By: MarkJ - 21 December, 2011 (7:37 AM) - Score: 10427 - Fixed Line Broadband
CityFibre Holdings, which specialises in the rollout of ultrafast fibre optic broadband ( FTTH , FTTP etc. ) infrastructure, has used a spot of basic science to remind people of why existing copper based DSL broadband services might not be the best choice for future investment.It's widely known that DSL (up to 24Mbps ADSL2+ etc.) solutions are notoriously unreliable and frequently deliver performance that is significantly less than advertised; often through no fault of the ISP. One of the biggest reasons for this, as we've said many times before, is to do with copper line length.
Neil Fairbrother, CityFibre Product Marketing Manager, said:
"There is another law that pertains to network bandwidth. Nielsen’s law states that network connection speeds for home users increases 50% per year, which equates to a doubling every 21 months, just shy of two years.
I’m not so sure this law holds true. The most common network technology used to connect users to the internet is good old fashioned copper wire. The use of copper wire means that Nielsen’s law can’t be true for most users.
Copper wire is an excellent conductor of electricity but it also has electrical resistance. Ohm’s law is used to calculate the amount of resistance any given material has and from my hazy memory of school physics, 1m of copper has a resistance of 1Ohm.
I also recall that the longer any given conductor is, the higher the resistance it has and that the smaller its area, the higher resistance it has. Copper wires as used to deliver broadband services tend to be very long and very thin, and while these were fine for delivering low bandwidth (or low frequency) analog voice, they are less well suited to deliver high speed (or high frequency) bandwidth."
"There is another law that pertains to network bandwidth. Nielsen’s law states that network connection speeds for home users increases 50% per year, which equates to a doubling every 21 months, just shy of two years.
I’m not so sure this law holds true. The most common network technology used to connect users to the internet is good old fashioned copper wire. The use of copper wire means that Nielsen’s law can’t be true for most users.
Copper wire is an excellent conductor of electricity but it also has electrical resistance. Ohm’s law is used to calculate the amount of resistance any given material has and from my hazy memory of school physics, 1m of copper has a resistance of 1Ohm.
I also recall that the longer any given conductor is, the higher the resistance it has and that the smaller its area, the higher resistance it has. Copper wires as used to deliver broadband services tend to be very long and very thin, and while these were fine for delivering low bandwidth (or low frequency) analog voice, they are less well suited to deliver high speed (or high frequency) bandwidth."
None of this is new and many of our readers will already be aware that ADSL and ADSL2+ services hit problems on lines longer than 6.5km (extremely slow or generally unreliable). Rural areas will naturally experience this more than urban ones as people in such locations usually reside further away from their local telephone exchange.
Crucially CityFibre's comments come at a time when both BT and the UK government are attempting to plough new money into existing copper based infrastructure, which Fairbrother believes should carry the tag of "caveat emptor" (i.e. let the buyer beware).
Neil Fairbrother adds:
"This propensity to lose speeds over distance is known as Loop Attenuation that is caused by a combination of factors including Ohms law and frequency interference known as “cross talk”. This is why copper-based broadband services are often marketed with “up to” speeds rather than specific speeds, because the service provider cannot with any degree of certainty tell you what the actual speed will be."
"This propensity to lose speeds over distance is known as Loop Attenuation that is caused by a combination of factors including Ohms law and frequency interference known as “cross talk”. This is why copper-based broadband services are often marketed with “up to” speeds rather than specific speeds, because the service provider cannot with any degree of certainty tell you what the actual speed will be."
Fairbrother goes on to note that "high speed VDSL2 doesn’t go as far as low speed ADSL", which marks a stealthy criticism of BT's Fibre-to-the-Cabinet ( FTTC ) based 'up to' 40Mbps superfast broadband services. Contrary to some advertisements, FTTC only uses fibre optic cable so far as your local street cabinet and VDSL2 then delivers the "last mile" connection over an existing copper line to your home.
It goes without saying that CityFibre has a vested interest in plugging the almost unquestionable merits of fibre optic lines versus copper based ones and he's not wrong to do so. The comments are also accompanied by a rather blurry graph (here).
Naturally BT might disagree with CityFibre and could point to the lower costs of deployment (they already have a vast copper network in the ground) for FTTC and the fact that its top speeds will rise to 80Mbps next year and 100Mbps after that. Others might well argue that this simply isn't future proof and more investment could be needed to 'fix' it later on.
The graph used by CityFibre also lists VDSL2 reach but it's unclear whether or not this has been measured from the telephone exchange (most likely) or street cabinet (as used in FTTC). Cabinets reside closer to homes and thus the actual reach would be further than if measured from your exchange.
