lxsw20: All of a sudden an over head install doesn't seem so ugly. 

ckc:

mdooher:

Behodar:

mdooher: Here underground means, well, under the ground.

It means that everywhere, but this is a "surface mounted cabling" install, not an underground install.

I do agree, however, that it's a poor installation.

Why would you accept a "surface mounted install" do you have some funny rules about not using power poles or something. In Dunedin its quite simple... It is Aerial or its Underground, depending on what you already have.

Good grief, some people will put up with anything.

isn't the first 200m of trenching part of the deal...it bloody well is here...

Chorus basically told me that if I wanted it to run not in the flower beds at the side of the shared driveway, or attached to someone else's fence, I would have to pay for it myself.

But they also told me they only had $1000 per premises for the install. And they told me that the existing ducting was "not conducive", despite not having actually assessed it.

I think they make it up as they go along, and they're pocketing the difference because their original tender was far too low and they can't overcharge copper users any more.

benokobi:  I read in the paper that the average cost was ~1500 and was lowering to 1300

mdooher:

kiwikiwi:

lxsw20: All of a sudden an over head install doesn't seem so ugly. 

Even my over head install is simple and easy. 
What if someone was to hit that fence and break the cable? I'm sure a car won't hit a overhead cable. Honestly sure there are reasons but I don't think this justifies a fence install. Too many things could happen that could put too much liability. Over head install and if it goes down blame it on god.

In the old telecom days they never would have got away with an install like that. And fibre is a lot more delicate that the old twisted pair. The way I look at it if you cant run a telecom cable that way what makes you think you can run a fibre there?   ...  oh no I've got it...CONTRACTORS

InstallerUFB:

mdooher:

kiwikiwi:

lxsw20: All of a sudden an over head install doesn't seem so ugly. 

Even my over head install is simple and easy. 
What if someone was to hit that fence and break the cable? I'm sure a car won't hit a overhead cable. Honestly sure there are reasons but I don't think this justifies a fence install. Too many things could happen that could put too much liability. Over head install and if it goes down blame it on god.

In the old telecom days they never would have got away with an install like that. And fibre is a lot more delicate that the old twisted pair. The way I look at it if you cant run a telecom cable that way what makes you think you can run a fibre there?   ...  oh no I've got it...CONTRACTORS

Ok im going to bite on this one - in the old telecom days you would have gotten dial up and liked it  - the network that this service was connected to would have be started to be installed (and paid for) approx 60yrs before you were connected and not a completely new network a few months before

-  a copper service cable isnt as strong or durable as this microducting is anbd yes it isnt suitable to be run like this / As you have already said you have never seen an install of this type so how would you know the difference

and it is Chorus, the network owner, who have required the CONTRACTORS to install this material not the other way around

and with that I have said my piece about the method.



Apart form the poor installation of the materiials, my real concern about the OPs installation has nothing to do with the method but the lack on concent - which should be of the highest concern

MadEngineer: Now I recall signing off a piece of paper but I can't recall if it was before or after the job was done however I'm pretty sure I signed off that I was happy to go ahead with the job as I was able to cancel the install at any point in time right up to them starting work ie if I suddenly had cold feet I could simply cancel with no obligations.