No voice circuit, but ADSL OK

My in-laws have had their normally stable ASDL connection go
intermittent over the last few weeks. When working the router is synced
at 2.2Megs, and SNR is 30dB, Att 40dB..

When not working the stats all collapse to N/A. I managed to catch it
not working, but listening to the phone line couldn't hear anything
wrong there (crackles etc)

Last Thursday the voice circuit suddenly died completely. No dial tone.
I'd fitted an ADSL faceplate filter to their NTE5 mastersocket when
they went broadband about 18 months ago.

I removed the filter and plugged a phone straight into the test socket.
Dead, no dial tone or noise from the phone. Investigating further I
removed the BT part, and stuck a meter across the incoming line. 50
volts DC. Suspecting a fault with the master socket, and having a spare
one in my toolbox, I connected that. Same results, dead phone. However
since the voice circuit died the ADSL connection has been working 24/7,
the router reports SNR 5.5dB, and 48dB attenuation !

I reinstated everything confident that the fault is on BT's side.

The BT man turned up this morning. MIL phoned me because he saw the
faceplate filter and threw a wobbly. I'm only just round the corner, so
I popped in. By then he'd realised what the filter was (never seen one
before !) He had his BT test laptop connected to the test socket, and
was just as surprised as me at the ADSL carrier, but no voice circuit.
Anyway he concluded the fault was 'outside' the house and set off in
his van to trace the break. I received a message a hour later that the
fault seems to be in an underground cable, about 60 metres from the
house. Next step is a team to dig up the road.

Any comments ?

On 18 Apr 2006, "Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Any comments ?

Only that it has been reported before (by Kraftee, I think) that a break on
one line doesn't always kill the ADSL. No more to add, really. Peter M.

poster wrote:
> On 18 Apr 2006, "Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Any comments ?
>
> Only that it has been reported before (by Kraftee, I think) that a break on
> one line doesn't always kill the ADSL. No more to add, really. Peter M.

Yes, what I find odd is that 50 volts DC was still present across the
line ?

I also hope that the earlier intermittent ADSL fault, and this complete
failure of the voice circuit are one and the same fault :-)

On 18-Apr-2006, "Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I received a message a hour later that the
> fault seems to be in an underground cable, about 60 metres from the
> house. Next step is a team to dig up the road.

A cable fault should have taken out the ADSL as well. Perhaps he should
have got his mate, back at mission control at the exchange, to check across
the outgoing pair for dial tone using his linesman handset.

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> On 18-Apr-2006, "Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > I received a message a hour later that the
> > fault seems to be in an underground cable, about 60 metres from the
> > house. Next step is a team to dig up the road.
>
> A cable fault should have taken out the ADSL as well. Perhaps he should
> have got his mate, back at mission control at the exchange, to check across
> the outgoing pair for dial tone using his linesman handset.

AIUI he went up the road to a cabinet (about 200 metres away), and had
dial tone there.

"Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> On 18-Apr-2006, "Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> > I received a message a hour later that the
>> > fault seems to be in an underground cable, about 60 metres from the
>> > house. Next step is a team to dig up the road.
>>
>> A cable fault should have taken out the ADSL as well. Perhaps he should
>> have got his mate, back at mission control at the exchange, to check
>> across
>> the outgoing pair for dial tone using his linesman handset.
>
> AIUI he went up the road to a cabinet (about 200 metres away), and had
> dial tone there.


It's probably a high resistance joint in one leg of the line. Enough to
stop the phone signalling the exchange, due to the extra resistance, but not
enough to prevent you seeing 50V. The ADSL will still work, it's a higher
frequency and not affected so much. ISTR that it's been reported that ADSL
will even work with one leg completely dis.

--
Ian

Use the Reply-To address to contact me (limited validity).
Mail sent to the From address is ignored.

Ian Bartholomew wrote:

> It's probably a high resistance joint in one leg of the line. Enough to
> stop the phone signalling the exchange, due to the extra resistance, but not
> enough to prevent you seeing 50V. The ADSL will still work, it's a higher
> frequency and not affected so much. ISTR that it's been reported that ADSL
> will even work with one leg completely dis.

That makes perfect sense. I'd totally forgotten the basics and Ohm's
Law in all the excitement. I'll get me coat !

"Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
|
| poster wrote:
| > On 18 Apr 2006, "Mark Carver" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
| >
| > >Any comments ?
| >
| > Only that it has been reported before (by Kraftee, I think) that a break on
| > one line doesn't always kill the ADSL. No more to add, really. Peter M.
|
| Yes, what I find odd is that 50 volts DC was still present across the
| line ?
|
| I also hope that the earlier intermittent ADSL fault, and this complete
| failure of the voice circuit are one and the same fault :-)
|

Having 50v accross the line means nothing.

Having 50v in relation to earth accross one leg, and around 4v accross the other
means everything.

Hint, put the black leg of your meter to earth (a good earth) and then look
for -54 volts on one leg and 4v on the other.

In a nutshell you have an HR break in the line. The adsl will work if it's the
right leg that is ok. The HR break may be part of a wet joint or other fault and
this may be causing other issues that may give rise to other problems.

Typical turnaround times are 3-30 days for someone like Skanska to come out and
dig on BT's behalf. (BT Have a no dig policy themselves now). I would expect it
to work inside 10 days. My advice is NOT to accept the free call divert offered.
You don't get any compensation as such if you accept it because you techincally
have service. Just my thoughts.

Mark Carver wrote:
> My in-laws have had their normally stable ASDL connection go
> intermittent over the last few weeks. When working the router is
> synced at 2.2Megs, and SNR is 30dB, Att 40dB..
>
> When not working the stats all collapse to N/A. I managed to catch
> it not working, but listening to the phone line couldn't hear
> anything wrong there (crackles etc)
>
> Last Thursday the voice circuit suddenly died completely. No dial
> tone. I'd fitted an ADSL faceplate filter to their NTE5
> mastersocket when they went broadband about 18 months ago.
>
> I removed the filter and plugged a phone straight into the test
> socket. Dead, no dial tone or noise from the phone. Investigating
> further I removed the BT part, and stuck a meter across the
> incoming line. 50 volts DC. Suspecting a fault with the master
> socket, and having a spare one in my toolbox, I connected that.
> Same results, dead phone. However since the voice circuit died the
> ADSL connection has been working 24/7, the router reports SNR
> 5.5dB, and 48dB attenuation !
>
> I reinstated everything confident that the fault is on BT's side.
>
> The BT man turned up this morning. MIL phoned me because he saw the
> faceplate filter and threw a wobbly. I'm only just round the
> corner, so I popped in. By then he'd realised what the filter was
> (never seen one before !) He had his BT test laptop connected to
> the test socket, and was just as surprised as me at the ADSL
> carrier, but no voice circuit. Anyway he concluded the fault was
> 'outside' the house and set off in his van to trace the break. I
> received a message a hour later that the fault seems to be in an
> underground cable, about 60 metres from the house. Next step is a
> team to dig up the road.
>
> Any comments ?

Doubt if it really requires the road digging up, possibly the pavement
but not the road, but probably you will get another visit in the next
couple of days from a UG engineer who will find that it's faulty in a
joint or that there is a spare pair in the cable & so can get them
working that way..

kráftéé wrote:

> Doubt if it really requires the road digging up, possibly the pavement
> but not the road, but probably you will get another visit in the next
> couple of days from a UG engineer who will find that it's faulty in a
> joint or that there is a spare pair in the cable & so can get them
> working that way..

Isn't the cabling under the pavement in conduits anyway, or is that a
more recent innovation ? The house and road date back to 1965.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.