Came across this in a local antique shop. At first I thought it was a typical AE40 but then I noticed that though the handset looked like the regular one for this model it had the "spit cup". Also the set had a cloth cover on the bottom. The cover is well fitted to the bottom plate and has a AE tag on it. The cover is slotted for all of the screw locations. Finally the handset cord is the braded type. Is this factory done? If so is it scarce?
The handset is probably a AF-55.
Search the TCI Library for "AE Type 38 & 41 Handsets" in quotes to see the catalog page.
There's also a related discussion here:
http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=14514.msg150944#msg150944 (http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=14514.msg150944#msg150944)
I have also run across fabric-covered bottom plates on early AE40s.
Quote from: paul-f on October 24, 2016, 06:05:46 PM
The handset is probably a AF-55.
I have also run across fabric-covered bottom plates on early AE40s.
Thanks for the information. After reading the info in the library I believe you are right about the handset being a AF-55.
Is there any documentation on fabric covered bottom plates?
Quote from: Fabius on October 24, 2016, 06:37:26 PM
Is there any documentation on fabric covered bottom plates?
I haven't seen any documentation but a lot of AE 40s were used in Australia by the military (but I don't think they were military phones) during WW2 - they all had cloth bases and no rubber. They had standard Type 41 handsets.
One could make a connection between war, rubber shortages and seeking alternatives but I don't know if any such connection exists.
Jack
I have had 1. Other collectors told me they have come across them as well.
The Paper AE tag makes me think factory or factory contract.
___________________________________________________________________________________
However I would think they are getting kinda scarce, Many collectors have had them pass thru their hands, but there probably weren't very many made . The value being highest on the condition of the paper tag.
I think they are an interesting variation.
JMO,
Jim S.
Here are pictures of the inside. Notice that there are two condensers (capacitors). It is a straight line ring. Anything indicate an early AE40?
Quote from: Fabius on October 26, 2016, 11:07:43 PM
Here are pictures of the inside. Notice that there are two condensers (capacitors). It is a straight line ring. Anything indicate an early AE40?
It depends on what you mean by early. It is early in the sense that it is a Type 40 (not a Type 41) but not necessarily one of the first.
That type normally has black metal rings on the handset so they are early in that they don't have faux metal rings (ie made to look like it has rings).
The dial on yours is definitely not early but it might have been added later.
Can you take a good picture of the circuit? If you can, will you? If the ID is not clear, can you transcribe it?
Thanks
Jack
Quote from: Jack Ryan on October 26, 2016, 11:41:39 PM
Can you take a good picture of the circuit? If you can, will you? If the ID is not clear, can you transcribe it?
Thanks
Jack
Here it is. What would be the correct dial type?
The metal bracket for mounting the dial is found only on they early model 40s.
The schematic is also an early type, Form D-53688 Issue 7, earlier than the diagrams I showed in this post (http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=13908.msg145393#msg145393).
The dial is a type 51 from the 1950s, but the phone was originally also equipped with a dial (–A0).
The original type was a 24A36 with the standard AK-25 contact arrangement (same as this one).
Would you mind sharing a high-resolution image of the bottom sticker.
Quote from: unbeldi on October 27, 2016, 12:20:36 PM
Would you mind sharing a high-resolution image of the bottom sticker.
I will post it when I get home this evening. I have a couple of spare type 24 AE dials.
Quote from: Fabius on October 27, 2016, 12:32:18 PM
I will post it when I get home this evening. I have a couple of spare type 24 AE dials.
Thanks.
A No 24 would be less authentic than a 51. Likely no AE 40 would be equipped with it, as it predates the 24A36.
As I noted earlier, the cloth based phones I have seen were issued during WW2. That in itself, makes the phones "early" but not necessarily the earliest. WW2 began at about the same time as the AE 40 was released (1939) but I am not aware of any cloth based AE 40s being deployed that early.
I am going to have to take more notice of period photographs.
Quote from: unbeldi on October 27, 2016, 12:20:36 PM
The dial is a type 51 from the 1950s, but the phone was originally also equipped with a dial (–A0).
The original type was a 24A36 with the standard AK-25 contact arrangement (same as this one).
Yes, it originally had a dial. There are also lots of "SN 4046 B0" CB manual telephones that have a cloth base.
I am still not convinced that all cast dials are Type 51 at the earliest but the dial is definitely not the one originally fitted.
