Thread: 100% NZ mobile coverage via SpaceX Starlink

Originally Posted by Happy Jack

Its a great idea but one I refuse to use anything Vodacrap and two Musk is a jerk and so is not getting my money. Apart from that its still a great idea and I hear other networks are in discussion with other sat companies. Coverage in the back country is a moot point I always have my phone on airplane mode to save battery and the Topo works on plane mode, for accidents I have a PLB. Wife knows I can't be contacted and is ok with that.

Other companies will have nothing at all like Starlink in the near future or late future for that matter

À plb last 5 years. A star link subscription for five years is a lot more. For those who do not want to be glueD to their phone while in the bush

Originally Posted by Friwi

À plb last 5 years. A star link subscription for five years is a lot more

It will NOT replace need for a PLB but this is the key bit why it might be a useful replacement to a inReach for additional emergency comms
The three mobile network providers already have a mutual arrangement to enable each others’ customers to contact emergency services over their cellular networks in situations where one of those is out of action.

$159/month, you've got to be joking. Although I can see the attraction for remote rural where alternatives like Farmside for example is also expensive.
I won't be buying Starlink (or a Tesla) anytime soon.

We bought Starlink over a year ago for our off grid block. 10km to cell coverage. Best money I have spent on electronic stuff ever. Simple to put together, simple to turn on, and it sure beats the hell out of any other Internet provider I've used in the backcountry. we can have 3 devices going, and watching Netflix and its almost instantaneous. Never had that good a service ever!

I'd buy Starlink if I was spending time on a boat around NZ, the amount of weather information available online is brilliant! to access this when out at sea would be great!

Originally Posted by zimmer

$159/month, you've got to be joking. Although I can see the attraction for remote rural where alternatives like Farmside for example is also expensive.
I won't be buying Starlink (or a Tesla) anytime soon.

Bog standard 4G Ruralnet is almost that and it's Gb-limited to I think 300Gb max on the plans. But 4G dies in the bum with network congestion, hence why the companies are driving the push to satellite! It's comparable price wise but it actually works...

Originally Posted by MarkN

I'd buy Starlink if I was spending time on a boat around NZ, the amount of weather information available online is brilliant! to access this when out at sea would be great!

They are telling us you can't have marine while you're moving though. A bit of a limiting factor if you're running coastal!

Originally Posted by uk_exile

It will NOT replace need for a PLB but this is the key bit why it might be a useful replacement to a inReach for additional emergency comms
The three mobile network providers already have a mutual arrangement to enable each others’ customers to contact emergency services over their cellular networks in situations where one of those is out of action.

My wife was on a first aid course a while back and she related during the course about her being 2nd car on the scene to a bad car crash and how it was unfortunate being on a bit of road known for being a blank spot for cell phone coverage.
The guy running the course said it's always worth trying because an emergency call will put both your phone and any cell tower it can reach on maximum transmit power.
Obviously not really relevant in the bush but useful info for anyone who didn't already know this. (I'm assuming it's a fact of course)

Originally Posted by No.3

They are telling us you can't have marine while you're moving though. A bit of a limiting factor if you're running coastal!

Bugger!

Originally Posted by csmiffy

Don't know about coverage per se, but phones do t have thr punch they used to have.
Bit like walkie talkies.
Back in the day there weren't so many towers about. As such they had to be grunting to reach them.
Now there are heaps of towers the phones aren't designed to go as far.
I think that is the case from a couple of conversations quite a fee years ago.
Won't be offended if proven wrong

Lower frequency waves/lower bandwidth have both a lower user capacity and less capacity for individual data transfer. The lower frequency radio waves have a better range and less distortion/loss.

As cellphone use has grown and data speed increased higher frequency networks have been adopted and as such individual tower range is lower.

was contemplating this the other day...IF they manage to achive what they claiming and do get a 99% coverage area,it will just about render two way radios obsolete other than the cost factor of using one and during power outage.

Ha ha https://gizmodo.com/spacexs-next-gen...lli-1850299668

Originally Posted by dannyb

They continued billing us for nearly 12 months after we switched providers after promises to provide us with fibre went unfulfilled for nearly a year.
We were not on a contract had been with them for several years, they kept sending us a bill every month and every month despite wasting hours of my life talking to supervisors and managers being assured I would not receive another bill for a service that was no longer being provided, only to receive a bill the next month and start the cycle of call centre in some far away land to eventually be put through to the next supervisor/Manager once again promised all would be sorted.....this absolute cluster went on for a year, I even resorted to sending them invoices for my time which was literally hours every month, they never paid not surprising.
This was finally sorted when I started publishing their emails on their fb page showing the utter incompetence of their call centre staff.

in the end got a call from someone in NZ and an apology but yeah it would be a hard pill to swallow to go back to them.

I had exactly the same experience with voda, DannyB, They are as useless as tits on a bull and arrogant to boot.

Originally Posted by Ned

My wife was on a first aid course a while back and she related during the course about her being 2nd car on the scene to a bad car crash and how it was unfortunate being on a bit of road known for being a blank spot for cell phone coverage.
The guy running the course said it's always worth trying because an emergency call will put both your phone and any cell tower it can reach on maximum transmit power.
Obviously not really relevant in the bush but useful info for anyone who didn't already know this. (I'm assuming it's a fact of course)

Good to know

I used to live in a patchy coverage area and a text would often make it through where a voice call wouldn't - but that was 20 plus years ago...