Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?
From: Frithiof Andreas Jensen (frithiof.jensen_at_diespammerdie.jensen.tdcadsl.dk)
Date: 12/01/04
- Next message: Frithiof Andreas Jensen: "Re: Department of Homeland Insanity (long)"
- Previous message: Frithiof Andreas Jensen: "Re: Need input on high voltage regulator design"
- In reply to: Winfield Hill: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Next in thread: Allan Herriman: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Reply: Allan Herriman: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Reply: BFoelsch: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 12:15:48 +0100
"Winfield Hill" <hill_a@t_rowland-dotties-harvard-dot.s-edu> skrev i en
meddelelse news:coisj00l0a@drn.newsguy.com...
> Do you think they used -48V back then?
I would not be surprised if the -48V was what they arrived at by stringing
batteries together until "it worked" ;-)
- Next message: Frithiof Andreas Jensen: "Re: Department of Homeland Insanity (long)"
- Previous message: Frithiof Andreas Jensen: "Re: Need input on high voltage regulator design"
- In reply to: Winfield Hill: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Next in thread: Allan Herriman: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Reply: Allan Herriman: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Reply: BFoelsch: "Re: Why -48V for telephone lines, and not positive?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]