Were any external disk drives stacked vertically?Where can I find an external 8-inch floppy disk drive?Only “Drive A:” detected with two floppy disk drivesWhy did the Atari 8-bit computers make beeping noises while accessing the disk and cassette drives?Why were floppy drives not any faster?Disk drive long storage, with or without disk inside?Were external floppy drives for Atari ST and Amiga inter-compatible?Why do hard drives not use larger platter sizes anymore?What is the danger involved in trying to write already closed file with Commodore 1541 disk drive?Purpose of two disk drives on the Osborne 1Wider tower cases

Took a trip to a parallel universe, need help deciphering

Why is Collection not simply treated as Collection<?>

Why does Arabsat 6A need a Falcon Heavy to launch

Emailing HOD to enhance faculty application

How to show the equivalence between the regularized regression and their constraint formulas using KKT

How do conventional missiles fly?

In a Spin are Both Wings Stalled?

What mechanic is there to disable a threat instead of killing it?

Can one be a co-translator of a book, if he does not know the language that the book is translated into?

How do I write bicross product symbols in latex?

intersection of two sorted vectors in C++

What's the difference between 'rename' and 'mv'?

How to take photos in burst mode, without vibration?

What reasons are there for a Capitalist to oppose a 100% inheritance tax?

How badly should I try to prevent a user from XSSing themselves?

What is going on with Captain Marvel's blood colour?

Where does SFDX store details about scratch orgs?

How much of data wrangling is a data scientist's job?

Twin primes whose sum is a cube

How can I make my BBEG immortal short of making them a Lich or Vampire?

AES: Why is it a good practice to use only the first 16bytes of a hash for encryption?

Were any external disk drives stacked vertically?

A reference to a well-known characterization of scattered compact spaces

If human space travel is limited by the G force vulnerability, is there a way to counter G forces?



Were any external disk drives stacked vertically?


Where can I find an external 8-inch floppy disk drive?Only “Drive A:” detected with two floppy disk drivesWhy did the Atari 8-bit computers make beeping noises while accessing the disk and cassette drives?Why were floppy drives not any faster?Disk drive long storage, with or without disk inside?Were external floppy drives for Atari ST and Amiga inter-compatible?Why do hard drives not use larger platter sizes anymore?What is the danger involved in trying to write already closed file with Commodore 1541 disk drive?Purpose of two disk drives on the Osborne 1Wider tower cases













4















There was a time when floppy disk drives were big, expensive devices that in many cases, instead of being components of a computer, would be separate machines connected by a cable, in some cases with their own CPU. A well-known example was the Commodore 1541, which had a similar CPU to the Commodore 64.



I personally only ever had one external drive, but when you look at photographs of setups with two drives (very desirable if you could afford it), they are always side-by-side, taking up an awful lot of desk space. Even the CBM 4040 dual drive, places the drives side-by-side in a single very wide case.



It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall, the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically. Maybe this would result in each drive picking up heat and vibration from the other one, but if this was tolerable when they were stacked vertically in a PC tower case, why not for external drives?



Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically? If not, why not?










share|improve this question

















  • 1





    Since there is no reason to prefer any orientation, this question asks for opinions about design, thus not realy OT at all.

    – Raffzahn
    7 hours ago






  • 2





    @Raffzahn and here we agree ;) Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down...

    – tofro
    6 hours ago












  • @Raffzahn I asked whether external disk drives were in fact ever stacked vertically (historical fact), and if not, why not - the intent of that part was whether there was some technical reason why not. As it turns out, the answer is yes, there were lots of vertically stacked disk drives, so it resolves to a matter of historical fact, not opinion at all.

    – rwallace
    6 hours ago











  • @rwallace The fault in your argumentation is assuming that an external case is anything but a case - no difference here, thus no base to differentiate. A case is a case is a case.

