National Broadband Plan or Starlink

joe123

Messer1 wrote: »

I'd say about 3 years would be very significant especially if, for example, you are trying to run a biz and/or have several school-going kids.

Starlink is aiming at underserved/unserved areas, not just extreme rural. Don't forget that there are also many homes within no/inferior BB outside the NBP's intervention area. Agree that it is expensive compared with other services but for some households it may be a price well worth paying - no one is forcing anyone to buy the service.

Fibre is certainly the gold standard at the moment and its deployment need not be delayed by the arrival of LEO BB which could be a solution for homes needing BB ASAP.

So doesn't that all come back to - if a user in the meantime wants to sign up to Starlink/alternatives they should.

The Government shouldn't be involved at all yet. I can only see it as a possibility at year 7 stage when they are looking at alternatives for that 1% they cant reach physically.

For me personally, Working from home in IT needing download/upload speeds, I am considering Starlink only because my area isnt likely to be touched until 2025. But I don't expect (or want) the government to get involved/sidetracked by other tech discussion.

Focus on accelerating the rollout and I'll be happy in the knowledge that in ~3/4 years il be serviced with FTTH.

listermint

joe123 wrote: »

So doesn't that all come back to - if a user in the meantime wants to sign up to Starlink/alternatives they should.

The Government shouldn't be involved at all yet. I can only see it as a possibility at year 7 stage when they are looking at alternatives for that 1% they cant reach physically.

For me personally, Working from home in IT needing download/upload speeds, I am considering Starlink only because my area isnt likely to be touched until 2025. But I don't expect (or want) the government to get involved/sidetracked by other tech discussion.

Focus on accelerating the rollout and I'll be happy in the knowledge that in ~3/4 years il be serviced with FTTH.

Definite plan by some to muddy waters, and open up conversations again. This sort of muddying the waters coupled with the price of starlink install and monthly would play right into WISP hands.


This muddying of waters and talking about government doing marketing for a private company is cynical and should be treated with as much skepticism as its being presented.

Orebro

Who knows what this guy is up to. The docs are just a summary of what LEO is, and some other fluff about Musk. Bit late in the day for this kind of nonsense anyway, and I doubt any TD is going to sit down and read it let alone actually do something about it.

heavydawson

Orebro wrote: »

Who knows what this guy is up to. The docs are just a summary of what LEO is, and some other fluff about Musk. Bit late in the day for this kind of nonsense anyway, and I doubt any TD is going to sit down and read it let alone actually do something about it.

A little bit of Googling will have you realise that he's not pushing some WISP agenda. He's simply an activist citizen (and has a good track record on other matters like NAMA), rightly questioning the costs of NBP and trying to keep alternatives in mind, even at this late stage. Yes, the docs are a summary, but if you're trying to convince people of something, you _should_ be providing the context. I agree it's late in the day, but as a pro-NBP member of the site, I'd still rather it not turn into a total echo chamber and we have other opinions (particularly those who do their homework) onboard.

NewClareman

Messer1 wrote: »

I certainly don't advocate stopping the NBP. The provision of good quality broadband to rural areas should be accelerated, not slowed.

I agree.

Messer1 wrote: »

This could be achieved by Starlink especially in areas which are unlikely to get fibre for years. When fibre arrives in these areas, users can decide whether to stick or switch.

I would go further, why not incorporate Starlink into the solution for the NBP. I think it was a poor decision and/or poor advice to have the focus on an all fibre solution - this was always going to drive excessive cost. The tender should have specified the criteria to be met, and how conformance would be measured. This is what was done in the states with the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. However, there were votes to consider...

As technology advances further options will arrive, equally as good, if not better, than Starlink. However, because of the manner in which it was handled by the then government, people are obsessed with getting fibre. It doesn't matter that alternative solutions might even offer an equally effective solution, maybe even more quickly.

To be clear, I am not against the NBP. What I am against is unnecessary state spending whether on fibre, health, or anything else. There will be a price to be paid for the ever increasing debt burden. I'm not concerned for myself, but very much so for my children and their generation.

(By the way, I know I am preaching to the converted. )

listermint

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree.



I would go further, why not incorporate Starlink into the solution for the NBP. I think it was a poor decision and/or poor advice to have the focus on an all fibre solution - this was always going to drive excessive cost. The tender should have specified the criteria to be met, and how conformance would be measured. This is what was done in the states with the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. However, there were votes to consider...

As technology advances further options will arrive, equally as good, if not better, than Starlink. However, because of the manner in which it was handled by the then government, people are obsessed with getting fibre. It doesn't matter that alternative solutions might even offer an equally effective solution, maybe even more quickly.

