Re: [Telecom] Emergency call boxes still in use article

Re: [Telecom] Emergency call boxes still in use article
NewsGroups | Search | Tools
User Password
Register Now! Lost Password?
 comp.dcom.telecom  Post an article  get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content  add this group's latest topics to your Google content  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Re: [Telecom] Emergency call boxes still in use article hancock4 11-22-2007
Posted by on November 22, 2007, 9:55 pm
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
On Nov 22, 1:03 pm, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

> I routinely -- as in several times a week -- encounter 'unable to complete
> your call' intercept messages and/or fast busy.

Where is that and why is that? Maybe the cities I've lived and worked
in had some magic touch, but I never encountered such poor service
"routinely several times a week". Here and there were very
occassional spot shortages over the years. but not "routinely".


> Trunks, on the other hand, are still relatively "expensive". and always
> will be. Before you consider things like '3-way' calling, that can tie
> up more trunks than premise lines.

A trunk consists of both the physical conductor between two locations
as well as the terminal equipment on each end. The terminal equipment
is VASTLY reduced in price. The physical conductor is vastly reduced
in price thanks to digital and fibre optics and greater economies of
scale. In other words, the CO switch is larger than it once was on a
per line basis, and there are more trunking and routing options on a
per line basis than years ago.

Likewise the switchgear in the C.O. is vastly cheaper so they can
afford more of it as a safety reserve.

Let's look at it another way. Back in 1975 when a major NYC telephone
exchange burned up ("Second Ave"), the lines that used ESS were the
easiest to quickly restore using other ESS switches elsewhere and swap
in replacement. Today everything is ESS. That means in case of a big
problem, they can, and they do, reassign resources via computer
redirect rather than have guys out with soldering guns and circuit
plans.



Posted by Justa Lurker on November 23, 2007, 10:09 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Today everything is ESS. That means in case of a big
> problem, they can, and they do, reassign resources via computer
> redirect rather than have guys out with soldering guns and circuit
> plans.

I think you are confusing ESS with DACS/DCS. Two different animals.


Posted by T on November 23, 2007, 10:09 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
@bbs.cpcn.com says...
> On Nov 22, 1:03 pm, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
>
> > I routinely -- as in several times a week -- encounter 'unable to complete
> > your call' intercept messages and/or fast busy.
>
> Where is that and why is that? Maybe the cities I've lived and worked
> in had some magic touch, but I never encountered such poor service
> "routinely several times a week". Here and there were very
> occassional spot shortages over the years. but not "routinely".
>
>
> > Trunks, on the other hand, are still relatively "expensive". and always
> > will be. Before you consider things like '3-way' calling, that can tie
> > up more trunks than premise lines.
>
> A trunk consists of both the physical conductor between two locations
> as well as the terminal equipment on each end. The terminal equipment
> is VASTLY reduced in price. The physical conductor is vastly reduced
> in price thanks to digital and fibre optics and greater economies of
> scale. In other words, the CO switch is larger than it once was on a
> per line basis, and there are more trunking and routing options on a
> per line basis than years ago.
>
> Likewise the switchgear in the C.O. is vastly cheaper so they can
> afford more of it as a safety reserve.
>
> Let's look at it another way. Back in 1975 when a major NYC telephone
> exchange burned up ("Second Ave"), the lines that used ESS were the
> easiest to quickly restore using other ESS switches elsewhere and swap
> in replacement. Today everything is ESS. That means in case of a big
> problem, they can, and they do, reassign resources via computer
> redirect rather than have guys out with soldering guns and circuit
> plans.
>
>
>

But there are still physical subscriber lines that terminate in offices.
It's not so easy to re-home them if the CO burns to the ground like what
happened in NYC.


Posted by Robert Bonomi on November 23, 2007, 10:10 am
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>On Nov 22, 1:03 pm, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
>
>> I routinely -- as in several times a week -- encounter 'unable to complete
>> your call' intercept messages and/or fast busy.
>
>Where is that and why is that? Maybe the cities I've lived and worked
>in had some magic touch, but I never encountered such poor service
>"routinely several times a week". Here and there were very
>occassional spot shortages over the years. but not "routinely".

Where: big city, central financial district.

Why: I make a _lot_ of calls during busy hours, into similarly congested
areas. Almost all of them inter-LATA.

Note: the blockages are momentary, I almost _never_ get a repeat failed call
on a redial.

>> Trunks, on the other hand, are still relatively "expensive". and always
>> will be. Before you consider things like '3-way' calling, that can tie
>> up more trunks than premise lines.
>
>A trunk consists of both the physical conductor between two locations
>as well as the terminal equipment on each end. The terminal equipment
>is VASTLY reduced in price. The physical conductor is vastly reduced
>in price thanks to digital and fibre optics and greater economies of
>scale.

Ignoring the labor cost, you have a point. unfortunately, labor _is_
a big, and *ever-rising* part of the total cost picture.


Similar ThreadsPosted
[Telecom] Emergency call boxes still in use article November 13, 2007, 8:44 pm
[TELECOM] Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 21, 2007, 5:19 pm
Re: [TELECOM] Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 22, 2007, 1:02 pm
[Telecom] Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 22, 2007, 1:09 pm
[Telecom] Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 23, 2007, 11:41 pm
Re: [Telecom] Emergency call boxes still in use article November 24, 2007, 9:40 pm
TELECOM Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 15, 2007, 12:01 am
[TELECOM] Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 21, 2007, 11:06 am
TELECOM Re: Emergency call boxes still in use article November 22, 2007, 10:01 pm
Re: [Telecom] Emergency call boxes still in use article November 23, 2007, 11:43 pm

other useful resources:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
Telecommunications Industry Association
Electronic and Software Security Products and Services
International Telecommunication Union

Custom CGI Perl and PHP programming by 1-Script.com

Contact Us | Privacy Policy
The site map in XML format XML site map