    – Raffzahn
    5 hours ago







  • 1





    @tofro, "Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down" - And here, I will disagree, as upside-down is certainly a valid orientation for floppies. In fact, back in the day, I cut notches into quite a number of floppies so I could put them in upside-down and double my storage capacity.

    – Glen Yates
    2 hours ago















4















There was a time when floppy disk drives were big, expensive devices that in many cases, instead of being components of a computer, would be separate machines connected by a cable, in some cases with their own CPU. A well-known example was the Commodore 1541, which had a similar CPU to the Commodore 64.



I personally only ever had one external drive, but when you look at photographs of setups with two drives (very desirable if you could afford it), they are always side-by-side, taking up an awful lot of desk space. Even the CBM 4040 dual drive, places the drives side-by-side in a single very wide case.



It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall, the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically. Maybe this would result in each drive picking up heat and vibration from the other one, but if this was tolerable when they were stacked vertically in a PC tower case, why not for external drives?



Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically? If not, why not?










share|improve this question

















  • 1





    Since there is no reason to prefer any orientation, this question asks for opinions about design, thus not realy OT at all.

    – Raffzahn
    7 hours ago






  • 2





    @Raffzahn and here we agree ;) Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down...

    – tofro
    6 hours ago












  • @Raffzahn I asked whether external disk drives were in fact ever stacked vertically (historical fact), and if not, why not - the intent of that part was whether there was some technical reason why not. As it turns out, the answer is yes, there were lots of vertically stacked disk drives, so it resolves to a matter of historical fact, not opinion at all.

    – rwallace
    6 hours ago











  • @rwallace The fault in your argumentation is assuming that an external case is anything but a case - no difference here, thus no base to differentiate. A case is a case is a case.

    – Raffzahn
    5 hours ago







  • 1





    @tofro, "Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down" - And here, I will disagree, as upside-down is certainly a valid orientation for floppies. In fact, back in the day, I cut notches into quite a number of floppies so I could put them in upside-down and double my storage capacity.

    – Glen Yates
    2 hours ago













4












4








4








There was a time when floppy disk drives were big, expensive devices that in many cases, instead of being components of a computer, would be separate machines connected by a cable, in some cases with their own CPU. A well-known example was the Commodore 1541, which had a similar CPU to the Commodore 64.



I personally only ever had one external drive, but when you look at photographs of setups with two drives (very desirable if you could afford it), they are always side-by-side, taking up an awful lot of desk space. Even the CBM 4040 dual drive, places the drives side-by-side in a single very wide case.



It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall, the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically. Maybe this would result in each drive picking up heat and vibration from the other one, but if this was tolerable when they were stacked vertically in a PC tower case, why not for external drives?



Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically? If not, why not?










share|improve this question














There was a time when floppy disk drives were big, expensive devices that in many cases, instead of being components of a computer, would be separate machines connected by a cable, in some cases with their own CPU. A well-known example was the Commodore 1541, which had a similar CPU to the Commodore 64.



I personally only ever had one external drive, but when you look at photographs of setups with two drives (very desirable if you could afford it), they are always side-by-side, taking up an awful lot of desk space. Even the CBM 4040 dual drive, places the drives side-by-side in a single very wide case.



It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall, the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically. Maybe this would result in each drive picking up heat and vibration from the other one, but if this was tolerable when they were stacked vertically in a PC tower case, why not for external drives?



Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically? If not, why not?







hardware floppy-disk disk-drive






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 9 hours ago









rwallacerwallace

10.5k453156




10.5k453156







  • 1





    Since there is no reason to prefer any orientation, this question asks for opinions about design, thus not realy OT at all.

    – Raffzahn
    7 hours ago






  • 2





    @Raffzahn and here we agree ;) Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down...

    – tofro
    6 hours ago












  • @Raffzahn I asked whether external disk drives were in fact ever stacked vertically (historical fact), and if not, why not - the intent of that part was whether there was some technical reason why not. As it turns out, the answer is yes, there were lots of vertically stacked disk drives, so it resolves to a matter of historical fact, not opinion at all.

