Am I misremembering?

[John]

When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in my
parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the phone
service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the installation, or
some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?

 

[Phil Allison]

"John"

When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in my
parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the
phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
installation, or some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?

** Yep.




......... Phil

 

[K Ludger]

"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:6mvk8gFi96elU1@mid.individual.net...

"John"
When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in
my parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the
phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
installation, or some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?


** Yep.




........ Phil

The jumper king who lived in the MDF room would test lines, I think doing a
polarity reversal and see how long the meter needle took to fall back,
giving an indication of the capacitance on across the line. More phones =
more capacitance.

IIRC the phones could be strapped share a single cap and still retain the
bell in each phone.

 

[Bob Parker]

On 31/10/2008 17:03 K Ludger wrote:

"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:6mvk8gFi96elU1@mid.individual.net...
"John"
When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in
my parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the
phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
installation, or some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?

** Yep.




........ Phil



The jumper king who lived in the MDF room would test lines, I think doing a
polarity reversal and see how long the meter needle took to fall back,
giving an indication of the capacitance on across the line. More phones =
more capacitance.

IIRC the phones could be strapped share a single cap and still retain the
bell in each phone.

I worked in an exchange once ... what's a 'jumper king'? The place
had air conditioning and we didn't wear jumpers.

Yep, during a line test we could see how much capacitance there was
by watching the meter. Lots of times it was obvious that there was more
than one phone on the line, but I don't remember anyone ever doing
anything about it.

The later 800 series 'colour' phones could be set up with only a
single capacitor on the line for more than one phone. I can't quite
remember if that was possible on the older 300 & 400 series bakelite phones.


Bob

 

[K Ludger]

"Bob Parker" <bobp.deletethis@bluebottle.com> wrote in message
news:490aa790$0$22604$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

On 31/10/2008 17:03 K Ludger wrote:
"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:6mvk8gFi96elU1@mid.individual.net...
"John"
When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in
my parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the
phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
installation, or some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?

** Yep.




........ Phil



The jumper king who lived in the MDF room would test lines, I think doing
a polarity reversal and see how long the meter needle took to fall back,
giving an indication of the capacitance on across the line. More phones =
more capacitance.

IIRC the phones could be strapped share a single cap and still retain the
bell in each phone.

I worked in an exchange once ... what's a 'jumper king'? The place had
air conditioning and we didn't wear jumpers.

In the '80s in WA there seemed to be a Tech Assistant who lived in the MDF
room running the jumpers between the Cable side of the MDF and the Xchange
side. I was in a 3rd in maintenance role
in long haul trunk equip (FDM, digital coax and the then newish optical
stuff), we all referred to the MDF guy as the jumper king.

Yep, during a line test we could see how much capacitance there was by
watching the meter. Lots of times it was obvious that there was more than
one phone on the line, but I don't remember anyone ever doing anything
about it.

Same here, no one was too worried, the techs view seemed to be more phones =
more calls = more $$.

The later 800 series 'colour' phones could be set up with only a
single capacitor on the line for more than one phone. I can't quite
remember if that was possible on the older 300 & 400 series bakelite
phones.


Bob

Aaah yep - I was thinking 800 series.

 

[Bob Parker]

On 31/10/2008 18:37 K Ludger wrote:

In the '80s in WA there seemed to be a Tech Assistant who lived in the MDF
room running the jumpers between the Cable side of the MDF and the Xchange
side. I was in a 3rd in maintenance role
in long haul trunk equip (FDM, digital coax and the then newish optical
stuff), we all referred to the MDF guy as the jumper king.

Ah, right. At the exchange where I was, the MDF jumpering got done
by whoever didn't have a lot else to do, often trainees like me.

Later I migrated to the radio communications section and looked
after broadband analog microwave systems which was hugely better than
running jumpers.



Bob

 

[Mr.T]

"K Ludger" <kjlkj@kljl.org> wrote in message
news:490a9fd4$0$22637$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

IIRC the phones could be strapped share a single cap and still retain the
bell in each phone.

That is "should" be strapped.... as clearly shown in the telecom manuals,
and even on the circuit diagram printed inside phones like the 800 series,
and many others. People who didn't know how to properly convert the phones
deserved to be caught for tampering with Telecom property

MrT.

 

[Eeyore]

John wrote:

When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in my
parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the phone
service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the installation, or
some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?

It was in the UK. I got away with a ticking off from the Post Office Telephones
Inspector.

Graham

 

[kreed]

On Oct 31, 2:50 pm, "John" <j...@junk.com> wrote:

When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in my
parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the phone
service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the installation, or
some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?

