Subj : Charger
To   : TOM WALKER
From : Roy J. Tellason
Date : Thu Jun 16 2005 01:21 pm

TOM WALKER wrote in a message to ROY J. TELLASON:

RJT>RJT> TW>  I must have mistated my Question. I am Fimilat with "AA"
RJT>RJT> matterie
RJT>RJT> TW> and  "AAA" battereis but don't recal the "A" designation
RJT>RJT> for MANY
RJT>RJT> TW> years and  was unaware they were even still being manfactured.

RJT>RJT>I don't remember ever actually seeing an "A" battery designated as
RJT>RJT>such in terms of a specific size,  mostly they were designated that
RJT>RJT>way because of their use (filament/heater current) along with "B"
RJT>RJT>(plate voltage) and "C" (bias) back when.

RJT>TW> That was my Point, Perhaps being a little picky but hrtew "A"
RJT>TW> battery only existed as it applied to the Old Vucuum Tube Filiment
RJT>TW> Batteries.  NIOT as an individual Cell like the "AA" and "AAA"

RJT>There must've been an "A" cell at some point,  or the system
RJT>wouldn't make
RJT>sense...

 TW>  One would think so. And it would have been a size inbetween the
 TW> "AA"  and the "C" for the system to be consistant. BUT I so far
 TW> have found  NO trace of it.
 TW>  WHICH brings up another question. WHAT ever happened to the "B" 
 TW> Battery? :-) :-)

Good question!  I've been wondering about that for a long time.

Maybe there was some confusion between that and "B" batteries in terms of 
function rather than size,  same thing with "A"...

--- 
 * Origin: TANSTAAFL BBS 717-838-8539 (1:270/615)

.