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

How to say in German "enjoying home comforts"

Why do I get two different answers for this counting problem?

How could indestructible materials be used in power generation?

Did Shadowfax go to Valinor?

What is the intuition behind short exact sequences of groups; in particular, what is the intuition behind group extensions?

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

Find the age of the oldest file in one line or return zero

What is the word for reserving something for yourself before others do?

How likely is it that my 1980 home has asbestos in the drywall?

What's the point of deactivating Num Lock on login screens?

Etiquette around loan refinance - decision is going to cost first broker a lot of money

Plain language with long required phrases

Doing something right before you need it - expression for this?

I Accidentally Deleted a Stock Terminal Theme

Facing a paradox: Earnshaw's theorem in one dimension

Fully-Firstable Anagram Sets

I'm flying to France today and my passport expires in less than 2 months

Were any external disk drives stacked vertically?

In Romance of the Three Kingdoms why do people still use bamboo sticks when papers are already invented?

How to take photos in burst mode, without vibration?

Is "remove commented out code" correct English?

Python: return float 1.0 as int 1 but float 1.5 as float 1.5

UK: Is there precedent for the governments e-petition site changing the direction of a government decision?

Would Slavery Reparations be considered Bills of Attainder and hence Illegal?



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













2















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
    5 hours ago






  • 2





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

    – tofro
    4 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
    3 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
    3 hours ago












  • I would be worried about knocking over a pair of full-height drives stacked one atop each other. So my guess is that the reason was mechanical stability. This issue goes away with half height floppy drives.

    – traal
    2 hours ago
















2















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
    5 hours ago






  • 2





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

    – tofro
    4 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
    3 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
    3 hours ago












  • I would be worried about knocking over a pair of full-height drives stacked one atop each other. So my guess is that the reason was mechanical stability. This issue goes away with half height floppy drives.

    – traal
    2 hours ago














2












2








2








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 7 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
    5 hours ago






  • 2





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

    – tofro
    4 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
    3 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
    3 hours ago












  • I would be worried about knocking over a pair of full-height drives stacked one atop each other. So my guess is that the reason was mechanical stability. This issue goes away with half height floppy drives.

    – traal
    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
    5 hours ago






  • 2





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

    – tofro
    4 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
    3 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
    3 hours ago












  • I would be worried about knocking over a pair of full-height drives stacked one atop each other. So my guess is that the reason was mechanical stability. This issue goes away with half height floppy drives.

    – traal
    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
5 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
5 hours ago




2




2





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

– tofro
4 hours ago






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

– tofro
4 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
3 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
3 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
3 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
3 hours ago














I would be worried about knocking over a pair of full-height drives stacked one atop each other. So my guess is that the reason was mechanical stability. This issue goes away with half height floppy drives.

– traal
2 hours ago






I would be worried about knocking over a pair of full-height drives stacked one atop each other. So my guess is that the reason was mechanical stability. This issue goes away with half height floppy drives.

– traal
2 hours ago











4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















5














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
    3 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
    3 hours ago


















4














  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
    2 hours ago











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

    – tofro
    2 hours ago











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

    – traal
    2 hours ago


















2















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 or tower, whatever fits the desk.

enter image description here






share|improve this answer
































    1














    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









      5














      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
        3 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
        3 hours ago















      5














      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
        3 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
        3 hours ago













      5












      5








      5







      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 5 hours ago









      TommyTommy

      15.9k14677




      15.9k14677







      • 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
        3 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
        3 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
        3 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
        3 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
      3 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
      3 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
      3 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
      3 hours ago











      4














      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
        2 hours ago











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

        – tofro
        2 hours ago











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

        – traal
        2 hours ago















      4














      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
        2 hours ago











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

        – tofro
        2 hours ago











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

        – traal
        2 hours ago













      4












      4








      4







      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 6 hours ago

























      answered 7 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
        2 hours ago











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

        – tofro
        2 hours ago











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

        – traal
        2 hours ago

















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

        – traal
        2 hours ago











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

        – tofro
        2 hours ago











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

        – traal
        2 hours ago
















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

      – traal
      2 hours ago





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

      – traal
      2 hours ago













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

      – tofro
      2 hours ago





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

      – tofro
      2 hours ago













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

      – traal
      2 hours ago





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

      – traal
      2 hours ago











      2















      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 or tower, whatever fits the desk.

      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer





























        2















        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 or tower, whatever fits the desk.

        enter image description here






        share|improve this answer



























          2












          2








          2








          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 or tower, whatever fits the desk.

          enter 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 or tower, whatever fits the desk.

          enter image description here







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 3 hours ago

























          answered 3 hours ago









          RaffzahnRaffzahn

          55.1k6136223




          55.1k6136223





















              1














              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



























                1














                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

























                  1












                  1








                  1







                  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 5 hours ago









                  jeffBjeffB

                  68828




                  68828



























                      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

                      名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

                      格濟夫卡 參考資料 导航菜单51°3′40″N 34°2′21″E / 51.06111°N 34.03917°E / 51.06111; 34.03917ГезівкаПогода в селі 编辑或修订