As fibre is used underground I don't think there is much risk of
disturbance, leaving aside earthquakes and plumbers.
When it is damaged they splice it.
The only problem that I see is as the capacity is so high, there were
only two fibres running up the North coast of NSW and both crossed the
same bridge at Telegraph Point.
When a break does occur it usually has widespread interuption.

Yet for day to day operation it is successful.
Still radio is good for data, but should NEVER be used for fixed
location operations, excepting impossible geographical locations.
I think the use of the analogue TV channels would be a waste of
spectrum for other than mobile data internet.

Bazz,

For the short runs to the houses, CAT6e is cheaper, easier to run, more robust, takes speeds up to 1000Mb/s and can power telephones, thus removing the need for battery back up.

Until anyone can answer this, the NBN fiber to houses remains a joke.

ShadMin; I presume you mean from the street into the house.
Yes I agree, but I don't think that is their plan.

What I object to is the miracle applications that are claimed.
Such as the latest; recovering patients could be at home with 100 Mbit fibre.
What a load of rubbish, if they need such intense monitoring they should
be in the Intense Recovery ward.
Would you risk your life on such a setup ?
Hospitals in regional areas might need 100 Mbits to send High
Definition Xrays to city specialists. The fibre will probably already
be in most regional towns anyway. If not it should be done first.
However not every premises in every town would need it.

It all sounds like snake oil salesman to me.

Agreed.

Complete BS.

Even the OECD warns against the NBN.