    – rwallace
    6 hours ago











  • @rwallace The fault in your argumentation is assuming that an external case is anything but a case - no difference here, thus no base to differentiate. A case is a case is a case.

    – Raffzahn
    5 hours ago







  • 1





    @tofro, "Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down" - And here, I will disagree, as upside-down is certainly a valid orientation for floppies. In fact, back in the day, I cut notches into quite a number of floppies so I could put them in upside-down and double my storage capacity.

    – Glen Yates
    2 hours ago












  • 1





    Since there is no reason to prefer any orientation, this question asks for opinions about design, thus not realy OT at all.

    – Raffzahn
    7 hours ago






  • 2





    @Raffzahn and here we agree ;) Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down...

    – tofro
    6 hours ago












  • @Raffzahn I asked whether external disk drives were in fact ever stacked vertically (historical fact), and if not, why not - the intent of that part was whether there was some technical reason why not. As it turns out, the answer is yes, there were lots of vertically stacked disk drives, so it resolves to a matter of historical fact, not opinion at all.

    – rwallace
    6 hours ago











  • @rwallace The fault in your argumentation is assuming that an external case is anything but a case - no difference here, thus no base to differentiate. A case is a case is a case.

    – Raffzahn
    5 hours ago







  • 1





    @tofro, "Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down" - And here, I will disagree, as upside-down is certainly a valid orientation for floppies. In fact, back in the day, I cut notches into quite a number of floppies so I could put them in upside-down and double my storage capacity.

    – Glen Yates
    2 hours ago







1




1





Since there is no reason to prefer any orientation, this question asks for opinions about design, thus not realy OT at all.

– Raffzahn
7 hours ago





Since there is no reason to prefer any orientation, this question asks for opinions about design, thus not realy OT at all.

– Raffzahn
7 hours ago




2




2





@Raffzahn and here we agree ;) Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down...

– tofro
6 hours ago






@Raffzahn and here we agree ;) Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down...

– tofro
6 hours ago














@Raffzahn I asked whether external disk drives were in fact ever stacked vertically (historical fact), and if not, why not - the intent of that part was whether there was some technical reason why not. As it turns out, the answer is yes, there were lots of vertically stacked disk drives, so it resolves to a matter of historical fact, not opinion at all.

– rwallace
6 hours ago





@Raffzahn I asked whether external disk drives were in fact ever stacked vertically (historical fact), and if not, why not - the intent of that part was whether there was some technical reason why not. As it turns out, the answer is yes, there were lots of vertically stacked disk drives, so it resolves to a matter of historical fact, not opinion at all.

– rwallace
6 hours ago













@rwallace The fault in your argumentation is assuming that an external case is anything but a case - no difference here, thus no base to differentiate. A case is a case is a case.

– Raffzahn
5 hours ago






@rwallace The fault in your argumentation is assuming that an external case is anything but a case - no difference here, thus no base to differentiate. A case is a case is a case.

– Raffzahn
5 hours ago





1




1





@tofro, "Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down" - And here, I will disagree, as upside-down is certainly a valid orientation for floppies. In fact, back in the day, I cut notches into quite a number of floppies so I could put them in upside-down and double my storage capacity.

– Glen Yates
2 hours ago





@tofro, "Any orientation is allowed on floppies except upside-down" - And here, I will disagree, as upside-down is certainly a valid orientation for floppies. In fact, back in the day, I cut notches into quite a number of floppies so I could put them in upside-down and double my storage capacity.

– Glen Yates
2 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















7














Yes; this was standard procedure for at least the BBC Micro:



enter image description here



Including for third-party drives:



enter image description here



Presumably because two drives arranged that way were only just taller than the machine itself:



enter image description here






share|improve this answer


















  • 1





    To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

    – Kaz
    5 hours ago






  • 1





    Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

    – Kaz
    5 hours ago


















5














  1. I don't think your claim that never happened is generally true

  2. It makes a lot of sense to put drives side by side when you want to place the drive set between computer and CRT (like many Apple users did). That wouldn't work well with stacks.