Friends of ours had an extension phone in their garage/workshop in the
1970's. Was a legit
Telecom install, and as I remember, there was a surcharge of around
$2-3 a month for the extra socket.

This was done using the black series 800 rotary dial phones.

Some time later, when I managed to obtain the correct telecom
connectors, I made up an "extension" for our place, to get around this
problem, simply ran the extension cord out to the shed, and would
either plug in the inside phone or the extension cord depending on
where I was going to be. (younger readers should also note that being
"available" by home phone every second of the day wasn't as important
as it seems to be now.) They deregulated it all some years later, and
at that time, just parallel wired it, using a cheap dick smith phone
as the extension when they first became available

 

[Bobby]

"John" <john@junk.com> wrote in message
news:gee2q5$ql$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...

When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in my
parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the
phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
installation, or some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?



Where I came from in Africa we used drums. If the Chief caught you strapping

an extension drum to your back you were in big trouble - you were put into
the pot and cooked.

 

[Mr.T]

"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5244421-a165-40cd-b4e5-5c6dc8dbda10@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Friends of ours had an extension phone in their garage/workshop in the
1970's. Was a legit
Telecom install, and as I remember, there was a surcharge of around
$2-3 a month for the extra socket.

Yep, that's why many people did it illegally.

This was done using the black series 800 rotary dial phones.

Actually black was not a standard colour issue for 800 series phones. Most
were ivory, with a variety of alternative colours available.

Some time later, when I managed to obtain the correct telecom
connectors, I made up an "extension" for our place, to get around this
problem, simply ran the extension cord out to the shed, and would
either plug in the inside phone or the extension cord depending on
where I was going to be.

No need with 800 series phones, proper wiring only required using 3 wires of
a two pair cable, and moving one quick connect jumper inside the phone
(which was clearly marked inside) and removing the link on the phone socket.

MrT.

 

[kreed]

On Nov 1, 3:18 pm, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:

"kreed" <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:d5244421-a165-40cd-b4e5-5c6dc8dbda10@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Friends of ours had an extension phone in their garage/workshop in the
1970's.  Was a legit
Telecom install, and as I remember, there was a surcharge of around
$2-3 a month for the extra socket.

Yep, that's why many people did it illegally.

This was done using the black series 800 rotary dial phones.

Actually black was not a standard colour issue for 800 series phones. Most
were ivory, with a variety of alternative colours available.

This one is black, looks identical to 800 series ones I see on the
net

http://www.retro-rotary-phones.com/ccp0-catshow/refurbished-telecom-pmg-rotary-dial-phones.html

Still have it actually. Only difference is that the numbers are
outside of the dial and are white, and there are small golden
triangles at the bottom of the dial holes. Underneath has "AWA" and
"68" stamped on it.
Took it with me when we moved, as the new place the handset had a
fault. When Telstra upgraded us to push button, some time in the early
1990s, they just gave us the new phone in a box, and never bothered to
take the rotary dial away. I suppose they would have millions of them
to store or get rid of if they had taken them back.

Interestingly my friends 18 year old daughter saw it when they were
here once and thought it was "extra cool"

Some time later, when I managed to obtain the correct Telecom
connectors, I made up an "extension" for our place, to get around this
problem, simply ran the extension cord out to the shed, and would
either plug in the inside phone or the extension cord depending on
where I was going to be.

No need with 800 series phones, proper wiring only required using 3 wires of
a two pair cable, and moving one quick connect jumper inside the phone
(which was clearly marked inside) and removing the link on the phone socket.

MrT.

 

[kreed]

On Nov 1, 3:18 pm, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:

"kreed" <kenreed1...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:d5244421-a165-40cd-b4e5-5c6dc8dbda10@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Friends of ours had an extension phone in their garage/workshop in the
1970's.  Was a legit
Telecom install, and as I remember, there was a surcharge of around
$2-3 a month for the extra socket.

Yep, that's why many people did it illegally.

This was done using the black series 800 rotary dial phones.

Actually black was not a standard colour issue for 800 series phones. Most
were ivory, with a variety of alternative colours available.

Some time later, when I managed to obtain the correct telecom
connectors, I made up an "extension" for our place, to get around this
problem, simply ran the extension cord out to the shed, and would
either plug in the inside phone or the extension cord depending on
where I was going to be.

No need with 800 series phones, proper wiring only required using 3 wires of
a two pair cable, and moving one quick connect jumper inside the phone
(which was clearly marked inside) and removing the link on the phone socket.

MrT.

