Strange Cabinet

My exchange has had all the FTTC infrastructure installed over the last few weeks and according to Openreach my cab has been upgraded with a predicted speed on the Wholesale website. What is odd is the cabinet that is supposed to be servicing my property. The cab is situated next to a small building site, it was originally a single dwelling on a large plot and is now having roughly 14 properties built on it. All of the surrounding cabinets are of the old thin faded grey/green type (with their numbers on) with their associated new fttc cabs in residence close by. My cabinet is stand-alone as far as I can tell but exhibits some of the external features of an fttc cab. Below is a link to a picture, is it possible that Openreach have installed some sort of hybrid cabinet as the old one may have been removed when the building work was started?

New Cabinet

I think that is a normal (new vandal-proof?) ordinary phone cabinet.

Has the old one been removed or not? If that has just appeared, then there must be another one somewhere servicing you.

You imply there are lots of cabinets nearby. Are they all 2-digit numbered, or are some much longer numbers?

Edited by RobertoS (Sat 30-Apr-11 17:22:10)

Nope, all are two digit, and it's been confirmed by an engineer, as he was diagnosing a line fault I had, that I am connected to Cab41. I'm not so worried as Wholesale say my cab is to be part of the upgrade etc., and a contact I have in Ian Livingston's complaints department has assured me that 41 is part of the upgrade

Edited by Embraer (Sat 30-Apr-11 17:34:04)

That looks, to me, to be just a standard telephony PCP cabinet.

I would expect there to be another cabinet, its fibre companion, somewhere close by if the service is currently enabled or the fibre cabinet has yet to be installed, if the service is not currently available to customers connected via No. 41.

Don't worry it's fairly normal that they "re-shell" cabinets in preperation for FTTC work. Some of the older designs (cast steel as apposed to the new pressed steel) lack the space inside to provide the ducts and tie cables necessary to link to and from the FTTC cabinet.

So don't panic, you'll still be getting your FTTC

It's the only cab out of 8 in my immediate neighbourhood that hasn't got an fttc twin, and boy have I looked. Every indication I've received, from the Wholesale checker to a nice lady in BT's ELC Dept, suggests the imminent arrival of fttc for me but until I have that nice shiny VDSL modem sitting on top of my Apple TimeCapsule and I'm murdering a movie download off iTunes I'm holding my breathe and standing by for disappointment. I've seen it all before with too many promises to improve my appalling speed

In reply to a post by polemonkey:

Don't worry it's fairly normal that they "re-shell" cabinets in preperation for FTTC work. Some of the older designs (cast steel as apposed to the new pressed steel) lack the space inside to provide the ducts and tie cables necessary to link to and from the FTTC cabinet.

So don't panic, you'll still be getting your FTTC

Assuming, from your forum ID, that you are an OR engineer would you agree that there is still a "fibre cabinet" to be installed, the partner to No. 41 ?

In reply to a post by Embraer:

It's the only cab out of 8 in my immediate neighbourhood that hasn't got an fttc twin,

Maybe it's slaved from a neighbouring cabinet.
I think most people are assuming when OR upgrade a cabinet to have FTTC capability, the fibre (and accompanying vDSL equipment) will go all the way to every cabinet.
I wouldn't be surprised, especially on lightly loaded cabinets, to see OR locate the vDSL equipment at another cabinet just down the road.

What you have (certainly the shell, anyway) is a bog standard cab (our cabinet, just round the corner, has looked like yours since it was installed about 10 years ago).

In reply to a post by adebov:

Maybe it's slaved from a neighbouring cabinet.
I think most people are assuming when OR upgrade a cabinet to have FTTC capability, the fibre (and accompanying vDSL equipment) will go all the way to every cabinet.
I wouldn't be surprised, especially on lightly loaded cabinets, to see OR locate the vDSL equipment at another cabinet just down the road.

That's an interesting suggestion. It really needs an OR engineer to comment or for Embraer, the OP, to track down and ask an engineer who is working in the local area.

