Comparing British 706 and American 500 and AE 80 'phones.

[Stephen Furley]

That's interesting.  We had shared service here, but I think, at least on the PSTN, it was only two parties. We used tip to earth and ring to earth ringing, at our normal standard of 25 Hz.  We had this at home at one time, but it was later replaced by an exclusive line, and a new grey 706 telephone.  The shared service 'phones had a button, and as far as I remember but it was a long time ago and I was quite young as this would have been replaced in about 1964-5, you had to lift the receiver, listen to tell if the line was in use, and if not you then pressed the button to get dial tone; presumably some sort of ground start line.  All of this is long gone, as none of our exchanges now support it.

Did you have any systems to separate speech as well as ringing for two parties on one pair, and allow both to use the line at the same time?  We had a couple of systems, but I don't think they were widely used, and I don't know much about them.  The first was an analogue system, where one subscriber received a normal service, except for needing a low-pass filter in their line, and the other had their signal modulated onto a carrier on the same pair; obviously they needed additional equipment between the line and their telephone, and also at the exchange.

The other system was digital; I believe that it basically used an ISDN line, with one subscriber's signal carried on each of the two bearer channels, but they didn't see the ISDN line, and didn't need an ATA; these were owned by BT, were located outside the subscriber's premises, and they were simply presented with a normal analogue line.

Of course, digital is the way to go if you want to get lots of signals down the same wires, or fibres.  With fibre you can get thousands of calls down something just a few mm in diameter and very little of even that size is the actual fibre itself.  It does make the bundles of 100 pair copper cables that we still have coming into the frame room at work, though gradually going out of use, look rather silly.

[Stephen Furley]

Great! I'll be interested in hearing what you think

I had to work late this evening; I arrived home to find two things waiting for me.  The first was an e-mail with a link to a video of a girl putting her head in a toilet  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J18dMZxYZrI&feature=related I'm not quite sure why they thought I would want to watch that, and, more interestingly, a box containing the 1543.

It got here really quickly, and somehow managed to slip through customs without me having to pay tax on it.

First thing that strikes me is that it's really heavy; this thing weighs a ton.  It's a bit dull looking, especially the handset; could do with a polish.  The dial's sticking a bit, but I think it will free up with use.

I have difficulty knowing where to put this 'phone.  You don't seem to have had the very sharp, revolutionary demarcation that we had between the 200 and 300 Bakelite 'phones and the 706.  There are aspects of this which would put it alongside the 500, but there are others which make it look older; belonging more with the 302.  The handset rest on your one looks modern; I mis-interpreted the way it works, I thought from your picture that it tilted to operate the switch, but it doesn't, it moves straight up and down, like the plungers in the 500.  The body feels different to any other telephone I've seen; is this the mythical 'soft' plastic of which people speak?  It has the low, flat, elephant sat on it, look of the 500 and the number ring surrounding the dial is similar, but the dial itself is different.  Was this dial made by  AE?

There are a number of differences to your example, the finger wheel is metal, and the finger stop is slightly more curved on the back edge.  if I remove the clear plastic dial card protector there is the same central nut that yours has, but the six-legged spider thing has only three legs on mine.  The dial card is like nothing I've seen before; I've got WE ones with the notch on the right, and the larger AE ones with several cut-outs around the edge, but this is smaller than either of these, or the British type.  The handset is also a slightly different, and older looking, shape to your one.  It is a Stromberg-Carlson handset, and it's not like the one for the 1243, which I have seen pictures of.  It seems odd to me to have the body and handset made of different materials, you'd have to go back to a wooden wall telephone, or a Candlestick to find that in a standard telephone here.  Ok, I know these old thlephones don't have a handset as such, but you know what I mean.  I suspect that it is the correct one for this model, but is just older than your one.  the base is marked 1543J, and underneath that 60~.  Is that 1960, or a 60 Hz. ringer?  The ringer is a single coil type, and the coil is huge.  Unlike the WE 500 and AE 80, but like the 706, there is no external means to adjust the ringer.  The position of the gongs, at the front underneath the dial, is similar to the 706 and 746.

The handset seems to be Bakelite, and could certainly do with a polish, I'll have to get some 'Paste Polishing No. 5', and see how it comes up.  I really don't know quite what to make of this; there seem to be some aspects of the design which look much older than others.  It has a carrying handle under the handset, which the 706 only acquired as a add-on some time after its introduction, and wasn't provided as part of the main moulding over here until the 746, in 1967.   The handle on the 1543 has a rather sharp, uncomfortable edge though.  When was the 1543 introduced by the way?  The handset cord is a plastic, coiled, one.  It is very thick and stiff, and is in good condition.  The line cord is a three-conductor round vinyl one, but I don't think is original.  There  is a restraint at the telephone end which doesn't seem to attach to anything; there's a knot tied in the cord to stop it pulling out.  At the other end there are no spades, just bare wires; I've put a four-prong plug on it.  I'm feeling too tired to try it tonight;  I'll have another look at it tomorrow.

