• CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Why ask if you won’t accept the answer?

    I found this https://krg.ca/en-CA/assets/Council/2024/May/EAUFON.pdf which includes the terrestrial uplinks that do in fact exist.

    Wireless has really limited range at high speeds. It needs to be high frequency to handle high speeds and high frequency is interrupted by mist, to say nothing of snow or rain, and high frequency also must be line of sight and simply doesn’t cover much distance. They would need to put up a tower roughly 1/4 as often as a wire carrying pole for much less reliability and much less capacity. Wireless is almost never the correct answer to a fixed connection.

    • Karmanopoly@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      4 days ago

      Thanks for finding that …it’s funny that part of their plan is these cable…plus star link

      • Sewerking@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        4 days ago

        Redundancy is almost always a good thing. If something goes wrong with one form, they have the backup while they fix it.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Arguably the suspicious cables aren’t on the public maps.

        It’s a little confusing but I think that they are putting a starlink ground station there to offset some of the cost of the fibre network, and until fiber is finished, people can use starlink.

        It’s really unfortunate that musk owns Starlink, but this remote community proves that fibre is a reasonable option if there’s emphasis put on it. Wireless should be a last resort and satellite should be well behind that.