Charles Wyble wrote:
So allow me to think out loud for a minute....
1) Why wasn't the fiber protected by some sort of hardened/locked conduit? Is this possible? Does it add extensive cost or hamper normal operation? Some people do lock their vaults/pits/manholes. But, to be honest, I'm not sure it helps a lot. How many passersby would stop someone appearing to be in a phone company/telco high-vis vest using bolt cutters - telling them the lock had seized?
(I can also think of quite a few options which don't require opening a lid, but here's not the place to discuss!)
2) Why didn't an alarm go off that someone had entered the area? It was after business hours, presumably not in response to a trouble ticket, and as such a highly suspicious action. Does it make sense for these access portals to have some sort of alarm? I mean there is fiber running through and as such it could carry the signaling. Would this be a massive cost addition during construction?
Alarms mean power. Adding power to hundreds of km of a route to every pit/manhole would cost a lot - it's underground and often quite wet. Better to provide diverse route protection for the same cost - then you protect against accidental external aggression. Maybe you could do something neat with fibre and some of the active monitoring stuff to detect pit openning passively, but you'd want it to be pretty good and reliable. Lots of false alarms lead to NOCs not caring.
3) From what I understand it's not trivial to raise a manhole cover. Most likely can't be done by one person. Can they be locked? Or were the carriers simply relying on obscurity/barrier to entry? Obscurity and that most people are blissfully unaware of manholes and other street furniture. Locking is certainly possible but I'm not convinced it adds a LOT (see above).
Accidental external aggression is far more likely. Backhoe fade and equipment failure is a bigger problem than vandalism. MMC