  3. Especially twin 3 1/2" drives were very often sold as vertical stacks. But some vendors also did the same with the larger drive sets

  4. If you look at earlier drives, 2 x 5 1/4 full-height drives stacked on top of the other really would be awkward to handle (but, see here) - that simply looks clunky.

Other than that, I don't see a technical reason why you wouldn't want to stack drives on top of the others. The frames of 5 1/4 drives are mostly aluminium castings, so stable enough to stack, and heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives.



German Wikipedia seems to know how to stack Commodore 4040 drives as well. You simply need to have enough of them ;)






share|improve this answer

























  • "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

    – traal
    4 hours ago











  • @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

    – tofro
    4 hours ago











  • On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

    – traal
    4 hours ago


















3















It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall,




To me they are taller than wide. After all, that's as well the orientation IBM did put the very first drive, so anything else is plain wrong, isn't it :))




the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically.




That's pure opinion and up to the designer how he imagines a drive to look best or fit best. The drives itself work in any orientation with any angle equally well.




It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices




As said before, they are not, they work in any orientation. At least as long as we talk about the technology. If at all, any orientation can come from ball bearing involved. Except, for simple low speed application next to any standard bearing will offer the needed support strength - if that drive has one at all.




Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically?




It has been used in any kombination you may thing of.



  • Horizontal side by side like in a DEC RX01/02 - as that will need less HE in a rack

enter image description here



  • Horizontal above each other like the Atari 815

enter image description here



  • Vertical side by side like IBM's 6330 8" drive

enter image description here



  • Vertical above each other (Again DEC computers)

(Still looking for the right picture)



  • Or even both like with a Heathkit H17 case where two dives were mounted horizontal side by side, but when a third drive got added they where turned vertical to fit the case.

enter image description hereenter image description here



  • Heck, they where even Computers mouting them both way at the same time:

enter image description here



  • And then there was the DEC RX-50 dual drive, used in PCs to be placed either as desktop (with the drive horizontal) or tower (now vertical), whatever fits the desk.

enter image description here



enter image description hereenter image description here






share|improve this answer

























  • I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

    – Valorum
    24 mins ago












  • @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

    – Raffzahn
    18 mins ago


















2














In the TRS-80 Model I and Model II ecosystems, floppy drives normally had the disk oriented vertically. This made the drives "tall rather than wide", and placing multiple drives side-by-side worked well.



In the Model III, two horizontal drives were stacked vertically in the main housing, to the right of the CRT (and above the numeric keypad).






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "648"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9569%2fwere-any-external-disk-drives-stacked-vertically%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    7














    Yes; this was standard procedure for at least the BBC Micro:



    enter image description here



    Including for third-party drives:



    enter image description here



    Presumably because two drives arranged that way were only just taller than the machine itself:



    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer


















    • 1





      To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago






    • 1





      Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago















    7














    Yes; this was standard procedure for at least the BBC Micro:



    enter image description here



    Including for third-party drives:



    enter image description here



    Presumably because two drives arranged that way were only just taller than the machine itself:



    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer


















    • 1





      To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago






    • 1





      Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago













    7












    7








    7







    Yes; this was standard procedure for at least the BBC Micro:



    enter image description here



    Including for third-party drives:



    enter image description here



    Presumably because two drives arranged that way were only just taller than the machine itself:



    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer













    Yes; this was standard procedure for at least the BBC Micro:



    enter image description here



    Including for third-party drives:



    enter image description here



    Presumably because two drives arranged that way were only just taller than the machine itself:



    enter image description here







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 7 hours ago









    TommyTommy

    16k14677




    16k14677







    • 1





      To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago






    • 1





      Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago












    • 1





      To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago






    • 1





      Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

      – Kaz
      5 hours ago







    1




    1





    To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

    – Kaz
    5 hours ago





    To my mind, the initial reason for stacking two half-height 5 1/4" drives on top of one another like that was because they take up the same space as a single full-height drive. Compare the BBC-branded AND02 twin half-height drives in your third photo with the AND-01 single full-height drive pictured at chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/… . They appear to have used the exact same outer casing for both models.

