Is it G.Fast?

I live in bolton and Ive noticed a lot of work on the cabinets and I know we are a G.Fast trial area and recently in the local area including cab 130 (mine) and 37 which i will be connected to after I move. They have added this side extension to both, is this just a copper extension or is this g.fast. I cant see gfast coming up on the superfast checkers anywhere for my line, address or new address

http://postimg.org/image/mqsi4cb9l/

Yes, I can confirm that is a G.Fast pod.

Great !! glad I got the builder to install Cat6 Networking into my new home

Is it LIVE now? the g.fast service.

I've just spotted one in Wombledon; cabinet 25 from the Putney exchange. Not my cabinet, sadly. It doesn't appear to be live yet.

It has been very busy at my cabinet recently.

The day I was connected to the G Fast pod on the right, contractors turned up to add the pod on the left.

I suspect the additional 'pod' on the left will be to make room in the extra tie pairs and jumpers, and hopefully not leave the cabs interior overly congested.

I think you are right.

Although G Fast isn't congested in the cab yet - I am the only one it!

Although G Fast isn't congested in the cab yet - I am the only one it!

I wasn't referring to the product itself being congested, I meant an excess of jumper wires in the PCP.

When originally designed there was only ever one jumper, from the E(exchange) to the D(distribution) pairs. With up to 600 plus wires, the assemblies could be quite 'busy' ...... When FTTC came along anyone taking the product would end up having two jumpers on their circuit, with FTTC being so popular there might be an additional 400 jumpers ...... some cabs becoming virtually unworkable.

Many of the larger telephone exchange frame rooms suffered similar fates as ADSL meant a doubling of many circuits jumpers.

no checkers are reporting it on my line

Interesting I saw one of those going in at the junction of Alexandra Parade and Alexandra Park Street in Glasgow this morning.

I was really surprised to see one in Shotley in Suffolk a couple of weeks ago. Martlesham around the Adastral Park aside, Suffolk is rarely the first to get brand-new tech stuff.

Turns out that it was only a standard PCP extension, though I wonder if a full cabinet might need a PCP extension before it can get a G.Fast pod.

However yesterday I spotted that cabinet 46 from the Bridgeton exchange which is further towards the centre of town on Alexandra Parade had a G.Fast pod added. This is it on Google Streetview

Streetview

And this is a photo I took this morning of the cabinet.

Post installation

And here is one of the pod installation in progress.

Installation

Interestingly this is right next to the Fir Park development of flats (they are the newish blocks of flats 10m up the road), which a combination of Hyperoptic/CityFibre seem to have been targeting. At least I have seen workmen sporting hi-vis vests with both those companies logos on iin the vicinity, including handling bundles of cables coming out the buildings.

This is not even close to the advertised trial areas in Glasgow for G.Fast.

The original cabinet I saw is this
one. Which now sports a expansion on the right as looking at from the above link.

I wonder if a cabinet is full, and that one pretty much is judging from what I saw last time, it would require a PCP expansion before it could get a GFast pod?

I would imagine so to house the block terminals for the tie cable pairs to the G.fast pod.

No, the PCP extensions are only required for 2nd VDSL DSLAMs.
G.Fast pods contain all the block terminals within.
https://ibb.co/ibiCFQ
It would be an almighty mess having tie cables go across the entire PCP from left to right between 2 pods.

Where do you think the tie cables between the g.fast pod and the PCP go? If the PCP is already physically full you would need a standard PCP extension to accommodate the additional G.fast ties. If an engineer is enabling a line for G.fast they don�t ever open the actual G.fast pod. It�s exactly the same as VDSL in that sense.

Zarjaz was the person who initially mentioned this point, consider where he works. Ditto for me.

Edited by deleted (Fri 28-Jul-17 18:40:40)

I did think this would be the case. There has to be more blocks and tie pairs for G.fast otherwise how would the signal be introduced onto the copper circuit.

Show me a G.Fast install with a PCP extension, that doesn't have a 2nd fibre twin.
A couple cabinets in the city centre near me have a 384 Huawei DSLAM and a G.Fast pod, with no PCP extension. Small PCP's are more likely to be reshelled than have a PCP extension.
G.Fast pods have far less ports than any VDSL2 DSLAM.

Edited by j0hn83 (Fri 28-Jul-17 19:20:25)

Some PCP's have enough room to house the additional blocks needed without an extension.

As above, regular engineers won't have access to the G.Fast pod, just like they don't have access to the FTTC cabinets.

How do you propose service engineers connect customers copper circuits to the G.fast pods of the block terminals aren't in the PCP?

Who says they aren't in the PCP.
I said it would be an almighty mess having tie cables crossing from left to right, from pod to pod. PCP extensions are added for VDSL2 tie cables, for 2nd fibre twins.

