Daily Telegraph article about slow FTTP roll out.

There is quite and interesting article in todays Daily Telegraph about the poor support the government is providing for the roll out of FTTP broadband.

I hope everyone can read the article but authorized access to the website may be needed.

It appear that the government would rather spend up to £170 billion on HS2 rather than £5 billion on FTTP.

I'm trying to remember back when the £5 billion was originally announced, did people think it was enough for 100% full fibre coverage across the entire UK?

The pledge to cover "every home in the land" in five years was never realistic, but I note the Telegraph weren't too fussed about interrogating those claims at the time.

Michael chare

HS2 is way more important that HS2 and will impact the uk for the next hundred years especially now that Phase 2 a is opening sequentially with HS2 Phase 1


daily telegraph got nothing else to write about then

the 5Bn will be spent but you dont get a lot of FTTP for 5BN especially if this complicaed and hard and in direct in ground

same as HS1 as you live near sevenoaks your are a side beneficialry of HS1 more cmmuter trains, more seats -

add about another 50 - 60bn and you might be there

bit lke labour pledge of free broadband which was about 80bn short and would have made about 100,000 redundant

got called out by an ISP owner to a London labour MP on LBC radio -- great video on youtube if you can find it

"HS2 is way more important that HS2" ?????

Lockdown has proved that there is no need to arrive in an office half an hour earlier when meetings, etc can be carried out via video conferencing software.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

"HS2 is way more important that HS2" ?????

Lockdown has proved that there is no need to arrive in an office half an hour earlier when meetings, etc can be carried out via video conferencing software.

The point that most people miss is that the construction of HS2 (a passenger railway) dramatically improves the capacity of the railway to handle freight traffic which is a situation of significant importance as we try to reduce our carbon footprint. When HS2 is open a lot of the passenger trains will be removed from the conventional railway network freeing up space for a more freight. At the moment the conventional railway from London to the Midlands and North West is actually running at over capacity so there is very little opportunity to add further freight trains. HS2 will bring that opportunity.

Here: https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/eddie-mair/ca...

The Telegraph is a rag for the Tories - it won't ever challenge stuff they say.


I'm afraid Boris Johnson is untruthful. He;s done this stuff before:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8692103.stm


- claim that every bus stop and lamp post would over 'free wifi' was always a nonsense.

Lets not have a referendum on HS2 versus full fibre as I predict the later may win by 52 - 48

Interesting point you make about freight traffic as I had never considered that before.

Surely most freight travels at less busy times, especially at night so is of little importance to passenger trains?

In reply to a post by Fastman3:

same as HS1 as you live near sevenoaks your are a side beneficialry of HS1 more cmmuter trains, more seats

The presence of HS1 makes no difference to anyone commuting from Sevenoaks to London.

The problem with HS2 is that it has a significant adverse environmental impact. The problem of route capacity could gave been addressed by using double decker trains as on the Swiss railways.

In reply to a post by Michael_Chare:

The problem of route capacity could gave been addressed by using double decker trains as on the Swiss railways.

Could this be achieved without modifying tunnels?

In reply to a post by Fastman3:

the 5Bn will be spent but you dont get a lot of FTTP for 5BN

Will it though?

£5 Billion to get 100% full fibre coverage quickly charged to 100% gigabit coverage.
That's now changed to 85% gigabit coverage.

Only £1.2 Billion of the pledged £5 Billion will be spent in this parliament under current plans.

In reply to a post by dect:

In reply to a post by Michael_Chare:

The problem of route capacity could gave been addressed by using double decker trains as on the Swiss railways.

Could this be achieved without modifying tunnels?

Absolutely correct. The UK uses a far smaller profile than any of the European railways (one of the pitfalls of being the first to use a particular technology). Not long after the Second World War there was a trial of double-decker trains from Kent into London using the existing loading gauge. The trains did not last long as they were so cramped that the customers did not like them. As we have got bigger since then that problem would be even worse now.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Surely most freight travels at less busy times, especially at night so is of little importance to passenger trains?

Afraid not. The night time is when the railway blocks the lines to do routine maintenance as there as so many passenger trains during the day. Lots of the lines are still open but you can't build a reliable overnight network (which is required by a lot of the time-critical freight the railway carries as part of Just-in-Time pipelines). There is freight moving at night but there would be the opportunity for a lot more if the maintenance didn't have to be carried out then at the behest of the passenger railway. If you have to put the stuff on road for one week a month or whatever, then you do it for four weeks a month so that you don't have capital equipment lying unused for 75% of the time.