Edited by burakkucat (Sun 01-May-11 11:11:59)

I shall get my stalking gear on. The engineers on my exchange are a pretty approachable lot - it's a northern thing! The evidence points to a date when I can order but no cab puts doubt in my mind. The footprint that 41 serves is rather large though, so I don't see why it would be slaved

Image One shows the Cab locations, Slater 2 being cab41 and the arrow pointing to my property. As you can see that's a pretty dense series of estates. My estate has been completed since this OS map was produced as you can see from this Google Maps image

Edited by Embraer (Sun 01-May-11 17:28:44)

becareful about showing people where u live, not everyone is honist. As for the cab id say its standard as theres loads of them here where i live, the one on my road was replaced after it was hit by a bin wagon reverseing out of a side road that knocked us out for a week and a half with one of this type, if its for fiber as well i carnt comment as where we live hasnt been upgraded yet and might not be altho every street near us (includeing ours) has a box halfway down the street and overhead wires to all propertys so im hopeful when we are annouced that we might be a canadate for the "overhead" fiber that virgin are tryaling (carnt see bt ignoreing something that works for the competishion)

The arrow points to the estate, not the property, don't worry

In reply to a post by Embraer:

I shall get my stalking gear on. The engineers on my exchange are a pretty approachable lot - it's a northern thing! The evidence points to a date when I can order but no cab puts doubt in my mind. The footprint that 41 serves is rather large though, so I don't see why it would be slaved

Image One shows the Cab locations, Slater 2 being cab41 and the arrow pointing to my property. As you can see that's a pretty dense series of estates. My estate has been completed since this OS map was produced as you can see from this Google Maps image

I spent a few interesting minutes adjusting the central position and scale of the Google map whilst correlating it to the older OS map. Eventually I located Cab.41 (Slater 2) to the east of St James' Church and therefore your home must be south of Nixon Lane, somewhere in Hedgerows Road. Having resolved the two locations, I have to agree with you that I would not expect Cab.41 to share a fibre cabinet with another PCP. Are you absolutely sure that you are connected through Cab.41 ? Dunkirk 1 on the OS map looks to be closer -- but then again, that may not be significant.

My immediate neighbour had a fibre service (FTTC) installed about three weeks ago. When he told me he was having it, I was somewhat puzzled for I thought I knew the PCP through which we are connected and it is definitely not fibre enabled. It turned out that I was mistaken. Although the cabinet I had assumed was ours is on the obvious direct route to the exchange (due S from us), we are actually served by a PCP in entirely the "wrong" direction (NNW from our location).

EDIT: I've just re-read your second post. So yes, Cab.41 is your PCP.

Edited by burakkucat (Sun 01-May-11 19:14:18)

Followed that a little further and found the cabinet on Google Street View, it's sitting there next to one of the old steel cabinets, the picture is 190 Slater Lane looking north west. That little bit of green belt is now a being-built mini housing estate, maybe they're waiting for it's completion before upgrade, or something. Why would they show me being able to get an FTTC speed if the cab hasn't been upgraded yet?

They say your line "will support ..." long before the cabinet goes in, as long as one is planned.

In reply to a post by Embraer:

Followed that a little further and found the cabinet on Google Street View, it's sitting there next to one of the old steel cabinets, the picture is 190 Slater Lane looking north west. That little bit of green belt is now a being-built mini housing estate, maybe they're waiting for it's completion before upgrade, or something. Why would they show me being able to get an FTTC speed if the cab hasn't been upgraded yet?

As I enjoy a spot of sightseeing, I used your directions via Google Street View and saw the pair of cabinets. So what number(s) do they possess? Both of them are just PCP cabs. Perhaps the "contents" of the old cabinet will be transferred to the new one and then the old one's location used for the site of the new fibre cabinet? Who knows?

In summary, you've been told by an OR engineer that you are connected via Cab.41 Looking NW at approx. 190 Slater Lane is the old & new pair of PCPs. Looking SW at approx. 182 Slater Lane is one new PCP. Neither looks like the photograph of Cab.41 that you showed at the start of this thread!

EDIT: I think Bob has the logic spot-on . . . Now why didn't I think of that!

Edited by burakkucat (Sun 01-May-11 20:45:57)

I suspect the cabinet @ 182 Slater La is not an Openreach cabinet

182's Cable, I know that. The larger of the 2 cabs at 190 is the same cab as in my first post, it's just the surroundings that have changed as the greenery has been trimmed back. So it's definitely a replacement standard cab and the FTTC unit has yet to be added

Hi,

all the previous posts seem to offer helpful thoughts on your situation.

Roberto has made a good (true) observation about estimated speeds on planned cabinets. It is normal for speeds to be issued even before the cabinet is installed and commissioned, so long as it's planned.

P.s.

