NBN Satellites cost us $620 million WTF ?
 

TWO satellites worth a total of $620 million will be launched by 2015 to provide high-speed internet to Australia's remote areas.

NBN Co is the federal government-owned enterprise charged with rolling out fibre optic cable broadband to 93 per cent of Australia's 13 million homes, schools and businesses by 2021.

Fixed wireless technology will provide high-speed internet to four per cent of premises and the remaining three per cent will be supplied by satellite technology to remote areas.

Senator Stephen Conroy said Australians were a step closer to fast and affordable broadband services.

[B]"This will ensure high speed broadband is delivered to Australia's remotest towns, such as Calvert in the Northern Territory and Bandya in Western Australia," he said in a statement.[/B]

Mr Quigley said the satellites were designed to deliver initial peak speeds of 12 megabytes download and one megabyte upload.

"It will be possible for retail service providers to offer services to homes and businesses in the satellite footprint that are as good or better than the services many city people currently experience," he said.

Space Systems/Loral president John Celli said the two companies shared a commitment to the highest quality performance.

"We're delighted to play a part in helping to deliver much-needed hi-speed broadband communities in regional and remote areas," he said.

I will shocked if there is even a computer in the towns of Bandya or Calvert. Any residents there will be sleeping on the ground or amongst burned out vehicles in a camp with no running water or electricity FFS.

I would bet my last dollar Senator Conroy has never even been to either of those areas. $620 million of tax payers money to buy Yank satellites that will give high speed broadband to 3% of the most remotes area of Australia is an absolute joke. :mad:

^ why is it an absolute joke?

That may seem like a troll question but can you justify why it is a joke?

I actually see no problem with this, what would it cost dig trenches to every house out there and lay cables?

The way i see it they should be doing this, even though it is only for 3% of the population, it is 3% of Australias population not Rwanda's (nothing against 3rd world countries)

I have been to Bandya WA which is closest to Laverton WA. I promise you there is nobody out there needing broadband but they do need some help with keeping the diesel gensets running and the natives away from the petrol bowser. The people living there are not carrying around laptops either.

taken from Wika search

Calvert River
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Calvert River
Mouth Gulf of Carpentaria
Basin countries Australia
Avg. discharge 1000 Gl
Basin area 10,033 km2

The Calvert River is a river in the Northern Territory of Australia which flows into the Gulf of Carpentaria 150 km east of Borroloola, not far from the border with Queensland in the Gulf Coastal bioregion. Its annual outflow is about 1000 Gl. Before reaching the sea it flows through the Australian Wildlife Conservancy’s Pungalina-Seven Emu Sanctuary.
[edit] Catchment

The river’s catchment area is 10,033 km2. It contains no major towns and the population was 103 in 2001, 45% of whom are Aboriginal people. The river is not dammed, nor used for irrigation. The main economic activity is cattle grazing.[1][2]
[edit] References

1. ^ Australian Government, Bureau of Rural Sciences: Calvert River Basin summary
2. ^ TRaCK: Calvert River profile

I think Dave is just upset at the way this government is happy to pour money into the NBN whilst other sectors are being left.

The $620m sounds high, but that equates to $1589 per home for the 3% using the satellites (assuming all homes get connected). Still a better investment than KRudd's $900 fun money.

What I find interesting is they mention only 12mbps down and 1mbps up. Given that 4G is a lot faster than that, I would have expected more with new generation satellite.

Its one thing to spend money if you have it but its entirely another when you don't.
The governments propensity to spend money we dont have is breathtaking and this is just another example.

You're just an angry man Dave.

IMO its a rare step in the right direction in catching up with the rest of the developed world and the cheapest way to do it considering our vastness.

[QUOTE=American Dave;650621]Its one thing to spend money if you have it but its entirely another when you don't.
The governments propensity to spend money we dont have is breathtaking and this is just another example.[/QUOTE]

Pay cash for your house? 99.98% of us use credit for large purchases, why would the government be any different? I dont see a problem with spending $620m to reach 3% of the remote population out of $40b spend.

go to Laverton and see what they lack out there.....high speed broadband is way down this I reckon...