CHOICE membership

The "Never Never Broadband Network" - NBN complaints



This is a government designed swing set, and analogous to the problem to fix the NBN. Where do you start?


Is that the original design or one that they said would be delivered sooner & cheaper and would meet the need for the foreseeable future?

Declare concussion a sport? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

Seriously, as with the NBN, begin with demolition. As I said, the final cost will be in the $100s of billions.


Got to ask if you are planning on selling wireless internet services for the interim?


We’re fast approaching the point, beyond which no wireless technology will meet the demand.

Sadly, they’ve made such a mess that much of the MTM is not fixable (nor upgradeable, if it comes to that). Replacement is the only option.


I guess I missed adding the :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


Lucky that new legislation isn’t in yet - you might have received a nasty letter by hitting a nerve like that :wink:


My home NBN is still a twinkle in some ones eye, or perhaps a satellite somewhere.

2020 seems so far away?


Everything’s all going to plan. Honest! :thinking: :roll_eyes:


From the prior referenced NBN plan:

“More than $1 billion investment in total capacity upgrades on the fixed wireless network up to FY22”

There are two ways to read this:
A/ existing FW towers are being upgraded to reduce congestion by giving all FW customers better service,
B/ NBN Co is adding more towers and cells to reach more customers on FW at the same 6Mps or better minimum speed every other FW customer is entitled to.

Which is most correct?

I suspect the second which is the added cost to the FW network to pick up all the marginal previously fixed line customers NBN Co dropped from FTTN to save costs of extra nodes or increased costs for FTTC.

It’s important to remember approx only 1 in 10 customers will be on FW or Satellite.


I would rephrase that as 1 in 10 customers are considered acceptable collateral damage by NBNCo and government. regardless of whether A or B


Made me happy you did!
So we do count, we are subject to damage, but it does not matter?
Slightly better than just being ignored.
I wish I lived in a marginal electorate again, instead of a safe LNP one.


But there’s no demand for fast Internet!


Here we go again:

That’s as much as it’s going to cost. Of course it is. :expressionless:


Are there any reliable speed measures available for FW? ACCC and Choice have none. If so what proportion are in fact congested?

My FW connection is reliable and fast. On a 25/5/plan I get consistently get 22-23/4.5 any time of day. I have no need of anything faster so I cannot say how that is. I know one case is not representative - that’s why I would like to see some figures.


What are your ping stats like?


Are there any reliable stat’s for anything connected with our NBN?

NBN Co admits to “under 500” out of “around 7000”. How reliable that is, I’ll leave for you to judge. They define “congested” as peak speeds less than 6Mb/s. That’s an improvement, it used to be 3Mb/s.

Indeed. Here’s a graph of some of my tests. It’s a 50/20 service on a tower that was first commissioned in January.

I’d like to test on other servers and incorporate things like ping and packet loss. One of these days, I might get around to it.


100 percent … :slight_smile:


34ms or thereabouts, seems to jump about


It would be interesting to see more detail. I wonder how much more useful these would be at an individual level as every tower, every cell on a tower and area has a different set of peformance variables. The one recent public report on FW performance had NBN Co stating towers that provided as little as 6Mbs were not considered congested or needing upgrade, while some towers had performance at peak times as low as 3Mps.

With the data the NBN Co and Telstra have access to it would be possible to see the performance at every tower, every cell and coverage area. With that data and some connected service maps and plans it might start to reveal useful information. No doubt this is not for our eyes to review?

It is not clear If there is any guarantee at present on FW performance other than 6Mps minimum NBN Co has advised is a threshold below which they will consider looking to upgrading towers selectively.

The plan for our area has approx 6 towers all interconnected by microwave to serve the area. There is no fibre connection between the towers. Some wiz might know the speed of the microwave links. I’m guessing they will actually be a bottle neck at peak times. This then will be more limiting than the individual cell capacity or customer conection speeds.

There is a long way to go yet with FW if you follow my next comment?

For FW 241 days and still waiting for a response?
I expect it will be another 500 days for the first packet?
Is 741 days a good ping result?

In the mean time we have super fast ADSL2 and 3G wireless at 20Mbs on a bad day to fall back on. A failure of FW to arrive at all may be a good thing.


Here is a near 1-year old Whirlpool discussion on FW w/speedtest results posted, still a Vsmall sample. @gordon is our resident satellite subscriber and I trust he will add his personal experiences, especially about the impact of 600+ms pings.