Also should mention that when in Russia, there were phones of
identical design to the Telecom series 800s still in common use. The
only difference was a cloth covered cord, most were in colours that I
have never seen in Australia, and the rotary dials were made of smoked
plastic rather than clear - and of course a totally different wall
socket. These seemed to be being phased out and replaced with touch
phones with digital displays for caller ID etc.

I also saw some exact replicas of early Telecom "commander" phones ,
but with a rotary dial and without the multi-line leds above the dial
like here

 

[Mr.T]

"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8113af80-93fa-431d-bedd-9253534736e9@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

This was done using the black series 800 rotary dial phones.

Actually black was not a standard colour issue for 800 series phones.
Most
were ivory, with a variety of alternative colours available.

This one is black, looks identical to 800 series ones I see on the
net
http://www.retro-rotary-phones.com/ccp0-catshow/refurbished-telecom-pmg-rot
ary-dial-phones.html

Funny, there are green, grey and ivory there, but I see no black. HOWEVER I
didn't say black 800 series phones were NOT available (I have one myself)
but since they are pretty rare, I said they were NOT a STANDARD color, and
therefore your statement that implied black as being the standard colour,
was wrong.
Or maybe you meant only the black ones could be modified? In which case you
are still wrong.

MrT.

 

[Bob Parker]

On 2/11/2008 13:25 Ross Herbert wrote:

When I sarted in the PMG in 1956 the standard phone was the 300 series and I
carried out many parallel and portable installations in subsequent years. In
order to reduce "bell tinkling" while dialling from a parallel phone the bell
circuit capacitor in the second (or third) phones had to be disconnected. A 3
wire parallel connection was employed so that the only capacitor in all of the
parallel phones was that in bell circuit of the first, or primary phone. All of
the bells in the paralleled phones were effectively in parallel and in series
with the capacitor in the primary phone. As far as the test desk "capacitor
kick" test is concerned, when all phones are on-hook, there is almost no
difference (if any at all) in the meter indication compared to when only a
single phone is connected to the line.

A typical 300 series portable connection illustrates the principle of parallel
connection. While this circuit indicates the use of a fixed bellset and a single
portable phone (with handle), the PMG in WA did not use this method AFAIK. The
standard method was that a primary, or "fixed", telephone had to be the first
connection point (in a similar manner to a standard parallel service) and this
was the only phone where the bell capacitor was in circuit.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/aus/300port.htm

Since all 300 series (and earlier) phones used a permanent hardwired connection
via a fixed terminal block (except where a portable service was used) there was
little chance (apart from someone ripping the incoming cable or line cord from
the terminal block) that a phone could be disconnected at the premises, so the
capacitor kick from the phone was a very reliable indication of the line
condition.

Ever since the mid 1930's when 162AT and the superior 232AT were the standard
phones in Australia there has been a provision for a 3rd wire to allow a
parallel phone connection using only a single capacitor in the bell circuit. In
fact there is probably no reason that earlier models than these could not be
connected in parallel using only a single capacitor in the bell circuit.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/aus/232cbt.htm

The early 800 series phones were essentially improved versions of the older 300
and 400 series phones and still used a magneto bell as the ring indicator. When
these were paralleled a 3 wire circuit had to be used similar to the 300/400
series.

The latest of the 800 series phones (eg. 8081) were essentially "all electronic"
and the ring indicator was either a 2" loudspeaker or a piezo sounder and these
phones could be effectively connected in parallel using a 2 wire connection.

Thanks for the info Ross. It's all coming back now. It's 36
years since I got out of that section of the PMG/Telecom .... makes me
feel old.


Bob

 

[Alan Rutlidge]

"Ross Herbert" <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:euspg4tbasel6vtdcgv8vgiqioo2dubqbt@4ax.com...

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:37:04 +1100, Bob Parker
bobp.deletethis@bluebottle.com
wrote:

:On 31/10/2008 17:03 K Ludger wrote:
:> "Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
:> news:6mvk8gFi96elU1@mid.individual.net...
:>> "John"
:>>> When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension
in
:>>> my parents' bedroom.
:>>> I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be
called
:>>> then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for
the
:>>> phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
:>>> installation, or some such thing.
:
:>>> Was this ever actually the case?
:
:>> ** Yep.
:
:
:
:
:>> ........ Phil
:
:
:
:> The jumper king who lived in the MDF room would test lines, I think
doing a
:> polarity reversal and see how long the meter needle took to fall back,
:> giving an indication of the capacitance on across the line. More phones
=
:> more capacitance.
:
:> IIRC the phones could be strapped share a single cap and still retain
the
:> bell in each phone.
:
:
:
: I worked in an exchange once ... what's a 'jumper king'? The place
:had air conditioning and we didn't wear jumpers.
:
: Yep, during a line test we could see how much capacitance there was
:by watching the meter. Lots of times it was obvious that there was more
:than one phone on the line, but I don't remember anyone ever doing
:anything about it.
:
: The later 800 series 'colour' phones could be set up with only a
:single capacitor on the line for more than one phone. I can't quite
:remember if that was possible on the older 300 & 400 series bakelite
phones.
:
:
:Bob