To be clear, I am not against the NBP. What I am against is unnecessary state spending whether on fibre, health, or anything else. There will be a price to be paid for the ever increasing debt burden. I'm not concerned for myself, but very much so for my children and their generation.

(By the way, I know I am preaching to the converted. )

The Debt arguement and the price for this is at this stage utter nonsense, It wil pay for itself ten times over with economic activity and above all CHOICE. The advent of work from home has driven home that message. We should not be held back as we were in the past by technologies in their infancy at the time like the '3G wireless solution' etc etc. Anyone thinking they can cut corners and save money on plans of this scale is beyond saving.

They literally dont understand the investment and its advantages.

This is not about echo chamber its about people side tracking and muddling plans and you end up with a bastardized solution like Australia. And the US is an absolute poor example of infrastructure on any metric.

We should approach this more like a korea than an australia. We have a massive size advantage and the core worlds tech companies based here to boost its use.

No silly messing around anymore, Starlink is an impressive technology its has applications these are very true, Its also true that its a brand new system with ways to go and it has questionable scalability and weather reaction.


We took the most bullet proof sensible approach on the table and the government should be commended for sticking to it than listening to absolute nimby and Small thinkers.

Messer1

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree.



I would go further, why not incorporate Starlink into the solution for the NBP. I think it was a poor decision and/or poor advice to have the focus on an all fibre solution - this was always going to drive excessive cost. The tender should have specified the criteria to be met, and how conformance would be measured. This is what was done in the states with the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. However, there were votes to consider...

As technology advances further options will arrive, equally as good, if not better, than Starlink. However, because of the manner in which it was handled by the then government, people are obsessed with getting fibre. It doesn't matter that alternative solutions might even offer an equally effective solution, maybe even more quickly.

To be clear, I am not against the NBP. What I am against is unnecessary state spending whether on fibre, health, or anything else. There will be a price to be paid for the ever increasing debt burden. I'm not concerned for myself, but very much so for my children and their generation.

(By the way, I know I am preaching to the converted. )

Lost of sound comment there. During 2019, I produced the first version of Plan B aimed at the Gov and Oireachtas Committee that was examining the NBP. It called for an independent expert to assess potential of LEO BB. The planners for NBP had no expertise in this and saw that the only alternative to fibre was G5. We definitely needed an NBP for rural Ireland but the structure adopted has been totally inappropriate.

Yes, LEO sat tech will grow and grow. For example, all Starlink sats launched after 2021 will provide for ISLL (inter-sat laser links). OneWeb will be using these from the outset and God only knows what Amazon have in mind. Also, the mid-20s *might* see the arrival of the EU's L€O (sic) service aimed at rural areas!! The arrival of reusable rocketry allied to big advances in electronics could (if properly managed by participants and regulators) create many new roles for LEO sats. There are also interesting things in mobile-LEO that need watching.

joe123

Messer1 wrote: »

Lost of sound comment there. During 2019, I produced the first version of Plan B aimed at the Gov and Oireachtas Committee that was examining the NBP. It called for an independent expert to assess potential of LEO BB. The planners for NBP had no expertise in this and saw that the only alternative to fibre was G5. We definitely needed an NBP for rural Ireland but the structure adopted has been totally inappropriate.

Yes, LEO sat tech will grow and grow. For example, all Starlink sats launched after 2021 will provide for ISLL (inter-sat laser links). OneWeb will be using these from the outset and God only knows what Amazon have in mind. Also, the mid-20s *might* see the arrival of the EU's L€O (sic) service aimed at rural areas!! The arrival of reusable rocketry allied to big advances in electronics could (if properly managed by participants and regulators) create many new roles for LEO sats. There are also interesting things in mobile-LEO that need watching.

Alot of If's and Maybes and "watch this space" but at the risk of causing delays and faffing about impacting FTTH rollout. We already know what Fibre is capable of. And its good, really really good. With potential to get even better.

You also keep ignoring that Musk has already said its not for your everyday consumer, yet it seems like you are actively trying to push this as a solution for Jim and Bob up the road who are just out of reach of FTTH.

There is no comparison between rural Ireland and rural countries like the US. Rural Ireland isnt just the man that lives 3km up the side of a mountain.

Anyways again the fact is this tech is largely untested.

Im repeating myself but I can only see it being a possible solution for those that are in the 1% that NBI wont be able to reach and for now, its a possible solution while people wait for FTTH but its up to that user to research and Starlink as a company to advertise.

Honestly though it feels like its even pointless debating this. You come across as your mind is made up and you literally won't listen to anything else.

