Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

12488Re: AT&T Chatham, NC Project Office

Expand Messages
  • kemartinatsnetnet
    Nov 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Charles,

      Well that was over 30 years ago.

      I know it was a #1 ESS switch.

      Note. All the links below may wrap.

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/9479603@N02/1814561709/in/set-
      72157602824222688/

      I know it had the unusual tel sets.

      I know it had drum RANS with preemption messages?

      Then again it could have been a water cooled step switch. :-}

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/9479603@N02/1814551011/in/set-
      72157602826943529/

      It wasn't crossbar. There were two Bell two-wire crossbar tandems
      down stairs and an AT&T #4 crossbar toll switch with those
      translators that made so much noise.

      See photo of original #4 crossbar tandem that was there.

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/9479603@N02/1815395770/in/set-
      72157602824221406/

      and old crossbar install

      http://www.flickr.com/photos/9479603@N02/1815393346/in/set-
      72157602826943301/


      OK I'll bite. King solomon treatment?


      --- In coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com, "Charles Fargis" <lackey91@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > fts and autovon were different switches.
      > autovon typical was 4wire 1 ESS
      > fts 4W #5 crossbar.
      > separate contracts then and now
      > last I new autovon > DCTN 5ESS
      > and fts got the King solomon treatment twice
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of kemartinatsnetnet
      > Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 11:58 AM
      > To: coldwarcomms@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [coldwarcomms] Re: AT&T Chatham, NC Project Office
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Thanks for the info.
      >
      > With all the nut jobs running around I was simply concerned that
      > appropriate sites whatever the tennant or tennants my be are
      > properly protected.
      >
      > I was a Bell switchman back in the 1970's and a particular multi
      > purpose building that had multiple switches in it. The only one
      that
      > appeared different was the one on the floor of the Autovon (FTS)
      > switch which had signage on the doors to that specific switch "No
      > access without prior permission of Wire Chief". The switches on
      the
      > other floors had no signage on their doors. Also, all the switches
      > had code lock doors and the Autovon switch had different codes.
      >
      > I had worked in the switch from time to time and remember asking
      the
      > first time in there why is there an additional row of buttons on
      the
      > keypads of the test phones and test call directors.
      >
      > Ken
      >
      > --- In coldwarcomms@ <mailto:coldwarcomms%40yahoogroups.com>
      > yahoogroups.com, Pj <packy41@> wrote:
      > >
      > > First, its a civilan property, so unless there was
      > > some other arrangement or rather another "tennant" you
      > > wouldn't see any MP's on the property.
      > >
      > > Second, as long as your off the property, there is
      > > nothing they can do.
      > >
      > > Third, as I stated before, its on a good word that
      > > there isn't too much going on there these days, as
      > > many operations have been shifted out of there.
      > >
      > > Other than the topo dishes, there isn't much ABOVE
      > > ground that an unwanted person could get in trouble
      > > with, so an actual breech is unlikely to occur.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- kemartinatsnetnet <kemartin@> wrote:
      > >
      > > >
      > > > That begs the question why has security got so lax?
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In coldwarcomms@ <mailto:coldwarcomms%40yahoogroups.com>
      > yahoogroups.com, "mbella42"
      > > > <mbella42@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > A friend who grew up within a mile or so of this
      > > > place was
      > > > confronted
      > > > > when he and a friend wandered to close to the
      > > > perimeter, I guess
      > > > that
      > > > > would have been early-80s. Thats about the only
      > > > reason I'd have to
      > > > > think the site would be aggressively secured. I
      > > > used to work at
      > > > the
      > > > > KRSOC at Kunia on Oahu, and the MPs there were not
      > > > too friendly
      > > > about
      > > > > vehicles that turned into the wrong driveway so to
      > > > speak. Maybe
      > > > they
      > > > > were just bored from guarding site in such a
      > > > laid-back location?
      > > > >
      > > > > > What makes you think that a site like that these
      > > > days would have
      > > > any
      > > > > sort of
      > > > > > "security staff," and especially enough security
      > > > personnel where
      > > > > they then
      > > > > > could have sent a quick-reaction team out to
      > > > "harass" some
      > > > > photographers?
      > > > > > I've certainly been known to 'pass a tres' in
      > > > the name of bunker
      > > > > nerdiness, but
      > > > > > by doing so, Evans & I are the ones doing the
      > > > harassing, and any
      > > > > security
      > > > > > forces would just be doing their job.
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > > __________________________________________________
      > > Do You Yahoo!?
      > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      > > http://mail. <http://mail.yahoo.com> yahoo.com
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Show all 16 messages in this topic