According to Alcatel-Lucent, a global telecommunications firm, FTTC technology should theoretically be able to deliver speeds of 20Mbps at a distance of about 1000m and 40Mbps at 400m (from the cabinet). A future enhancement called Vectoring, which helps to cut out some of the interference (cross talk), will also be able to deliver speeds of 100Mbps at 400m (details). It remains to be seen if this holds up in the real world.
Tweet
wirelesspacmanPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 9:30 AM
Link to comment
Typical marketing guy - does not let truth get in the way of a good story!
Whilst I might agree with the underlying sentiment, he really should not put out such gumf when he clearly has not got a clue what he is talking about.
eg "1m of copper has a resistance of 1Ohm" to say nothing of him using the term resistance when the issue is down to impedance.
oh, and a quick fag-packet calculation shows that if you start with, say, residential speeds of 500Kbps back in 2003 then doubling every 21 months gives you 64Mbps by 2015. I'd say copper is doing pretty well considering!
Andrew FergusonPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 10:29 AM
Link to comment
Sorry Mark, you've fell for some incorrect facts.
Zoom the graph and you can see that VDSL2 is around 35Mbps at 600m and VDSL 20Mbps at same distance.
To Alcatel are correct, and there is enough people with their own VDSL2 modems and known line lengths to support this.
SomersetPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 10:34 AM
Link to comment
The 2M at 600m was something you copied from an incorrect Twitter comment.
Pity the x-axis is offset on the graph...
DTMarkPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 10:58 AM
Link to comment
From what I've read online of peoples' experiences;
Threshold of a copper line for "superfast" broadband 25Mbps+ is about 650m (roughly corresponds with Andrew's figure)
Threshold of an aliminium line for superfast not known however at only 800m speed is down to around 16Mbps, so might suggest maximum permissible D-side length around 200m or something similarly very short.
Which is to say replacement of D-sides needed with copper or preferably and maybe more obviously fibre in such cases.
I'll bet nobody except a few of the local engineers know for sure which lines are which. This also helps explain why ADSL speeds are so random as is now.
Without enhancements, the fastest speed with the new up to 80Mbps profile is going to be about 50Mbps on the best lines, with a very small number able achieve higher.
Which could be a credible medium term solution: for those with the best lines.
JamesPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 10:59 AM
Link to comment
Why don't they quit their jibber jabber and give me unlimited usage fibre already.....
MarkJPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 11:49 AM
Link to comment
@Andrew:
"Alcatel are correct, and there is enough people with their own VDSL2 modems and known line lengths to support this."
Until we get vectoring on UK FTTC lines then we won't know for sure whether the promotional estimates hold up, although I do agree that they'll probably be pretty close.
MichaelPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 12:52 PM
Link to comment
2 other factors that really matter on copper and how it is deployed in the UK network
1. Most rural exchange cabinets are in fact closer to the exchange than to customers - making a simple upgrade to FTTC fairly futile - so you may as well deploy FTTP anyway
2. Most calculations on copper assumed only a 50% cable fill and no other "disturbers" from other signals running in the rest of the copper bundle. This may mean that if more than 50% of customers start using high speed copper in the same bundle all customers will start to experience slower lines.
Once fibre is in the long term Opex starts to outweigh the short term Capex investment. At some point this will factor in most incumbents ROI models.
BobPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 4:36 PM
Link to comment
What you have to remember is the higher the speed the higher the noise. Most of the results to day are based on lab trials and a small number of live users generally on short lines.
Once you start getting a significant number of HS users on the line particular those with long lines then you will start hitting problems. You could see significant speed drops and increases in the connection being lost
The more noise on the cables the less bandwidth there is available,
Deploying Fibre to rural areas is probably a non starter simply from a cost basis. The most likely soultion will be FTTC and then Wi-Fi Wireless. Even timescales rule it out as deploying fibre to a handfull of homes could take months
DeductionPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 5:38 PM
Link to comment
@Andrew
quote"Sorry Mark, you've fell for some incorrect facts.
Zoom the graph and you can see that VDSL2 is around 35Mbps at 600m and VDSL 20Mbps at same distance."
Errr dont think so, suggest you look again you got that back to front.
VDSL2 is just over 20Mb at 600Metres
VDSL is just under 35Mb at 600Metres.
VDSL2 line is light blue VDSL is purple).
The story while shameless self promotion is mostly correct as AFAIK BT FTTC is VDSL2.
VDSL2 seriously loses speed after just a few hundred metres. Not just that chart that shows it either.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 9:01 PM
Link to comment
What a load of pish. I have run tests which in part measures resistance of each leg and then the combined loop hundreds of times, on lines many kilometres long it is only a few hundred ohms per leg.
Secondly for VDSL2 performance in real world I have seen 30Mb at 1300M (this under old 8c bandplan) on 10yr old well maintained (i.e. perfect) copper on two customers in one street. On a revisit (after heavy take up of service in street) this had reduced to 25Mb. I have also seen full 40Mb at 700M of Ali cable (1986 cable again well maintained - although was first customer in street).
