Fraudband

[Jovial_Monk]

Fraudband cannot be rolled out due to cable, pit and pipe limitations:

This is when Matt really stepped up & found this gem inside Telstra’s own documentation hosted by the ACCC:

3.1.1 Transmission Limit Considerations

The only cable gauges installed in the network today are listed below;

The smallest gauge cable, 0.32mm, has inadequate transmission properties for normal urban use so is only used in areas where there is limited housing capacity and a short loop length requirement to the customer. In this model, 0.32mm cable would only be used in a CBD environment as sufficient duct space would be created in urban areas to install standard cable sizes.Access Network Dimensioning Rules Page 5 of 14

The 0.40mm gauge cable is the cable of choice in urban areas. In practice, it should be the heaviest cable gauge installed into the urban network today as network beyond the transmission limits of that cable should be on a fibre fed technology. For the purpose of this model, 0.64mm gauge cable may be used in urban areas to reach customers in DA’s which are currently fed by cable but are beyond 0.40mm transmission limits.
The heavier gauge cables are most often used in Rural and Remote areas. Of these, 0.64mm is currently the most widely used and is often used beyond its stated transmission limit, with voice levels maintained by utilising loading coils and additional active gain devices. 0.90mm cable was used in the rural and remote environments in the past for customers having excessive distance from the communications building, in recent times 0.64mm cable with active gain devices has mostly replaced 0.90mm cable.

Well, there you have it, Telstra’s own design documentation stating that in urban areas 0.40mm & 0.32mm copper are the most common used. 0.64 copper is most widely used in “Rural & Remote” areas: read, covered by Wireless under the NBN.

This would mean that in areas with 0.40mm & 0.32mm copper you’d need a cabinet every 300m to 500m (MAX) down the cable run, along a street this could be as close as every 100m depending on the cable run. This would mean millions of cabinets, yes, millions, with only a few lines attached. We’re talking in the region of 4 to 10 lines per cabinet. Once the cost of the cabinet & ISAM are factored in, this takes the cost of deploying FTTN way over the Coalition’s claimed ~$30b build target.

The other option is to rip up all the 0.40mm & 0.32mm copper & replace it with 0.64mm copper right? Well, not if Mal is to believed when he states that the LNP will not need to touch as much pit & pipe. To install thicker cable, you first need to rip up the pit & pipe to install thicker pipe, bigger pits & wider turns in the cable run (as per section 3.1.1.2):

If a heavy gauge cable is required to be used in the urban model, it shall be used as the last section of Feeder cable before the pillar. In this location the thicker and heavier cable can be accommodated in the 100mm conduit and larger pits or manholes contained in the feeder network more easily than it could be in the distribution network. In addition, placement at the farthest portion of the main segment avoids the cable congestion that would occur closer to the exchange.

0.64mm cable is not to be used in the Distribution Network except in the rare circumstances where transmission performance cannot be met otherwise, as all pipe and pit sizes would need to be increased to accommodate the larger cable size and bending radius of the heavier cable.

So that settles it, bringing cable up to spec for VDSL2 is something Telstra would only do in the “rare circumstances where transmission performance cannot be met otherwise”, not as part & parcel of deploying an FTTN network. The main reason is cost, the bigger the cable, the more kg/km, the bigger the pit & pipe, the more work required to get it into the ground.

Sure, Mal has said he’d do remediation on copper that’s not up to scratch, however he hasn’t explained how he’ll fit 0.64mm copper down pipe designed for 0.40mm or 0.32mm copper. In an 100 pair cable (most pillars have a few of these feeding streets) the differences can be in the order of centimetres when you include the larger insulation, bigger twists (all pairs are twisted) & the bigger shielding jacket required for thicker gauge wires.

http://sortius-is-a-geek.com/?p=3187" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No broadband policy, no AS policy. How do the LNP expect to win?

[IQS.RLOW]

FTTN will still be cheaper and more than adequate for 99.9999%

Stop wasting my fucking money you syphilitic money sponge pensioner.

[Jovial_Monk]

FTTN is not possible with the copper that is in place right now. Not without a node every 300 metres along every street—the power requirements alone would be horrendous.

Nope, Fraudband is just the 20th or 21st LNP broadband policy that will never be acted upon!

[Rorschach]

You realise of course that the argument has always been one primarily about cost.
The financial cost of FTTP, the cost in time of implementation, the cost to those who do not need it and will never use it, the cost to locking us into a specific technology in a field where technical advances occur almost daily.

In your most oft quoted website Delimiter...

Like mindless junkies scrabbling for their latest fix, the virulent community of pro-NBN extremists in Australia’s technology sector will do or say almost anything to prove the Coalition’s NBN policy to be completely worthless, despite the fact that it shares most of its fundamental principles with Labor’s own superior broadband vision.

