On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 3:08 AM, Fritz Mueller <fri...@fritzm.org> wrote: >>> Thanks for the info! I can check the bottom of a VT52 to see what's >>> there at those dimensions - feet or any corner/edge features. Anyone >>> have a photo handy of the bottom of a VT52? With a scale ruler? I >>> can take one but it'll be a week or two until I'm in the right place. >> >> Pic of bottom of VT52 w/ ruler: >> >> https://drive.google.com/a/fritzm.org/file/d/0Bx_zOIQ4Z79ZbVBHa1dYSTlmQzA/view?usp=sharing >> >> <https://drive.google.com/a/fritzm.org/file/d/0Bx_zOIQ4Z79ZbVBHa1dYSTlmQzA/view?usp=sharing> > > As I recall, the VT52 stand is smaller than you'd expect because the pan > holds only the main body of the display: the four feet (two at the back and > two near the back edge of that mesh panel) drop into the pan at its four > corners. The keyboard section of the VT5x simply extends forward from the > stand pan.
That makes sense. I was looking at the pan size and it was several inches longer than the footprint of the 4 feet on the bottom of the terminal (13 3/4" for the VT52 and 22 7/8" for the pan) , and then there was Paul Birkel's comment that the footprint of his VT52 was wider than that pan. Checking the external dimensions of a VT100, the terminal is 18" wide by ~14" deep, and the keyboard is 18" wide and 8" deep. Adjusting for a small setback for the feet, a 17"x22" pan seems like it would have no problems accepting a VT100 and keyboard with not much margin. > On the other hand, a VT100 needs a large pan because the keyboard is a > separate part, and it too sits on the stand. So I suspect the stand shown by > BM is a VT100 stand, not a VT52 stand. I have seen neither so I can't provide any historical experience to tell them apart, but the dimensions seem to bear that out. A nice stand, and if I found one close, I'd use it, but not specifically a VT52 stand. -ethan