Jack
Quote from: Jack Ryan on October 27, 2016, 07:04:57 PM
I am still not convinced that all cast dials are Type 51 at the earliest but the dial is definitely not the one originally fitted.
The Type 51 dial was the first with the spring assembly that is no longer removable in one piece.
This one is not, if I looked at the picture correctly. I think materials are not the criterion, I think I have had dials that appeared to be made from different ones, at least finished differently.
Quote from: Jack Ryan on October 27, 2016, 07:04:57 PM
As I noted earlier, the cloth based phones I have seen were issued during WW2.
It appears reasonable that phones during WW2 would not have a rubber shoe around the bottom edge.
Rubber was a super-scarce material in that period, to the extend that the entire industry, many university labs, and many entrepreneurs were trying to successfully formulate a synthetic rubber substitute that could be produced more cheaply, more rapidly, and in larger quantities than natural rubber. The country had a projected need that exceeded the supply of almost an order of magnitude, if I recall correctly.
The task was solved amazingly quickly with enormous effort, IIRC, about mid-war period.
Quote from: unbeldi on October 27, 2016, 07:44:52 PM
The Type 51 dial was the first with the spring assembly that is no longer removable in one piece.
That is what I am not convinced of.
I don't think I have ever seen a cast dial with removable spring assembly - but that doesn't mean there isn't one.
Jack
Quote from: unbeldi on October 27, 2016, 07:57:11 PM
It appears reasonable that phones during WW2 would not have a rubber shoe around the bottom edge.
Yes, that is why I suggested earlier that the material base was released during WW2. I think originally rubber was used, then material introduced during WW2 and then a return to rubber (or faux rubber).
If that is the case, the phone in question is early, but not the earliest.
Jack
Here's the tag.
Tom ,
Here's pg. 45 in AE Catalog 4055 C , 1940. Hope this helps.
AE Catalog 4055 D , 1944 , pg.55 , shows the cupped mouthpiece #10 and ring # 11. Hope this helps. stub
left click on pics to enlarge
Quote from: stub on October 29, 2016, 01:17:41 AM
Tom ,
Here's pg. 45 in AE Catalog 4055 C , 1940.
Thanks
It looks like it has Chicago not Chicago 7 on the tag so that means it is NOT any newer than 1943.
Terry
US1615311 1927 1923 Obergfell AE--Impulse-sending device
US1642822 1927 1924 Obergfell AE--Calling Device
US1687117 1928 1925 Webber S&H--Telephone Desk Set
US1688475 1928 1924 Smith AE--Substation Telephone Circuits
US1689598 1928 1925 Pye AEL--Telephone Substation Circuits
US1719992 1929 1925 Obergfell AE--Calling Device
US1738919 1929 1927 Obergfell AEL--Telephone Desk Set
US1878800 1932 1931 Obergfell AEL--Electromagnetic Device (induction coil)
US1971499 1934 1932 Obergfell AEL--Telephone Handset
US2068700 1937 1935 Peterson AEL--Calling Device
US2133469 1938 1936 Obergfell AEL--Calling Device
US2149628 1939 1935 Pye AEL--Telephone Transmitter
here is the label in full beauty:
So no patents any more recent than 1943 on there Karl? Or do you wind up actually seeing the date that each patent was actually granted which could go into 1944 and even 1945?
Terry
Quote from: AE_Collector on January 14, 2017, 08:07:24 AM
So no patents any more recent than 1943 on there Karl? Or do you wind up actually seeing the date that each patent was actually granted which could go into 1944 and even 1945?
Terry
The latest patent year on this label is 1939. I listed the patent in an earlier post in this topic. My coding for patent file names is patent country and number first, then issue year, then application year, applicant(s), company, and finally exact title. Comments are last in ().
I am adding the list again to the intact image.
The handset patents, also those for the transmitter and receiver capsules, were approved in 1940, which are not on the label. Therefore the label was likely produced earlier than 1940.
But we really don't know why they included certain patents and not others, or how soon they updated labels after new patents were granted. It is a bit of guess work and only a guide.
I don't have any 40's with the black felt covered base myself though I have one in my records with some info given to me by a member "recrum" but he hasn't been active here on the forum since 2013. I sent him a PM and an email to see if we can get some more info on his felt covered 40.
Meanwhile, a trip into the spare parts box yielded this black felt covered base for a 40 without the rest of the 40. It doesn't have the usual paper patent label on the bottom but it does have its schematic diagram intact inside. The drawing is D-53688 Issue 4 and the telephone was a N4038 B0. The ringer that is still attached to the base is a low impedance SL ringer which looks correct for a 40xx set with a "0" ringer code.