When I sarted in the PMG in 1956 the standard phone was the 300 series and
I
carried out many parallel and portable installations in subsequent years.
In
order to reduce "bell tinkling" while dialling from a parallel phone the
bell
circuit capacitor in the second (or third) phones had to be disconnected.
A 3
wire parallel connection was employed so that the only capacitor in all of
the
parallel phones was that in bell circuit of the first, or primary phone.
All of
the bells in the paralleled phones were effectively in parallel and in
series
with the capacitor in the primary phone. As far as the test desk
"capacitor
kick" test is concerned, when all phones are on-hook, there is almost no
difference (if any at all) in the meter indication compared to when only a
single phone is connected to the line.

A typical 300 series portable connection illustrates the principle of
parallel
connection. While this circuit indicates the use of a fixed bellset and a
single
portable phone (with handle), the PMG in WA did not use this method AFAIK.
The
standard method was that a primary, or "fixed", telephone had to be the
first
connection point (in a similar manner to a standard parallel service) and
this
was the only phone where the bell capacitor was in circuit.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/aus/300port.htm

Since all 300 series (and earlier) phones used a permanent hardwired
connection
via a fixed terminal block (except where a portable service was used)
there was
little chance (apart from someone ripping the incoming cable or line cord
from
the terminal block) that a phone could be disconnected at the premises, so
the
capacitor kick from the phone was a very reliable indication of the line
condition.

Ever since the mid 1930's when 162AT and the superior 232AT were the
standard
phones in Australia there has been a provision for a 3rd wire to allow a
parallel phone connection using only a single capacitor in the bell
circuit. In
fact there is probably no reason that earlier models than these could not
be
connected in parallel using only a single capacitor in the bell circuit.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/aus/232cbt.htm

The early 800 series phones were essentially improved versions of the
older 300
and 400 series phones and still used a magneto bell as the ring indicator.
When
these were paralleled a 3 wire circuit had to be used similar to the
300/400
series.

The latest of the 800 series phones (eg. 8081) were essentially "all
electronic"
and the ring indicator was either a 2" loudspeaker or a piezo sounder and
these
phones could be effectively connected in parallel using a 2 wire
connection.

Spot on the money there Ross.

As newer phones where introduced (and were still using pulse dialling), an
add on device called an anti-tinkle module was wired into the bell circuit
of the phones. The module consisted of a simple circuit of semiconductors
and resistors encapsulated in a small epoxy block about half the size of a
box of matches. It had two connections - one flying grey lead and one fixed
spade type terminal which was wired into the bell circuit in the later 800
series phones (both wall mount and table sets). This prevented the bells
from tinkling when the phones were wired in parallel using only a two wire
cable pair, effectively eliminating the need for the third wire to the other
phones.

Cheers,
Alan

 

[qmod]

Ross Herbert wrote:

:Bob

When I sarted in the PMG in 1956 the standard phone was the 300 series and I

You must have been sent to one of the more modern exchanges at that
time, I started a few years after you but we only had the older magneto
phones and exchanges in the district.

I recall that some of the older techs made sure that one of us trainees
was hanging on to the line when they tested with their "portable" phone.

That 90 0r so volts sure livened things up a bit.

carried out many parallel and portable installations in subsequent years. In
order to reduce "bell tinkling" while dialling from a parallel phone the bell
circuit capacitor in the second (or third) phones had to be disconnected. A 3
wire parallel connection was employed so that the only capacitor in all of the
parallel phones was that in bell circuit of the first, or primary phone. All of
the bells in the paralleled phones were effectively in parallel and in series
with the capacitor in the primary phone. As far as the test desk "capacitor
kick" test is concerned, when all phones are on-hook, there is almost no
difference (if any at all) in the meter indication compared to when only a
single phone is connected to the line.