But there is no reason why they did not consider using double deck trains on HS2. There are many failings on HS2 planning, scheduling and roll out wit a total lack of "joined up thinking".

The now scrapped direct link to LHR - another failing. That would have helped alleviate the need for the third runway.

HS" is nothing to do with arriving in an office 30 mins earlier -- its a bout removal and capacity enhance to enable major modal shift from m6 and m1 corridors enhancinig green agenda and reducing massive carbon emission - this is why Phase 2a and Phase 1 will be built together -- which means HS2 will run between london and Crewe once its opens between 2029/2032

broadbad freight tracvels 24 hours a day , there are no daytime spare freigh paths between london and midlands , for every hour there are 2 spare minutes , onces HS2 that goes up to about 30 - 35m as you are currently running trains between 50 - 125 miles an hour onces HS2 built you are running trains between 50 - 100 miles an hours thus increasing many more paths every hour -

Michael chare it does because if ther was no HS1 everything would be routed through sevenoaks . more trains in same track , less seats , more delay - like it was before 2003 when HS1 opened

I am not sure what you are suggesting. The presence of the Eurotunnel trains did not have an adverse impact on the South East rail services. If they had there would have been many complaints.

In reply to a post by MHC:

But there is no reason why they did not consider using double deck trains on HS2. There are many failings on HS2 planning, scheduling and roll out wit a total lack of "joined up thinking".

I'm not aware of any high-speed services that use double-deck trains.

Quite a few in Europe, France, Germany, Switzerland, Spain and Luxembourg at up to 320km/h.

edit to add:

https://www.alstom.com/our-solutions/rolling-stock/a...

Edited by MHC (Sat 13-Feb-21 18:42:10)

In reply to a post by GonePostal:

In reply to a post by broadband66:

"HS2 is way more important that HS2" ?????

Lockdown has proved that there is no need to arrive in an office half an hour earlier when meetings, etc can be carried out via video conferencing software.

The point that most people miss is that the construction of HS2 (a passenger railway) dramatically improves the capacity of the railway to handle freight traffic which is a situation of significant importance as we try to reduce our carbon footprint. When HS2 is open a lot of the passenger trains will be removed from the conventional railway network freeing up space for a more freight. At the moment the conventional railway from London to the Midlands and North West is actually running at over capacity so there is very little opportunity to add further freight trains. HS2 will bring that opportunity.

HS2 is only important to the elites and bungs for their mates ,The country will not benefit from this waste of money It would from Full fibre, Bit like his bridge to NI across the Irish sea, lol it would spend more time closed

In reply to a post by heathrow:

Here: https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/eddie-mair/ca...

The Telegraph is a rag for the Tories - it won't ever challenge stuff they say.


I'm afraid Boris Johnson is untruthful. He;s done this stuff before:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8692103.stm


- claim that every bus stop and lamp post would over 'free wifi' was always a nonsense.

He lies frequently especially last year, but when he has ZERO credible opposition he can get way with doing anything he likes, And CTP Hindsight is even worse, There is only 1 MP who is vote worthy out of the 650 of them

I'd be amazed if there were not many complaints regarding the effect of Eurostar trains on the South East rail network. Indeed many people may not have realised their regular timetable or route was changed specifically to accommodate Eurostar trains

In reply to a post by Michael_Chare:

There is quite and interesting article in todays Daily Telegraph about the poor support the government is providing for the roll out of FTTP broadband.

I hope everyone can read the article but authorized access to the website may be needed.

It appear that the government would rather spend up to £170 billion on HS2 rather than £5 billion on FTTP.

We can't read it as it needs a subscription, I would not buy the Torygraph as a printed newspaper, so I certainly would not subscribe to it.

My idea in another thread was to have a FTTP network laid by one company or at first I thought it would be a good thing for the government to do it. But I don't think the Tax payers should pay for private companies to run it, no more than I think the tax payers should pay for HS2 for private companies to run their trains, unless they pay an amount to use the network.

So if the government put money into a new network, be it train or FTTP, then the companies should pay the government back, not that I agree with having a need for a HS2 no more than i agreee4d with the need for a by-pass for this city, which have now been cancelled

On the one firm running it the problem is not money but rather who and how its run. People want AAISP but likely to be Tiscali style

In reply to a post by Michael_Chare:

The problem with HS2 is that it has a significant adverse environmental impact. The problem of route capacity could gave been addressed by using double decker trains as on the Swiss railways.

