Featured
Latest
Fibre To The Premis...
 
Share:
Notifications
Clear all

Forum 141

Fibre To The Premises; do we really need it?

12 Posts
5 Users
0 Likes
800 Views
Cathovisor
(@cathovisor)
Posts: 6390
Famed Member Registered
Topic starter
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-49209013

Ignoring the politics behind this as we should, is having every home with a fibre connection necessary or even desirable? It will be the only way of delivering UHD TV for the foreseeable future, but do we need gigabit fibre connections to the home? And if the home has a gigabit connection, how big must the backbones be? It all seems a bit excessive to me - and it also means that each home will have to have a converter box for speech inside it.

What if you don't want an Internet connection at all? What happens if the mains power to your converter box fails? And from my experiences of it, VOIP isn't that great. I visited an aunt yesterday who has a landline... and nothing else. No mobile, no Internet, nothing. She simply has no need of it. What of those people?

I'm still on ADSL: although FTTC is available here, my ADSL speed is 14.4Mbit/sec. I simply have no need for anything faster, and consequently more expensive.

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 9:19 am
PYE625
(@pye625)
Posts: 5121
Famed Member Registered
 
Posted by: @cathovisor

I simply have no need for anything faster, and consequently more expensive.

Me neither.

And of course making more money from the public for this "service" is hardly the main driving force now is it?  ? 

To understand the black art of electronics is to understand witchcraft. Andrew.

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 10:12 am
mfd70
(@mfd70)
Posts: 281
Honorable Member Registered
 

The debate about FTTP reminds me of the push for cable TV in the eighties and early nineties, contracts were handed out to companies many with poor business models, most of which bankrupt themselves laying the cables. Then their potential market was severely compromised as digital DTH satellite provided a superior product. Of course now Virgin cable has caught up and can offer 1Gb over copper using docsis technology, but I don't think any new cable systems have been installed in twenty years. FTTP has its place, but I can't see who will pay to physically connect every household in the UK and by the time is is done, other technologies may have made it irrelevant.

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 2:51 pm
Nuvistor
(@nuvistor)
Posts: 4594
Famed Member Registered
 

At home I have about 10-11Mb/s down 0.9-1Mb/S up, the download speed is fine but a faster upload would be useful. FTTC is available but the cabinet is more than 1km distant, I would get a speed increase but not enough to warrant the extra cash.

My daughter as abysmal internet speeds, lucky to get 2-3Mb/S down, 200Kb/s up if we are lucky, plus lots of contention, very often stops at times.

Openreach have recently strung fibre to a pole nearby but there has not been any marketing so no idea of the cost or when it’s available.

I don’t think she is bothered how the connection is delivered just as long as it works.

 

Frank

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 3:22 pm
Terrykc
(@terrykc)
Posts: 4005
Member Rest in Peace
 
Posted by: @mfd70

The debate about FTTP reminds me of the push for cable TV in the eighties and early nineties, contracts were handed out to companies many with poor business models, most of which bankrupt themselves laying the cables.

I'm not sure that I'd agree about 'most' here.

I do know of one, Masada, in Manchester where one partner pulled out, I think due to bankruptcy, leaving the other partner, Pacific Telesys (Pactel) to take over their share. Now this did cause a problem with the company I had recently joined, East London Telecommunications (Eastside Cable) as Pactel owned 44.5% of ELT as they wanted out so they could bail out Masada. 

As a result, ELT scaled back its production programme until a new partner could be found which happened in the shape of Bell Canada. There were, however, lots of mergers which were not caused by bankruptcies but by economies of scale. With the awarding of new franchises in NE London, Epping Forest, Bexley, Ashford, Dover and Folkestone, the East London name was no longer appropriate and it changed to EnCom (from entertainment and communications). Another partner, Jones Intercable also had franchises in NW London and was awarded a new one for the Chilterns.

Bell Canada and Jones merged their interests and the company became know as Bell Cablemedia.

BCM was then acquired by Cable & Wireless which then brought us into the same 'family' as Nynex, Videotron and Diamond Cable. The second last step was the merger with ntl:.

By now, there were only two major players, ntl: and TeleWest so the final step, the move to Virgin Media was inevitable.

Kingston Communications is, as far as I know, still independent and I think there is one other somewhere in the country but I'm not sure where.

When all else fails, read the instructions

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 4:23 pm
Terrykc
(@terrykc)
Posts: 4005
Member Rest in Peace
 
Posted by: @mfd70

Then their potential market was severely compromised as digital DTH satellite provided a superior product. 

It did? Cable networks were carrying DTV signals while most of the country was still using analogue SKY boxes! 

What compromised the cable market was the slow speed that HMG awarded franchises so that, by the time many were built, the cables were being laid past houses already adorned with satellite dishes!

When all else fails, read the instructions

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 4:31 pm
Nuvistor
(@nuvistor)
Posts: 4594
Famed Member Registered
 

Kingston have just had the approval for a sale to Macquarie, no idea what other businesses they are involved with.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/01/kcom_shuts_shop_as_627m_macquarie_is_complete/

A little more information.

https://www.macquarie.com/uk/about/newsroom/2019/meif6-fibre-ltd-announcements

 

Frank

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 4:34 pm
Terrykc
(@terrykc)
Posts: 4005
Member Rest in Peace
 

The address the original question about FTTP, I can't see that most people will really benefit from it. VM already offer 200Mbps as standard - much faster than I could ever make use of it and FTTC provides good speeds provided that the connection to the subscriber isn't too long and full of badly made joints.