I have seen many of these "long" lines report capable of 70 - 80 meg under profile 17; although I have also seen lines of similar length sync at 40 but predict much worse - say 50 - 65Mb in shabby line areas.
Distance whilst a factor seems to have less an impact compared to cross talk and overal line quality.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 9:27 PM
Link to comment
Also on a tragically bad line (which would not support adsl) 2.6KM from cab got sync of 2-3Mb (unstable).
Whilst not a perfect technology and certainly not a silver bullet, single pair per customer FTTC will probably be delivering a very good service for the next 20years for the majority. With providers looking at LTE / satalite etc for infill and BET (for worst case scenario) for rurals I think things are going in the right direction (however slowly). Vectoring will improve reach of higher speeds and bonding / rings could give us acceptable 0.5Gig+ service in the decades to come if required.
I doubt we will ever see a full ftth network delivered to in the next 30 - 40years. This continual copper bashing is boring enough without false claims. We should instead by highlighting the poor performance areas and demanding fixes rather than wasting effort on non stories like this.
SledgehammerPosted: 21 December, 2011 - 10:19 PM
Link to comment
Lets be perfectly clear COPPER LINES are inferior to FIBRE period.
Prolonging the use of copper and all the ancillary bits to prolong the life of copper will cause greater problems in the future.
I only hope that when 4G comes out that it is targeted at the areas that still have copper and the last 10%.
Maybe the take up of 4G in those areas will result in BT loosing 10% of its standing charges cost and take a hit in the pocket for their woefully inadequate treatment of people in these outer areas. One can but hope.
DeductionPosted: 22 December, 2011 - 2:40 AM
Link to comment
LMAO @Telecom Engineer listening to that waffle everyone in the UK with FTTC should get atleast 20Mb, which is obviously not the case as BT only guarantee 15Mb for conventional FTTC and 5Mb for those unlucky enough to have a reach extended product.
As for BET, if thats so great why have BT been slow to adopt it. There are hundreds in the UK stuck at sub 2Mb speeds which would love at least that, but oh no thats the future 2Mb for all eh?
As to copper being around for the next 20 years, nonsense, anyone still on a copper line for broadband in 20 years time will be in the middle of nowhere. Copper will be dead tech in 20 years, by then people will either want full FTTH or will have said screw BT and its UPTO copper cack and gone to 4G and beyond mobile services. BT defenders are always a giggle though.
BobPosted: 22 December, 2011 - 10:25 AM
Link to comment
Given the age of most of BT's copper loop and the increasing costs of trying topush it beyond what it can realy suport costs are going to increase particularly on support as many people will encounter problems.
I would have thought we have reached the point that in Urban areas it would be more sensible to deploy FTTH particularly as the price of coper has increased considerable and increasing amounts are being stolen and what BT can do to safeguard it is limited
DeductionPosted: 22 December, 2011 - 12:49 PM
Link to comment
They probably dont give a damn about costs considering they are likely to be milking the government and tax payer for a fair chunk of their so called next gen roll out.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 22 December, 2011 - 9:30 PM
Link to comment
Deduction, 1st I did not say everyone will get 20Mb, but I agree most lines will (BT estimate average dside length being 400M). 15meg has more to do with GEA backhaul (which can be increased). BET is a complex technology (taking adsl, reformatting to shdsl - streetside regenerators etc) take time to develop - then there is the issue for ensuring anfp compliance and equivalence of access etc. It can be deployed in any exchange once a trigger of demand is hit (I believe 15 subs). It will roll-out but its likely to require government / ISP funding to make 100% availability. 3rd copper is far from dead, fibre is far superior but copper has the distinct advantage of already being here, with associated pstn switching etc (which would cost in excess of 10billion to replace) already existing in each exchange. This fact means that a significant part of the business case for fttp is diminished....
Telecom EngineerPosted: 22 December, 2011 - 10:01 PM
Link to comment
... as significant sums need investing to obtain revenues that are currently received through the copper cash cow.
If you dont agree that pole mounted dslams, vdsl rings, vectoring, bonding and band plan changes can improve performance then think another way.
BT is investing 2.5 billion of its own money and will match fund any government money (so probably looking at 3.5 billion to FTTC and small fttp to 90% of the country). Taking into account the huge growth in copper lines (3 - 4X that of Virgin docsis network additions) with many customers opting for slower value packages, where is the incentive for private firms like BT to build a new £30billion fttp network? (especially when receiving the revenues from the current one?).
Any what government would spend such sums when a perfectly acceptable improvement is being made by the private sector? especially in a recession?
Telecom EngineerPosted: 22 December, 2011 - 10:09 PM
Link to comment
The crux of the matter is that FTTC is the only way we are going to see high speed broadband this side of the century in this country. The copper "facts" in the story are laughably bad. VDSL performance is improving all the time ( I read a BT document spouting the benefits of VDSL in 2000 saying wonderful 14Mb could be achieved).