In short, the Coalition has chosen a very similar mix of technologies to deploy its version of the NBN as Labor has. The most remote communities will still be served by NBN Co’s satellite access, regional communities will be served by fixed wireless infrastructure, and fibre will be deployed throughout Australia’s larger population areas. As with Labor’s policy, the mix has been chosen based on cost factors. It is simply not economical to reach many rural areas of Australia with fibre-based broadband; a fact universally acknowledged by both sides of politics.

You can argue the specifics until the cows come home, but it remains true that there are substantial international precedents for both fibre models being proposed in Australia. Labor can take heart from the fact that Asian countries such as Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea have already deployed fibre to the premises nationally. And the Coalition has been able to successfully argue that fibre to the node infrastructure is common throughout Europe and the Americas.

However, unfortunately there remains a segment of the population which remains completely unwilling to accept that the Coalition’s proposal has any merit whatsoever.

Re another of your oft quoted sources; (Keiran Cummings) Sortius.

The issue I have with Cummings’ article is that it is completely one-sided. I listened to the debate (you can read a transcript here), as I have hundreds of other speeches and debates involving the two NBN spokesmen over the past several years. And I found it quite evenly balanced. Both Conroy and Turnbull were able to score points in it, reflecting the relative advantages of their parties’ differing policies. Conroy was obviously at home on the technical advantages of the Labor NBN, but Turnbull is also correct in that Labor hasn’t been as good as its promises on delivering the NBN infrastructure, leaving a space for the Coalition’s argument that its FTTN solution could be rolled out more quickly. And by the way, this isn’t a controversial claim: Even NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley has acknowledged that FTTN infrastructure is significantly faster to deploy.

But if you read Cumming’s article, you don’t get a sense of the complexity and well-established nature of the debate. What you get is a series of nitpicks with respect to Turnbull’s specific claims about the technical capabilities of FTTN with respect to Telstra’s existing copper network, coupled with praise for Conroy’s “great restraint”, to the extent that the Communications Minister didn’t go completely over the top in damning Turnbull, who Cummings labelled as “a total arse” building a NBN policy on “lies”. The irony that it was only last week that Cummings was ranting about the shortcomings of Australia’s technology journalists in covering issues such as the NBN appears to have been lost on the commentator. You don’t achieve quality journalism by unashamedly backing one side.

Funny you never speak of this article... or take on board the factual points made by the other side of the debate.
How many times have I told you again and again about the biased articles and opinions you present. About the lack of knowledge you show. About the fact that you need to listen to both sides of the argument. How many years have delimiter not acknowledged this? Finally... finally they have admitted it.

[Rorschach]

This link to a blog site which uses a comment on the Delimiter site to frame some issues with the NBN...

http://jimboot.com/the-nbn-is-a-bad-idea" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I guess you either don't believe or never read this comment eh Monk.

[Rorschach]

No broadband policy, no AS policy. How do the LNP expect to win?

I keep telling you.... outright lies do nothing for your credibility.

[Jovial_Monk]

The wire gauge most commonly installed just precludes FTTN unless nodes are 2-300 metres apart. Not gonna happen. Fortunately, the Libs are busy losing the Unloseable Election™ Mk 2 so Fraudband will just slide into history, as it deserves to.

[Super Nova]

The wire gauge most commonly installed just precludes FTTN unless nodes are 2-300 metres apart. Not gonna happen. Fortunately, the Libs are busy losing the Unloseable Election™ Mk 2 so Fraudband will just slide into history, as it deserves to.

Your ruthless promotion of waste and lack of understanding of the future combined with making a large bet on a technological solution to take fibre to nearly every home further confirms your lack of appreciate for ROI and spending money wisely.

Luckily for you your contribution to societies finances is over and you are just a drain on the public purse so anything that comes for nothing to improve your network surfing capacities is something you support. You don't care as long as it something extra for your own selfish desires. It is people like you that ruin the future for the next generation. Invest now in another white elephant. Who cares, no my problem, future generations can pay for the current mistakes.

You have failed in you defence of this spending in all of your threads on this topic.

Even you copper is dead argument is bullshit.

If the libs lose the election it is because of the number of people who express personal greed without a capacity to earn a living has increased and want a free ride in life without paying for it. People like you.

[Jovial_Monk]

The copper CANNOT provide VDSL aka FTTN unless nodes are 2-300 metres apart!

BT’s FTTN rollout is full of problems and actual speeds are a long way short of promised speeds, and there the wire gauge is >.6mm unlike here.

Give me detailed arguments are stop gumming up useful threads! Maybe learn something about IT while you are at it!

[Super Nova]

The copper CANNOT provide VDSL aka FTTN unless nodes are 2-300 metres apart!

BT’s FTTN rollout is full of problems and actual speeds are a long way short of promised speeds, and there the wire gauge is >.6mm unlike here.

Give me detailed arguments are stop gumming up useful threads! Maybe learn something about IT while you are at it!

The key word there dickhead is "promised".

Wake-up you idiot.