    – Kaz
    5 hours ago




    1




    1





    Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

    – Kaz
    5 hours ago





    Though it should also be noted that some drive sets for the BBC Micros put the drives side-by side, see chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/Master512.html and chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/Computers/BBCBI3.html

    – Kaz
    5 hours ago











    5














    1. I don't think your claim that never happened is generally true

    2. It makes a lot of sense to put drives side by side when you want to place the drive set between computer and CRT (like many Apple users did). That wouldn't work well with stacks.

    3. Especially twin 3 1/2" drives were very often sold as vertical stacks. But some vendors also did the same with the larger drive sets

    4. If you look at earlier drives, 2 x 5 1/4 full-height drives stacked on top of the other really would be awkward to handle (but, see here) - that simply looks clunky.

    Other than that, I don't see a technical reason why you wouldn't want to stack drives on top of the others. The frames of 5 1/4 drives are mostly aluminium castings, so stable enough to stack, and heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives.



    German Wikipedia seems to know how to stack Commodore 4040 drives as well. You simply need to have enough of them ;)






    share|improve this answer

























    • "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

      – traal
      4 hours ago











    • @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

      – tofro
      4 hours ago











    • On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

      – traal
      4 hours ago















    5














    1. I don't think your claim that never happened is generally true

    2. It makes a lot of sense to put drives side by side when you want to place the drive set between computer and CRT (like many Apple users did). That wouldn't work well with stacks.

    3. Especially twin 3 1/2" drives were very often sold as vertical stacks. But some vendors also did the same with the larger drive sets

    4. If you look at earlier drives, 2 x 5 1/4 full-height drives stacked on top of the other really would be awkward to handle (but, see here) - that simply looks clunky.

    Other than that, I don't see a technical reason why you wouldn't want to stack drives on top of the others. The frames of 5 1/4 drives are mostly aluminium castings, so stable enough to stack, and heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives.



    German Wikipedia seems to know how to stack Commodore 4040 drives as well. You simply need to have enough of them ;)






    share|improve this answer

























    • "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

      – traal
      4 hours ago











    • @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

      – tofro
      4 hours ago











    • On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

      – traal
      4 hours ago













    5












    5








    5







    1. I don't think your claim that never happened is generally true

    2. It makes a lot of sense to put drives side by side when you want to place the drive set between computer and CRT (like many Apple users did). That wouldn't work well with stacks.

    3. Especially twin 3 1/2" drives were very often sold as vertical stacks. But some vendors also did the same with the larger drive sets

    4. If you look at earlier drives, 2 x 5 1/4 full-height drives stacked on top of the other really would be awkward to handle (but, see here) - that simply looks clunky.

    Other than that, I don't see a technical reason why you wouldn't want to stack drives on top of the others. The frames of 5 1/4 drives are mostly aluminium castings, so stable enough to stack, and heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives.



    German Wikipedia seems to know how to stack Commodore 4040 drives as well. You simply need to have enough of them ;)






    share|improve this answer















    1. I don't think your claim that never happened is generally true

    2. It makes a lot of sense to put drives side by side when you want to place the drive set between computer and CRT (like many Apple users did). That wouldn't work well with stacks.

    3. Especially twin 3 1/2" drives were very often sold as vertical stacks. But some vendors also did the same with the larger drive sets

    4. If you look at earlier drives, 2 x 5 1/4 full-height drives stacked on top of the other really would be awkward to handle (but, see here) - that simply looks clunky.