The UK rail network suffers greatly from being the first. What you suggest would require the lifting of many bridges and raising the ceiling of many tunnels as while the track gauge might be the same as on the continent, the loading gauge (aka the size of carriage that can go down the track) is much smaller in the UK.

There is a legitimate and valid beef with HS2, and that centres around it's top speed. Basically a 250mph railway is a *LOT* more expensive (like tens of billions) than a 200mph railway. However due to the relatively small size of the UK and the distances between stations means the trains will only spend very short times at 250mph. You are spending 10's of billions to cut 3 minutes of the journey time to Birmingham from the numbersI have seen.

Consequently the top speed needs cutting down to 200mph at least on the sections up to Manchester (get the trains for 250mph speed as north of Manchester there is long runs up to Glasgow that make it worth while) and spend the money saved on fibre broadband.

Unfortunately the 250mph is a willy waving contest.

It's the joy of capitalism.

In a nationalised undertaking you wouldn;t have the likes of AAISP (premium service, premium price - I was a happy customer for many years).


You'd have PO Telephones - long delay for stuff, homogenised product. Expensive and poor,.

You want a new broadband line? 18 months wait.

To see why a nationalised provider was a bad idea, and why allowing the incumbent to do what it ikes, check out this 2004 Channel 4 documentary: https://youtu.be/-zHAj0XoHy8

Power Behind The Button? My [censored].

The issue with HS2 is relatively few people will have a faster or easier journey. If you are lucky to live close to one of the HS2 stations your journey time might improve but hardly an earth shattering time saving, however for many people getting on to the HS2 line will require a train from their local station or some other form of public transport/car first, removing any speed advantage from just staying on a train from their local station as they might do now. If the government/rail companies start to force people onto HS2 by removing services from existing lines, many people will have a much longer and frustrating commute to work.

Given the pandemic and how many people are now working from home, HS2 is looking more like a waste of money than it was before, and investing in other infrastructure like FTTP would be more beneficial. Surely it is more environmentally friendly to have people travelling less from home to work rather than being at work everyday but a bit faster.

In reply to a post by tommy45:

Bit like his bridge to NI across the Irish sea, lol it would spend more time closed

A little behind the times. Scoping studies and preparatory work for designs on "Boris's Burrow" are likely to start in the next few weeks.


People said the same about the Sweden to Denmark link - and proven wrong. Look at the number of lorries crossing by ferry every day - from either North or South Wales. A decent rail link with containers rather than lorries could see freight being loaded in Dublin, transported by rail all of the way through to depots on each major European capital and tens of thousands of lorry journeys through the UK alleviated.

What’s blast from the past. That documentary is practically vintage now, 2001. The Ovum consultant could have subsequently added two more “unrecognisable” industry changes to his career in the intervening 20 years since this came out!

In reply to a post by heathrow:

It's the joy of capitalism.

In a nationalised undertaking you wouldn;t have the likes of AAISP (premium service, premium price - I was a happy customer for many years).


You'd have PO Telephones - long delay for stuff, homogenised product. Expensive and poor,.

You want a new broadband line? 18 months wait.

To see why a nationalised provider was a bad idea, and why allowing the incumbent to do what it ikes, check out this 2004 Channel 4 documentary: https://youtu.be/-zHAj0XoHy8

Power Behind The Button? My [censored].

In reply to a post by MHC:

A little behind the times. Scoping studies and preparatory work for designs on "Boris's Burrow" are likely to start in the next few weeks.

However as the hauliers have said repeatedly improving the roads to Stranraer would be way way more useful than a bridge. What's the point of a fancy bridge if to get to it you have to slog through Dumfries and Galloway on a single carriageway A road (either A77 or A75) where the speed limit is 40mph for a HGV?

Part of that is if you ask me the clowns in London have about as much idea of the geography of Scotland as a tea-leaf knows the history of the East India Company.

Bridge? What bridge?

Comments have already been made about rail links and shifting freight from road to rail

In reply to a post by MHC:

Bridge? What bridge?
Comments have already been made about rail links and shifting freight from road to rail

Strange turn for this thread, but this article is interesting:
https://www.ice.org.uk/getattachment/knowledge-and-r...