Point stands. Show me a G.Fast pod with a PCP extension that DOESN'T have a 2nd fibre twin.
How big do you think a 100 pair block terminals is? Even with 2 x VDSL2 cabinets, a PCP extension, and a G.Fast pod, the G.Fast tie cables/block are in the PCP, not the extension.

I think there's some crossed wires here, excuse the pun

What you're saying is that an PCP extension pod wouldn't be used to house he block terminals for a G.Fast pod, only for a second fibre twin.

That said, I have seen PCP extensions used for standard copper connections when a new housing estate popped up.

Not sure what would happen in an area that had 2 copper extension pods? There must be some somewhere?

Would Openreach install a larger PCP? Or just not put G.fast at that cabinet?

In reply to a post by lee111s:

I think there's some crossed wires here, excuse the pun

haha. literally just about choked having a drink.

In reply to a post by lee111s:

What you're saying is that an PCP extension pod wouldn't be used to house he block terminals for a G.Fast pod, only for a second fibre twin.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Having the G.Fast tie cable block in the PCP extension would be a mess, and likely be a crosstalk nightmare (for the VDSL2 circuits).

In reply to a post by j0hn83:

Point stands. Show me a G.Fast pod with a PCP extension that DOESN'T have a 2nd fibre twin.
How big do you think a 100 pair block terminals is? Even with 2 x VDSL2 cabinets, a PCP extension, and a G.Fast pod, the G.Fast tie cables/block are in the PCP, not the extension.

Well the cabinet in question (Bridgeton/42) that prompted my comments is what I would describe as "stuffed to bursting point", based on my nosey parkering while walking past with engineers doing work.

Further I have now seen what physical size of the tie blocks in a G.Fast pod is, and I would say there is not a cat in hell's chance of get the corresponding ties in that cabinet. That cabinet (Bridgeton/46) was basically empty compared to Bridgeton/42.

Presumably either a second VDSL cabinet or a G.Fast pod is going in sometime in the near future so lets see what happens. There is no building work in the vicinity that would require more standard telephone lines so it must be broadband related IMHO.

Edited by jabuzzard (Mon 31-Jul-17 11:43:50)

In reply to a post by lee111s:

Some PCP's have enough room to house the additional blocks needed without an extension.

As above, regular engineers won't have access to the G.Fast pod, just like they don't have access to the FTTC cabinets.

How do you propose service engineers connect customers copper circuits to the G.fast pods of the block terminals aren't in the PCP?

Spot on. Extensions to regular PCPs can be and are used for all sorts anyway. It all depends on how many copper Es and Ds are in the original PCP. Sometimes there�s strips of E-sides that aren�t in use, they�re just spare. But they exist and they�re taking up space, it�s daft to remove them as you might need them in future. But in a cab like that you�re going to need a PCP extension a lot sooner. Initially for FTTC they might just put in 100 tie pairs. In some cabs that might be all you can fit in, so straight away when they want to add another 50 tie pairs an extension is needed. Basically there�s no rules, it all depends on the cabinet in question.

In some cabinets there�s stacks of room. You might be able to house the tie pairs for VDSL and G.fast inside the copper cabinet.

In reply to a post by j0hn83:

Who says they aren't in the PCP.
I said it would be an almighty mess having tie cables crossing from left to right, from pod to pod. PCP extensions are added for VDSL2 tie cables, for 2nd fibre twins.

Point stands. Show me a G.Fast pod with a PCP extension that DOESN'T have a 2nd fibre twin.
How big do you think a 100 pair block terminals is? Even with 2 x VDSL2 cabinets, a PCP extension, and a G.Fast pod, the G.Fast tie cables/block are in the PCP, not the extension.

If you say so. You�re wrong though.

I can tell you don�t work for Openreach as even your question here doesn�t have an easy answer - �How big do you think a 100 pair block terminals is?� - It depends on the blocks, if the cabinet is the older style strips where you crimp the wires together (very common) 100 pairs can take up a lot of space. Depending on the type of cabinet they may have to use strips for the G.fast tie pairs as you can�t secure the newer style blocks to the rear of some of the older cabinets. Same goes for if the existing cabinet is a shelf style cabinet, you usually can�t attach modern blocks to them and either have to attach further shelves or use strips.

If the original copper cabinet is physically full, where do you propose the G.Fast tie cables be placed? I can tell you now they�ll be going in the extension.

Edited by deleted (Mon 31-Jul-17 13:11:29)

It's likely that you have spotted our team at work.
We can confirm that Hyperoptic is live in Fir Park Court and we are working on bringing fibre to Fir Park Close.

If you would like any other info, do get in touch.

- Karis

While the original extension may well have been a standard PCP extension, the cabinet is now sporting a G.Fast pod too. So my hypothesis that a full cabinet might need a PCP extension before it can get a G.Fast pod is correct.

As proof of the pudding I present a photo of the cabinet 42 from Glasgow Bridgeton sporting it's PCP extension and G.Fast pod.