NewClareman

Messer1 wrote: »

Yes, LEO sat tech will grow and grow. For example, all Starlink sats launched after 2021 will provide for ISLL (inter-sat laser links). OneWeb will be using these from the outset and God only knows what Amazon have in mind. Also, the mid-20s *might* see the arrival of the EU's L€O (sic) service aimed at rural areas!! The arrival of reusable rocketry allied to big advances in electronics could (if properly managed by participants and regulators) create many new roles for LEO sats. There are also interesting things in mobile-LEO that need watching.

I'm certain that many new roles will be created for LEO satellites. Unfortunately, many of them may not be for the betterment of society.

To me, the work on the Inter-Satellite Laser Links is of immense importance, in its own right. There is significant crossover between Free Space Optics (FSO) for inter-satellite communication and FSO for terrestrial communication. FSO has long shown promise for terrestrial communications, but progress has been slow. I am aware of trials in India, China and Russia, but not of any live deployments in commercial networks.

However, the whole FSO area is now lit up, driven by the likes of Starlink and Amazon. There is a good chance that this focus, and allied research investment, will lead to viable terrestrial solutions. If so, that would be a game changer as big as LEOS's. It would support high capacity broadband, using ground-based cells, with FSO based backhaul from the tower. The problems they are solving for ISLL's should migrate to terrestrial solutions that can be deployed easily, without specialised technical expertise.

oscarBravo

FSO makes sense in space: there's no weather in space. It's unlikely to ever be a significant terrestrial player.

NewClareman

oscarBravo wrote: »

FSO makes sense in space: there's no weather in space. It's unlikely to ever be a significant terrestrial player.

Terrestrial FSO is already in play, with a greater market share than space FSO. Many of the weather related issues have been progressed, to the extent that FSO can now be considered a potential backhaul solution and is already a resilient fronthaul solution. One of the more difficult areas is atmospheric turbulence which effects both Terrestrial FSO and Satellite to Base Station FSO Links. Technologies such as machine learning and deep learning show promise, but require further research. Pointing error is another area where technologies being developed for LEOS links, could help terrestrial FSO development.


FSO is forecast to outpace space FSO, even as that market ramps up.


However, there are many elements to FSO and that graphic doesn't show is what elements of terrestrial FSO are in play. The graphic below, from markets and markets, show that Mobile Backhaul is a significant element.

celtic_oz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVJHzqk85JA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpyTLhP2iu4

celtic_oz

Sorry to bombard the thread with video, but there are reports of speeds hitting 400mbs (UK user below )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PDicWV4qdc

joe123

There's also reports over on the reddit forum of people in the Uk of not hitting over 5Mb.

Promising though to hear better speeds.

listermint

celtic_oz wrote: »

Sorry to bombard the thread with video, but there are reports of speeds hitting 400mbs (UK user below )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PDicWV4qdc

I've reports of my imagine hitting 262mb, it's just not consistent.

celtic_oz

It's consistency is yet to be proven.

Much like an electric car company or a private rocket company 10 years ago.

listermint

celtic_oz wrote: »

It's consistency is yet to be proven.

Much like an electric car company or a private rocket company 10 years ago.

True but it's not a broadband company it's creating a network to support its electric vehicles and perhaps remote driving etc. The provision of internet to early customers merely allows that main goal to be in some part subsidized.

celtic_oz

listermint wrote: »

True but it's not a broadband company .

Irrelevant

The starlink IPO is widely anticipated, and selling broadband will be its primary play.

Anyhow whats your point the Tesla car company now has a bustling power storage play which not its not its primary focus "Tesla’s TTM Energy Revenue Soared Beyond $2 Billion"
I'm sure those customers are not worried about Teslas cars, each product stands on its own and will be judged accordingly

Orebro

Bit of a reality check for those with high expectations for Starlink or those that are pushing it hard against NBP: https://www.theverge.com/22435030/starlink-satellite-internet-spacex-review

con747

Not a reality check if your getting existing speeds of less than 3mbs download like me, plenty out there in the same situation would love speeds in excess of 20-30mbs never mind in the hundreds!

Orebro

con747 wrote: »

Not a reality check if your getting existing speeds of less than 3mbs download like me, plenty out there in the same situation would love speeds in excess of 20-30mbs never mind in the hundreds!

Nothing stopping you getting Starlink if you want it!

con747

Orebro wrote: »

Nothing stopping you getting Starlink if you want it!

Never said there was.

celtic_oz

Orebro wrote: »

Bit of a reality check for those with high expectations for Starlink or those that are pushing it hard against NBP: https://www.theverge.com/22435030/starlink-satellite-internet-spacex-review

Good independent review.