Network providers are invested in copper, a great deal of investment in R&D will therefore be pushed into copper technology by the likes of alcatel and eci to feed this market with ever increasing speeds.
BAd decisions were made in the past - thatcher not allowing BT develop a national cable network, BT spending billions of 3G licence and then selling cell net for a pittance - when it could have invested that in fttp or deploying wireless broadband through its mobile arm.
But this is where we are now, and the right economic decisions are being made.
SledgehammerPosted: 23 December, 2011 - 9:00 AM
Link to comment
@Telecom Engineer
After reading you post it makes me wonder if BT rearly have a clue where they are going, or are they just sleep walking into the future. When other countries are whole heartedly behind fibre and are laying it as though its going out of fashion. BT will still be trying to make copper work. What a shame.
The other point is if and it's a big IF people dont take up FTTC then BT are going to be in even worse position.
themanstanPosted: 23 December, 2011 - 10:40 AM
Link to comment
@Sledgehammer
yes other countries have been laying fibre for domestic broadband purposes for years, early 2000s some of them.
If you want to point a finger and blame, try OFCOM... they only allowed BT to operate in the market in mid-2009... that's just 2 and half years. Yes they could go FTTH... but are you prepared to wait the 15-20 years needed to fibre up a large country like the UK? Given the comments from people who think that FTTC is a slow roll-out, it seems ludicrous having forced BT to wait for so long to then say you can't use a tech that will allow coverage to be achieved in a "short" period of time. Especially if they do hit their target of 2/3rds of the UK by 2015...
Note France is the most similar european nation by population, higher density in urban and they're are looking at 60% FTTH by 2020... are you prepared to wait that long with just ADSL servcices?
SledgehammerPosted: 23 December, 2011 - 11:01 AM
Link to comment
@themanstan
In that case OFCOM have a lot to answer for.
I have always thought they are a waste of space. Another body that should be disbanded, why is it we end up with ineffective bodies that can't see any further than the end of their nose and hinder, hold up and delay anything thats worth doing properly. Typical ripoff britain.
DeductionPosted: 23 December, 2011 - 4:07 PM
Link to comment
ill quote the funniest thing...
"BT estimate average dside length being 400M"
Er most decent size towns have high streets longer than that, illl not even include main roads. If that remark is true and something they have stated then BT sound like they are Stuart Little and have never visited civilization.
SomersetPosted: 23 December, 2011 - 9:56 PM
Link to comment
D - Surely BT know? Why not plot all the cabinets in your area on a map.
DeductionPosted: 24 December, 2011 - 12:26 AM
Link to comment
Obviously they dont know the average distance if they think most roads are that length.
One look at any map if they can read a map would tell them otherwise.
themanstanPosted: 24 December, 2011 - 11:03 AM
Link to comment
D
Most town high streets have an exchange nearby... and are the oldest buildings and fed directly from the exchange, so no cab... just a bit of obviousness if spend a couple of seconds thinking about it...
And average D-side is just that average of all lengths.... so if your average side street in the UK is ~500-1000m in length... most of the UK population lives on side streets not main roads.... so surprise, surprise it's not hugely off BT's quoted distance...
Telecom EngineerPosted: 24 December, 2011 - 12:19 PM
Link to comment
Deduction. I have seen dside lengths of 4KM (heard of 12KM on one line in scotland), each cab will have a handfull of lines only 20M (as dp sited next to cab). Average is exactly that, not a maximum. And most lines in my town centre are less than 400M as we have 8 cabs and many short E/O runs.
BT know exactly what lengths as the db loss value for each DP and each eside cable etc is held on record (used for calculating if digital services will work, how many pairs need bonding to give a guarnteed speed on leased lines - can an improvement be made to a faulty dsl by engineers swapping onto lower db cable etc, also the bt infinity checker will give you an estimate - taking into account dside length and effect of cable fill etc.
I think when it comes to lack of knowledge about the network and the technologies I think it is you who is found wanting - not the operator.
DeductionPosted: 24 December, 2011 - 4:14 PM
Link to comment
quote "Most town high streets have an exchange nearby... and are the oldest buildings and fed directly from the exchange, so no cab... just a bit of obviousness if spend a couple of seconds thinking about it..."
Which has nothing to do with FTTC services and what speed is obtainable, thats down to distance to the cabinet. If a road is over 400M long then unless theres more than a single cabinet for that singular road someone is more than 400M from a cabinet.
If a premise is getting a fibre service from BT and it doesnt come via a cabinet then that will be FTTP which is an entirely different product.
I know of no reasonable sized town where everyone is within 400M of a cabinet, if you want to pick any town in the uk ill use google maps to show an example of a road which has premises more than 400M from the nearest cabinet.
