I had considered that, but it comes back to the post that started this - it seems like a lot of effort to purposely avoid using the network that is already in place (the ducts are good, we had an EAD service installed recently and some work has been undertaken in the past year to replace a collapsed section). No new poles have been installed, so unless the plan is to put them in them when an order is placed I am at a loss as to how this premise is going to be served.

I'm sure it's not a database error because it was funded by the local authority and only recently flipped to showing as being served.

I guess all we can really do is keep an eye on things and see what happens.

The EAD network is also completely separate from the FTTP network, and I believe it's also exchange-based (hence more likely to follow copper routes).

When I had my FTTPoD installed, some of the engineers I talked to expressed surprise that OR were ignoring all the existing leased-line fibre and pulling a new cable from scratch to the fibre aggregation node. It's just how they work - FTTP is kept entirely separate.

But like you say, wait and see what happens when the OLH gets its service installed.

I'm aware it's separate but it doesn't have it's own duct network - I mentioned it to cover off the possibility of ignoring existing ducts due to them being damaged.

I've never heard of a property being served from a pole where the CBT is underground.

…. but it does occur sometimes.

Have had a UG CBT, then up the stick, and span to a property.

A wall mounted CBT, then through duct to a pole, then three spans before the property (that was a huge PITA to pull in)

Edited by Zarjaz (Thu 18-Nov-21 11:49:42)

OK, well that's positive.

This also might be an opportunity for the OP to try out the new FTTPoD pricing trial from Dec 1st.

Presumably the office in question is not planned to be served from the same CBT (otherwise it would already show as available in the checker). But if OR only have to install a new CBT in another footway box, and connect it to an existing splitter within 500m, then the reduced pricing could be available. They will have to commit £250+VAT to find out though.

In reply to a post by jpm:

The whole industrial estate is served off an underground network, then there's a pole next to a chamber with a copper DP at the top, and then two intermediate poles before this house is connected. It's the only thing served by the poles, which have been there for decades.

Given that, reckon a CBT (if it does actually exist and isn’t an artefact from a DB anomaly) would be located in a chamber.

The poles look subsidiary and not the main network pathway.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

The EAD network is also completely separate from the FTTP network, and I believe it's also exchange-based (hence more likely to follow copper routes).

When I had my FTTPoD installed, some of the engineers I talked to expressed surprise that OR were ignoring all the existing leased-line fibre and pulling a new cable from scratch to the fibre aggregation node. It's just how they work - FTTP is kept entirely separate.

But like you say, wait and see what happens when the OLH gets its service installed.

I think getting a new EAD service just proves, as jpm said, that the local OR duct network is in good enough shape to pull new cables through, whether that be for FTTP or private circuits.

Don't think theres much more to it than that. They are as you say separate and EAD typically runs to the nearest node (joint enclosre) - jpm probably has access to the mapping tools from OR and can see where the various T nodes are located.

I'm surprised he's not thought of selling broadband to his neighbours....apparently its a doddle...

Given the other side is a lock, i don't think BT/OR would have spent money on doing ducting around there. So the overhead feed makes sense and is the cheapest route.

Completely unrelated to this thread and the OP (sorry for the tangent) - this made me think of all the dark fibre thats was laid pre-millennium around canals and waterways owned by British Waterways - a surprising number of trunk routes are under those towpaths.

Carry on

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

owned by British Waterways

(formerly British Waterways), and I remember the "Energis" brand that installed dark fibre on the electricity pylons.