[HobieSport]

I have difficulty knowing where to put this 'phone.  You don't seem to have had the very sharp, revolutionary demarcation that we had between the 200 and 300 Bakelite 'phones and the 706.  There are aspects of this which would put it alongside the 500, but there are others which make it look older; belonging more with the 302.

IMHO we had a revolutionary phone demarcation in the US in 1950 when we transitioned from the 302 to the 500.  I would compare the SC 1243 in the 302 category and the 1543 with the 500.  If I've got this info right the1243s were used right after the war to help fill demand for the 302s until the 500s and 1543s were born.

[BDM]

Yes they were Matt. But the network is more like the 500 in function & form than the 101 network used in the 302.

[HobieSport]

Ah, I see now. Thanks Brian.

[Stephen Furley]

If that's a 1543 then it's a very different one to the one which BDM posted some pictures of earlier in this thread, and the one which I have, and mine is  marked 1543 on the base.  The one in your picture certainly looks closer to a 302 in design.

[bingster]

Matt, if I'm not mistaken, those photos are of the 1940s 1243, rather than it's replacement 1443/1543, which looks more like a 500 with cut corners.

[BDM]

Actually, they look very similar to the 1543. Dimensions are close, at least on my examples. And they use the same network for the most part, from the 1243 up.

[Stephen Furley]

BDM,

Now you've really got me confused.  That 'phone looks nothing like the one which you posted pictures of on page 2, and which does look very similar to mine.  The one in this evening's pictures, sorry I can't remember who posted them, is totally different.  Dial at a steeper angle,  dial mounted in case rather than on base, handset rest much further forward, case a quite different shape etc.  The main things they seem to have in common are the cut corners, and the slightly 'stepped out' lower section to the case, both of which seem to be hallmarks of Stromberg Carlson.

[HobieSport]

Whoops!  Apologies for my newbie phone confusion between the 1243 and the 1543.  My bad.  Sorry Stephen et.al..  I removed the pics of the 1243.  Now I see that the 1543 seems indeed to be in the 500 category.

-Matt

[BDM]

BDM,

Now you've really got me confused.  That 'phone looks nothing like the one which you posted pictures of on page 2, and which does look very similar to mine.  The one in this evening's pictures, sorry I can't remember who posted them, is totally different.  Dial at a steeper angle,  dial mounted in case rather than on base, handset rest much further forward, case a quite different shape etc.  The main things they seem to have in common are the cut corners, and the slightly 'stepped out' lower section to the case, both of which seem to be hallmarks of Stromberg Carlson.

Yes, that was a 1243 Matt posted. My pics on page #2 are of a late 1543 with the later handset, which uses the U1 and T1 receiver/transmistter. Like those used in the W.E. 500. They are different, but similar. The 1543 is more relaxed in design, but similar. Regardless, the networks are the same with very minor differences. SC used this network from just after the war, until the mid 60s.

[Stephen Furley]

Here's my 1543; note the different style of text on the dial ring.

[BDM]

Looks good. What ringer frequency does your phone have?

[Stephen Furley]

I don't know; in my original post yesterday I wrote:

'the base is marked 1543J, and underneath that 60~.  Is that 1960, or a 60 Hz. ringer?  The ringer is a single coil type, and the coil is huge.  Unlike the WE 500 and AE 80, but like the 706, there is no external means to adjust the ringer.  The position of the gongs, at the front underneath the dial, is similar to the 706 and 746.'

It doesn't seem to want to ring on our 25 Hz. system, but I'm not too worried about it, I want it more for display than for use.

There's a slight crack in one front corner, which I'll cement before it spreads any further, and it's a bit dirty, but I polished up a small area, and it came up fine.

The handset seems to be Bakelite, but it's different to ours, or rather to that used in GPO 'phones.  These used wood flour as a filler, but I think the 1543 handset looks and feels more like asbestos-filled Bakelite.

There's what seems to be a date on the ringer which is in 1965, which seems to be to late for the 'phone itself, so maybe it had a non-standard frequency ringer fitted at that time.  There are numbers on various other parts, but these don't seem to be dates.

[Stephen Furley]

I don't know; in my original post yesterday I wrote:

'the base is marked 1543J, and underneath that 60~.  Is that 1960, or a 60 Hz. ringer?  The ringer is a single coil type, and the coil is huge.  Unlike the WE 500 and AE 80, but like the 706, there is no external means to adjust the ringer.  The position of the gongs, at the front underneath the dial, is similar to the 706 and 746.'

It doesn't seem to want to ring on our 25 Hz. system, but I'm not too worried about it, I want it more for display than for use.

There's a slight crack in one front corner, which I'll cement before it spreads any further, and it's a bit dirty, but I polished up a small area, and it came up fine.

Edit:

I've just seen the document in the technical library; The 'J' does indicate a model with 60Hz. ringer.

The handset seems to be Bakelite, but it's different to ours, or rather to that used in GPO 'phones.  These used wood flour as a filler, but I think the 1543 handset looks and feels more like asbestos-filled Bakelite.

There's what seems to be a date on the ringer which is in 1965, which seems to be to late for the 'phone itself, so maybe it had a non-standard frequency ringer fitted at that time.  There are numbers on various other parts, but these don't seem to be dates.