In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

£0.5m versus £2500m is a big jump in terms of project management

Even if it were true.

THe FTTC project is though whilst very large not that complex. It can be broken down into a large number of relatively simply tasks with few critical paths to cause knock on problems

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

THe FTTC project is though whilst very large not that complex. It can be broken down into a large number of relatively simply tasks with few critical paths to cause knock on problems

Especially if you have employed 50% more engineers than are necessary to complete the project on time and within budget, so you have no need to divert any elsewhere when there is a reason for delay. And have in-house or third-party teams and coffee-drinking duct fixers sitting around like Ambulance Crews waiting for callout.

Ambulance crews are worth paying to do that. FTTC cabinet crews are not. They move on so they never stop working.

Nor, given a holdup when a cab is half done, do they move on to another, and return once the holdup has gone. They complete the one they are on, and whatever is next in the schedule, and so on and so on. Until a gap turns up like another that is held up, when they may return to the first and complete it.

Elementary.

Never mind the whelk stall, could you manage two simultaneous buffets for 100 people each, in different rooms at an hotel , one a wedding and one a funeral party, without screwing up and upsetting someone?

Well BT could be in for a big shock with the BDUK rollout. It appears penalty clauses are being but in place to ensure BT stick to the agreed schedule. THe provisional figure I have is that BT are expected to deliver 97% on time and on budget. If they fall behind that the penalty charges kick in.

I live in Rayleigh, Essex - BT have recently pushed back their FTTC date from Sept to Dec 2012.

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

Well BT could be in for a big shock with the BDUK rollout. It appears penalty clauses are being but in place to ensure BT stick to the agreed schedule. THe provisional figure I have is that BT are expected to deliver 97% on time and on budget. If they fall behind that the penalty charges kick in.

Now you qualify as someone who might be a success as a comedian.

Whatever happens, they will pay out far less capital per cabinet on BDUK than they do on their self-funded rollout. In effect, given the revenue stream discounted over 10 years, (certain), maybe even only five years, (guess/possibly), they will make a profit from BDUK compared to what they would make from self-installing those cabinets. That's why they've forced the issue by refusing to do it themselves.

Do you really think that the costs of possible slippage, i.e. possible penalty charges, haven't been built into their BDUK tender? They have all the data they need as to what contingencies may arise. They may even have built in contingency funds for emergency callouts of all staff and subcontractors involved when "stuff happens".

You really don't know a damn thing. Not just about Project Management, but about basic capital investment. Certainly not about major commercial tenders. Just a big know-all with no knowledge at all.

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

Well BT could be in for a big shock with the BDUK rollout. It appears penalty clauses are being but in place to ensure BT stick to the agreed schedule. THe provisional figure I have is that BT are expected to deliver 97% on time and on budget. If they fall behind that the penalty charges kick in.

*yawn* too bad for you then... when those area's are in danger of falling behind target they'll get resourced and your cab will get pushed back again.

In reply to a post by FRS_Plunderer:

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

Well BT could be in for a big shock with the BDUK rollout. It appears penalty clauses are being but in place to ensure BT stick to the agreed schedule. THe provisional figure I have is that BT are expected to deliver 97% on time and on budget. If they fall behind that the penalty charges kick in.

*yawn* too bad for you then... when those area's are in danger of falling behind target they'll get resourced and your cab will get pushed back again.

ROFL

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by FRS_Plunderer:

*yawn* too bad for you then... when those area's are in danger of falling behind target they'll get resourced and your cab will get pushed back again.

ROFL

It was my first thought too. The law of unintended consequences...

An interesting post back here, on the status of cabinets in Finchampstead a month ago, with the report coming from Openreach.

In there, you can definitely see the impact of power connections on the progress of each individual cabinets.

Bob will tell us that BT should have, in each case, just ordered the power 6 weeks earlier.

My suspicion is that BT can't do that, in case the cabinet is not physically present. ie That the electricity contractor cannot just poke a wire out of a conduit, and leave it for BT to install alone. I suspect that the cable will be unmetered (and unfused?), and the HSE would take exception to such a wire poking into the open air.

The language of the report suggests that 6 weeks is a perfectly acceptable leadtime to BT - and therefore built into their plans. Every cabinet with a "6 week power wait" is just reported as such. The ones with an 8 or 10 week delay are, on the other hand reported as having management action taken - so presumably unacceptable.

The report also talks about duct blockages, and the impact on the "fibre spine". There the delay seems to be a couple of weeks.

That ties with something I read elsewhere... where duct blockages were being found every 200 metres, and that each one incurred a 2 week delay on the fibre pull while it was dug & fixed.