One other piece of evidence is that it still has the special brass "nut" on the forward base mounting screw which was used to attach the front of the base plate on 40's that had the old steel dial mounting ring as opposed to the newer bakelite cases that had bakelite tabs to attach the dial to.
I wish I had this phone intact as I don't have any complete felt based AE 40's!
Terry
Here is one that sold last week:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/232185894943
Unfortunately the interior of the set is not shown, but by the patent label it may be directly inferred that it was made between 1939 and 1943, and in context of other known patent labels, that it was made between 1939 and 1940.
Hey Fabius:
Can you confirm that the schematic diagram has N4020 on it, can't see the letter for certain.
Also can you see what 2 letter code is on the bottom row if printing on the small condenser and if you can see what is printed on the large condenser.
The picture that shows the induction coil makes it look different than normal. Is it marked D-282996-A?
And finally, any chance if a closer look at the dial and markings on the back.
Thanks,
Terry
Here are some quick shots - sorry they are not as sharp as they might be. Not enough light, not enough hands and no camera mount.
Regards
Jack
The second set failed to post - try as a PDF
Jack
Quote from: Jack Ryan on January 24, 2017, 04:02:08 AM
The second set failed to post - try as a PDF
Since you are using a Canon EOS 70D camera with some meta data, I'd think one of the 5 images you tried to load had a random string within the image that caused all 5 images to no load. Resizing the image at least one, or just the offending image (you could try loading those 5 one at a time to see which one has the bad string, resize it and try loading it again).
The meta data attached to the last image you posted is attached to this reply in pdf format.
Having created a lot of combined images for the auction contest gallery and Find of the Month winning phones, I ended up with 2 or 3 that did not load and offered what I found to work best when dealing with the security "Error" issue, which come from 1 of 2 issue or in the worst case, both in one image.
http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=16137.msg180586#msg180586
After resizing the problem images, they loaded without further issue.
So, TK7 is the "order number", according to the tag. And TK is also stamped on the ringing capacitor.
Yes that is a significant thing that I see in that group of pictures. Seems odd that so many components would have the order number on them, even condensers that you would think were built by the thousands including the identification printing and the used as needed to build phones. Could always be an order placed by AE with themselves to manufacture 10,000 of a certain type of 40 to meet demand over the next month or so.
Can we see markings on the transmitter and receiver capsules Jack?
Terry
Quote from: poplar1 on January 24, 2017, 09:12:26 AM
So, TK7 is the "order number", according to the tag. And TK is also stamped on the ringing capacitor.
I think that is doubtful. It is just stamped there by chance. The first two letters of this group are usually stamped on the base, the dial, the capacitor, the TX and RX elements. It probably is an inspection code. The code on the dial and the capacitor is often suffixed by a number, one or two digits, but not consistently the same on the same set. TX and RX elements apparently never have any suffixes, just the two letter. The two-letter code can be used to spot sets that had a component changed after manufacture.
None of the other information on that tag is stamped where one would expect it, why assume that the last code is ?
It appears that the tag was stamped in the same manner as the bottom was stamped on set that didn't have a felt cover. Someone stamped the type string, and then someone stamped the "third group" code, as we have been calling it here lately. These rarely line up, and sometime are even upside down, it appears a separate process.
My suspicion is that this set has that tag because they couldn't stamp the bottom, but we don't have other new sets to compare. Perhaps they all had a tag as well. I doubt there is a stamp underneath the felt.
Quote from: AE_Collector on January 24, 2017, 10:01:40 AM
Can we see markings on the transmitter and receiver capsules Jack?
I could not find any stamped markings on the elements to photograph.
Jack
Quote from: TelePlay on January 24, 2017, 04:50:07 AM
Since you are using a Canon EOS 70D camera with some meta data, I'd think one of the 5 images you tried to load had a random string within the image that caused all 5 images to no load. Resizing the image at least one, or just the offending image (you could try loading those 5 one at a time to see which one has the bad string, resize it and try loading it again).
The meta data attached to the last image you posted is attached to this reply in pdf format.
Having created a lot of combined images for the auction contest gallery and Find of the Month winning phones, I ended up with 2 or 3 that did not load and offered what I found to work best when dealing with the security "Error" issue, which come from 1 of 2 issue or in the worst case, both in one image.
http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=16137.msg180586#msg180586
After resizing the problem images, they loaded without further issue.
