Gfast Vanished from DSL checker.

Gfast was recently installed on my cabinet and it popped on the DSL checker for my address and I could get about 158mbs but now its vanished and unavailable but available to my neighbour who is about 20 meter closer to the cab on the same DP

My line is 230 meters long and I get a strong 80mbs line on a quite a full cab..

Why has it vanished and is Gfast that bad it doesn't work at that distance? what a waste of time installing for all of about 20 houses that could get it off my cab.

They increased the minimum on G.Fast from 100Mb to 120Mb.
Possible your line is amongst those that are now out of range.

Was the 158Mb the Clean/High estimate?

A screenshot (if taken at the time) of the estimates would help.

so they have made the worthless tech even more worthless by increasing limits..

so they have made the worthless tech even more worthless by increasing limits..

Worthless to you perhaps but far from worthless for the many with useful functioning G-Fast connections.

Lucky those and the 3rd of the users (at best) on their cabs that can get it.. Yes I'd say that's worthless.

This is mine compared to next door - ironically I get better FTTC results...

https://ibb.co/zGPvfFQ

Very plausible that what j0hn said is the case.

You're obviously entitled to your opinion nevertheless there are many users who disagree with you and are perfectly happy with their G-Fast connections.

Your neighbour is on the edge of G.Fast range.
Why your line was removed and theirs wasn't is beyond me.

Just look what G.Fast would likely do to your neighbors upstream.
The lower estimates are 80Mb down / 6Mb up.

In all likelihood it would be somewhere between the 22Mb high estimate and the 8Mb low estimate

I wouldn't be jealous the neighbour can order G.Farce at those estimates if I got 80/20.

In reply to a post by MCM:

You're obviously entitled to your opinion nevertheless there are many users who disagree with you and are perfectly happy with their G-Fast connections.

Not as many as you might think. The most recent BT group results for quarter ending 31 March 2019 show only 25,000 active subscribers for G.fast, out of 2.020 million properties where it is nominally available - or 1.2% take-up.

There are more than ten times as many active FTTP connections (306,000), even though only 1.247m properties are passed by FTTP.

Obviously there are various factors skewing this, such as properties where FTTP is available but no FTTC.

Edited by candlerb (Mon 01-Jul-19 08:50:26)

Lots of the that FTTP take-up is going to be new build - fttp only option and BDUK areas where it is the only fast option. Comparing G.fast take-up to that blanket wide figure when some of the FTTP has been in place for almost ten years also needs factoring in.

Looking at Fibre First areas which are nearest to the G.fast footprint it is not much of a different take-up story for now.

G.fast is always a good talking point on this forum, those that love it and those that don't, sadly either way there are many who will never live close enough to the pod to benefit from it.

In reply to a post by MCM:

You're obviously entitled to your opinion nevertheless there are many users who disagree with you and are perfectly happy with their G-Fast connections.

Do you have a Gfast connection? If you do, how do you find it?

I do wonder how many pods will ever recoup the full cost to Openreach of installing them. Never mind the original research and design costs, which of course having been spent cannot be unspent.

Many FTTP areas only have the option of FTTP whereas G.Fast areas is a choice.

Looking at the data Mr Saffron collates, my reading is that G.Fast is performing very well but customers have very little demand for faster speeds in either G.Fast or FTTP areas.

Another often overlooked benefit of G.Fast is the very fast install time and cost compared to adding another VDSL cabinet in fully subscribed areas.

Always a shame to see kit installed but it not being used because of the lack of demand.

I'm not exaggerating when I say there is probably 30 houses at the very most connected on my cab that can get Gfast - it's a [censored] deployment when a 240 meter line can't have Gfast. There is hundreds of houses on my estate who just won't benefit from this poor technology..

As a few folk on here say it's just BT meeting some obligations and stat padding to look like they are meeting targets with this skewed way of deploying it.

Edited by lockyatlrg (Mon 01-Jul-19 14:18:03)

Hi

G.Fast was always going to be a low take up and a bit of a waste of time as soon as they dropped the closer nodes at the distribution point that would have shortened the copper length and changed to deployment from a cab, something it was never really designed to do.

Yes some people will get >300 down and > 30 up, giving them a good speed boost and perhaps tempting them to move over, but those people are very few on any given cabinet due to it being so distant dependant.

There is a high percentage of people that will get a speed boost from G.Fast but not enough to make the expense and hassle of changing worthwhile, as these same people will be on 80/20 on VDSL. There is also the risk for those not having the G.Fast pod as their next door neighbour that their upload speeds will be reduced, hardly an incentive to "upgrade". So overall, G.Fast is an improvement for only the lucky few that are already on a fast service where it makes the least impact.

Regards

Phil

Edited by deleted (Mon 01-Jul-19 14:47:16)

In reply to a post by partial:

Looking at the data Mr Saffron collates, my reading is that G.Fast is performing very well but customers have very little demand for faster speeds in either G.Fast or FTTP areas.