    Other than that, I don't see a technical reason why you wouldn't want to stack drives on top of the others. The frames of 5 1/4 drives are mostly aluminium castings, so stable enough to stack, and heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives.



    German Wikipedia seems to know how to stack Commodore 4040 drives as well. You simply need to have enough of them ;)







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 8 hours ago

























    answered 9 hours ago









    tofrotofro

    16.3k33392




    16.3k33392












    • "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

      – traal
      4 hours ago











    • @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

      – tofro
      4 hours ago











    • On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

      – traal
      4 hours ago

















    • "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

      – traal
      4 hours ago











    • @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

      – tofro
      4 hours ago











    • On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

      – traal
      4 hours ago
















    "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

    – traal
    4 hours ago





    "Heat really shouldn't be a problem with floppy drives." That's true but the power supply generates heat.

    – traal
    4 hours ago













    @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

    – tofro
    4 hours ago





    @traal but you won't stack the power supply?

    – tofro
    4 hours ago













    On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

    – traal
    4 hours ago





    On the top or the bottom? Passive or active cooling?

    – traal
    4 hours ago











    3















    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall,




    To me they are taller than wide. After all, that's as well the orientation IBM did put the very first drive, so anything else is plain wrong, isn't it :))




    the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically.




    That's pure opinion and up to the designer how he imagines a drive to look best or fit best. The drives itself work in any orientation with any angle equally well.




    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices




    As said before, they are not, they work in any orientation. At least as long as we talk about the technology. If at all, any orientation can come from ball bearing involved. Except, for simple low speed application next to any standard bearing will offer the needed support strength - if that drive has one at all.




    Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically?




    It has been used in any kombination you may thing of.



    • Horizontal side by side like in a DEC RX01/02 - as that will need less HE in a rack

    enter image description here



    • Horizontal above each other like the Atari 815

    enter image description here



    • Vertical side by side like IBM's 6330 8" drive

    enter image description here



    • Vertical above each other (Again DEC computers)

    (Still looking for the right picture)



    • Or even both like with a Heathkit H17 case where two dives were mounted horizontal side by side, but when a third drive got added they where turned vertical to fit the case.

    enter image description hereenter image description here



    • Heck, they where even Computers mouting them both way at the same time:

    enter image description here



    • And then there was the DEC RX-50 dual drive, used in PCs to be placed either as desktop (with the drive horizontal) or tower (now vertical), whatever fits the desk.

    enter image description here



    enter image description hereenter image description here






    share|improve this answer

























    • I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

      – Valorum
      24 mins ago












    • @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

      – Raffzahn
      18 mins ago















    3















    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall,




    To me they are taller than wide. After all, that's as well the orientation IBM did put the very first drive, so anything else is plain wrong, isn't it :))




    the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically.




    That's pure opinion and up to the designer how he imagines a drive to look best or fit best. The drives itself work in any orientation with any angle equally well.




    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices




    As said before, they are not, they work in any orientation. At least as long as we talk about the technology. If at all, any orientation can come from ball bearing involved. Except, for simple low speed application next to any standard bearing will offer the needed support strength - if that drive has one at all.




    Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically?




    It has been used in any kombination you may thing of.



    • Horizontal side by side like in a DEC RX01/02 - as that will need less HE in a rack

    enter image description here



    • Horizontal above each other like the Atari 815

    enter image description here



    • Vertical side by side like IBM's 6330 8" drive

    enter image description here



    • Vertical above each other (Again DEC computers)

    (Still looking for the right picture)



    • Or even both like with a Heathkit H17 case where two dives were mounted horizontal side by side, but when a third drive got added they where turned vertical to fit the case.

    enter image description hereenter image description here



    • Heck, they where even Computers mouting them both way at the same time:

    enter image description here



    • And then there was the DEC RX-50 dual drive, used in PCs to be placed either as desktop (with the drive horizontal) or tower (now vertical), whatever fits the desk.

    enter image description here



    enter image description hereenter image description here






    share|improve this answer

























    • I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

      – Valorum
      24 mins ago












    • @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

      – Raffzahn
      18 mins ago













    3












    3








    3








    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall,




    To me they are taller than wide. After all, that's as well the orientation IBM did put the very first drive, so anything else is plain wrong, isn't it :))




    the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically.




