Assuming enough people sign up which they might not as they already get fttc and the price for that is a lot lower than ultrafast)

Then it might be worth pointing out that they can still get the standard speed services , maybe with a more limited number of providers. Unless they are getting good FTTC speeds already the move to FTTP will greatly improve even the 80/20 services for little or no extra.

In reply to a post by McShaneDCFC:

(Assuming enough people sign up which they might not as they already get fttc and the price for that is a lot lower than ultrafast)

Sorry fo not paying attention: how does this work? I assumed the subsidised / voucher / government schemes to bribe Openreach into building their network were only available in areas with very poor connectivity. If people already have FTTC they will have over 30Mb/s, many could have much faster speeds. How / why is there a scheme here?

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

... were only available in areas with very poor connectivity. If people already have FTTC they will have over 30Mb/s, many could have much faster speeds.

Not necessarily. One area I know of has FTTC available with an extremely high take up. The best speed there is around 6Mbps. Even with vouchers the cost is still too high.

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

why is there a scheme here?

The numbers must stack up for Openreach (subject to the vouchers being pledged), if there is money on the table from the government its a good option for Openreach, certainly cheaper than a commercial rollout for them and the end user benefits as well.

In reply to a post by MHC:

One area I know of has FTTC available with an extremely high take up. The best speed there is around 6Mbps.

Really. Surely that's well below the Hand Back Threshold? I'm surprised people are sold a connection so slow on FTTC. They must be a long way from the cabinet.

Once they knew it could be provided, even at those speeds, they jumped at it. ADSL was running at around 1 Mbps.

Have just called up one of the lines:

Featured Products Downstream Line Rate(Mbps) Upstream Line Rate (Mbps) Downstream Handback
Threshold(Mbps) WBC FTTC Availability Date WBC SOGEA Availability Date Left in Jumper
High Low High Low
VDSL Range A (Clean) 3.6 1.4 1.2 0.8 1 Available Available --
VDSL Range B (Impacted) 3.6 1.4 1.2 0.8 1 Available Available --


ADSL Products Downstream Line Rate (Mbps)
WBC ADSL 2+ Up to 1


Observed Speeds VDSL
Max Observed Downstream Speed 3.09
Max Observed Upstream Speed 0.92

So, max 3.6, actual achieved 3.1 and handback at 1.0 Still 3x faster than ADSL


Some that are marginally closer get 5-6 Mbps (on a good day)


Also, in the village where the cabinet is located, most are up at 70+ compared to the sub-5 ADSL, just this "hamlet" is totally isolated.

Edited by MHC (Thu 14-Jan-21 10:51:33)

In reply to a post by witchunt:

Assuming enough people sign up which they might not as they already get fttc and the price for that is a lot lower than ultrafast)

Then it might be worth pointing out that they can still get the standard speed services , maybe with a more limited number of providers. Unless they are getting good FTTC speeds already the move to FTTP will greatly improve even the 80/20 services for little or no extra.

This is something that is often overlooked IMHO. Very few people get the full speed out of a 80/20 connection so even if you don't initially take a higher speed package you will invariably get a higher speed.

The other factor is that poor broadband is likely to effect the selling price of your property. As such getting an FTTP connection is likely to add well more than any additional cost from a more expensive fibre package to the value of your property and it could be many years before a commercial FTTP roll out hits your property if you don't take this opportunity.

In reply to a post by Woolwich:

In reply to a post by MHC:

One area I know of has FTTC available with an extremely high take up. The best speed there is around 6Mbps.

Really. Surely that's well below the Hand Back Threshold?

No: the hand back threshold is different for each line, and depends on the distance from the cabinet. It's the speed above which the line is considered working "as expected", i.e. there's no fault.

In reply to a post by MHC:

I'm surprised people are sold a connection so slow on FTTC. They must be a long way from the cabinet.

If you had a choice between 6Mbps on FTTC or 1Mbps on ADSL, then you'd probably take FTTC. In any case, the cost differential between FTTC and ADSL is now close to zero, or actually zero for some providers.

You can see a rough idea of speed versus distance for VDSL here:
https://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/2013/chart-...

Actual speeds may be slightly higher these days with things like 3dB SNR target and G.INP, although on the flip side, increased take-up of FTTC has resulted in increased crosstalk which reduces speeds.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

This is something that is often overlooked IMHO. Very few people get the full speed out of a 80/20 connection so even if you don't initially take a higher speed package you will invariably get a higher speed.

I recall when FTTC was being planned the design was for a high percentage (maybe 70% ?) to achieve 40/10 Mbps, at the average 500 metres of cable to the PCP. At 450 metres, my line managed 50/6 at best, which collapsed to 41/3 when I left. I blame crosstalk. I have friends at 400 metres whom have 60/18 for example.

Just so many variables and cross talk or external noise can only ever be estimated and they may well have failed to account for cross talk from other non-adsl devices being conducted along the lines too.


I have a 455m line - from a TDR measurement and it started with max attainable of over 90 with upstream at 25, that has now collapsed to 71/15 and at times some other noise source sends my connection down to about 50-55 down but 15 up!