Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia

  • 52 Replies
  • 6070 Views
?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« on: September 05, 2011, 10:21:52 PM »
So there is this underwater fibre optic cable that is in the Indian Ocean called the SAFE cable system.
This is a cable built by a private company, Tyco Submarine Systems, and its furthest apart terminal ends are at Melkbosstrand and Penang.

According to the website, the total cable length is 13,500km.
Source: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (click on System Information)

The cable length (not geographical distance) from Melkbosstrand to Penang is 11,465 km according to the latency calculator.
Source: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (click on Configuration and enter Melkbosstrand and Penang at the bottom.)

Now, using the standard FE map, where longitude is like the angular coordinate and latitude is like the radial component (equator is half-way to the south rim from the north pole, lines of latitude are equally spaced. Assume earth radius of 20,000km, like the standard FAQ) I calculated the distance between the two cities.

Melkbosstrand is located at 33.723197S, 18.440552E
Penang is located at 5.274213N, 100.467224E

using the following python code, I estimated the distance between the two cities on the flat earth:
'''
import math

def toRad(x):
   return x*math.pi/180

lat1 = -33.723197
lon1 = 18.440552

lat2 = 5.274213
lon2 = 100.467224

dy = (1-lat1/90.0)*math.sin(toRad(lon1)) - (1-lat2/90.0)*math.sin(toRad(lon2))
dx = (1-lat1/90.0)*math.cos(toRad(lon1)) - (1-lat2/90.0)*math.cos(toRad(lon2))

print
print "FE distance: %i km"% int(10000*math.sqrt(dy**2+dx**2))
print
'''

My output was:
>FE distance: 15546 km

This is much further than the entire length of the cable system, and longer than the length of the cable between the two cities.
This FE distance is in fact, this is 4,081 km longer than the length of the cable connecting the cities.
To give you a feel for 4000 km, thats about going from Canada to Mexico and back.

This means that, on a flat earth, the cable would need to be a minimum of 35.6% longer than its true value, and practically longer since the cable is not a straight line; it curves.

There is absolutely no way the company could not notice that they were producing and laying more than 4000 extra km of cable, or even contain this knowledge to high management levels.

How can FE explain this?
« Last Edit: September 05, 2011, 10:28:27 PM by momentia »

*

CharlieF

  • 10
  • Pyramidal Earth believer
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2011, 11:48:00 PM »
Math? What is this math?

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #2 on: September 06, 2011, 02:21:07 AM »
Momentia, thank you for your effort.


Alas, this might prove to be the weak point:

"According to the website, the total cable length is 13,500km.
Source: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (click on System Information)"

In other words, we only have the SAFE people's word for it that the cable is 13,500. The beastly swines might deliberately be stating that their cable is shorter than it actually is.


Not to derail, but you quote latitude and longitude in your post. Is it not true that if you walked a fixed distance due east or west at latitudes nearer the poles of a round earth, your longitude would alter more than if you did this nearer the equator?

Surely if this is the cast, and can be seen to occur on both hemispheres, it would be evidence that the south as well as the north pole is a fixed point at which all lines of longitude meet.

I said "not to derail" but I have done so. My apologies.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2011, 02:26:24 AM »
Interesting. I will research the cost of their endeavour and see if there are any anomalies when I have more time. If there is any foul play there will be a discrepancy somewhere.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39541
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #4 on: September 06, 2011, 06:18:10 AM »
Math? What is this math?

Please refrain from low content posting in the discussion forums.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #5 on: September 06, 2011, 08:47:49 PM »
Alas, this might prove to be the weak point:

"According to the website, the total cable length is 13,500km.
Source: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (click on System Information)"

In other words, we only have the SAFE people's word for it that the cable is 13,500. The beastly swines might deliberately be stating that their cable is shorter than it actually is.

Hmm, so they're in on the Conspiracy too... LOL

?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #6 on: September 06, 2011, 10:30:50 PM »
Momentia, thank you for your effort.


