PCP side pods

Here in my valley in South Wales, over the last couple of months there have been additional side pods added to PCP cabinets.

These were I believe intended for the G-fast equipment but as that's no longer needed I wonder why.

Even cabs with one pod, a second has added to the other side.

The newest additions are very noticeable due to the brightness of the paint.

Perhaps for additional battery backups to aid FTTC and VoIP requirements ?

I have photos but don't know how to add them here.

Could it be the associated FTTC cabinet is being expanded and they need more tie pairs?

Edited by deleted (Mon 04-Jul-22 14:09:56)

They could be additional DSLAM pods for increased FTTC capacity if the existing FTTC cabs are full up

I have now found a Google street view that's up to date enough.


https://tinyurl.com/49abzjsn

Good thoughts, but would they not have added the extra pods to the FTTC cabs.
Lot of extra work to create the tie lines and would still need more space for them as well.

Imschuffer

FTTC additional capacity. Now getting rarer to see as FTTP is being used to relieve capacity issues instead.

Yeah that'll be an FTTC DSLAM expansion, we've had one installed near our cabinet recently FTTC was full.

It's the best place for the FTTC hardware, all the lines are in the PCP already there so only short tie pairs required. Lines connected to the pod will not go via the FTTC cabinet so a lot less work than adding extra tie pairs to a nearby FTTC cab.

No power in PCP's either so I don't think that's what's going on.

Here is a link to the adjacent FTTC cab to the PCP above, space for but no pod here.

https://tinyurl.com/mrx4jv6b

Several replies have stated it's a FTTC expansion pod on a PCP, they don't put expansion pods on the FTTC cabinets. The power is obtained from the FTTC cab the same as it is for G.Fast pods. Are you convinced yet.

In reply to a post by Realalemadrid:

Several replies have stated it's a FTTC expansion pod on a PCP, they don't put expansion pods on the FTTC cabinets.

Splitting hairs: they *do* put expansion units on the side of FTTC cabinets, because this happened to ours a couple of years ago. I'm not sure whether you'd technically call them "pods"; it's an expansion box on the side, which overhangs the ground a bit.

But apart from that I agree: the most likely case for such a pod on the side of a PCP these days is for FTTC expansion, not G.Fast.

Perhaps I should have said, generally FTTC only cabs do not have expansion pods of the size indicated in the earlier post however All in One cabs can have a copper cable expansion pod on one side (away from the live mains power) The only addition I have seen on an standard FTTC cab is a small additional section just a few inches wide to accommodate a slightly larger electronics rack with increased line capacity.

In reply to a post by dect:

Could it be the associated FTTC cabinet is being expanded and they need more tie pairs?

Its the G FAST DSLAM and line cards ect

In reply to a post by tommy45:

Its the G FAST DSLAM and line cards ect

So if I understand you correctly you're saying Openreach are still rolling out G.Fast hardware?

The only expansion added to a FTTC cabinet that I am aware of is to cater for additional Copper terminations on a High Density upgrade.
I think there is pod being developed that will attach directly to FTTC cabinets that will house sub tended headends

If that's the cabinet and pod in question then it is g.fast, but it's been in situ for several years

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I have now found a Google street view that's up to date enough.


https://tinyurl.com/49abzjsn

That's G.Fast pod

In reply to a post by adslmax:

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I have now found a Google street view that's up to date enough.


https://tinyurl.com/49abzjsn

That's G.Fast pod

Why are you repeating what I have already posted?

In reply to a post by witchunt:

In reply to a post by adslmax:

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I have now found a Google street view that's up to date enough.


https://tinyurl.com/49abzjsn

That's G.Fast pod

Why are you repeating what I have already posted?

He never mentioned speed for a change.

OK I got that a bit wrong, it's the same Huawei MA5603T with the higher density (64 port ) line cards so it is a hardware upgrade, the additional space is as you say for the extra copper tie pairs.