People travel by car because it is cheaper, faster and much more convenient than by train, unless trying to park in London.

Why are there so many Smart Motorways (not ideal I know) being built then? Surely the way to get people on to the railways is to leave the roads congested?

In reply to a post by broadband66:

People travel by car because it is cheaper, faster and much more convenient than by train, unless trying to park in London.

Car = Individual Point to Point, whereas Train = town/region to town/region.

Why are there so many Smart Motorways (not ideal I know) being built then? Surely the way to get people on to the railways is to leave the roads congested?

Before the pandemic, the trains were full as well as the roads.

More train capacity makes sense, but is the cost of super fast warranted? Unclear. Will it stop people flying from Gatwick, Luton, Stansted to Glasgow? Probably not, as people say they don't want to go into London to travel out again, but the Eurostar worked.

Anyway, all this is pre-pandemic, once we get out of this mess, the future will be different, companies have now seen that home working over broadband internet is possible. Many didn't believe it before.

Agreed. Last year economic output declined by 10% due to the pandemic. The worst decline in 300 years if the headlines are to be believed.

In many respects one could argue that the availability of home networking and technology, actually was the safety net that staved off complete economic and educational system catastrophe.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In many respects one could argue that the availability of home networking and technology, actually was the safety net that staved off complete economic and educational system catastrophe.

Yes, I would argue that, but I'm probably biased working for a massive IT company

I don't think you're biased at all. I think most 'joe public' folk that have jobs that allow them to WFH through remote working tech/networking and/or have children in school/university, despite all the pitfalls, can see that it has been the only way to maintain some level of normality and forward progress this past year.

More importantly in future this is a massive "enabler" as this (post C19 societal landscape) looks to be the new normal on some levels for perhaps this next decade depending on whom you listen to.

Has the "office" and "school" and "uni" been changed forever.....?

HS2, by moving long distance trains which use a lot of capacity, from other lines will release slots on existing railways.


So you benefit if you're nowhere near HS2.

Example: Trains from Aberyswtwyth serve Birmingham New Street. New Street is crowded and there are few spare slots.

HS2 will take Euston trains away, serving Curzon Street and allowing more trains from Aberystwyth to serve BNS. And providing more resilience if service is disrupted.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In many respects one could argue that the availability of home networking and technology, actually was the safety net that staved off complete economic and educational system catastrophe.

Yes, I would argue that, but I'm probably biased working for a massive IT company

Iim not biased at alll, i work in construction. But what i would say is that it's obvious that home tech is the future. What i can't understand about it though is how would you build up friendships, long term working relationships if you have never actually met the people you work with ? All those little nods, winks that actually make up all of our characters.

In reply to a post by kitfit1:

Iim not biased at alll, i work in construction. But what i would say is that it's obvious that home tech is the future. What i can't understand about it though is how would you build up friendships, long term working relationships if you have never actually met the people you work with ? All those little nods, winks that actually make up all of our characters.

Vitally important!

When I worked in consulting for around 10 years, 4 out of 5 days I was either working on the clients premises or WFH.In order to maintain any sense of community or belonging with my actual colleagues (whom I could be working together with on another project with in 6 months time) it was vital to get around a day a week in our office, together. We would always try and do that despite my offices being 200+ miles apart. You can't beat time spent physically together to build actual human relationships.

Conversely my wife has "trainees" in her practice that have been employed by her company that have never actually stepped foot in their HQ since the start of their employment. How they are going to build relationships with their colleagues that they will depend on in times of difficulty or challenge is hard to fathom out. There is a growing generation that could be rather disenfranchised by too much remote working and not enough relationship building time.

Edited by Pheasant (Sun 14-Feb-21 15:46:44)

In reply to a post by kitfit1:

Iim not biased at alll, i work in construction. But what i would say is that it's obvious that home tech is the future. What i can't understand about it though is how would you build up friendships, long term working relationships if you have never actually met the people you work with ? All those little nods, winks that actually make up all of our characters.

This is something, in IT anyway, we realised a few years ago with multi-country teams. The only solution was to have groups of people in each country, then the groups talk to each other across the video calling systems.

I don't see long term home working for individuals, but I can see a 50% reduction in travel (and in hotel stays) for people going to an office a long way away. Perhaps a higher reduction in sales folk flying from London to Glasgow for a 2 hour meeting, and flying home again same day.