I await the apologies from all those who said I was blowing smoke.

Wrong wrong wrong and wrong again. Take a look at this photo for proof that you are in fact wrong.

http://small.buzzard.me.uk/stuff/20170822_092449.jpg

Yep I am rubbing your nose in it, but if you are going to be so emphatic about something you better dam well make sure you are correct. Apology awaited

I point to cabinet 42 from Glasgow Bridgeon, has a VDSL cabinet, a PCP expansion pod that went in end of July and a G.Fast pod that went in yesterday. There is only one VDSL cabinet.

http://small.buzzard.me.uk/stuff/20170822_092449.jpg

So whatever your reason to think otherwise you are just how can I put it dead wrong.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility they are going to be standing another FTTC cabinet as well.

Not likely in this instance, but not sure what the fuss is about

Congratulations, I was wrong.... do you want a blue Peter badge? Why do you need to reply to me 3 times with the same picture.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

http://small.buzzard.me.uk/stuff/20170822_092449.jpg

LOL the main PCP could do with a lick of paint

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

While the original extension may well have been a standard PCP extension, the cabinet is now sporting a G.Fast pod too. So my hypothesis that a full cabinet might need a PCP extension before it can get a G.Fast pod is correct.

As proof of the pudding I present a photo of the cabinet 42 from Glasgow Bridgeton sporting it's PCP extension and G.Fast pod.

I await the apologies from all those who said I was blowing smoke.

I�m completely confused. What�s your point exactly? That every cabinet would have PCP extension prior to getting G.Fast? Or that it just might?

If there�s enough space inside the PCP for the G.Fast tie pairs then no extension is required. Or have I misunderstood?

In reply to a post by Icaras:

I�m completely confused. What�s your point exactly? That every cabinet would have PCP extension prior to getting G.Fast? Or that it just might?

If there�s enough space inside the PCP for the G.Fast tie pairs then no extension is required. Or have I misunderstood?

I hypothesized that a full cabinet might need a PCP expansion in order for a G.Fast pod to be fitted. I was told this was rubbish the tie pairs where in the G.Fast pod. My point was that this is pretty much definitive proof that I was correct. So don't be surprised if in one of the G.Fast areas you see a PCP expansion going in for it to be followed by a G.Fast pod a few weeks later.

It is also relevant that there has been a flurry of activity around cabinets out of Glasgow Bridgeton, such as PCP expansion and what looked like resurfacing work around the cabinet among other things. Clearly you can't in all instances just rock up to a cabinet and bolt a G.Fast pod on.

Another point of note is that it seems to take pretty much a whole day to add the pod to the cabinet.

What do you mean the �tie pairs are in the G.Fast pod�?

They�re tie pairs, their very nature means they go from one place to another. They go from the PCP to the G.Fast pod and vice versa. There�s a few people who keep insisting that extensions are needed to cabinets for G.Fast. Those of us who work in these cabinets every day keep telling you that tie pairs are just crammed in wherever they will fit! Whether that�s to the left or the right of existing pairs. If the cabinet is completely full, then sure, a PCP extension is fitted.

You may very well see an extension go on a few weeks before a G.Fast pod. The existing cabinet could have had FTTC for a few years, possibly have two FTTC twins even by now. It�s not surprising that a lot of copper cabinets are getting full with all the tie pairs required for FTTC.

So a PCP extension is not done as a matter of course and is only done when there�s no more physical space in the cabinet for more VDSL2 or G.Fast tie pairs! Money isn�t just thrown away doing cabinet extensions for a laugh.

I do wonder one thing. A weird thing, though...

Why do the wiring extensions seem to get a base (ie an adjustment to the tarmac or concrete base), and appear to be free-standing? While the G.Fast pods appear to be cantilevered in mid-air, with a triangular-shaped brace, but no base?

Stand off cabinets require more duct space to the nearest joint box for the extra copper pairs hence the civils work required and new tarmac. The G Fast pods were designed for minimal civils hence why they've been bolted onto existing cabinets with a hole into existing cabinet to feed tie pairs and combined power / fibre cable to the FTTC DSLAM. This keeps costs down and can be rolled out quickly.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

I do wonder one thing. A weird thing, though...

Why do the wiring extensions seem to get a base (ie an adjustment to the tarmac or concrete base), and appear to be free-standing? While the G.Fast pods appear to be cantilevered in mid-air, with a triangular-shaped brace, but no base?

Answer is in the post above mine. It�s all wired via the existing PCP so the hybrid cable to the FTTC DSLAM from the G.Fast pod just uses one of the ducts in the copper PCP.

DSLAM extensions are the same, cantilevered. They�re generally used when the DSLAM size chosen is wrong, so they add a pod on the side of the DSLAM to add more ports. You don�t see many though.

Edited by deleted (Thu 24-Aug-17 21:49:09)