DeductionPosted: 24 December, 2011 - 4:17 PM
Link to comment
quote"BT know exactly what lengths as the db loss value for each DP and each eside cable etc is held on record (used for calculating if digital services will work, how many pairs need bonding to give a guarnteed speed on leased lines - can an improvement be made to a faulty dsl by engineers swapping onto lower db cable etc, also the bt infinity checker will give you an estimate - taking into account dside length and effect of cable fill etc."
Nonsense if they knew that their speed checker would had always been more accurate than it is.
Not to mention changes in weather can even alter db values on a line, as can someone in the same street having a new line installed, so it would be impossible.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 12:22 AM
Link to comment
As outlined above they know the lengths. The speed checker under estimates peoples initial speed - i.e. people quoted 30meg syncing at 40meg but then complain of speed lowering as time goes on - this is due to cross talk and cable fill - hence the original estimate being more reflective how what speeds to expect over time. The only time the checker would be wrong would be where the network records for that line have not been updated correctly - i.e. line is listed off dp 1900 when it is dp1009 or on a radial dp where dp loss is taken from first breakout point (not numerous carrier pole etc), or when estimating dp by postcode.
I dont know what line of work you are in, but you can take a guess at mine, the records exist and are used thousands of times every single day.
Your "facts" are just about as accurate as the idiot in the article. School boy mentality.
DeductionPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 2:00 AM
Link to comment
quote "As outlined above they know the lengths"
Nope you clearly said they know the line db, they clearly do not know as much detail as you insist, if they did the estimates would be more accurate.
Something as minor as weather change can alter cross talk values and line db, storing info like you insist would be pointless as its constantly altering.
All the BT checker does is use a map to estimate line length via a postcode to exchange, NOTHING MORE and if you want to know what line of work im in ill rip the html code from it to show you.
Insisting it does any other checks is stupid, infact for FTTC it doesnt even check the vicinity of a cabinet, it estimates the distance to exchange and then using a equation guesses the distance you are to a cabinet to estimate the speed you will get on infinity services.
DeductionPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 2:04 AM
Link to comment
If BT had any records of exact line dbs they would be able to give a speed estimate within about 500kb of what actual speed you will get.
Fact is though not even an SFI engineer can say what exact speed a line should get, there are too many variables, not just distance and line db, but the quality of the copper, what repairs it has had over the years (SOMETHING ELSE BTW which will constantly alter a lines db and speed) and so much more.
Your multi blabbering posts read of nothing more than a BT staffer, ex-staffer or shareholder defending them with utter dribble and fantasy.
And if you wish to continue to argue otherwise ill show how basic the code for their line checker actually is.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 1:29 PM
Link to comment
Im afraid you have it quite wrong. BT know exactly the length of the cables, what year they were installed, what conductor etc. The length to which they use them varies per task but the records do exist. Based on these the DB value is calculated at various frequencies (for pots, dacs, isdn, 300khz adsl etc), the variances of temperature on a working lines db is insignificant - obviously they will take a set parameter to calculate cross talk (the checker isnt going to be updated each time a new sub is added to a cable) hence the UNDER estimation on most lines. An SFI can indeed tell what db value a line should be by using said systems. Infact one parameter for raising certain sfi jobs is a degredation of 6db from norm.
Anyway, its obviously pointless arguing. You think BT are an evil monopoloy investing their shareholders money in national infrastructure....
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 1:36 PM
Link to comment
.. some people will have genuine gripes with any large company. However most who knock obvious worthwhile projects like the fttc rollout are the usual self important fools i.e. they believe that whatever far flung corners of the country they decide to live in, BT should give them a gig direct fibre line, uncontended with SLG for instant repair. Of course you probably wouldnt want to pay more than £20 a month for it or have to pay a connection fee. But anything less just isnt good enough.
Fact is, this is as good as it is getting for the next 15years, and if you dont like it dont subscribe. Just wait till the 12th of never for some 2bit fibre start up or fuji to deliver on their promises... you'll be stuck on adsl forever...
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 3:07 PM
Link to comment
Funny how Virgin dont get any stick for their fttc service (the docsis network with its own unique flaws with over subscribed areas) and lack of coverage. I dont know exactly what people expect of private firms. BT are building a fibre hybrid network the size of Singapore every few months, people still complain how slow rollout or over months delays. If were to go down the FTTP route, even without the extra costs (home install alone taking average 2 days compared to 2 hours with fttc), then we would be looking at 10 year rollout at best. Forget the tech, FTTC is the only way (without a mobile revolution) that we would see high speeds for most before 2020. BT and global tech firms like Alcatel believe that the technology can service our needs for decades to come via enhancements. You may not. Script kiddy vs industry leaders. I know who I would believe.
DeductionPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 9:08 PM
Link to comment
quote"Based on these the DB value is calculated at various frequencies"
Oh so now its guesstimated is it? Not what you stated originally and with that your idiosyncrasy is complete
quote"BT are building a fibre hybrid network the size of Singapore every few months"
Complete and utter fanboy verbal diarrhoea. At that rate they would had built a network to cover planet earth within a few years.
quote"An SFI can indeed tell what db value a line should be by using said systems"
Again utter nonsense, without inspecting cable from premise to exchange nobody knows what a lines db should be.
quote"Of course you probably wouldnt want to pay more than £20 a month for it"
I pay more than that now for regular ADSL, so wrong on that also.
quote"I dont know exactly what people expect of private firms"
To be private and not tug at the public purse for their rollout would be a start
DeductionPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 9:14 PM
Link to comment
Oh and happy xmas, If you BT staff spent as much time upgrading infrastructure as you do defending the useless sack of a company, there wouldnt be towns and roads like mine still waiting for a cabinet upgrade to go with the exchange which was done a year ago. Of which the date has been *COUGH* revised on 9 different occasions (AND ITS still not done).
I spose its less effort to spout tripe on a website than it is to make the lazy BT staff donkeys unblog ducts though. Physical labour with tax payer cash is too much to ask for, if you cant just shove a fibre cable down a duct and have a piece of cake job you dont want to know. Typical BT and has been since they started providing internet access.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 9:36 PM
Link to comment
Because fuji, virgin etc have promised to cover 66% of the country without taxpayers money huh? 2.5bill of its own money has been allocated thus far. There will be roughly 800million from the government over the next few years up for grabs - which BT will have to tender for and have promised to match fund.
Hardly ripping the government off. Lets not forget BT have opened their network to other operators - on both a service and physical level. Dont see anyone else offering that on such a scale (another reason why fttp wont be such a wise investment yet). Slow? 10 million available connections next year, whole project 1 yr ahead of shedule. OFCOM greenlit this in march 2009? What a bunch of lazy slackers huh?
Anyway, why are you waiting for BT to upgrade the cabinet? Surely there are thousands of companies begging to put a fibre straight into your home?
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 9:50 PM
Link to comment
RE attn:
It is known from the original cable plans, there are formulas to work out the logs of an increase in frequency vs attn.
The base line is known. If a repair is made it would be an improvment i.e. replace ali length with copper so again attn would be an over estimate (so better realworld result). Also the dsl circuits have routing and wholesale figures for sync recorded.
I am not saying BT know the exactly value of every single atom along every line - the point is from their systems they have a very clear idea how long their lines are. When BT say the average is around 400M then it is so. Your arguments seem to show a failing in the understanding of averages. I have already said there are some longer and shorter.
As for whether the service is good enough, I am capped at 40Mb / 10Mb at the moment, with my line capable of around 130Mb / 40Mb, this is without vectoring or bonding.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 25 December, 2011 - 9:59 PM
Link to comment
... this at roughly 370M from my cabinet.
Some homework for you: look up vectoring, bonding, rings, phantom channel.
Re BT knowing the state of their network, search for Pair Quality Testing, TAMs, CIDT. Download and read the manuals for the BT tester of choice HST 3000 by JDSU - will give you an in-depth view of parameters and characteristics of copper networks and how they change in conditions etc.
Once you digest all that you may start to appreciate the capabilities of the network and future improvements beyond your own personal hatred for BT PLC.
DeductionPosted: 26 December, 2011 - 1:30 AM
Link to comment
Blah blah, virgin already cover around 50% of the country and they did it without taxpayer cash.
I suggest you get back to digging and get BT FTTC sorted out.
Complete cack about cable replacement also with regard to BT, its the other way round copper gets in-filled with aluminium.
Rubbish about what your FTTC line is capable of without vectoring also, the max FTTC can do without vectoring is around 90Mb.
Suggest you refer to all this imaginary BT info and stats you talk about instead of misreads from your BT router and its bug ladden firmware.
There is no future for FTTC, even 4G mobile speeds within 2 years will surpass it.
Virgin cable speeds will surpass it in 2012 with 200Mb services likely.
BT FTTC is old tat, other countries have had FTTC systems for years, its old, out dated and a rip off to the tax payer.
DeductionPosted: 26 December, 2011 - 1:35 AM
Link to comment
BT dont even seem to know how many premises are connected to an exchange looking at this story.......
http://www.ispreview.co.uk/story/2011/12/20/bt-confirms-20000-homes-in-milton-keynes-uk-to-get-superfast-broadband
.html
Let alone all that fantasy rubbish you have typed an essay about.
Bit more than their imaginary 20,000 premises LOL
You BT workers need to wake the hell up and get a clue.
If it aint the head boffins spouting nonsense its the minion workers.
themanstanPosted: 26 December, 2011 - 1:34 PM
Link to comment
God you're funny D... good thing you aren't in a position of responsibility for people's money or national infrastructure...