    That's pure opinion and up to the designer how he imagines a drive to look best or fit best. The drives itself work in any orientation with any angle equally well.




    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices




    As said before, they are not, they work in any orientation. At least as long as we talk about the technology. If at all, any orientation can come from ball bearing involved. Except, for simple low speed application next to any standard bearing will offer the needed support strength - if that drive has one at all.




    Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically?




    It has been used in any kombination you may thing of.



    • Horizontal side by side like in a DEC RX01/02 - as that will need less HE in a rack

    enter image description here



    • Horizontal above each other like the Atari 815

    enter image description here



    • Vertical side by side like IBM's 6330 8" drive

    enter image description here



    • Vertical above each other (Again DEC computers)

    (Still looking for the right picture)



    • Or even both like with a Heathkit H17 case where two dives were mounted horizontal side by side, but when a third drive got added they where turned vertical to fit the case.

    enter image description hereenter image description here



    • Heck, they where even Computers mouting them both way at the same time:

    enter image description here



    • And then there was the DEC RX-50 dual drive, used in PCs to be placed either as desktop (with the drive horizontal) or tower (now vertical), whatever fits the desk.

    enter image description here



    enter image description hereenter image description here






    share|improve this answer
















    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices that want to be wide rather than tall,




    To me they are taller than wide. After all, that's as well the orientation IBM did put the very first drive, so anything else is plain wrong, isn't it :))




    the obvious solution would be to stack them vertically.




    That's pure opinion and up to the designer how he imagines a drive to look best or fit best. The drives itself work in any orientation with any angle equally well.




    It seems to me that since disk drives are fundamentally horizontal devices




    As said before, they are not, they work in any orientation. At least as long as we talk about the technology. If at all, any orientation can come from ball bearing involved. Except, for simple low speed application next to any standard bearing will offer the needed support strength - if that drive has one at all.




    Were external disk drives ever stacked vertically?




    It has been used in any kombination you may thing of.



    • Horizontal side by side like in a DEC RX01/02 - as that will need less HE in a rack

    enter image description here



    • Horizontal above each other like the Atari 815

    enter image description here



    • Vertical side by side like IBM's 6330 8" drive

    enter image description here



    • Vertical above each other (Again DEC computers)

    (Still looking for the right picture)



    • Or even both like with a Heathkit H17 case where two dives were mounted horizontal side by side, but when a third drive got added they where turned vertical to fit the case.

    enter image description hereenter image description here



    • Heck, they where even Computers mouting them both way at the same time:

    enter image description here



    • And then there was the DEC RX-50 dual drive, used in PCs to be placed either as desktop (with the drive horizontal) or tower (now vertical), whatever fits the desk.

    enter image description here



    enter image description hereenter image description here







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 4 mins ago

























    answered 6 hours ago









    RaffzahnRaffzahn

    55.1k6136223




    55.1k6136223












    • I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

      – Valorum
      24 mins ago












    • @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

      – Raffzahn
      18 mins ago

















    • I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

      – Valorum
      24 mins ago












    • @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

      – Raffzahn
      18 mins ago
















    I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

    – Valorum
    24 mins ago






    I'm disappointed to see that you've not included any examples of them being oriented vertically and then stacked on top of each other

    – Valorum
    24 mins ago














    @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

    – Raffzahn
    18 mins ago





    @Valorum I'm so sorry, there is a DEC machine doing exactly this, but I couldn't find any worthwhile picture so far. Shame on me.