Personally very disappointed if video conferencing is a no go even in the early stages. I'm hopeful that these are beta ( better than nothing ) glitches and consistent low latency is achievable.

Darc19

celtic_oz wrote: »

It's consistency is yet to be proven.

Much like an electric car company or a private rocket company 10 years ago.

Elon Musk is a major shareholder in Stripe, so of course it's a glowing review.

It is a great option for those inaccessible areas. North America in particular has many areas that have no broadband, so a half decent service will be superb for them

Messer1

Orebro wrote: »

Bit of a reality check for those with high expectations for Starlink or those that are pushing it hard against NBP: https://www.theverge.com/22435030/starlink-satellite-internet-spacex-review

"I have my dish 60 feet away from my house with clear views of the sky, and it is still obstructed for two hours a day because of the very top of my house and the trees behind it. If this wasn’t a short-term review, I would certainly have it mounted on a pole on top of the structure."
Clearly, a poorly located antenna. Not surprised that he got an erratic performance. Next time, put it on the roof!

Pique

Messer1 wrote: »

"I have my dish 60 feet away from my house with clear views of the sky, and it is still obstructed for two hours a day because of the very top of my house and the trees behind it. If this wasn’t a short-term review, I would certainly have it mounted on a pole on top of the structure."
Clearly, a poorly located antenna. Not surprised that he got an erratic performance. Next time, put it on the roof!

He also says
" I encourage you to square the advice to mount the dish as high as possible with the Starlink team’s further recommendation to bring ol’ Dishy inside in high wind conditions. Keep that ladder handy."

clohamon

"'Who polices the heavens?': Irish astronomers frustrated by Elon Musk's satellites" - video

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/who-polices-the-heavens-irish-astronomers-frustrated-by-elon-musk-s-satellites-1.4566389

limnam

Lad having a crack off the verge review

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DiU8EzNBEgo

heavydawson

Interesting read:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210510/08050146767/elon-musk-makes-it-clear-starlink-wont-have-capacity-to-disrupt-us-broadband.shtml

But for those who continue to think Starlink is going to truly disrupt the broken U.S. broadband market, here's a few quick numbers. Up to 42 million Americans lack access to any broadband whatsoever, be it wired or wireless. Another 83 million currently live under a broadband monopoly, usually Comcast. Tens of millions more live under a broadband duopoly, which usually consists of Comcast and some regional phone company that stopped caring about upgrading its DSL networks sometime around 2005 or so. This regional monopolization directly results in spotty, expensive, sometimes sluggish service.

In contrast, SpaceX and Musk say that the 500,000 users will probably get the service they've pre-ordered. But Musk noted last week that as the company begins to push into the several million connection territory, things will likely get tricky. Particularly in more dense areas where capacity constraints will continue to be a big problem, much like existing higher-orbit satellite offerings.

Wall Street analysts recently predicted that even with Starlink's projected max deployment of about 12,000 low-orbit satellites, it's still only going to serve somewhere between 300,000 to 800,000 households, or less than 1% of the US market. And while over time analysts estimated that it could scale to about 6 million subscribers, that's still a fairly small dent in a very large US broadband problem. And at $600 for the first month of service, it's still out of range for many for whom broadband affordability is the real impediment to reliable access.

It's also still not entirely clear what kind of network limitations we'll see on a fully-loaded commercial Starlink network in the post net neutrality era. The company initially won't want to impose too many draconian limits (like caps, overage fees, or heavy-handed throttling) in order to lure in new subscribers. But as the network gets congested and runs into the unnegotiable limitations of physics, it seems inevitable we'll see more and more restrictions of this type, once again making it clear that wireless and satellite offerings are still no substitute for future-proof technologies like fiber.

Again, if you can afford the $600 first month payment, can actually secure a pre-order, and have no other options, it's very likely that Starlink will be a godsend regardless of where on the planet you live. It will also probably be helpful for those interested in getting portable access when camping, driving around in an RV, or in the middle of the ocean. But even the normally hype-prone Musk is making it abundantly clear that those expecting a major U.S. broadband market disruption shouldn't hold their breath.

babelfish1990

heavydawson wrote: »

Interesting read:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210510/08050146767/elon-musk-makes-it-clear-starlink-wont-have-capacity-to-disrupt-us-broadband.shtml

Excellent article - very well written. Starlink is a very credible technology, and Musk has a track record of making these complex technology projects work. However, it's all about the capacity. Starlink will be a huge success as a business, but will only ever serve a tiny fraction of desperate customers who will likely have to pay high prices for severely throttled services vs fibre, to avoid the system becoming congested. Anyone who doesn't get this hasn't done the sums.