Sorry if you've already thought of this, but:

is their any new backfill (tarmac) leading away from cab 41 to any of the other observed FTTC cabs?

If there is, then this would indicate that the trenches have been dug, ducts laid etc. and following the new tarmac could lead you to the serving FTTC cab.

Just like in the Wizard of Oz

Nothing obvious, the closest 2 cabs are a good distance away. There ain't no big green cab hiding in the bushes as far as I can tell

In reply to a post by adebov:

In reply to a post by Embraer:

It's the only cab out of 8 in my immediate neighbourhood that hasn't got an fttc twin,

Maybe it's slaved from a neighbouring cabinet.
I think most people are assuming when OR upgrade a cabinet to have FTTC capability, the fibre (and accompanying vDSL equipment) will go all the way to every cabinet.
I wouldn't be surprised, especially on lightly loaded cabinets, to see OR locate the vDSL equipment at another cabinet just down the road.

What you have (certainly the shell, anyway) is a bog standard cab (our cabinet, just round the corner, has looked like yours since it was installed about 10 years ago).

If I've read this properly I think it could be a valid point?

Are you saying 1 FTTC cabinet may serve 2 conventional cabs directly?

or are you saying cab41 may link through another cab (which is FTTC served)?

Although both are technically feasible, not sure if the planners are allowed to use either as a solution. Any planners on this forum?

If it's any use, the FTTC cab CAN be upto a 100m from its copper cab, but preferably within a few metres, as seems to be the norm.

In reply to a post by Ribble:

I suspect the cabinet @ 182 Slater La is not an Openreach cabinet

I thought we might have to disagree on that but I've now taken another look from the opposite angle. I agree, the cabinet's profile does now suggest to me that it is not OpenReach plant -- what did confuse me, initially, was the jointing chambers in the pavement and that cabinet is to the east of St James' church, just as the "Slater 2" legend on the OS map shows, along with Embraer's original statement: "Image One shows the Cab locations, Slater 2 being cab41".

Being curious, I'm now going to have to continue to the east and see what is present at the point marked "Slater 1".

Edited by burakkucat (Mon 02-May-11 00:37:02)

I agree with Ribble. The cab at 182 is not an Openreach cab. It's a cable cab.

In reply to a post by MadMan:

I agree with Ribble. The cab at 182 is not an Openreach cab. It's a cable cab.

Agreed. I now also share that opinion.

Having had a look at "Slater 1", outside approx. 106 Slater Lane, looking S, it too is identifiable as a cable cabinet. So that OS map, which I was originally relying on, turns out to be not much help!

Edited by burakkucat (Mon 02-May-11 00:54:33)

In reply to a post by MadMan:

I agree with Ribble. The cab at 182 is not an Openreach cab. It's a cable cab.

so op you want bt infinity when you can get cable?

I think its a new estate so no cable network

In reply to a post by mattypi:

so op you want bt infinity when you can get cable?

Assuming that the cable is run in Embraer's road, of course.

In reply to a post by Ribble:

I think its a new estate so no cable network

I've just spent the last 14 minutes making a visual tour of the area approximate to the "arrow" and yes, you are right. It is a relatively new development and there is no sign of cable anywhere in that area.

No cable, would have been nice 10years ago, then we wouldn't be having this discussion

It's looking more and more likely that this FTTC cab for cab 41 is planned but not yet installed.

Apparently these things can be commissioned within days. So keep your ears open for the roar of stihl saws and the pounding of pavement breakers and there's a good chance they'll be "planting" it

(I am of course assuming you can't directly see the cab from where you live! Otherwise just look out your window!)

They can also take over 6 months to have their power sorted out after installation. Nothing's obvious in this roll-out...

I have heard from someone with FTTC in Cornwall. Their line is definitely wired through a slave cab, where only the master has the FTTC twin.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

I have heard from someone with FTTC in Cornwall. Their line is definitely wired through a slave cab, where only the master has the FTTC twin.

Are you referring to a SCP which, logically, then connects to a PCP and thence to the exchange? If so, that is a different scenario to what has been speculated (above) for what may be used in this case. Different because Cab.41 is a PCP, not a SCP.

I can't say for certain, but they do indeed seem to be talking about a second PCP.

But that depends on what physical aspect an SCP can take. I always assumed they weren't shaped like green cabinets, and were small pole-mount connection points. But if they can be green cabinets, then he could be getting as mixed up as I would.