Alas, this might prove to be the weak point:

"According to the website, the total cable length is 13,500km.
Source: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (click on System Information)"

In other words, we only have the SAFE people's word for it that the cable is 13,500. The beastly swines might deliberately be stating that their cable is shorter than it actually is.


Not to derail, but you quote latitude and longitude in your post. Is it not true that if you walked a fixed distance due east or west at latitudes nearer the poles of a round earth, your longitude would alter more than if you did this nearer the equator?

Surely if this is the cast, and can be seen to occur on both hemispheres, it would be evidence that the south as well as the north pole is a fixed point at which all lines of longitude meet.

I said "not to derail" but I have done so. My apologies.

Create a new thread for a new discussion.

Is there no FE answer other than a conspiracy of this private company to make over 4000 extra km (likely a lot more due to the path) of cable and then lie about it?
Without evidence, that is a pretty weak claim. I see no benefit for them to lie.

Also, if you can find a way to use the cable from wherever you live, you can run traceroute on a site on the other side of the cable and check the latency of the cable. I'm pretty sure that when the cable was installed, people were checking the latency. If it were way off, there would have been significant complaints. In short, it is possible to determine the rough length of the cable.

I'll let you think about it some more and come up with a better answer than conspiracy.

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #7 on: September 07, 2011, 12:24:41 PM »
Well, this is an interesting one. Could you please show us the path the cable follows?

?

Thork

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #8 on: September 07, 2011, 01:36:57 PM »

I like the boat from your site.

May I ask a few questions?

1) Do you know who the members of SAT3/WASC/SAFE Consortium are?
2) Please then explain why telecom companies who own 'satellites' are not on the Conspiracy list?
3) Why did you state that the cable length was 11465km? That was misinformation. The route length is supposed to be 11465km.
4) Please explain why 2 cables side by side have a discrepancy of 850km?
Quote from: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (system information page)
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SAT-3/WASC & SAFE SPECS to be laid side by side)
SAT-3/WASC
System length: 14,350km
SAFE
System length: 13,500km
4) If the distance on FE is 15,546km as you say, why did you say the discrepancy was 4,000km and make a Mexico Canada comparison? We are only 1200km short for the 14,350km cable. We already have unexplained discrepancies of 850km.
5) Most importantly, the shortest cable is 13,500km allegedly, to cover a route of 11,465km. May I assume the extra 2000km is to cover undulating terrain under the sea so the FE distance would need to be nearer 17,000km? However using their latency calculator they claim the time to be 57.32 milliseconds from Melkbosstrand to Penang.
The speed of light is 299,792 km/s. Speed x Time = Distance. 299,792 X 0.05732 = 17,184km. 2000km longer than the calculated FE distance for the route. Of course their customers would get ping times, so they have to match up. Their customers aren't going to measure the cable. Why are they telling their customers to expect Flat Earth times?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2011, 01:47:02 PM by Thork »

?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #9 on: September 07, 2011, 02:10:00 PM »

I like the boat from your site.

May I ask a few questions?

1) Do you know who the members of SAT3/WASC/SAFE Consortium are?
2) Please then explain why telecom companies who own 'satellites' are not on the Conspiracy list?
3) Why did you state that the cable length was 11465km? That was misinformation. The route length is supposed to be 11465km.
4) Please explain why 2 cables side by side have a discrepancy of 850km?
Quote from: http://www.safe-sat3.co.za/ (system information page)
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (SAT-3/WASC & SAFE SPECS to be laid side by side)
SAT-3/WASC
System length: 14,350km
SAFE
System length: 13,500km
4) If the distance on FE is 15,546km as you say, why did you say the discrepancy was 4,000km and make a Mexico Canada comparison? We are only 1200km short for the 14,350km cable. We already have unexplained discrepancies of 850km.
5) Most importantly, the shortest cable is 13,500km allegedly, to cover a route of 11,465km. May I assume the extra 2000km is to cover undulating terrain under the sea so the FE distance would need to be nearer 17,000km? However using their latency calculator they claim the time to be 57.32 milliseconds from Melkbosstrand to Penang.
The speed of light is 299,792 km/s. Speed x Time = Distance. 299,792 X 0.05732 = 17,184km. 2000km longer than the calculated FE distance for the route. Of course their customers would get ping times, so they have to match up. Their customers aren't going to measure the cable. Why are they telling their customers to expect Flat Earth times?