Your blah blah about VM cabling 50% of the country with no tax payers money is laughable... NTL and Telewest went bankrupt to the tune of £15billion between them to get near that amount of of coverage and it took them the best part of 15 years... VM still has ~£5b debt and still doesn't turn a profit. They will soon mind you, they got some good people driving the financials and are managing the debt pretty well.
It's surprising that even with a high coverage tech such as FTTC it still takes plenty of time, 5 years projected for 2/3rds. To me it isn't, any national infrastructure build will always encounter obstacles and you need to do it with a sustainable workforce... not hire shed-loads of people then sack em a few years later.
themanstanPosted: 26 December, 2011 - 1:42 PM
Link to comment
Get real D...
Yes, many countries have had excellent infrastructure for BB, but that's because their regulators allowed the incumbent to invest in infrastructure for day zero (mainly because gov still has shares). Not have muppets in UKgov and OFCOM prevent the incumbent from competing in this market. Any CEO/business would find himself fired by shareholder and fined by the regulator if they started investing lots of money in a market for which they were not allowed to operate.
Give us your business plan and methodology for FTTH roll out in the UK... Because I can't see you coming up with anything that won't bankrupt BT.
FTTC will give coverage in a short time frame, which is important for ROI. They don't need to connect everyone in a given area, no mandate to do so... just like VM or any other ISP. FTTP comes next and it'll take longer, much longer ~15-20 years. It's that simple...
DeductionPosted: 27 December, 2011 - 12:19 AM
Link to comment
Is it in the BT job description to use multi IDs on a forum to talk crap?
DeductionPosted: 27 December, 2011 - 12:24 AM
Link to comment
Oh and BT have been completely private since the early 90s.
Oh and dont ask me for my business plan and harp on how wonderful BTs is.......
BT could IN THEORY bankrupt thereself, atleast if they stick to the idle promises they make....
That being promising to invest/match whatever the government put into the next gen rollout.
What they gonna do if the government invest more cash than BT have?
Dont spose you thought about that possible but unlikely scenario.
ortechPosted: 27 December, 2011 - 6:50 PM
Link to comment
quote"But hey, what the hell would I know - I only make a living out of maintaining this network."
Obviously you don't, or you are just a bare faced liar!
Despite your insults towards a poster and obvious multi nick trolling, ill bite.
As someone that has been a BT engineer for near 20 years and approaching retirement and has been involved in deploying FTTC to 2 separate counties. I can honestly say the poster named Deduction is correct in most of what he has said.
Ali is still used in cabling and joints.
FTTC is not capable of more than around 80Mb in its current form.
There is no accurate record of line margins, the only record regularly updated relates to line power (or tx)
Oh and unlike some im also willing to back up my claims and prove I know what im on about rather than what you think you know about. Ill scan my Openreach ID card if you wish.
SomersetPosted: 27 December, 2011 - 9:47 PM
Link to comment
D - html would be interesting, please post.
DeductionPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 12:56 AM
Link to comment
From the post prior to yours Somerset i dont think its needed any further LOL.
Its a shame theres not more people like ortech which work for BT. Instead its riddled with people like Telecom Engineer/themanstan and demonstrates the company attitude nicely. (Assuming he/she does indeed work for them, in which case nice job highlighting to the world the type of person BT employ nowadays).
DeductionPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 1:00 AM
Link to comment
Im still laughing at the nonsense posted in this comment...
http://www.ispreview.co.uk/story/2011/12/21/cityfibre-uk-attempts-to-debunk-copper-based-superfast-broadband-with-
science.html?cpage=15#comment25
Along with the rest of them by that individual and Mr enginneer
Depsite BT disagreeing
http://bt.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/13922/c/346
No cabinet = No FTTC.
Also says more than enough about line lengths to cabinets in some cases being too far despite what some idiot who THINKS he is an engineer has to say about it working 1000s of metres away.
ROFL (over and over)
Will still post the code if the trolling tard continues and im sure ortech will scan his ID also LMAO
beenPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 8:56 AM
Link to comment
Ignore the provocation, Telecom Engineer ... there's only one here doubting your qualifications. I, and others I'm sure, appreciate you bringing your obvious knowledge and experience to this forum and hope you'll continue to do so.
SomersetPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 8:58 AM
Link to comment
D - Distance to cabinet has nothing to do with road lengths. Suggest you plot cabinets on a map to see how many there are.
Please show how you believe the checker works.
SomersetPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 9:02 AM
Link to comment
If Basingstoke is a typical town
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=113723393798586269048.000479c3
4c26feb4e4244&z=15
SomersetPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 10:25 AM
Link to comment
All the BT checker does is use a map to estimate line length via a postcode to exchange, NOTHING MORE and if you want to know what line of work im in ill rip the html code from it to show you.