An SCP would normally be numbered in the format XX/1 in this scenario, that would be 41/1, for example.

The numbering on this cab strongly suggests its a PCP (unless the /1 sticker has peeled off )

Sometimes (but rarely) cabs do link through one another (e-sides feeding the 1st cab can be diverted through to another cab via the 1st cab, avoiding underground cable diverts). Both are classed as PCPs in their own right and their numbers are not related, for example, PCP13 may have a 100 pair link to PCP27, further down the road. This just provides flexibility for the planners, because PCP27 might get "busier" than PCP13... but then again it might not.

If this is the case then the the OP would only really find out by asking a local engineer. I say local because they might know off the top of their head without having to look at the recortds etc. etc.

two cabs within 20M of each other up the road both had new ducting put into the same footway box - both had vdsl cab installed - from the no. of houses 1 would probably have done (200 - 300 houses max). So I would say they treat each cab as its own separate job.

Thanks for that. If the PCP were the other Slater Lane cab how could we expect to get the predicted speeds in the high 20s on the front part of our estate? Look at the distances, we'd be talking well over 1000m

Well according to a document linked here - http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/fibre/t/3999911-ver... - it shows my postcode PR26 7JQ linked to Leyland Cab 41, so that clears that up, hopefully

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

I can't say for certain, but they do indeed seem to be talking about a second PCP.

But that depends on what physical aspect an SCP can take. I always assumed they weren't shaped like green cabinets, and were small pole-mount connection points. But if they can be green cabinets, then he could be getting as mixed up as I would.

I understand. When thinking back 50 - 55 years, a PXCP (primary cross connection point) was a big cabinet, a SCXP (secondary cross connection point) was a small cabinet and a TXCP (tertiary cross connection point) was an asbestos pillar, often located at the foot of a pole.

As Embraer seems to be willing to keep this thread updated with developments, I guess we may as well watch, read and learn.

In reply to a post by polemonkey:

An SCP would normally be numbered in the format XX/1 in this scenario, that would be 41/1, for example.

The numbering on this cab strongly suggests its a PCP (unless the /1 sticker has peeled off )

Sometimes (but rarely) cabs do link through one another (e-sides feeding the 1st cab can be diverted through to another cab via the 1st cab, avoiding underground cable diverts). Both are classed as PCPs in their own right and their numbers are not related, for example, PCP13 may have a 100 pair link to PCP27, further down the road. This just provides flexibility for the planners, because PCP27 might get "busier" than PCP13... but then again it might not.

If this is the case then the the OP would only really find out by asking a local engineer. I say local because they might know off the top of their head without having to look at the recortds etc. etc.

Thanks for that information, Mr Monkey. It's now tucked away in one of the recesses of my grey coloured wet-ware.

In reply to a post by Embraer:

Well according to a document linked here - http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/fibre/t/3999911-ver... - it shows my postcode PR26 7JQ linked to Leyland Cab 41, so that clears that up, hopefully

You got to it before me!

I see --

$ awk -F, '/PR267JQ/ { print $1, $2, $3, $4, $5, $6, $7, $8, $9, $10 }' PCP*.csv
LCLEY LEYLAND PR267JQ {LCLEY}{p41} 0 100 25.54 6b Yes FTTC

Now, what do those fields represent? (Rhetorical question to self.) --

$ grep SAU_ID PCP*.csv
SAU_ID,Name,Postcode,SAU_NODE_ID,Exchange Only Flag,Percent Lines,Uplift,Phase,Deployed,FTTC or FTTP

The interesting (or perhaps crazy) thing is that Field 9 says Yes -- i.e. Deployed.

(From that, I deduce the report was not produced by Carol's computer. "The computer says . . . No.")

In reply to a post by Embraer:

. . . it shows my postcode PR26 7JQ . . .

Somewhat off-topic but how does the information here correlate to reality?

“YES” = Part of scheduled deployment- dosnt mean its ready for service/accepting orders

In reply to a post by Ribble:

“YES” = Part of scheduled deployment- dosnt mean its ready for service/accepting orders

Utterly logical.

So, checking against my postcode --

$ awk -F, '/IP326AU/ { print $1, $2, $3, $4, $5, $6, $7, $8, $9, $10 }' PCP*.csv
EABSE BURY ST. EDMONDS IP326AU {EABSE}{p28} 0 100 6.08 4b Yes FTTC

The first glaring error is in the spelling of the exchange name. It is the same as the town, Bury St Edmunds. Bah!

