Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[c6em]

And of course areas like the B4RN footprint where BT is scrambling to deploy its own FTTP network. I wonder why they can't make do with FTTC?

The B4RN FTTP project is quite quite different from any commercial company.
It is @Kitz has said a total community run project where the community do ALL the work.
It only works due to the curious coincidental availability of physically active semi or fully retired locals in the area with the fibre/networking experience and industry contacts to be able to do it coupled with easy access to backhaul.  Then there is the easy availability of farmers with the mechanised kit to do the digging/cable laying. Plus it's an area so spread out that FTTC is not really an option coupled with the incentive of existing appalling speeds to get people to help.  Finally farmers have spaces and yards to store cable drums and supplies.

You can see why B4RN works but also you can see why it is unlikely to be re-duplicated elsewhere in the UK.
I notice with some amusement how people ask if B4RN can come and do their area - the concept that rather than someone doing it for them - they might actually have to get out and do it themselves is clearly not what they were thinking.

B4RN don't have to 'pay' for labour, and most importantly all wayleaves across land are free.
Were some commercial company to come along then that same farmer granting B4RN access across the land would be on to their land agents and solicitors seeing how much money they could grub out of the commercial firm for letting the cables run across the field.
In fact so money grubbing are these types that I know of an altnet who was 'forced' to go alternative ways along public roads thanks to the obstructiveness of land owners....and its not just telecoms they seem to hate. The local electric distribution company actually moved their equipment due to the bloody mindedness of the land owner.  Clearly none of these people give a monkeys about the local community.

[Black Sheep]

Great post c6em. The usual anti-BT brigade don't know the half of what goes on behind the scenes, and would probably whinge even if they had FTTP.
There's a reason they do what they do ….. money. They are a business, not your best friend. If anyone thinks they have a cunning master-plan that would see FTTP installed into our houses, then apply for a position at BT and lets get it on. Obviously, the incredible well-paid board of directors, the financial advisors, corporate solicitors etc, are missing the very simple method that you guys are aware of ?.

[kitz]

Ive said this before but one of the major aspects too is Barry Forde.    How many local communities would be lucky enough to have someone like this working for them for free

During his career at Lancaster University he was head of networking, head of technical services and Deputy Director of Information Systems Services. In these roles he was responsible for the University’s networking and IT systems as well as overseeing the regional academic network C&NLMAN. He was a member of the JISC Joint Committee on Networking which oversees the JANET academic network which provides links to thousands of college and University sites.

If I'm gauging the time-scale right, Barry would have been very heavily involved in getting broadband to outlying educational faculties colleges and high schools where standard technology at the time was impossible.  Lancaster had microwaved links and I know that in the mid 90's they really were considered about the best in the UK at what they did technology wise when it came to providing an academic network in hard to reach areas and won many awards for it. 

Not only are they lucky enough to have Barry, but just about all of their management team have links with Lancaster Uni, networking, ICT or broadband backgrounds.    Its not often a community would be so lucky enough to have so many knowledgeable people living in the area who are willing to dedicate their time and expertise for their own community. 

Lancaster University is surrounded by many rural areas which is likely were a high proportion of their professors and lecturers also live.   Come just one mile outside of the city centre and its all rural...  no major towns for miles and miles and hardly the type of area that BT would normally touch.   Even Lancaster Uni is out on a limb practically in the middle of nowhere.

[jelv]

I wonder how much it would cost if the government set aside some billions to convert all copper lines to fibre!

Probably less than HS2!

[AArdvark]

I wonder how much it would cost if the government set aside some billions to convert all copper lines to fibre!

Probably less than HS2!

Regardless of cost, a full fibre network would be of greater value to more people and communities than HS2.
The end result of HS2 will NOT be businesses moving out of the south and London, fostering growth in the regions, BUT it will give the perfect reason to STAY where they are as the rest of the country can now get to London so much quicker. 
Just wait and see.