    – Raffzahn
    18 mins ago











    2














    In the TRS-80 Model I and Model II ecosystems, floppy drives normally had the disk oriented vertically. This made the drives "tall rather than wide", and placing multiple drives side-by-side worked well.



    In the Model III, two horizontal drives were stacked vertically in the main housing, to the right of the CRT (and above the numeric keypad).






    share|improve this answer



























      2














      In the TRS-80 Model I and Model II ecosystems, floppy drives normally had the disk oriented vertically. This made the drives "tall rather than wide", and placing multiple drives side-by-side worked well.



      In the Model III, two horizontal drives were stacked vertically in the main housing, to the right of the CRT (and above the numeric keypad).






      share|improve this answer

























        2












        2








        2







        In the TRS-80 Model I and Model II ecosystems, floppy drives normally had the disk oriented vertically. This made the drives "tall rather than wide", and placing multiple drives side-by-side worked well.



        In the Model III, two horizontal drives were stacked vertically in the main housing, to the right of the CRT (and above the numeric keypad).






        share|improve this answer













        In the TRS-80 Model I and Model II ecosystems, floppy drives normally had the disk oriented vertically. This made the drives "tall rather than wide", and placing multiple drives side-by-side worked well.



        In the Model III, two horizontal drives were stacked vertically in the main housing, to the right of the CRT (and above the numeric keypad).







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 7 hours ago









        jeffBjeffB

        69828




        69828



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9569%2fwere-any-external-disk-drives-stacked-vertically%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            How should I use the fbox command correctly to avoid producing a Bad Box message?How to put a long piece of text in a box?How to specify height and width of fboxIs there an arrayrulecolor-like command to change the rule color of fbox?What is the command to highlight bad boxes in pdf?Why does fbox sometimes place the box *over* the graphic image?how to put the text in the boxHow to create command for a box where text inside the box can automatically adjust?how can I make an fbox like command with certain color, shape and width of border?how to use fbox in align modeFbox increase the spacing between the box and it content (inner margin)how to change the box height of an equationWhat is the use of the hbox in a newcommand command?

            Doxepinum Nexus interni Notae | Tabula navigationis3158DB01142WHOa682390"Structural Analysis of the Histamine H1 Receptor""Transdermal and Topical Drug Administration in the Treatment of Pain""Antidepressants as antipruritic agents: A review"

            inputenc: Unicode character … not set up for use with LaTeX The Next CEO of Stack OverflowEntering Unicode characters in LaTeXHow to solve the `Package inputenc Error: Unicode char not set up for use with LaTeX` problem?solve “Unicode char is not set up for use with LaTeX” without special handling of every new interesting UTF-8 characterPackage inputenc Error: Unicode character ² (U+B2)(inputenc) not set up for use with LaTeX. acroI2C[I²C]package inputenc error unicode char (u + 190) not set up for use with latexPackage inputenc Error: Unicode char u8:′ not set up for use with LaTeX. 3′inputenc Error: Unicode char u8: not set up for use with LaTeX with G-BriefPackage Inputenc Error: Unicode char u8: not set up for use with LaTeXPackage inputenc Error: Unicode char ́ (U+301)(inputenc) not set up for use with LaTeX. includePackage inputenc Error: Unicode char ̂ (U+302)(inputenc) not set up for use with LaTeX. … $widehatleft (OA,AA' right )$Package inputenc Error: Unicode char â„¡ (U+2121)(inputenc) not set up for use with LaTeX. printbibliography[heading=bibintoc]Package inputenc Error: Unicode char − (U+2212)(inputenc) not set up for use with LaTeXPackage inputenc Error: Unicode character α (U+3B1) not set up for use with LaTeXPackage inputenc Error: Unicode characterError: ! Package inputenc Error: Unicode char ⊘ (U+2298)(inputenc) not set up for use with LaTeX