My cabinet, 28, is deployed, active and available for CP orders. (As it is shown as Phase 4b, I wonder if all Phase 4b cabinets in the country are in an identical state or, perhaps, I can only expect that all Phase 4b cabinets connected to EABSE are active. Hmm . . . )

It's a little vague on some things, the first bunch of descriptions seem to cover just about everybody, but it's a reasonable respresentation

Yeah, I'll keep everybody updated. If I manage to get an FTTC order in without an obvious FTTC cab I'll be taking a trip back to cab41 with the engineer to see what he's doing. Still no sign of a twin, and regardless of all the evidence I won't be completely at ease until I'm seriously cooking on gas with Infinity

My exchange & many local cabinets are described as 4b. The exchange went live in November, with many cabs, but mine got delayed until April - seemingly with power problems.

So I wouldn't assume that every 4b cabinet is *actually* deployed yet.

However, while the BIG file has the column "Deployed" which really means "In the normal schedule" (as "No" means it is still in the schedule but delayed, and blanks means it isn't in any plans)... the other document lists the cabinets that are RFS (ready for service).

It shows that cabinets 1,7,8,10,13,15-22,24-26,28-31,34,36-46,48,49,51,53-56,59,61,63,66,68,71,72 are RFS.
Of those, #40 is marked as New.

So punch in my postcode and you get {LCLEY}{p41} - 0 - 100 - 25.54 - 6b - Yes - FTTC

This is good then, right? By other document are you talking about the one dated 15th April running at 270k? If so quite correctly nothing for my exchange is showing as the RFS is scheduled for 30th June. I like the 25.54 btw, don't you

In reply to a post by Embraer:

So punch in my postcode and you get {LCLEY}{p41} - 0 - 100 - 25.54 - 6b - Yes - FTTC

This is good then, right?
<snip>
I like the 25.54 btw, don't you

I read that the Leyland, Lancashire, exchange PCP No. 41 will have FTTC deployed in Phase 6b and that an average user could then, perhaps, see a 25.54 fold increase in speed. What it does not tell us is when Phase 6b will be enacted (although we can guess it's some time now -- from the other PCPs in the area that have already been given a "fibre twin" cabinet.)

So, yes. That is good. And the 25.54 is a bit of a silly multiplier . . .

Edited by burakkucat (Thu 05-May-11 18:35:09)

Seems good to me.

The other document is the "BTW-FTTC-Exchange-and-Cabs-15042011" one, 264K here.

I guess the names of the phases are irrelevant. Yes, that is how BT went about adding exchanges to the plan, but then individual exchanges have dates that move around. Woking, a 5b, seems to have dropped back to Dec 2011, while yours, a 6b, has pushed up quite well it seems.

I don't care much about the uplift - it's all based on averages, and probably aimed at marketing. All I care about is what my speed will go to - and the average won't help.

The news is no news, here endeth the update. No sign of any new OR work since my last post 9 days ago

Back from holiday after 2 weeks and guess what?? Nothing

I realise that the exchanges will generally go online with about 10 cabs live but is it also common for cabs to have a delayed upgrade even if it's expected.

Some people would give a resounding "Yes" to that.

But even if not *common*, it is certainly often enough. My cab took 3 months longer to get fuctioning, even if it was installed at the same time as others locally. It needed at least 2 more sets of roadworks by the power company toward 2 different lamposts (one across the road; one down the path) before going live.

Well as of today the exchange is live and people on enabled cabinets can place orders. Still no sign of my cabinet appearing - getting depressed now

Little bit frustrating but the Wholesale checker is showing no FTTC provision on my cabinet until the 30th September ie the end of the next quarter. I'm not too surprised though, as there seems to have been no further cabinet works in Leyland since the initial flurry of activity. I think a contributing factor may possibly be that permission to site the cabinet has been delayed because of it's close proximity to the new build mini-estate that is currently going up immediately behind its location. Ho hum, another summer with 750k ADSL Long Line, don't know what I'm missing as I've never seen a really fast connection

