W.E. 1002 ( 141 W 70 ) Handset

[Nick in Manitou]

A while back I came across a W.E. 1002 handset and folks on the forum helped me identify it.  The only markings on the handset show Western Electric 141 W 70, but no other hint as to what the model number is, so they often show up on the web as "141 W 70 Handset".

I am surprised that there seems to be so little information about these on the forum...and that there seem to be a good number of them out there to be found.

On Paul-f's site, http://www.paul-f.com/weHandsets.html#1002 , it states that these were introduced circa 1907.  Does anyone have any more information about these?  Photos of them in action?  I think that they are pretty cool looking and from taking mine apart enough to clean it up, it sure seems to be simple and well put together.

Has anyone tried to use one?

Thanks,
Nick   

[Sargeguy]

I restored one a while back (thanks to Ralph Myers) but when I asked on the list for information on how it was used I didn't get many useful responses.  Specifically I wanted to know how it hung up.  I know it is used in conjunction with a magneto box or subset, and there is a compact subset thing like a doughnut phone subset that it was also used with but I have nothing specific.

[G-Man]

Code No. 1002-A

Description

For use in place of a regular local battery bridging or central battery desk stand or transmitter arm. Includes No. 141-W receiver, No. 267-W transmitter and No. 319 cord .............List Price Each  $6.35

[paul-f]

Photos of them in action? 

Over the years, I have found several of them still attached to 315 or 400-type subsets.  As described, they simply take the place (physically and electrically) of any other desk stand or hand telephone set. 

A simple hook screwed into the side of the subset provided a place to "hang-up" the handset.

Here's a photo from an auction many years ago.

[Sargeguy]

You mean to tell me that the Bell System does not have a BSP or its earlier equivalent defining the type of hook and its proper placement, installation and maintenance?  It's just a simple hook?

[Nick in Manitou]

I am functioning with a serious lack of information in this field, but it seems surprising to me that if the concept of a handset with the receiver and transmitter in it was first introduced into production in 1907, that it took so long for it to become the standard with the introduction of the W.E. "A" and W.E. "E" handsets in the early to mid-1920s (per Paul-f's website).

It seems to me that the convenience of being able to hold the handset with one hand and make notes with the other would have driven demand and development for handset phones more quickly than it did.

Were there other handsets that were commonly in use during the period 1910-1920 or was the candlestick or other "two piece" phone the standard?  Was weight the reason the handset did not become the standard more quickly?...that it took development of lighter components and materials?

Were the receiver and transmitter on the 1002 handset significantly less effective than those of a two-piece phone?

Just wonderin'

Nick

[paul-f]

A lot has been written on the factors that delayed deployment of handsets in the Bell System -- especially as they were so widespread in Europe that phones with handsets were nicknamed "French phones."  I don't remember enough details to summarize the arguments from memory.

Some examples include the two part article, "The First Handsets" in the May and June 1995 issues of Singing Wires and "Bell System Numbering Plan" in the January 2008 issue, both by Stanley Swihart.  Also, "Old Telephones: Curiosities and Characteristics" by Charlie Pleasance in the December 1999 issue.  I'm sure a thorough search of the Singing Wires archives would produce more articles.  (The issues are archived in the TCI Members Area on www.telephonecollectors.org.)

There are likely accounts in several Bell System publications, such as A History of Engineering and Science in the Bell System.

[LarryInMichigan]

I think I read somewhere that the first Kellogg and/or FTR handsets were made under license and with parts from Ericsson.

Larry 

[Nick in Manitou]

Thanks for the responses!  I will pursue these avenues...I have some reading to do.

[poplar1]

ISTR that it was J. J. Carty that blocked the use of handsets until a multi-positional transmitter was developed. That is, a transmitter that gave satisfactory performance regardless of how the subscriber held it.

Carty also thought dials were unnecessary. Bell even removed dial phones and replaced them with manual ones when they bought out automatic exchanges. After an operator strike crippled service in Boston, he was overruled about dials.

[G-Man]

While produced and used for intercoms and small exchanges, because of their poor performance handsets were not popular with either independents or especially with Ma Bell who had the bulk of long toll lines where top performance was demanded.

It was not until the early 1930's when George Eaton of Kellogg Switchboard and Supply patented the non-positional transmitter that the manufacturing and use of handsets took-off in large numbers.

Just prior to that Bell came out with the E1 handset but the bullet transmitter rendered poor performance. That is why Bell licensed the non-positional transmitter from Kellogg and retrofitted the handsets with F1 transmitters.

Also, the story about John Carty  backing down on his position about automatic switching is an old wife's tale that keeps getting repeated. There are numerous errors in that story; for one, Bell was developing automatic switching long before the operators strike.

[G-Man]

I think I read somewhere that the first Kellogg and/or FTR handsets were made under license and with parts from Ericsson.

Larry 

As I recall, Kellogg was the first to manufacture a handset but later on Ericsson copied and made their own version. Someone can take a glance in Swihart's tome to verify whose came first.

Copying the work of others was part of a pattern by Lars Ericsson who got his start by repairing Bell telephones that were imported into Sweden. He soon copied them and since Bell did not patent them in Sweden he did not have to license or pay royalties. Consequently they were cheaper and sales were good even if the initial quality wasn't.

[G-Man]

You mean to tell me that the Bell System does not have a BSP or its earlier equivalent defining the type of hook and its proper placement, installation and maintenance?  It's just a simple hook?

Very poor quality but I have attached a screenshot from TCI's Singingwires homepage that shows how early (foreign) handsets were mounted when not in use. Others may know of better quality photos that are on-line.

[poplar1]

I think I read somewhere that the first Kellogg and/or FTR handsets were made under license and with parts from Ericsson.

Larry 

As I recall, Kellogg was the first to manufacture a handset but later on Ericsson copied and made their own version. Someone can take a glance in Swihart's tome to verify whose came first.

Copying the work of others was part of a pattern by Lars Ericsson who got his start by repairing Bell telephones that were imported into Sweden. He soon copied them and since Bell did not patent them in Sweden he did not have to license or pay royalties. Consequently they were cheaper and sales were good even if the initial quality wasn't.

Ericsson started using handsets c. 1895. I believe the Kellogg "Grabaphone" was many years later.

[poplar1]

While produced and used for intercoms and small exchanges, because of their poor performance handsets were not popular with either independents or especially with Ma Bell who had the bulk of long toll lines where top performance was demanded.

It was not until the early 1930’s when George Eaton of Kellogg Switchboard and Supply patented the non-positional transmitter that the manufacturing and use of handsets took-off in large numbers.

Just prior to that Bell came out with the E1 handset but the bullet transmitter rendered poor performance. That is why Bell licensed the non-positional transmitter from Kellogg and retrofitted the handsets with F1 transmitters.

Also, the story about John Carty  backing down on his position about automatic switching is an old wife’s tale that keeps getting repeated. There are numerous errors in that story; for one, Bell was developing automatic switching long before the operators strike.

G. K. Thompson's patent for what would later be called the A1 hand set mounting was applied for in  1922 and issued in 1924. My point was that as chief engineer Carty insisted on waiting on technical improvements before allowing handsets to be mass produced for the Bell System, and that he *personally* also did not like automatic switching.

Perhaps you also recall the speech he made in Europe in which he stated his vehement objection to automatic switching. Perhaps you also recall that when Bell purchased independent companies with automatic exchanges, they replaced the dial equipment with manual switchboards. That in no way diminishes what Bell Labs was developing.

I would think that you would have a certain affinity for Mr. Carty seeing how you like to belittle those who disagree with you.