[renluop]

and get out

[jelv]

@AArdvark

Absolutely spot on. Get the technology and the infrastructure right and all these people who think meetings have to be face to face will be doing that via the next generation of video conferencing where all are sat round the same virtual table and can look around the room to watch other people' expressions. Unless HS2 can boost train speeds up to approaching the speed of light it will never be as quick as is possible with a good network.

[AArdvark]

Unless HS2 can boost train speeds up to approaching the speed of light it will never be as quick as is possible with a good network.

That would be HS(infinity-1), it will still arrive late & be x2.5 over cost.
I think I will be long gone by then.

[sorc]

A large part could be due to the fact that they dont own any copper, so it would complicate things to have to access the existing Openreach network?  The way they operate on the basis where its more of a barter system of time for shares and relying on as much as possible for free. Their business model is unlike anything else we have seen.

B4RN stuff

I was referring to Openreach's FTTP rollout in the area. I believe the B4RN villages weren't going to get anything from them, hence B4RN itself, but since there's now credible FTTP competition in the area the usual excuses of "too expensive, too hard" die away and BT gets the fibre splicers out, rather than going for the cheap half-baked fix that they're deploying to everyone else. What other reason would there be for Openreach to not deploy FTTC there?

Unfortunately it will always be that the more urban districts get the newer technology first.  The more users there are in an area then the more cost effective it will be.   Those further out are less profitable and BT appear to be using 'proper' FTTC only where its more cost effective to do so... or theres no other alternative :/

BT have never been a forerunner in technology and have a cautious approach..  although they seem to have dropped a clanger with the ECI's :/

That's the thing though, Cornwall is not urban at all and BT seems able to do a hell of a lot of rural FTTP here (but really could be a lot more than even that) - but apparently rural (or indeed urban) areas elsewhere in the UK can't do it. Maybe the EU and Cornwall Council are better negotiators? (Cornwall is not being done under BDUK, it has its own thing)

The only consolation for me is that my FTTC cabinet is Huawei

Great post c6em. The usual anti-BT brigade don't know the half of what goes on behind the scenes, and would probably whinge even if they had FTTP.
There's a reason they do what they do ….. money. They are a business, not your best friend. If anyone thinks they have a cunning master-plan that would see FTTP installed into our houses, then apply for a position at BT and lets get it on. Obviously, the incredible well-paid board of directors, the financial advisors, corporate solicitors etc, are missing the very simple method that you guys are aware of ?.

Or indeed what are they missing that the well-paid board of directors, the financial advisors, corporate solicitors etc missing that their adjuncts at other telcos across the world have found to justify going for FTTP vs copper bodging? Or, what ROI/benefits is BT seeing in deploying FTTP to single rural farmhouses and the odd street in Cornwall that somehow doesn't exist in the rest of the UK

Given how late to the party BT was on unmetred dialup, ADSL, faster ADSL, ADSL2+, VDSL and indeed what little FTTP they have, and having to be dragged into it by regulatory and competitive pressures, I'm not sure they should be held up as wise decision makers

If BT was doing this 100% with its own money they could do anything they want, but it's not unreasonable to question the decisions being made with taxpayer funds.

[kitz]

If BT was doing this 100% with its own money they could do anything they want, but it's not unreasonable to question the decisions being made with taxpayer funds.

I see that argument brandished around quite a lot.   BT have to put at least half of their own funds to it as well and they arent getting a total free ride.  What is is doing is ensuring that BT are enabling cabinets now, that under normal circumstances they would be the type of cabs very last to be done.

As regards to 'taxpayers' money, the councils wont fork out for FTTH if someone comes along and offers a much cheaper solution for FTTC.

Cornwall is not being done under BDUK, it has its own thing

Exactly.   Ive said before that BDUK wasn't necessarily the best way of doing things.   Its cost the taxpayer an awful lot of money, much of will have also gone into pockets of R&D and admin workers.   Its pretty obvious at the start that BT would win most of the contracts.   There's a good reason for that too - security.    ie they aren't going to hit and run / go bust and then things be abandoned in a few years time.   It takes a long time to recoup installation costs. 