A typical 300 series portable connection illustrates the principle of parallel
connection. While this circuit indicates the use of a fixed bellset and a single
portable phone (with handle), the PMG in WA did not use this method AFAIK. The
standard method was that a primary, or "fixed", telephone had to be the first
connection point (in a similar manner to a standard parallel service) and this
was the only phone where the bell capacitor was in circuit.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/aus/300port.htm

Since all 300 series (and earlier) phones used a permanent hardwired connection
via a fixed terminal block (except where a portable service was used) there was
little chance (apart from someone ripping the incoming cable or line cord from
the terminal block) that a phone could be disconnected at the premises, so the
capacitor kick from the phone was a very reliable indication of the line
condition.

Ever since the mid 1930's when 162AT and the superior 232AT were the standard
phones in Australia there has been a provision for a 3rd wire to allow a
parallel phone connection using only a single capacitor in the bell circuit. In
fact there is probably no reason that earlier models than these could not be
connected in parallel using only a single capacitor in the bell circuit.
http://www.britishtelephones.com/aus/232cbt.htm

The early 800 series phones were essentially improved versions of the older 300
and 400 series phones and still used a magneto bell as the ring indicator. When
these were paralleled a 3 wire circuit had to be used similar to the 300/400
series.

The latest of the 800 series phones (eg. 8081) were essentially "all electronic"
and the ring indicator was either a 2" loudspeaker or a piezo sounder and these
phones could be effectively connected in parallel using a 2 wire connection.

--
Laurie.
Registered Linux user # 468070

 

[K Ludger]

"Alan Rutlidge" <don't_spam_me_rutlidge@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:490d22b5$0$22608$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

"Bobby" <bob@bobsville.com> wrote in message
news:v6POk.10052$sc2.1098@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

"John" <john@junk.com> wrote in message
news:gee2q5$ql$1@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
When I was a kid (in the 70s) the family house had a phone extension in
my parents' bedroom.
I remember being told that Telstra (or whatever they used to be called
then...) should not find out because they would charge us more for the
phone service, or we would get in trouble for tampering with the
installation, or some such thing.

Was this ever actually the case?



Where I came from in Africa we used drums. If the Chief caught you
strapping an extension drum to your back you were in big trouble - you
were put into the pot and cooked.



LOL - best contribution to this thread so far.

mmmmmm, I wonder if "Bobby" is a psuedo for one of the training school
instructors who used to tell us TOITs/TTOs in depth of his Africa/PNG
travels.

 

[Kevin Martin]

Mr.T wrote:

This was done using the black series 800 rotary dial phones.

Actually black was not a standard colour issue for 800 series phones. Most
were ivory, with a variety of alternative colours available.

From what I remember of the stores list, black was always there, but
demand was so low, it was probably met from refurbished stock. Often
used in mechanics or similar areas, where dirt was common. Although they
were just as likely were ivory. ;-)

When the T200s came out, I always said when people apologised for the
state of it (well some did), that the colour is "motor mechanic white".

The 891 also had some "modern" colours added to the range in the early
80s, the powder blue always looked good on white tiles in a kitchen.


Kevin Martin

--
To Reply, delete what is "Not Required" in abbreviated form

 

[Ross Herbert]

On Sun, 2 Nov 2008 12:44:30 +0900, "Alan Rutlidge"
<don't_spam_me_rutlidge@iinet.net.au> wrote:

:
:Spot on the money there Ross.
:
:As newer phones where introduced (and were still using pulse dialling), an
:add on device called an anti-tinkle module was wired into the bell circuit
f the phones. The module consisted of a simple circuit of semiconductors
:and resistors encapsulated in a small epoxy block about half the size of a
:box of matches. It had two connections - one flying grey lead and one fixed
:spade type terminal which was wired into the bell circuit in the later 800
:series phones (both wall mount and table sets). This prevented the bells
:from tinkling when the phones were wired in parallel using only a two wire
:cable pair, effectively eliminating the need for the third wire to the other
hones.
:
:Cheers,
:Alan
:


While I did know about this add-on for the earlier decadic push-button phones I
never actually used it. I considered it as a "bodgie" way of connecting parallel
phones using only 2 wires, and they were generally not available in our depots
anyway. It was not available already fitted to a phone so a tech had to install
it for a customer anyway.

It only made sense to use the anti-tinkle module if an insitu cable was
installed to the point where the parallel phone was required and that cable was
single pair, and the tech didn't feel like running a new 2pr cable, or this
option was too difficult. A module was required in each phone as well so it was
probably just as costly as running a new cable. Since the early 60's internal
customer cabling was done using 2pr (or 3pr in some cases) pvc cable so there
were usually spare conductors available even where insitu cabling was installed.
It was just as quick to connect the third wire and modify the parallel phone
rather than install the ant-tinkle devices.

I considered it as inferior to the 3 wire connection and I always opted for the
old method.