It was much faster to create a PDF than to play trial and error with the pictures and I was in a rush. The pictures were already processes (cropped).
It would be much more efficient to fix the problem.
Jack
Quote from: Jack Ryan on January 24, 2017, 11:22:20 AM
It was much faster to create a PDF than to play trial and error with the pictures and I was in a rush. The pictures were already processes (cropped).
It would be much more efficient to fix the problem.
Jack
Yes, I fully understand and agree. In this case, I took the opportunity of your reply as a way to let other members know of the fix. When in a hurry and getting hung with with that "error" issue, anything that can get the job done works. The "posting photos on the forum" area is not as highly read as these interesting phone topics.
I screen captured your images from the pdf file so they could be posted on their own but being screen captures (wasn't working on my machine that extracts pdf images) are low resolution so if you want to upload the images, if you care to do so, in higher resolution, that would be great.EDIT: Original images have been extracted from the pdf document and posted in place of the screen captured images in Reply 29 (http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=16986.msg181117#msg181117) above.
Quote from: TelePlay on January 24, 2017, 01:23:47 PM
I screen captured your images from the pdf file so they could be posted on their own but being screen captures (wasn't working on my machine that extracts pdf images) are low resolution so if you want to upload the images, if you care to do so, in higher resolution, that would be great.
Thanks for posting the images. For reference it was not necessary (should not have been necessary) to screen capture. I usually right click an image and, depending on the application, "copy image", or "save image as". Anyway, the information has been conveyed.
Regards
Jack
(off to a meeting)
Quote from: Jack Ryan on January 24, 2017, 05:08:22 PM
Thanks for posting the images. For reference it was not necessary (should not have been necessary) to screen capture. I usually right click an image and, depending on the application, "copy image", or "save image as". Anyway, the information has been conveyed.
I only have the reader versions, Acrobat Reader and Nitro Reader, and right click in either does not work. However, Nitro Reader does have an extract images button in the tool bar which allowed me to extract all images at once and exchange the screen capture images posted in the full sized pdf file images.
http://www.classicrotaryphones.com/forum/index.php?topic=16986.msg181117#msg181117
The images shown are clickable, they enlarge to full size when clicked on.
A couple of things about Jacks Felt based 40 that are different than any in my records so far.
The ringer is a SL with code D-56452-C. So far I don't have ANY ringers in the 5645x range but lots of 5646x range. Will have to look that up unless anyone knows of hand what may be different about this one.
The Induction coil is the only -B that I have seen. All 40's, 47's and 50's have the D-282996-A Induction Coil yet this one has a -B and its code is stamped on the side of the bakelite base of the IC, not on the fabric wrapped around the coil like usual.
Jack:
Can you check the large Condenser for model and two letter code.
Is there no printing on the capsules at all? Is the transmitter capsule black, brass or the newer aluminum case? I have seen the new aluminum, ones that are unmarked and have seen a couple that a code is stamped into the aluminum, rather than printed on but most of the old capsules have ink printing on them.
The schematic references an Optional handset with a transmitter Cut Out for noisy locations. I don't think that is normally shown on the Schematic is it? Yet it is an option not always equipped. Would the different induction coil have anything to so with the option of using this handset on this 4046 sets?
Terry
The major groups of ringers are distinguished in the digit preceding and including the position of '4', i.e. D-56yxx with y=1,2,... and xx for the various specific properties.
The series starts with y=1 in the late 1920s.
I believe the D-564xx ringers were issued in the 1941-1942 time frame. I have found no specific reference to the series in the catalogs. It seems to fall in between those that are easily available in digit form. However, circumstantial evidence of ringer coil numbers place it into that time slot, IMHO. Perhaps the change in numbering reflects certain changes in permissible materials during the war period. I am thinking of similar changes that Western Electric made starting in 1941 when they changed the material of their ringer coil cores for the red-stripe ringers.
The same argument may apply to the induction coil. Rather than issuing a new number, the changed the suffix from A to B. I believe after the war, the standard coils was once again marked –A.
The early schematic of the AE 40 sets was D-53688 which indeed had the alternate receiver in the diagram. I have found the same diagram in other sets, for example, I have recorded a set SN 4022 A0 with that diagram with issue no. 6.
Quote from: AE_Collector on January 24, 2017, 07:30:11 PM
A couple of things about Jacks Felt based 40 that are different than any in my records so far.