This is one point. But remember G.fast is only available to the people already getting the maximum out of their FTTC connection. So they are less likely to upgrade.

The further we go away from the cabinet peoples FTTC connections aren't performing well and so they would be more likely to have upgraded to G.fast if it had become a possibility of getting a higher speed.

I'll assume you have an ADSL type of connection?

>>The further we go away from the cabinet peoples FTTC connections aren't performing well and so they would be more likely to have upgraded to G.fast if it had become a possibility of getting a higher speed.

I'm not sure this statement is evidence based. Think Broadband mapping from my reading doesn't show very high take up of the fast speeds in town or country, G.Fast, FTTP or cable.

In reply to a post by MCM:

so they have made the worthless tech even more worthless by increasing limits..

Worthless to you perhaps but far from worthless for the many with useful functioning G-Fast connections.

Many? Last I heard it was three people, one of whom had ordered it by mistake

Last I heard it was three people, one of whom had ordered it by mistake

What a ludicrous and childish comment. You only have to read these forums to know that more than three people have G-Fast. In my case I'm aware of more than that number on one cab alone.

OK, take up is low for higher speed services be those services cable, FTTP or G-Fast. One only has to look at the significant numbers who opt for the lower speed FTTC connections let alone those still on ADSL2+ through choice rather than finance driven. Whilst only a minority currently want a higher speed connection let's not deprive them of the opportunity.

In reply to a post by MCM:

Whilst only a minority currently want a higher speed connection let's not deprive them of the opportunity.

Even if we all have to contribute to the capital cost �.

Including shareholders, and BT pensioners like myself. In December 2018 we had "... in recent years the fund has racked up a deficit of more than £11billion, partly because of rock-bottom interest rates".

Edited by RobertoS (Mon 01-Jul-19 16:57:55)

How is it stat padding? If they say its only available to 30 houses then that is what they'll be recording in their own stats.

Do they not go off how many houses are connected to the cab and not how many can receive gfast from said cab? I think they do...

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

Do they not go off how many houses are connected to the cab and not how many can receive gfast from said cab? I think they do...

False.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Even if we all have to contribute to the capital cost �.

Including shareholders, and BT pensioners like myself. In December 2018 we had "... in recent years the fund has racked up a deficit of more than £11billion, partly because of rock-bottom interest rates".

As much as I hate to reply to any of your posts I don't believe BT Pensioners via the BTPS are contributing toward BT infrastructure capital costs. The contribution holiday's BT took in the 90's added to the scheme being benefit based rather than contribution based is where the deficits started.

They don't do that

If I turn off the speed filter on my data I get 2.84 million premises
Enable the 120 Mbps filter and this drops to 1,725,524.
With the old (i.e. yesterday morning) 100 Mbps filter in place it was 1,912,797

In reply to a post by partial:

I'm not sure this statement is evidence based. Think Broadband mapping from my reading doesn't show very high take up of the fast speeds in town or country, G.Fast, FTTP or cable.

I'm still paying for the top rate of FTTC. But my sync speed is now connecting at 58Mbps (used to be in the 70's), the next step down would be cheaper and I'd only be losing 6Mbps on the sync. So if I wanted to save some money and dropped down a package, in the stats it would list me as having the higher tier available but I chose the slower package. When in reality I'm not really getting the full speed of the top tier, but in the stats it would look like I would.

I just wonder how many are in a similar situation to me.

What stats?

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

What stats?

The ones that people refer to as showing that "people pick the slower speeds even when higher speeds are available".

In those kind of stats if I decided paying top tier prices for only a 6Mbps difference wasn't worth it and dropped down to the upto 52Mb tier, it would look like I'd chose the slower speed package even though technically I still could get the higher tier.

Is that not the precise point of those stats to show how many are picking the slower product tier when faster is available. Or am I missing something.

The stats don't of course tell you why the people chose the product they do, it might be price, it might be the slower product is fast enough, it might be they don't realise faster is available or they may not understand the products.

As things stand today the take-up of FTTP in Openreach Fibre First areas does seem to be similar to the take-up of Fast

The stats aren't particularly reliable though.

G.Fast did (and still does) show as available for my house. I ordered, had the engineer visit, and the best he could manage (in 3 hours of trying) was a downstream sync < 80 Mb/s. We agreed it wasn't possible. Line length was 303m to the DP, probably 320m to the NTE.

So essentially G.Fast is not available at my house. Yet the dslchecker website still shows:
G.fast Range A (Clean) 217.8 162.9 33.4 14.5
G.fast Range B (Impacted) 184.2 127.6 22.5 11.1

My whole street shows G.Fast as available. Only 4 houses are closer to the cabinet than me. Maybe a couple of those would sync at the new 120 Mb/s threshold. So in the small sample size of my street there are 30+ premises showing G.Fast available, of which maybe 2 could even get minimum speed. I doubt I live in some unicorn street, so over the country the availability of 'ultrafast' is clearly going to be overstated, possibly by a significant percentage.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Looking at Fibre First areas which are nearest to the G.fast footprint it is not much of a different take-up story for now.