I hope that teams still continue to physically locate together for a lot of the time, but perhaps more people will be able to home work occasionally, e.g. when children are sick, or you need some work on your home etc.

Once we have a route out of the chaos, lots of companies will be asking these questions. Especially those whom have offices in extremely expensive locations, or those with no staff car parking etc.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

On the one firm running it the problem is not money but rather who and how its run. People want AAISP but likely to be Tiscali style

Tiscali style? I was with Tiscali and they were fine, ok that was in dial up days, but still ok.

We don't all want AAISP style, what we want is a reliable service which has the speed/bandwidth to cope with what we throw at it to a certain extent and at least some sort of customer service.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Tiscali style? I was with Tiscali and they were fine, ok that was in dial up days, but still ok.

We don't all want AAISP style, what we want is a reliable service which has the speed/bandwidth to cope with what we throw at it to a certain extent and at least some sort of customer service.

I think he may have been comparing the Rolls Royce with say an average road car, both get you from A to B but the ride in the Rolls Royce may be a lot more comfortable

Get a Rolls Royce service for Rolls money.


As opposed to an Austin Maxi

In reply to a post by heathrow:

As opposed to an Austin Maxi

I had a Hillman Minx in my mind but both are good examples

In reply to a post by broadband66:

People travel by car because it is cheaper, faster and much more convenient than by train, unless trying to park in London.

Why are there so many Smart Motorways (not ideal I know) being built then? Surely the way to get people on to the railways is to leave the roads congested?

Some smart motorway schemes have made absolutely no difference to the congestion, namely the M25.

Also made them significantly more dangerous by having the refuge areas every 1.5 - 2 km instead of every 500m as approved following the trial and many still don't have the stationary vehicle detection systems up and running yet.

Something like that comparison will work for some age groups

Tiscali in the days of 0.5 Mbps ADSL was well known for having 2 Mbps of capacity on exchanges and only increasing this once between 50 and 100 or more customers were sharing it, i.e. they ran the 50:1 contention strictly.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Something like that comparison will work for some age groups

Fair point, maybe I should have used a more modern car like a Zephyr Zodiac

https://web.archive.org/web/20210216180526/https://w...

Our village is all fibered up on the main poles. Can't get it though despite it going past the bottom of my drive. The only people who have been connected are those on the outskirts of the village with terrible internet who by being connected gained BT a large subsidy from the EU?/council? It took a day to wire up most distant houses. Just a few people quickly tacking the fibre to the existing poles, didn't even bother pinning up the copper line where it had fallen off. No time at all. So long as they can insist how expensive it is the longer they can justify claiming big subsidy payments to install it.

Its the old dial up story again, BT are going to sweat their existing assets to the last until they are either bribed, forced or competed to upgrade their copper for their own benefit... The amount of money that must be being wasted still putting in new/replacement copper lines when its supposed to be fibre in a few years....

If they are not carefull their market will have hollowed out to 5g before they get around to building it.

So

People are always more likely to post about a bad experience than post about a good one. Over the last month Andrew has found another 178,620 properties that can now order FTTP via the Openreach infrastructure, I wonder how many of them people we will see post on here about that fact.

In reply to a post by heathrow:

HS2, by moving long distance trains which use a lot of capacity, from other lines will release slots on existing railways.


So you benefit if you're nowhere near HS2.

Example: Trains from Aberyswtwyth serve Birmingham New Street. New Street is crowded and there are few spare slots.

HS2 will take Euston trains away, serving Curzon Street and allowing more trains from Aberystwyth to serve BNS. And providing more resilience if service is disrupted.

but I am in Norfolk how will I benefit from HS2

In reply to a post by threelegs:

In reply to a post by heathrow:

HS2, by moving long distance trains which use a lot of capacity, from other lines will release slots on existing railways.


So you benefit if you're nowhere near HS2.

Example: Trains from Aberyswtwyth serve Birmingham New Street. New Street is crowded and there are few spare slots.

HS2 will take Euston trains away, serving Curzon Street and allowing more trains from Aberystwyth to serve BNS. And providing more resilience if service is disrupted.

but I am in Norfolk how will I benefit from HS2

Example: Trains from Ely (with connections from Norwich) serve Birmingham New Street. New Street is crowded and there are few spare slots.

HS2 will take Euston trains away, serving Curzon Street and allowing more trains from Ely and Norwich to serve BNS. And providing more resilience if service is disrupted.