After showing a picture of a G.Fast cab somewhere in his area, obviously not an expansion that has happened recently so nothing to do with recent additions to PCPs the OP seems to have given up on this thread.

I enjoyed my couple of days away staying with friends.

Thanks for all the replies but I think we have lost our way a bit.

I do agree the vented pods fitted to PCP cabinets are of the type used to provide G-Fast, but that was not my question.

The Google was to show an example of the type of pods that "seem" to have recently been fitted to some cabinets in the valley.

Street view is not up to date everywhere, so, just to be clear, none of the street views are of the cabinet under discussion.

This is the currently available street view of twin pod cab that my comments are about taken in 2011. https://tinyurl.com/3rw243ez

I have a current picture of this one, but how to post it ?.

Here is another similar https://tinyurl.com/3dbma7ya


I first reported, at least one of the cabs in the valley has two pods fitted they are both of a slightly different design, the left a surface door on the outside with extra vents, ( pod as in the street view the another cab ) as against the right one where the whole panel opens with small vents.

The PCP cabinet is very faded, the plain pod is a bit faded, the vented pod has very bright paint, which gives the impression it has been fitted fairly recently, and probably after the demise of G-Fast roll outs ( paused in 2019 ) and as far as I know, it was never available in the valley anyway, the BT availability checker does not show any G-Fast on this cabinet. (3)

If all the above is correct, what is the PCP extra pods "intended" use now ?.

I have to acknowledge that the rush to switch everybody to VoIP, and all by 2024, Dslam extensions will be needed.

I will be surprised if fibre gets installed to "every" premises in the stated timescale.

As you don't need FTTP to get "just" VoIP, so maybe for voice only users they will leave the copper to the premises in place ( initially perhaps ) and that's what going in the PCP pods ?.

The issue of the length of time a Dslam and premises ONT battery backup lasts is as yet unresolved.

Equally, I could be wrong as to how long the paint of the cabs looks new !.

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I have a current picture of this one, but how to post it ?.

Use an image hosting site like imgur.com, postimg.cc etc, and post the link here.

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I have to acknowledge that the rush to switch everybody to VoIP, and all by 2024, Dslam extensions will be needed.

PSTN switchoff is December 2025.

I don't believe it's true that there will be widespread FTTC cabinet extensions, and the current evidence is that such upgrades are being delayed when cabinets reach capacity.

Firstly, there's a lot of FTTP going in between now and December 2025, and every user that switches from FTTC to FTTP frees up a cabinet port. Secondly, there will be SOADSL for those who cannot, or choose not, to get FTTC or FTTP.

SOADSL comes from local exchanges, so FTTC capacity is not an issue. Admittedly, it could potentially delay the closure of those exchanges - but there are other problems like leased lines to deal with as well.

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I will be surprised if fibre gets installed to "every" premises in the stated timescale.

It won't be; but if deployment reaches say 75%, then that releases three-quarters of existing FTTC cabinet capacity for other users.

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

As you don't need FTTP to get "just" VoIP, so maybe for voice only users they will leave the copper to the premises in place ( initially perhaps ) and that's what going in the PCP pods ?.

Copper is still going to remain for a while. Even after a "stop sell" in an area, users can continue to remain on their existing copper broadband products - although will be unable to modify them (e.g. regrade the speed).

As far as I know, there's no process yet agreed for forcing stragglers from copper to fibre. And even then, many FTTP areas won't reach 100% coverage, so some copper will be left in place to serve the remainder. Therefore, I suspect they'll just leave it to natural churn.

Forcing copper PSTN users to copper SOADSL/SOGEA *will* have to take place by December 2025, but it is just a case of sending an engineer round to install the router and plug in the phone. This will mainly be a problem for BT, as most people who have phone-without-broadband will get it from BT.

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

The issue of the length of time a Dslam and premises ONT battery backup lasts is as yet unresolved.

It's pretty well resolved I'd say. Cabinet battery backups last half a day or more, and for extended outages in a local area OR tend to swap in fresh batteries.

Home router/ONT backups last for as long as you like, depending on what you're prepared to pay for your UPS.

Mobile phone is now the preferred option for many people. The Shared Rural Network should ensure much better coverage of mobile signal, and is being deployed in the same sort of timescale that we're talking about. Power packs for mobiles are cheap and easy to get hold of.

There is a g.fast pod connected to PCP 3 Pontycymmer which has been in situ for several years.
It shows on the availability checker for addresses nearby.

Edited by witchunt (Thu 07-Jul-22 07:08:09)

Thanks Candlerb for a clearly knowledgeable and well explained reply.

I was interested in your comments re the ending of copper just for voice.

I thought the main driver was to enable the removal of copper from cabinet to exchange and it's eventual closure and thus reducing all the associated cost and the copper faults expenditure, therefore needing Dslam expansions.

You indicate a different view, which I'm not suggesting is incorrect, just very different.

The whole uprising about being unable to make a possibly urgent phone call during a lengthily power outage, as experienced by many during the last storms, came from users perhaps without a mobile phone, poor or no signal at home.

BT had said they "may" provide battery backup to those users, who are most likely either without internet or silver surfers.

https://www.bt.com/help/landline/fibre-home-phone-se...

This was why I said it was not yet solved, and BT said recently that they would suspend delivery of VoIP until they had a better backup solution.

I accept knowledgeable users could buy other solutions but that misses the point.

Mobile phone masts are subjected to similar issues, all be it not quite so short as 1 hour.

https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussion/1811850/mob...

A big worry for a lot of people.

Verizon in the states did it in 2019, forced by hurricane damage, to a lot of complaints and battery backup being the main concern, solved somewhat now with a verity of options but still only managing maximum 24 hours, probably OK for 99% of the time.

BUT this needs a suitable modem/router as a voice only battery saver.

https://www.verizon.com/support/residential/battery-...

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

I was interested in your comments re the ending of copper just for voice.

I thought the main driver was to enable the removal of copper from cabinet to exchange and it's eventual closure and thus reducing all the associated cost and the copper faults expenditure, therefore needing Dslam expansions.

You indicate a different view, which I'm not suggesting is incorrect, just very different.

My understanding is that the primary driver is to get rid of all the ageing analogue telephony equipment in exchanges - which is becoming expensive to maintain and would otherwise need upgrading/replacement. There's no investment case or payback for such an upgrade, given that the volumes of fixed-line voice traffic and the interconnect rates have plummeted, and continue to do so.

It's clear that Openreach want out of the wholesale telephony business entirely, which is why they stopped selling voice services over the ONT voice port even for FTTP.

Of course, PSTN switch-off is also one of the pre-requisites for shutting down the local exchanges, which will have a big payback when completed.

As for DSLAMs in the exchanges, ultimately those ought to go too. However many third-party ISPs already have these installed, and are keen to continue milking this investment - i.e. they will want to continue using Local Loop Unbundling (LLU) for as long as possible.

To be more precise: there are two types of LLU. MPF = Metallic Path Facility, which is where the copper connects directly to the ISP's MSAN and they provide both voice dialtone and data. SMPF = Shared Metallic Path Facility, where the OR exchange provides dialtone and the ISP's DSLAM provides only data.

For example, if you get phone+ADSL from Talktalk, then you're getting your both data and analogue dialtone from a Talktalk MSAN, not from the BT/OR exchange.

What Openreach says here is:

Summary of UK stop sell rules

Where a premises has access GEA-FTTP there will be no new supply of other products
...
If a premises does not have GEA-FTTP available, SOGfast, SOGEA, GEA-FTTC, SOTAP, (where no fibre available), MPF will be available
...
Consideration will also be given to investment policies in the copper network which could include VDSL cabinet capacity and repairs of the copper network

My understanding of that is: in a stop-sell area, if you have FTTP available, you'll only be able to order that. In the absence of FTTP but the presence of SOGEA or SOGfast (i.e. various types of FTTC), you'll only be able to order those. But if none of those are available, then OR are committed to retain MPF back to the exchange.

EDIT: more info from Openreach in the All-IP FAQ (PDF). SoTAP is the "new but temporary product" which will replace MPF for those properties which can't be served by FTTP or FTTC.

Edited by candlerb (Mon 11-Jul-22 16:50:12)

In reply to a post by candlerb:

My understanding is that the primary driver is to get rid of all the ageing analogue telephony equipment in exchanges - which is becoming expensive to maintain and would otherwise need upgrading/replacement. There's no investment case or payback for such an upgrade, given that the volumes of fixed-line voice traffic and the interconnect rates have plummeted, and continue to do so.

I read in a newspaper that this is actually the same across europe.

Global trend with fixed line telecoms and aged/legacy PSTN switches. Basically too much excess capacity, too much real estate and kit which is too old to maintain.

IP killed the telephone switch.

Thanks again Candlerb for another excellent detailed reply.

The FAQ's have some anomalies re planned actives and appear to contradict each other sometimes.

Q6. What is Fibre First?
This is a programme that Openreach are using to get as much of the UK Network on to a
fibre line and so improve the reliability and speed of connections and data transmission

Q10:- Move everybody and you've got to do it by 2025

This is probably the sauce of press reports that users would be forced to change to VoIP, which it turn kicked off the battery uptime issues, covered in some length further down.

Q 8:- I have read that there are some current issues around users on FTTC with ISP's without a current VoIP capability not allowing them to move their voice only to another provider, it appears that a stop voice triggers a full stop service.

I can see issues if you can't have your VoIP and internet services with different providers.

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

The FAQ's have some anomalies re planned actives and appear to contradict each other sometimes.

Q6. What is Fibre First?
This is a programme that Openreach are using to get as much of the UK Network on to a
fibre line and so improve the reliability and speed of connections and data transmission

Q10:- Move everybody and you've got to do it by 2025

This is probably the sauce of press reports that users would be forced to change to VoIP, which it turn kicked off the battery uptime issues, covered in some length further down.

I don't see any contradiction there. Everyone *will* be moved to either FTTP or SOGEA (inc. SOGfast) by Dec 2025. And therefore yes, everyone who takes fixed-line telephony *will* be forced to change to VoIP.

A tiny few stragglers, where neither FTTP nor SOGEA is available, will be left on SOTAP. That's not a choice you get as a customer. This just means that people who only have ADSL available at the time, will not have it taken away from them.

(Long term, maybe Openreach will swallow the cost of the final FTTP/FTTC upgrades, or will persuade people over to 4G/5G. They will have a lot of decommissioned FTTC cabinets to recycle!)

In reply to a post by lmschuffer:

Q 8:- I have read that there are some current issues around users on FTTC with ISP's without a current VoIP capability not allowing them to move their voice only to another provider, it appears that a stop voice triggers a full stop service.

I can see issues if you can't have your VoIP and internet services with different providers.

You are correct that if you transfer the PSTN phone number to a VOIP provider today, it will cease the broadband service attached to that line.

Most people who want voice will take it from the same company as their broadband provider, typically via a VOIP port on their provided router. Currently, Plusnet and Talktalk are the two big ISPs who are not yet ready to do this.

Almost no provider is currently able to release the number without ceasing the broadband. AAISP is the only one I know who can do that (but you first have to transfer both the phone line and broadband to them).

However, if you're getting FTTP installed, this generally can be installed alongside FTTC - so that's the opportunity to do the split, for anyone who wants to do so.

Similarly: by the time that ISPs start to force people over from FTTC to SOGEA, they'll hopefully have processes either to release the phone number or to retain it.

Another TBB forum post discussing the backup situation started yesterday.
https://forums.thinkbroadband.com/general/4716771-ac...

And the Ofcom also yesterday issued a "What you need to know"
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms-and-interne...

One more question re cabinet side pods.

I was never able to provide a photo of the cabinet that started all this off.
Today I found an identical cab elsewhere

https://tinyurl.com/68a5y4r2

The side pods are very different and I would be very interested in a view as to what they both are used for.

Both are ventilated implying electrical equipment inside.

One answer for the question that doesn't go away. Your old Google street view picture shows
Cabinet 3 on PONTYCYMER exchange which is now G.Fast enabled and almost certainly has been for some time, so that's one of the pods accounted for. The other one could be an FTTC expansion but you will probably not accept that based on your previous comments.

Edit This thread seemed to go off topic and I may have missed Witchunt's post on the 7th Jul about Cab 3 being G.Fast, I reckon the OP missed it as well

Edited by Realalemadrid (Fri 29-Jul-22 10:38:57)

Post deleted by adslmax

The OP has linked to streetviews of pcp 3,4,5 and 8 so far

This is where the OP previously made an incorrect assumption on the 6th July ... .after the demise of G-Fast roll outs ( paused in 2019 ) and as far as I know, it was never available in the valley anyway, the BT availability checker does not show any G-Fast on this cabinet. (3)

From the various cabinets that have been displayed there is a lot of G.fast in the valley.

6th July

Not missed.

I first reported, "at least one of the cabs in the valley has two pods fitted they are both of a slightly different design, the left a surface door on the outside with extra vents, ( pod as in the street view the another cab ) as against the right one where the whole panel opens with small vents."

Very interesting chat to two MJ Quinn engineers in front of this open cab. https://tinyurl.com/68a5y4r2
Turned out to be a tutor and apprentice.

The right pod contains a G.fast Dslam.
The left pod contains punch downs multi core connected directly to the other pod.

Why is the left pod vented unlike the main cab.
New PCP's punch downs will now all be vented.

Why do they not put G.fast pods onto Vdsl cabs.
As the G.fast range is limited to those ideally under 300 meters of copper, the pod on the Vdsl would be subject to two additional lengths of the link cable between it and the PCP, which could be up to 50 meters away, thus excluding some potential users.

He thought that BT/OR has underestimated the amount of take-up there would be.

I think it might have been TBB news who reported that a large number of G-fast users had opted for less than max speeds.

Can't find a search option there so can't confirm.

It might have been kitz.

Thanks to all contributors for learned views.

Open Small G-fast pod here.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/09/openre...

The left side extension also contains splitters which can be damaged or cause issues if condensation is allowed to build up and cause corrosion of the contacts.

Could you please describe what a splitter is ?

Separates the VDSL and the exchange based signals interfering

It must be Groundhog day, this thread keeps going round. So you have given us an example of a cabinet with a G.Fast pod with added cable connection pod, these pods are not recent additions to the PCP cabinet.

What about the cabs that you noticed in your opening post ... the newest additions are very noticeable due to the brightness of the paint.? Do you think these are all G.Fast cabinets now?

These cabinets may not have the same configuration as the one you have shown, if they actually have recently added pods they will not be to do with G.Fast, so still unexplained. Could they perhaps be be additional FTTC DSLAMS to increase capacity as suggested right at the start of your thread?

My second post in the thread explained why these expansion pods are not put on the FTTC cabinets whether for additional FTTC lines or more crtically to give shorter lines for G.Fast, so nothing new there.

The take up of G.Fast has been pretty low as it only benefits customers very close to the cabinet. Openreach have decided it's not worth bothering with and many ISPs don't sell it.

In reply to a post by Realalemadrid:

The take up of G.Fast has been pretty low as it only benefits customers very close to the cabinet. Openreach have decided it's not worth bothering with and many ISPs don't sell it.

My G.fast is around 193m away and get around 242/42 in cold winter and get around 211/34 in hot summer but no longer have G.fast anymore (my best recommend G.fast is 160/30 for all seasonal).

Edited by adslmax (Fri 12-Aug-22 13:04:01)