If you are looking at "ultrafast" FTTP takeup, then part of the issue is that FTTP works so well. When you buy 80/20 on FTTP, you get a full, rock-solid 80/20. That's an excellent home service, and many people today won't feel the need for anything faster.

Since G.fast only works for people so close to the PCP that they already get 80/20 on FTTC, then you can expect takeup will be similarly low.

If DP distance is 303m then looks like the estimates are wrong and once job was closed the feedback loops should have got records updated and then the checker itself.

Be interested in seeing how my stats actually hold up on this one though. Likely to be just inside the 120 Mbps range

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Is that not the precise point of those stats to show how many are picking the slower product tier when faster is available. Or am I missing something.

I'm not disputing the stats. I'm just disputing the interpretation that some people put forward that people choose the slower product purely based on the lack of need for speed.

Though FTTC overall is a good product, the speed difference between the products is big so someone on tier 2 might get 80Mbps, while someone else might get 60Mbps. The person with the slowest connection might decide its not worth the money just for 8Mbps more. That decision is purely based on that they aren't getting their monies worth on tier 2. Not that they wouldn't like the speed. If they was getting 80Mbps then they would keep on tier 2.

The downside of FTTC is the more popular it becomes the less speed most people on the cabinet will get, with crosstalk interference.

In reply to a post by bowdon:

The downside of FTTC is the more popular it becomes the less speed most people on the cabinet will get, with crosstalk interference.

Maybe you should change the laws of physics .

I knew its much less of a percentage of premises can get it than actual getting it than BT's stats say... As I say it's a worthless tech..

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

In reply to a post by bowdon:

The downside of FTTC is the more popular it becomes the less speed most people on the cabinet will get, with crosstalk interference.

Maybe you should change the laws of physics .

Insert obligatory Montgomery Scott joke

Edited by deleted (Tue 02-Jul-19 10:47:10)

You get a rock solid connection speed which does not equal a rock solid throughput speed, since there is more than that bit of GPON involved and so many people use Wi-Fi don't forget.

Comparing new build where only FTTP is available with other types of areas where FTTP from Openreach is available is the key to understanding the differences and observing the buying habits, of course we cannot tell you precisely why people do or don't buy a product but we can see differences and is not enough to say that while a small number of champing at the bit for FTTP as an upgrade from superfast FTTC the great majority as yet are not.

Now in a few years that may all change, in the same way that in 2010 most were relatively content with ADSL2+

The point to get across is this - some are saying FTTP is the only way and everyone wants it, but being too evangelistic as some are carries the risk that in a year or two that investors will look at sign-up figures and panic and stop investing. Take-up of FTTP without bulk migrations is going to be a similar curve to the FTTC take-up, which is similar to the curve Virgin Media have shown for their Project Lightning roll-out too.

Mr S, from the TBB speedtest map, are you able to provide a % figure of households who take out the 80/20 or less tier in Openreach FTTP only areas such as new build sites? I'm pretty sure its > 50% but would be good to get an actual number.

New build fibre only areas i.e. not even an ADSL2+ service

80% on 80/20 or slower
59% on 55/10 or slower

Perhaps the cleanest indication of what people are happy to buy given its the only network usually available.

In the areas we identify as Fibre First and have FTTP available around 4% on faster than 80/20
So 96% on 80/20 or slower - NOTE This may be FTTC or FTTP or ADSL2+
85% on 55/10 or slower
72% on 38/19 or slower

The ADSL is included when looking at Fibre First since for some they are going from Exchange Only to having a FTTP option, or a non VDSL2 cabinet.

Of course there is some uncertainty in the figures, but have seen the same sort of patterns over time, so these Q2/2019 figures are reasonable illustrations.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

New build fibre only areas i.e. not even an ADSL2+ service

80% on 80/20 or slower
59% on 55/10 or slower

Perhaps the cleanest indication of what people are happy to buy given its the only network usually available.

In the areas we identify as Fibre First and have FTTP available around 4% on faster than 80/20
So 96% on 80/20 or slower - NOTE This may be FTTC or FTTP or ADSL2+
85% on 55/10 or slower
72% on 38/19 or slower

The ADSL is included when looking at Fibre First since for some they are going from Exchange Only to having a FTTP option, or a non VDSL2 cabinet.

Of course there is some uncertainty in the figures, but have seen the same sort of patterns over time, so these Q2/2019 figures are reasonable illustrations.

Thanks Mr S

In reply to a post by lockyatlrg:

I knew its much less of a percentage of premises can get it than actual getting it than BT's stats say... As I say it's a worthless tech..

I know of a G.fast pod where only 1 property is less than 100m away from it and there are no other properties within a radius of 300m. Sounds like the max possible take up on that pod is 1 property.

Edited by deleted (Wed 03-Jul-19 17:42:37)