Insisting it does any other checks is stupid, infact for FTTC it doesnt even check the vicinity of a cabinet, it estimates the distance to exchange and then using a equation guesses the distance you are to a cabinet to estimate the speed you will get on infinity services.
Please do. So how does it know which exchange you are on?
SomersetPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 11:10 AM
Link to comment
then using a equation guesses the distance you are to a cabinet
That must be rubbish!
DeductionPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 11:31 AM
Link to comment
quote"D - Distance to cabinet has nothing to do with road lengths. Suggest you plot cabinets on a map to see how many there are.
Please show how you believe the checker works.
asa logoSomerset
Posted: 28 December, 2011 - 9:02 AM
Link to comment
If Basingstoke is a typical town
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=113723393798586269048.000479c3
4c26feb4e4244&z=15"
Good example what happens to the premises on the harrow way and grove road in your fine example? Think you have answered for yourself that little stretch is over a mile long.
I wont bother zooming in and asking what happens to the other streets.
DeductionPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 11:35 AM
Link to comment
You are indeed right now, it looks like at quick glance they have even removed the equation where it guesstimated distance to the cabinet.
Interestingly though a road in my town and using 2 (RARE) premises that can get FTTC it estimates the property nearer to the cab will get 3Mb more than the person further away even though its the same street. I can only assume that calculation is done on some weird and whacky database they had. Unless they have embedded something else in the checker! Will dig a bit deeper.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 6:34 PM
Link to comment
Right ORTECH lets knock you down a peg or two.
“Obviously you don't, or you are just a bare faced liar!”
-- get real. What do you want? My EIN?, CSS ID? December pay was 21st, overtime cut off 5th.
“Oh and unlike some im also willing to back up my claims and prove I know what im on about rather than what you think you know about. Ill scan my Openreach ID card if you wish. “
--- unlike you I have a job I wish to protect. I could easily screen capture and dump a few images to prove I am right but that would be a breach of my contract – as you know.
“Despite your insults towards a poster and obvious multi nick trolling, ill bite.”
---Not multi nick at all – the people who have posted know who is in the right on that point. Calling me a bare faced liar is both bizarre and destroys your moral high ground.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 6:35 PM
Link to comment
“As someone that has been a BT engineer for near 20 years and approaching retirement and has been involved in deploying FTTC to 2 separate counties. I can honestly say the poster named Deduction is correct in most of what he has said.”
“Ali is still used in cabling and joints.”
--- so how many ali length have you pulled in the last 20years then mate? Learn to read before you start posting tripe. D said copper is actively replaced with ali. I have already said it is in use and commented on its performance. It is a LEGACY conductor, there a miles and miles of it in the ground and in associated joints, but when whenever faulty gets replaced with copper. Has been for a very long time.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 6:36 PM
Link to comment
“FTTC is not capable of more than around 80Mb in its current form.”
-- Im afraid you are very wrong. It may be that you have seen a max cap of 80meg when installing cabs in the past – this was because an non configured port used to output using a 12mhz profile – which gave the 80meg. This was then capped the night before connection to a customer down to vdsl 8mhz profile which gives a max of 40-49M and associated sync rates applied (40 up 2 down etc). However with the release of the new band plans (17mhz) max cap sync rates are well above the 100meg on short lines – but actual sync / profile is still capped as 40meg is the current product. BT wont put 100 meg out until vectoring is applied to ensure greater coverage. I talked at length about the numerous upgrade paths and other tech BT can deploy for future speed increases.
“There is no accurate record of line margins, the only record regularly updated relates to line power (or tx)”
---- Go into your local exchange, find an experianced boost engineer (or a coach even better), ask him to show you woosh, seam and even the old network record prints cable plans. Its all there.
Telecom EngineerPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 6:38 PM
Link to comment
Last bitchy comment; I think you are out of touch / behind the times when it comes to the tech – or simply havent read the posts correctly. As a complex / PCR guy you would not have access to most of these systems anyway as you would not use them. I am on volume and use them every day for boost / sfi. You may think you are more intelligent / worthy engineer than me, but just think – which division were BT desperately trying to sell off 2 years ago? Suggest you get with it before you're tupe'd off to Carillion.
SomersetPosted: 28 December, 2011 - 8:30 PM
Link to comment
D - re Harrow Way. Random sample in the checker gets 28M down.
SomersetPosted: 29 December, 2011 - 9:36 AM
Link to comment
D - If you want to have a sensible discussion I suggest you write constructively and politely.
MarkJPosted: 29 December, 2011 - 1:17 PM
Link to comment
Deduction please can you cut down on your personal abuse towards other members, it's against our rules and will just get your comments removed. Thanks.
Generated in 0.76981 seconds.
DB queries: 8
Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved (Terms, Privacy Policy, Links (.), Live Chat & Website Rules).