But, as I sit here with my 200Mbps feed and the BT cabinet 100m away offering FTTC, I have lots of options. It is the folk who struggle to get a signal to crawl down a few km of twisted pair that really need the attention. But is it viable to give them FTTP? I don't really know.

A few years ago, a consortium was set up to provide fibre to entire counties that BT had expressed no interest in but it would only be viable if they had the sole right to provide the service. 

As if by magic, BT whistled up teams to expand there network in these places, cherry picking the most lucrative areas and leaving the rest. Of course, the original scheme was no longer viable and the rural customers no better off.

When all else fails, read the instructions

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 4:47 pm
mfd70
(@mfd70)
Posts: 281
Honorable Member Registered
 

@terrykc

The advantage of Sky Digital was that from day one, wherever you lived you had access to over one hundred channels including BBC, and eventually Ch4,Ch5 and ITV. The Cabletel analog service in Cardiff was unable to compete and was taken over by NTL. The older cable systems in the Welsh valleys and even one in Swindon were abandoned with customers being given free Sky Digital installs.

 
Posted : 03/08/2019 5:06 pm
Terrykc
(@terrykc)
Posts: 4005
Member Rest in Peace
 

Were these Switched Star Networks (SSN), by any chance?

When CATV started in this country, for some reason known only to itself, HMG wanted the operators to build networks using new, leading edge SSN technology. As a carrot, licences for 23 years were given to SSNs but only 15 years to broadband networks.

Apart from the frequencies involved, broadband and satellite systems work in the same way. All of the available channels are connected to a Set Top Box which then converts the incoming signal into one suited to the subscribers TV.

In an SSN, the broadband network is essentially the same but the subscriber gets only one channel at a time (or two for a VCR connection) at a low (48 - 64MHz) frequency and the STB is just a VHF/UHF up-convector to drive the TV and simple communications to control the equipment in the roadside cabinet. This is where all the intelligence is - modems and processors (like the Z80!) and individual cards for each subscriber to select and forward the required channel. Fine on paper, perhaps, but not so good in the demanding environment of a roadside cabinet. Needless to say, it wasn't the most reliable of systems although it did improve over time.

The maximum bandwidth of a CATV network is determined by amplifier technology. The Belgian networks of the mid 70s were limited to 290MHz. By the time the earliest of UK networks saw the light of day it was up to 450MHz and rapidly improved to 550 and 600MHz.

By the time that ntl: wanted to upgrade its networks, 750MHz amplifiers were available that complied with the strict demands of distortion and noise (defined in a British Standard), gave sufficient bandwidth expansion for the new services and, in the vast majority of cases, didn't need any other major upgrades such as new cables, just the replacement of all the passive taps and splitters.

This wouldn't work for an SSN though because all of that expensive leading edge technology would need to be redesigned and replaced at tremendous cost. And it couldn't simply be converted to a broadband system, either.

The low frequencies used for sending signals to the subscriber's home meant that a 200m drop cable would loose only about 10 or 11dB. At 750MHz, the loss would leap up to around 37dB! A complete RF redesign would have been needed with many more roadside cabinets, ducts and trunk cabling at tremendous cost. No wonder many operators threw in the towel.

As the old adage goes, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. SSNs were a solution to a problem that never existed.

When all else fails, read the instructions

 
Posted : 04/08/2019 3:57 pm
Terrykc
(@terrykc)
Posts: 4005
Member Rest in Peace
 

Some further observations:

The two oldest franchises I encountered in Greater London were switched star networks - both were abandoned, just like those in Wales and Swindon.

Another problem is that the internet, as we know it today, would have been beyond anybody's wildest dreams when SSN technology was born and the one-channel delivery approach would have been a major limiting factor. The maximum data rate in an 8MHz channel is 55.62 Mbps for EuroDOCSIS - and that is, of course, a shared resource. 

However, by bonding several channels together, astronomic data rates are possible today, hence VM's current 200 Mbps entry level service.

Modern satellites are very reliable, which is just as well because you can't send out a man in a van to fix one if something goes wrong. However, the weather isn't as reliable and heavy rain can block reception (and 3" of snow stuck on a dish doesn't work well either). 

Cable, though, carries on unaffected because it doesn't rely on satellites - all of the data on its network is fed on fibre direct from the broadcasters.

When all else fails, read the instructions

 
Posted : 05/08/2019 1:32 pm
Nuvistor
(@nuvistor)
Posts: 4594
Famed Member Registered
 

Just down the lane from were I am at the moment they had to have satellite broadband installed, ADSL was not good enough for their purpose and there is no chance of cable ever being delivered.

Satellite is expensive even on the more restricted tariffs but it’s a darn sight better than the ADSL that is available at this location. I have not looked but if Openreach has passed his house with FTTP I think he will be first in the queue.

 

 

Frank

 
Posted : 05/08/2019 2:00 pm
Share: