In reply to a post by j0hn83:

Protect Lightning will eventually cover 4 Million new properties, with half of them being full FTTP. Seems your area was unlucky and early in the rollout. Initially they were aiming for 25% FTTP but most being built now are pure fibre and will take the target to 50%

Well it wasn't my area, but areas around my area, if you looked at their rollout areas, we are one of the domes without it, its not an issue.

But yeah those areas near me that do have VM must of been unlucky, but these areas are very built up, so the take up was fast LOL.

Lets hope the new areas they are rolling out in are lucky and get the full fibre installed.

Paul

In reply to a post by PaulKirby:

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Note my choice of words, none guarantee that it will be FTTP but am seeing enough areas to support my statement.

I am not saying you are wrong, I just said those that all got VM a year or two ago as part of Project Lightning never got FTTH and where other people was saying its FTTH / FTTP, when it "might" not be, that's what I was trying to say.

They did get as close as the over side of the main road from us LOL.

But yeah, nothing is guaranteed.

Paul

At the time those areas in East London were built FTTP was still very much in trials.

I am not sure why anyone would claim those builds were Project Lightning. Lightning didn't exist at the time they were started, it didn't exist when the builds near me were started, however all infill projects were rolled into Lightning later on.

Lightning didn't exist until 2016.

All large new builds, such as Thanet, will use FTTP. It is future-proof, and cheaper to install than HFC.

All in-fill builds, plugging missing streets in existing areas, will use HFC unless there are specific factors at play.

All large new builds planned in 2015 / early 2016 will be HFC as FTTP wasn't yet scaled up for commercial build.

Virtually all congested areas are that way due to power, cooling or space preventing migration of the hubs feeding them to CCAP, and leaving them on legacy equipment. This is basically a non-issue for the FTTP areas, they will be fed by CCAP from the start, and RFoG can be run alongside XGPON at VM's convenience.

In reply to a post by PaulKirby:

TBH, I don't really know how VM will be rolling out pure FTTP, but I bet you each fibre will be split more than 32 ways, also it depends on how much bandwidth they send down each fibre and the quality of fibre cables used.

Also if its pure fibre from point A to Point B, why the need of the cabinets?
Maybe its being used as a form of a Fibre Node / Splitter where each fibre goes to the customer.

Paul

The deployment is initially RFoG, so basically the same as the HFC areas, but using glass all the way to the home. In time there will be a move to XGPON. These can run side by side. There seem to be either 24 or 48 premises on each total split, I think 24, however as VM can move to XGPON when required, 10Gb split between the premises, either way congestion on the split won't be a major issue.

The comment on quality of the fibre cables being used is bizarre. Either they can support XGPON and RFoG or they cannot, and given unlike Openreach VM actually have to build new cabinets and dig new ducts to deploy this network, along with the relevant consultancy and deployment work there would be no real room to skimp on materials. The deployment method, at least here, is based around consultancy with Huawei, using appropriate materials. The fibre s fine to run both variations of XGPON and 40GPON simultaneously with RFoG.

Why the need of cabinets? VM and everyone else don't have a load of ready-built chambers in the ground or poles they can use to house splitter and aggregation nodes. In common with every other fibre deployment they use cabinets to house the optical equipment.

The large powered cabinets are the equivalent of an NGA headend, they house the OLTs, the cabinets house the optical splitters. The powered cabinets feed approximately 3000 premises. The smaller cabinets, depending on where they are being used in the network, serve 1024 or 512 premises if being used as what would be the equivalent of aggregation nodes, and 48 and 96 premises if being used as distribution cabinets directly feeding homes.

TL;DR these areas should be fine for congestion and are, for obvious reasons, vastly superior to anything Openreach have apart from the few hundred thousand premises of FTTP, with the added bonus that the taxpayer isn't subsidising any of this FTTP network.

Although that said, the HFC VM are building now is likewise vastly superior to anything Openreach have planned this side of 2020 too, with the exception of the FTTP areas.

It's all good. Let's hear it for competition.

Edited by deleted (Sat 15-Apr-17 14:34:44)

just a word of warning, when my street first got VM broadband (already had tv and phone), it was congested from day one, which did seem to surprise ignition when I told him. I guess what happened with my area they didnt give it it's own node and just shoved it onto a existing neighbouring node to save costs.

However in your case with it been FTTP I would assume it wont suffer from docsis type problems?

Edited by Chrysalis (Sun 16-Apr-17 18:27:51)

I agree the new areas are likely to be built better, as these are been done with modern broadband speeds in mind.

The problem is the older parts of VMs network, those areas were done in pre dialup days and were done just for analogue cable tv and analogue phone services.

If you are a VM exec, its harder to justify spending money on an area like Leicester because they will know full well they already have very high takeup in the area, on the existing infrastructure, and its a poor business case for spending just to improve quality of service to customers without any extra revenue from it.

I remember the days when cable was been laid in Leicester, I was just 13 years old, I am 38 now. Cable laid over 20 years ago just was not done with broadband in mind, hence when ignition revealed my city is pretty much all coax with very large nodes I wasnt surprised at all.

I'm not even sure I'll go with Virgin, I like a fixed IP which they only do on business connections although I could make do without a fixed IP - apparently they're quite sticky these days.

In theory being FTTP it should be much better than what I have now 47/6, but there's always that VM bugbear of congestion at the back of your mind even with it being FTTP.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

just a word of warning, when my street first got VM broadband (already had tv and phone), it was congested from day one, which did seem to surprise ignition when I told him. I guess what happened with my area they didnt give it it's own node and just shoved it onto a existing neighbouring node to save costs.

However in your case with it been FTTP I would assume it wont suffer from docsis type problems?

Yes, that is one of the issues with the early bits of Project Lightning that is being ironed out - new builds being tacked onto existing nodes when they should have had their own, or not been released until they were split.

However, sounds like you are referring to an area that was previously one-way network and was upgraded to two-way. That's a completely different story.

FTTP will initially run DOCSIS. XGPON or higher can be run simultaneously to add new tiers and capacity relief.

In reply to a post by lee111s:

Project lightning is full FTTP.

Wrong.

It still using coax cable from cabinet to the home. It's not full Fibre. Never is.

VM have just finished cabling my street as part of Project Lightning. I did very briefly get a chance to check out the cabling being laid to individual properties and I have to say it certainly didn't look or feel like any kind of coax I've ever seen.

Wrong.

Try and keep us as it is yourself that is wrong here which does seem to be becoming a habit of yours.