To reiterate what I said before, it has always been AA’s choice not mine as to whether or not they get on to BTW/OR. And if you want to know about other lines then you can ask me. My lines 1 and 3 have always been fine, in fact line 3 is perfect. The third point is that sometimes even with HCD faults, OR engineers have found a fault out on the moor and fixed it by repairing a joint. So it’s not the case that there are non-problems reported. There most certainly have been problems that have vanished between the time I report them and the time when OR arrives but I can’t help that and in every case I have objective proof of the extent of the HCD fault and as I have said before have always left it to get incredibly bad before calling for help, so that an engineer will have something obvious and really bad to see. There was a fault that was a no-show when the OR engineer arrived, no problem seen, and that could have been because AA understandably called OR out too early, trying to get it fixed quickly, but it was too soon and hadn’t developed as much as I would have liked to give OR the best chance. But once again, AA makes the decisions as to whether or not to call OR out, not me.
I do not order AA to fix non-problems and you can believe that or not, unfortunately I can’t easily prove it. But you could look back at all the old threads.
As for the ‘problem of scrutiny’ I’ll just have to ask you to believe me that I did not ever do this. I’m sufficiently clued up to know what is a problem and what is not, and since anything bad gets handed over to AA it is they who make the decisions not me. My emails to AA always contain a ‘what do you think?’ or ‘would you take a look at x?’. I don’t nag AA into fixing faults, or non-faults for that matter. You don’t really know me, and I could be one of the OR time wasters that you have encountered and like certain persons I can think of, but I just ask you to believe that I’m not and in any case, there is always AA there who would act as a filter.
I haven’t tweaked anything to run at 3 dB SNRM downstream. It’s an option on AA’s control panel, and I discussed it with AA first, and monitored the results to see if there were any errors. If there had been any downstream errors then I would have put the SNRM up to 6 dB. I’ve been very happily running at 3 dB downstream SNRM for well over five years and the only reason that I can do it is because of my Broadcom PhyR software in the modems and that in the exchange which fortunately matches it. It’s easily worth about 4 dB. Unfortunately it’s only available for downstream.
AA is understandably saying that they simply can’t diagnose HCD after trying for many many months.
Recap: ultimately this leads to very high downstream SNR and extremely low downstream sync rates, say 288 kbps - 400 kbps instead of 2.0 - 3.1 Mbps often with high packet loss too. In anyone’s book those sync rates are unusable, no?
We’re not talking about a minor whinge or a request for optimisation. Occasionally bad joints have been found, fixed and that cured it. So it’s possible that all HCD is caused by bad joints.