Print

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

[waltergmw]

Gentlefolk,

Does anybody know what the current rules are for a FTTH installation where the existing phone service is standard GPO armoured cable direct buried.
In particular do BT Openreach insist on installing their small (60 mm ?) ducts first, or would they attempt a new overhead pole solution ?

Kind regards,
Walter

[Black Sheep]

Firstly, I've no idea how FTTH is planned so the rest is just my own thoughts. 

I would imagine each install is planned on an individual basis. As with CU/ALI circuits, it all depends on what the circumstances are like in the here and now, as opposed to yesteryear when the 'Direct in ground' armoured cable was lain. This type of cabling seemed to be prevalent in the 60's/70's' so a lot may have been done to the premises or surrounding area that could prevent replacement underground duct work from taking place ??

On a costing basis, on an average length house frontage ........ it will always be cheaper to go for the laying of duct, and I think protocols are to keep the install as near to the original work as possible.
That said, if as mooted above, laying of duct will take the costings through the roof (or past the Planners budget  ), then having a pole erected would be the most frugal step forward.

Some members on here would probably insist that OR erect a pole outside every house, and run 12 separate ducts to each premises ......... just in case. <joke>. 

[licquorice]

Some members on here would probably insist that OR erect a pole outside every house, and run 12 separate ducts to each premises ......... just in case. <joke>. 

I wasn't going to bite, but I will.

Until you provide the relevant costings of

(a) 50 metres of 100 pair cable
(b) 50 metres of 200 pair cable
(c) 50 metres of ductwork and associated civils across a road

I won't alter my view.
I am convinced the cost difference between (a) and (b) is literally pence, whereas the cost of (c) is £1000s hence at least a 1000 (b)s could be provided for the cost of every (c)

http://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,16347.0.html for those confused by the 'joke' and the reply.

[Black Sheep]

Thankfully, for the shareholders ....... everyone else in BTOR aren't convinced. 

[Ronski]

100 pair is £4.80 per meter, 200 pair is £11.36 per meter, which is just over double, no doubt BT will pay less especially in bulk, but the 200 pair cable will still be around double the cost because it contains double the pairs. I do wonder why you expect it to cost just a few pence more for double the cable........


http://www.netshop.co.uk/product/820/tcjf5100pb-ctl
http://www.netshop.co.uk/products/1794/cw1128-outdoor-duct-grade-telephone-cable?page=1
http://www.thecablingstore.com/proddetail.php?prod=CW1308B-BK-200P

[licquorice]

Because the cost of the material is a very small proportion of the cost of manufacturing a cable.

[Ronski]

Well now you have it in full glorious colour (rather than in black and white) on the internet, 200 pair cable is about twice the cost of 100 pair 

[licquorice]

Indeed I do, thank you for that, I sit corrected.

[waltergmw]

Thank you BS et al for your replies.

Those attempting to do the sums please note the civils costs can quite easily significantly exceed the materials costs. E.g. Contractors have been known to charge a standard road-crossing excavation fee of £1,200.

The other part of the financial equation is the pay-back period E.g. in round figures Infinity 4 @ £54 + Line rental @ £17 = £71 * 18 months = £1278 but I don't know what churn and inflation factors might be applied thereafter.

Kind regards,
Walter

[WWWombat]

Edit: Let's ignore that, shall we? This has been done to death in the other thread...