Look how many £100's of millions of public funding was lost with Digital Region.   The end result is there are people on lines in the city centre of Sheffield who cant get any type of fibre.   Ask UB how he feels coping on about 2Mb knowing that BT couldn't go in because of DR.   

[Black Sheep]

"If BT was doing this 100% with its own money they could do anything they want, but it's not unreasonable to question the decisions being made with taxpayer funds".

Only the smaller percentage BDUK jobs are part-funded by taxpayers money, the rest of the FTTC/P rollout is funded by the companies share-holders. People like myself for example.

You'll get no argument from me about FTTP being the 'Mutts Nuts', this is more than obvious. However, I am not a FTSE100 CEO with a team of advisors around me as to what is the most practicable solution for the company, and its shareholders as a whole ? Rightly or wrongly, that's what Thatcher brought upon us.

Of course, we all have an opinion and yours is as salient as mine is. But, for every web-hit saying the UK is going to be left behind with regard to future-proofing their broadband technology, there's another that says we're ahead of the game compared to most countries !! The usual stance of N.Korea having the best speeds doesn't bother me, I'd rather have 56k speeds and be a free man. Jersey, or is it Guernsey's fibre infrastructure ..... I forget ?? Means nothing when land mass is compared.
We are where we are, and that is continually improving broadband speed. There is lots going on with regard to G.VECTORING and G.FAST technologies to further improve upon these speeds.

There's an old saying that everyone's a football manager when watching a game played out, I think everyone's also a FTSE100 CEO when chatting about the future of broadband ..... myself included.  .
Comparing the likes of B4RN to BT is nonsensical ..... they're not in the same hemisphere when it boils down to how they have to operate. I've always wished them well though, and it's a great success story.

In closing, I see all sorts of wild comments about 'we' will need at least 330Meg, or 150Meg ..... or even 1Gig by 2020. I doubt that very much for the average family, and if the obscure family DO feel it's needed ..... it's going to have to be paid for. I've a feeling that will be the next big, major gripe on forums .................. 'We want FTTP ... but we want it for free'. 
Not from BT you wont, or any other profit-making business.

[loonylion]

The usual stance of N.Korea having the best speeds doesn't bother me, I'd rather have 56k speeds and be a free man.

It's SOUTH Korea with gigabit to every home. Most people in North Korea don't even have access to a working computer, much less the internet (which is restricted to a few members of the elite anyway). South Korea is a democratic country (allegedly, just as the UK allegedly is). So you can have gigabit and be a free man at the same time

[Black Sheep]

The usual stance of N.Korea having the best speeds doesn't bother me, I'd rather have 56k speeds and be a free man.

It's SOUTH Korea with gigabit to every home. Most people in North Korea don't even have access to a working computer, much less the internet (which is restricted to a few members of the elite anyway). South Korea is a democratic country (allegedly, just as the UK allegedly is). So you can have gigabit and be a free man at the same time

Apologies, I was led to believe the infrastructure was better in N.Korea, even with the limitations put upon their people. I quickly GOOGLED this http://blog.m2fx.com/is-fttc-enough-for-the-uks-future-superfast-broadband-needs (First paragraph) which is why I commented as I did.

[c6em]

Perhaps we should get South Korea in to sort out our NHS if it is all so wonderful out there....
Because in South Korea every single hospital and doctors surgery is in private hands and privately run.

[Bowdon]

I think if G.FAST and vectoring gets rolled out in the next couple of years, and with G.INP coming now. If most houses are close to these nodes (lets hope the nodes are a plenty!), then it would be a fair deal to then offer an upfront fee for people who then want full fibre by paying money out to have the line from the node to the house fibre too.

One of the situations I've noticed is how older cabinets are serving roads quite away from the cabinet location. So these nodes would be a good thing, even just in cutting the distance to the house down.

I do think that eventually we'll have one of the most capable networks to get high speeds. But like most of Britains history we tend to have to build around things i.e. look at our road system.. we seem to drive in loops!