Re: Old Party-Line Arrangements

When it comes to outgoing calls once DDD and CAMA had arrived, I've

> seen references to different ringer wiring combinations to enable the > equipment to test for originating party, and also in the earlier days > of DDD that in some places (maybe small independents?) callers had to > dial an ID digit (e.g. 1x + NPA + number).

The only method I'm aware of for transparently identifying the calling party was used by Ma Bell on two-party fully-selective lines. This used the ringer coils in a balanced bridge configuration to ground to indicate when the "tip" party was off hook.

For four-party and eight-party lines, the usual practice was to intercept and send the call first to a live operator to identify the party.

Can anybody elaborate and explain in more detail the arrangements which > were commonly used, both in the Bell System and in the larger > independents?

When speaking in context of Ma Bell, in metropolitan areas, two-party and four-party fully-selective (no party heard another party's ring) lines were at times offered. Ringdown voltage was applied between one side of the pair and ground on two-party lines. On four-party lines a small cold-cathode tube was used as a rectifier to discriminate the positive or negative ringdown pulses sent on the appropriate side of the pair.

Eight party semi-selective lines were offered in rural areas, and in some cases until quite recently. This was similar to the four-party fully-selective method but employed a "one long" or "two short" ring cadence to identify the called party.

The indies would more commonly use frequency-selective ringers to ring only the bell of the called party's phones.

Reply to
jsw
Loading thread data ...

In the 1970s, I knew people at non-Bell independents who used circle

> digits, the extra digit to identify the calling phone. There was also > a surprising amount of ONI, operators cutting in to ask for your > number, even on private lines in Bell territory before ANI was > universal.

My employer in 1973 had Centrex but suburban (message unit) and toll calls were ONI -- you dialed the number and a Bell operator came on and asked you for your number. (I believe the Centrex was run by step-by-step switch since it had secret digit absorbtion of the first digit of the extension. All our extensions began with "3" and you didn't need to dial that 3 except when calling 33xx. My co-workers were impressed when I discovered that.) My employer also used a cord switchboard; I thought all Centrex users had more modern consoles.

AFAIK, ANI trailed direct-distance dialing in the Bell System.

I would think being an ONI operator would be a pretty boring job -- all you did was enter 4 digits into a key pad all day long.

TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response:

She said the old biddies on the party line would set the phone in a > galvanized laundry tub, so even if they were sitting out on the > front porch on a hot summer night, they would all hear that > (amplified by the galvanized tub) 'tick sound', and the front-porch > ladies would quietly slip inside and try to listen/spy on the > neighbor who had received the phone call, to find out who had called > and what they were talking about. PAT]

From time to time people say "back in the good old days people were nicer, more respectful, etc." The above example -- which was very common -- shows this wasn't always the case.

On two-party lines whether it was tip or ring determined whether > either party would be charged and you could use AMA. With four party > you used CAMA and an operator would come on the line to ask what your > number was.
[repeating an old story]

Back in the 1970s I was making a lot of toll calls from home (thank goodness for cheap after 11pm rates). We had a private line served by a #5 XBAR in a city.

Suddenly, my phone bill didn't show any long distance calls. Month after month went by. I finally called the phone company and reported it and they denied anything was wrong. About a month later someone from the _business_ subscriber service (not residential) called me to report they found a problem with my line. The man said somehow my "tip and ring were confused with a business customer and my toll calls were charged to him; they reviewed the calls against my past usage and put them back on my bill; I would be allowed to pay it out over a few months."

I don't know how the internals confused my line and this business's for billing purposes, his number wasn't anything like mine. But the toll calls were mine and my own calls showed up again.

As I understood it, the businessman noticed my toll calls (being made late at night) and repeatedly complained to the company it couldn't have come from his place. The phone company simply said someone must have access and using his phones. After I guess he made a big enough stink they researched it and found the 'tip/ring' problem and fixed it. Oh yes -- he called one of the numbers I called and got more info.

The only subsequent problem was that while the man said I could pay it out, the regular _residential_ service people demanded the full payment at once.

Reply to
Lisa Hancock

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.