MIne is one that has a socket for the phone and another one for 'adsl' - he has just plugged it into the adsl one...

In reply to a post by Moochy:

They do not have to move the master socket that is down to individual engineers as to whether they will do this. If the master socket is not near the Sky Hub which is usually by the PC then they have to run a data extension cable to your Hub.

Yes, thats what I was trying to say

Mine did nothing other than plug it into my existing phone line by the PC which is a quick way of doing it and not what ISP's (we) pay for.

Yep.

Good to see you got it sorted.

The ADSL faceplate filter should have been changed for a VDSL interstitial filter and separate phone only faceplate. The VDSL filter is the only one specified as part of the BT Openreach VDSL product and is what Sky paid to have installed.

Elsewhere on the forums, an ADSL faceplate filter has been reported as performing only marginally worse than the 'proper' VDSL filter (loss of around 1.5Mbit/second downstream speed on a >40Mbit/second connection). The ADSL filters have not been tested at the higher VDSL frequencies and an individual example may perform much worse at VDSL frequencies than the particular example tested.


Running a cable under a door, especially one that is opened and closed periodically, is very poor engineering practice. If Sky had ordered the Home Wiring Solution, which costs them nothing, you could have had a proper hard-wired socket installed for the modem.

So, even though i am happy with the way things have gone, particularly speed-wise, would i be better off fitting one of the vdsl filters myself, or better off leaving it all as is?

In reply to a post by David_W:

The ADSL faceplate filter should have been changed for a VDSL interstitial filter and separate phone only faceplate. The VDSL filter is the only one specified as part of the BT Openreach VDSL product and is what Sky paid to have installed.

Elsewhere on the forums, an ADSL faceplate filter has been reported as performing only marginally worse than the 'proper' VDSL filter (loss of around 1.5Mbit/second downstream speed on a >40Mbit/second connection). The ADSL filters have not been tested at the higher VDSL frequencies and an individual example may perform much worse at VDSL frequencies than the particular example tested.


Running a cable under a door, especially one that is opened and closed periodically, is very poor engineering practice. If Sky had ordered the Home Wiring Solution, which costs them nothing, you could have had a proper hard-wired socket installed for the modem.

Get back in touch with the Sky Fibre team, if you did not have a faceplate the install was not done correctly.

Agreed having it under the door will cause problems in future. I have found fibre so sensitive to little things like crushed cables etc. Not good at all.

The explanation for using a new socket was that the older traditional ones were more expensive to manufacture. I didn't know they performed worse though! The VDSL should have been installed though.

Sky should be quick to resolve this though.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

The explanation for using a new socket was that the older traditional ones were more expensive to manufacture. I didn't know they performed worse though! The VDSL should have been installed though.

The older ADSL faceplate filters were not tested at the higher VDSL frequencies - they may perform OK or they may not.


One big advantage of the new VDSL interstitial filter is that it's easier to install yourself if you have hardwired extensions, as it installs like the BT iPlate (or whatever it's called now). You remove the faceplate of your NTE5, ease the wiring connected to the faceplate through the slot at the bottom of the VDSL filter, push the filter into the NTE5 and the faceplate into the filter, then tighten the stack with the longer screws provided.

The old ADSL filtered faceplate needed an IDC tool to reterminate the extensions on the back of the filtered faceplate.

The only people who should have any difficulty self-installing the VDSL filter are those with old NTE5s that have brass inserts for machine screws (the sort of screws used on a mains socket) - though you can force the new screws into the brass inserts if you must. It would also be very difficult to install if there was very little slack in the extension wiring behind the faceplate, but if there's enough slack to remove the faceplate, there should be enough slack to install the filter.


Another advantage of the new VDSL interstitial filter is that you can disconnect your extensions and leave the filter in place, as there's a 'test socket' available on the filter with the faceplate removed.

I highly highly doubt that when fibre becomes a self install option that they will supply the VDSL faceplate.

We will go back to the dangley filters and internal wiring causing issues.
People aren't comfortable unscrewing their own sockets even if the process is a simple one.

I do agree with you that this is easier if it became a self install but I don't see that ever becoming standard.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

I highly highly doubt that when fibre becomes a self install option that they will supply the VDSL faceplate.

We will go back to the dangley filters and internal wiring causing issues.
People aren't comfortable unscrewing their own sockets even if the process is a simple one.

I do agree with you that this is easier if it became a self install but I don't see that ever becoming standard.

In fact BT SIN 498 does allow for micro filters as well as a centralised SSFP and the trials carried out by Openreach using them used old BT micro-filters as used for ADSL/ADSL+

This was covered in a news story on this site some time ago.

It's much like in the good old days of broadband just as dial-up was fading. Engineers initially came out and fitted filtered faceplates and then it became a self install option and micro-filters came into play.

So much easier for the consumer. It's a case of convenience over performance.