Still drumming one's fingers on the table but a little more accurate info has been provided from within the bowls of OR. A contact I've made whose title puts him well up the OR totem has confirmed an issue with the siting of my FTTC cab and that "we are working with other utilities currently to try and find a better location to position our new cabinet". No progress yet some progress with a confirmed implementation period set between today and year's end. I'm patient as it took me 3 years from ADSL rollout for BT to even look at +60db long lines and I've been bumping along sub-1mb since 2004 so I don't know what I'm missing. My only pet peeve is people constantly complaining about getting "only" 30mb when the checker says they should get 38mb, please have a little consideration for the have-nots, thanks

I'm not willing to post my contact's email address on the forums but will provide it on receipt of PM so long as your issue is ongoing, such as mine, rather than a general enquiry

In reply to a post by Embraer:

My only pet peeve is people constantly complaining about getting "only" 30mb when the checker says they should get 38mb, please have a little consideration for the have-nots, thanks

What? So people don't have the right to get the best out of their line?

The problem is that anything involving DSL is *always* going to be an unfair technology, and anything involving external communication is going to be subject to external faults and external interference.

Whether an individual's limitation is a matter of the technology, the rollout plans, or an operational fault, doesn't he have a right to pursue BT to get the best?

They have every right. It's simply a matter of perspective. I'm sitting here barely able to get 0.5mb and people who don't know how to use all of their bandwidth are moaning about an unused shortfall.

The checker is not the most accurate database and people shouldn't put all of their trust in this holy grail. I am predicted 14.4mb FTTC, my neighbours on either side of me all running from the same cable, but with a different postcode, are predicted 28mb. Explain please, and before you say the cable may route a different way, the geography of my cul-de-sac prevents any other cable possibly being used

Life's unfair, don't I know it

Nothing much to add here other than the fact the local council has refused just about every planned location for the fibre cab

Here's the latest responses from my OR contact

"Spoken to our planner and they have identified two locations one of which requires a wayleave agreement as it crosses private land which may prove to be an issue and the other has been proposed to the highways agency for approval.

If location agreed orders should be able to start getting placed in around 3 months’ time, this is subject to the location receiving approval for the proposed location."

&

"We have proposed another location with the highways which is the final suitable location, the highways agency are reviewing this still currently as they need to assess it based on safety grounds.

These assessments are quite lengthy and can still lead to rejection, so I cannot confirm anything further than I did on my previous mail at this stage."


Damn those council wobbles, can't people just walk in the street to get round my cab?

Maybe time to talk to others locally and goto meetings.

A key influencer would be a local business or two complaining that lack of FTTC may mean they move to a different area.

BT is not going to fight every cab location as hard as local people/businesses will, because with their limited funding Openreach can simply deploy the cabinets in another town, making them more attractive to home buyers/businesses

My contact (I'll PM you his name to confirm his position) has been open and honest with me throughout and I'm going to exhaust the work OR is doing before going further. He has re-iterated that the cabinet's footprint regarding orders makes it a priority as there is no Virgin provision and most telephone numbers I've input that I can google for the area return sub-3mb speeds.

Regarding businesses, apart from a garage I can't find any. There's a school but they tend to have their own leased lines as far as I've heard

I contact him the first week of the month so I'll update further then

Edited by Embraer (Tue 18-Oct-11 15:50:08)

With my County Councillors hat on:-

In your quote from your OR contact, you refer to "highways agency". Which is not your local council.

The Highways Agency is a government agency with responsibility for trunk roads. http://www.highways.gov.uk/

I know from my own dealings that they do not like anything on or under "their" roads such as a sewer (which I suggested be laid under a proposed widening of a trunk road.

So, first of all, is your existing cabinet on what might be described as a trunk road (it does not have to be a dual carriageway)? If not, then it would be likely to come under your local council planners. In which case, you have the right to speak with them yourself or get your local councillor to speak to them on your behalf. If your Council operates in a similar manner to mine, then your local councillor would have been contacted by the council for his/her view on a new cabinet if it was contentious. For my exchange, Hawarden, I was contacted for one cabinet which was located within the Conservation Area. I happily offered no objection (it was NOT the box which serves my house !!!).

I you let me know who your council is, or your postcode, by PM if you like, I will find you a contact phone number for your local planning department. The road that your cabinet is on may be useful too. (Flintshire has a website where you can follow planning by post code, hopefully yours has similar)

Cheers!

Council comment was a bit flippant, sorry. Will PM you the details, know a lot already but would be interested to have a contact if there is a planning refusal

Well, seriously on a downer now, planning permission for my cab has been turned down by the Highways Agency on safety grounds. Full text of the email from my OR contact below

Not great news I am afraid, the Highways Agency rejected our final position on safety grounds last Thursday (this is something they are legally entitled to do), as we do not have any other locations suitable we are struggling and as a result we may have to consider removing this from our roll our programme.

