093688im not against big size if there's a point to it im just saying people would trade ruggedness for being light/compact in a lot of cases
>>62093695whats the power level of those radios?i dont think the size helps with that a lot , maybe it has a gigantic battery that lasts a week
>>62093667Power output and required ruggedness. If your outside of the wire for 3 days you don’t want to have to lug 6 spare batteries
>>62093697PP, kys.
>>62093701It's not about the power level, but heat dissipation. Smaller components have less surface area to get rid of the waste heat created by electrical resistance. Sure, you could bolt a bunch of heatsinks onto everything that gets hot... but heatsinks add weight and they're yet another component that could come loose from vibration, impacts or elastic deformation of other parts. Right now it's just simpler and more cost efficient to make it bigger. Since heat transfer gets more efficient with higher temperature differences, if you can make your electronics that are more tolerant to high temperatures, you can scale component sizes down while retaining the same power level and resistive losses. Your main limitation is the degradation of components and electrical contacts from heat and thermal cycling.
it needs to survive 10+ years with shit maintence and neglect while also be able to function perfectly. Thus the need for it to be a foot long and built like a brick.
>>62093667Engineering skill issue and legacy parts.>>62093695>>62093703That's bullshit. All modern electronics are tiny and modern batteries very energy dense.>>62093763This is total bullshit as well. Heat sinks are THE weight efficient method of dealing with heat, your post is fundamentally flawed.>>62093793As said, engineering skill issue.
>>62093864I think you're underestimating the retard strength that a lot of people in the armed forces have.
>>62093864from what i remember from military aviation if you keep avionics looking mostly the same from generation to generation while updating them you dont have to re-test them which costs millionsmaybe military tech will look how it looks now forever because of regulations
