The daft thing is that according to OFCOM our cabinet delivers "Superfast" to at most half a dozen scattered farms and rural properties.
Homes that didn't get superfast speeds (ie 25Mbps+) will not have counted towards any subsidy from BDUK or the local council. Unless you were one of the last cabinets to get upgraded in the county, it seems likely that more premises were counted as "upgraded" than you think.
What exchange and cabinet number? People can then help with other estimates.
So what are the options for OR to make good the poor service they are offering our village? Move the cabinet? A secondary cabinet located actually within the village?
An infill cabinet in the village will help speeds there, and will need subsidising.
Those premises not over the superfast threshold are still eligible for BDUK support from your local council project. Contacting them would be the logical first step, to discover whether there are enough properties for your area to stand a chance of this.
Failing that, persuading BT to include the cabinet in LR-VDSL trials might help.
Failing that, BT do run a community fibre scheme that allows community groups to contribute to an upgrade.
Failing that, a DIY wireless link to one of the properties that can get decent speeds.
However upstream only uses the U0 band and syncs at around 1Mb/s.
From what I know, it looks unlikely that there is a technical fix with the FTTC cabinet in its present remote location. (If there is, please tell me!)
Here's one out of left field...
This is indeed a problem for longer lines. The upstream seems to drop away faster than downstream at longer ranges, beyond 1.5km or so. But the reasoning is complicated... (*)
There is a mechanism employed by the FTTC cabinets known as "upstream power backoff", UPBO. Its job is to reduce power on nearby modems, so that longer-range modems suffer less crosstalk, and get a better upstream speed.
However, the settings for this mechanism appear to be tunable by the operator, and can give different results to people at different distances. I cannot explain exactly how tuning works, but the upshot is that modems within (say) 200m get slower than expected upstream speeds, while those between (say) 200m and 900m get better, and then those beyond 900m get worse again. Instead of a 900m threshold, an operator could tune for a 600m threshold instead. Or a 1.2km threshold instead.
I have seen nothing (in, for example, the ANFP) where BT give details about their chosen setup for UPBO, and absolutely nothing that shows they can tune this setting for different cabinets. It suggests BT may have a single configuration common to all urban and rural cabinets.
If your first hypothesis is correct - that very few premises are within 1km, and many are beyond 1.2km - then my guess
is that your upstream speeds could be collectively suffering in order to bring benefit to a set of lines (below 1km) that just don't exist in your case.
There is a chance
that your upstream could behave differently if BT reconfigured UPBO. But I've never, ever, heard of this suggested or pursued anywhere at all. No ISP nor engineer will understand it. And there is no chance it would happen if there is a reasonable number of premises getting superfast speeds.
- This paper describes UPBO.
The 6 graphs on page 3 show the result of tuning UPBO for different reference lengths (with "blue squares") vs the speed without UPBO at all ("black line").
It is obvious that whatever gain is made in the intermediate distances, it is paid for with relatively low speeds beyond the reference distance.
Edited by WWWombat (Mon 24-Apr-17 12:33:39)