As a last resort we are currently trying to divert some existing infrastructure to see if that will provide alternative options, this as I mentioned is a last resort and is not something we have ever tried before so it is a long shot and may not work.

Realise this is not the best of news for you as a potential customer, we are though trying everything we can to try and find a solution for your cabinet.

In terms of timescales, I should know by the end of November if we have a possible way forward or not.

Not too sure if the existing infrastructure is FTTP but not holding out much hope

You've got to love forum contacts. Not a lost cause yet, the contractor involved is actively working to find an alternative site for the cab

In reply to a post by Embraer:

You've got to love forum contacts. Not a lost cause yet, the contractor involved is actively working to find an alternative site for the cab.

Knowing how long you have been waiting, I hope that some good news does eventually come your way.

Cheers mate. Just managed to tweak my adsl speed to a whopping 2.5mb using the DGTeam Netgear firmware, until recently I've been speeding along at 800K . Not bad considering the checker says I should get nothing close to that

that is not a DSLAM as far as i can see but looks like a Reshelled PCP

think you need to look elsewhere for the cab

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

that is not a DSLAM as far as i can see but looks like a Reshelled PCP

That was agreed by everyone, including the OP, months ago .

think you need to look elsewhere for the cab

I doubt if he will do that, as he knows it hasn't even got planning permission yet . See his post on 31 October.

Edited by RobertoS (Mon 07-Nov-11 09:09:09)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I doubt if he will do that, as he knows it hasn't even got planning permission yet . See his post on 31 October.

From my own experience new cabinets sometimes go in before planning permission is granted. Nothing ilegal here, just that if refused then it has to be removed. Many individuals and companies take the risk and jump the gun. In my local case I had already signed off my agreement - the cab was technically within the defined Conservation Area, but located in a 1970's developed area, so I had no problem with it. OR simple got on with the job before the LA had signed it off. After all it was adjacent to the existing cabinet.

And NO, it was NOT the FTTC cab to which I'm connected!

Cheers!

In reply to a post by Ancient_Mariner:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I doubt if he will do that, as he knows it hasn't even got planning permission yet . See his post on 31 October.

From my own experience new cabinets sometimes go in before planning permission is granted. Nothing ilegal here, just that if refused then it has to be removed

I think there is a misunderstanding here .

The Anon poster clearly has not read the recent posts in the thread, perhaps no posts other than the opening one, and the relevant parts of the OP's posts may perhaps have slipped your memory.

(As I'm sure you know but some others may not), Local Authority planning permission is very rarely required for BT cabinet installations. The case you cite is unusual to start with, and in this one it is the Highways Agency that are kicking up the fuss and it has been a protracted process. What happened with the example you give is interesting but I don't feel it is particularly relevant to my reply to the Anon poster .

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

in this one it is the Highways Agency that are kicking up the fuss

In this case it is not the Highways Agency that are causing the problem. Simply, the Highways Agency are a government body involved with Motorways and Trunk Routes; Slater Lane is neither of those!

What has confused this usually simple erection of a FTTC cabinet is that the local council, whilst responsible for planning, is not the local Higway Authority; that is Lancashire County Council. Overall, the actual issue here is a combination of ownership of land for a suitable cabinet location and OFCOM rules on distance been existing and FTTC cab.

Hopefully it will all come together.

Cheers!

So you are saying the OP and/or his OpenReach contact are talking rubbish? And that the Anon poster is correct in saying the OP should look elsewhere for his FTTC cab?

Edited by RobertoS (Tue 08-Nov-11 10:03:10)

His OR contact is mixing up Highways Agency and Lancashire County Council.

PM sent.

Cheers!

Cheers.

Still doesn't materially affect my reply to the Anon .

Happy to report that the area of land that was original thought to be unadopted is actually adopted highway so my contact in the infrastructure company responsible for installing the cab is placing all the orders for it's siting.

Happy, happy, happy

Many thanks again to the Mariner, that is a man with a seriously large number of really useful contacts

BTW Mariner, your quote re John Glenn is incorrect, it was Alan Shepard who said it - he is also originator of the "Shepard's Prayer", just google it

Edited by Embraer (Wed 09-Nov-11 18:52:24)

So, finally, some good news has come the way of he who has waited.

Pleased to have been of help and thanks for spotting my mis-attribution to John Glenn, corrected now.

My favourite astronaut story, sadly untrue apparently, was featured some years back in the February 1996 edition of the General Aviation magazine Flyer, quote:-

"AURAL RIDDLE EXPLAINED - Until recently, just one small thing remained to be explained about the Apollo moon missions. When he had landed on the moon and made his famous ‘one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind’ contribution to the world’s dictionaries of quotations, Neil Armstrong followed it with the more mysterious ‘Good luck, Mr Gorsky’. At the time, nobody could explain this comment (other than some not too serious suggestions of moon madness) and nobody thought much of it. However, as is the way with such moments in history, the comms records of that first ever moonwalk have been closely analysed. Generally technical comms-speak, the ‘Gorsky’ statement stood out. It could have been assumed that it was directed at a rival Soviet Cosmonaut - but there is no Gorsky known in the Russian space camp. Over the past 25 or so years many questions had been asked about the ‘Good Luck, Mr Gorsky’ statement. But it was only on July 5 last year that Neil Armstrong broke his silence. It appears that when he was young, Neil Armstrong had been playing baseball with his brother in the backyard of his parents’ home. His brother hit a ball which landed right in front of the neighbours’ bedroom window - a certain Mr and Mrs Gorsky. As he gathered the ball, Armstrong heard Mrs Gorsky shouting at Mr Gorsky ‘Oral sex? You’ll get oral sex when the kid next door walks on the moon!’

So now you know, and a prize to the first person to find the correct CAP 413 of expressing this." unquote.

Cheers!

Another Urban Myth. If you want a good read though look for Riding Rockets by Mike Mullane

We have progress, a hole & a trench, lots of orange barriers and a commitment from Openreach that orders will be placeable by mid-April

In reply to a post by Embraer:

We have progress, a hole & a trench, lots of orange barriers and a commitment from Openreach that orders will be placeable by mid-April

That will only be eleven and a half months from your first post, starting this thread . . .

Are there any photographs of the hole & trench available? Their location on Google Maps, perhaps?

A hole is a hole but definitely fttc related. I'll try and get a picture tomorrow

But when is a hole not a hole?

When there's an FTTC cabinet planted right on top of it

Link

Not directly related to this cabinet but I started to get all excited when I saw a bunch of workmen replacing my cabinet on Monday. They took the old one away & I assumed that there was a new FTTC one in it's place but on closer inspection today it's the same as the one in Embraer's original photo
My Cab 1
My Cab 2

I have a date of 1/6/2012 for FTTC so am not getting too upset just yet but why would BT need to replace what was only a 10 year old cabinet already?

cant look at your links right now but guess its a re-shell, which is sometimes required to allow space for the link cables that connect to the fibre cabinet

It's a re-shell.

In reply to a post by Embraer:

But when is a hole not a hole?

When there's an FTTC cabinet planted right on top of it

Link

Thanks for the link. That cabinet has been a long time coming!

Is it sited in the entrance roadway to the new development?

FTTC Cab is at 53°41'24.80"N 2°43'58.49"W

Primary Cab is at 53°41'25.71"N 2°44'1.27"W

The issue was the pavements on the Primary's road were too narrow for any new cabinet and Openreach and the contractors were unsure of the status of the road that the FTTC cab is now situated on. It was initially assumed it was unadopted which makes cabinet siting complicated. It turned out, after some digging about, that it was adopted and the work has now commenced

Got it!

I can almost get Google Street View at the same angle as your photograph. Fortunately the shape of the brick wall and the white mark on the brickwork confirms the correct alignment.

Your photograph also has a bonus -- I can see a glimpse of the new development on the north side of Slater Lane.

All you need to do, once your fibre service has been connected, is to post a speed test and then this thread will be complete.

And LOCKED

Commissioned already! Available on BTWholesale Tracker this morning, Infinity ordered for the 26th, will post stats

Excellent news!

I've been keeping my eye on "Fibre Broadband" waiting to see how you got on.

Hope all goes well on Monday 26th.

Cheers!

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1857049703.png

Thank you and good night

In reply to a post by Embraer:

Thank you and good night

But you won't be going to sleep. You will be playing with the speed all night .

At long last!

Certainly looks good.

Cheers!

So you have finally got there. Persistence paid off!