The ringer is a SL with code D-56452-C. So far I don't have ANY ringers in the 5645x range but lots of 5646x range. Will have to look that up unless anyone knows of hand what may be different about this one.
The Induction coil is the only -B that I have seen. All 40's, 47's and 50's have the D-282996-A Induction Coil yet this one has a -B and its code is stamped on the side of the bakelite base of the IC, not on the fabric wrapped around the coil like usual.
Jack:
Can you check the large Condenser for model and two letter code.
Is there no printing on the capsules at all? Is the transmitter capsule black, brass or the newer aluminum case? I have seen the new aluminum, ones that are unmarked and have seen a couple that a code is stamped into the aluminum, rather than printed on but most of the old capsules have ink printing on them.
The schematic references an Optional handset with a transmitter Cut Out for noisy locations. I don't think that is normally shown on the Schematic is it? Yet it is an option not always equipped. Would the different induction coil have anything to so with the option of using this handset on this 4046 sets?
Terry
Oh okay, I didn't realize that the optional handset was shown in diagrams frequently, just an option I guess.
This ringer while being in the 654xx series is a 5645x which I haven't seen rather than 5646x which are very common. Some short lived version or possibly a change necessitated by materials shortages.
Terry
It might be useful to tabulate ringers found in AE Monophones. Only the catalogs until 1934 show the part numbers, after 1934 the catalogs were changed to using different catalog numbers for many or most parts and assemblies, for example the 34A3 changed from format L-220 to AA-10. However, the codes that were printed on, for example, schematic labels, were still L-220, in this example. Samiliarly for ringers. This makes it very hard to correlate parts found on telsets to those displayed in catalogs. We have several bulletins with replacement parts, which do list the part numbers, rather than those shorter catalog numbers.
When I started recording Base Codes and the details of each phone a number of years ago I didn't do a very good job. Much of my early info was recorded from phones seen on eBay where the pictures were quite good. But large amounts of detail still wasn't available. I made up for some of that when I started asking phone club members to fill in survey forms about their phones but that still missed some detail. Now I have records of numerous phones that could be of particular interest but key details weren't recorded. Nothing to do but keep collecting more info.
Yes, if the codes in the catalogs lined up with the codes on the bases of the phones this project would be considerably easier!
Earlier in a different topic we discussed the dial code letter used when ordering (L4111) AE 47 sets. They are M for Numbers Only, C for Dial Blank, E for Letters/Numbers yet the codes on the actual phones are A for numbers only, B for Dial Blank and D or E for Numbers/Letters Dials. E lines up in this case but likely a total coincidence.
I think it was either after the 4055 (1934) or the 4055A (1937) and by the 4055B (1938) catalog when the ordering codes completely changed.
Terry
Quote from: AE_Collector on January 25, 2017, 12:15:07 PM
Yes if the codes in the catalogs lined up with the codes on the bases of the phones this project would be considerably easier.
Earlier in a differentt topic we discussed the dial code letter used when ordering (L4111) AE 47 sets. They are M for Numbers Only, C for Dial Blank, E for Letters/Numbers yet the codes on the actual phones are A for numbers only, B for Dial Blank, D or E for Numbers/Letters. E lines up in this case but likely a total coincidence.
I think it was either after the 4055 (1934) or the 4055A (1937) and by the 4055B (1938) catalog when the ordering codes completely changed.
Terry
4055A already uses the new codes.
I have the feeling that the codes for the dial evolved over time and was not necessarily constant even within a model line. For example, on the Type 43 Monophone, the compact desk side or wall phone, the presence of the dial was code 'L', while B was again a blank. One might think that AE couldn't have used so many different dials that they ran out of numbering options. We simply don't understand the coding logistics used by AE. Even apparatus that could not conceivably have a dial, such as a ringer or magneto generator and battery box, used the same coding style: L 594 A0.
It may well be that the "A" model was not a particular characteristic, but a designation for the "standard" factory configuration, no matter what it exactly was at any given time.
Quote from: unbeldi on January 25, 2017, 12:37:14 PM
It may well be that the "A" model was not a particular characteristic, but a designation for the "standard" factory configuration, no matter what it exactly was at any given time.
Yes that could be, "A = Standard Configuration" for that particular model.
There are numerous potential differences in dials between the different number plates and different contact set arrangements though there wouldn't be many different contact set arrangements used within off the shelf 40, 43, 47 & 50 sets.
Terry