1) Tyco Submarine Systems (actually Tyco International)/AT&T built SAFE (others built SAT3/WASC, but I don't care about them).

2) Because of all the extra cable that would need to be made. Thats not an easy job, nor is it cheap.

3) Because thats the length of the route (cable) from Melkbosstrand to Penang. Not sure what you're getting at here.

4) The SPECS are being laid side by side, the CABLES are not:

Blue is SAFE.
Red is SAT-3/WASC.

4 part 2) I used the 11,465km distance of cable from Melkbosstrand to Penang figure. I thought I'd ignore unused branches to get a signal from Melkbosstrand to Penang. The Mexico Canada comparison was to show how absurdly long the extra cable would have to be (Canada to Mexico and back.)

5) a) 11,465km is only the cable distance from Melkbosstrand to Penang. There are branches on the cable. See above picture.
b) the speed of light is not the same in a vacuum as in a cable. it is 1.5-1.6 times slower (so, 10,740 to 11,456 km). The company probably has good fibre optics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_fiber#Index_of_refraction
In fact, that's part of the physics of optical fibres, that the speed of light is significantly slower in the core glass compared to the sheathing glass to cause total internal reflection.

"a good rule of thumb is that signal using optical fiber for communication will travel at around 200 million meters per second. Or to put it another way, to travel 1000 kilometers in fiber, the signal will take 5 milliseconds to propagate."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_fiber#Index_of_refraction
57.32/5 = 11464 km.


So, to recap, you're only real argument is the conspiracy one. That one is pretty silly.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2011, 02:15:24 PM by momentia »

?

Thork

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #10 on: September 07, 2011, 02:26:18 PM »
1) I think you will find Orange Madagascar, Mauritius Telecom, and France Telecom are amongst the investors.
2) So what? They can order from more than one supplier.
3) No, it is the alledged length of the route. It is not the cable distance. The cable is 13500km (apparently).
4a) I will accept. In that case we are only interested in the 13500km cable.
4b) Who says the branches are the difference? Is the cable pulled taught over the surface of the earth, of does it follow the sea bed up and down and round rocks etc?
5) If the cable is 13500km, how is the cable length 10,740-11456 km max according to ping times? The ping times are even shorter than the route distance. Something is wrong here.

?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #11 on: September 07, 2011, 02:48:05 PM »
1) I think you will find Orange Madagascar, Mauritius Telecom, and France Telecom are amongst the investors.
2) So what? They can order from more than one supplier.
3) No, it is the alledged length of the route. It is not the cable distance. The cable is 13500km (apparently).
4a) I will accept. In that case we are only interested in the 13500km cable.
4b) Who says the branches are the difference? Is the cable pulled taught over the surface of the earth, of does it follow the sea bed up and down and round rocks etc?
5) If the cable is 13500km, how is the cable length 10,740-11456 km max according to ping times? The ping times are even shorter than the route distance. Something is wrong here.

1) Ok, so more people investing and are expecting to see RE results and are watching how their money is spent.
2) More conspiracy.
3) See how the path branches on the map I put up, the sum length of ALL branches is 13500km. The length going along the cable from Melkbosstrand to Penang is 11465km (This excludes side branches.) (This is the length of the non-straight path that the cable takes, not RE geographical distance.)
4) The cable follows follow the sea bed up and down and round rocks etc. My point is that a straight line is the minimum theoretical distance on an FE, so the actual FE distance would be much longer than 15546 km. The branches are the extra distance between 11465km and 13500km. The terrain and path have already been accounted for in the 11465km calculation.
5) These are average values, not necessarily for all fibre optic cables. These are probably better and faster than average. I'd still go with: "a good rule of thumb is that signal using optical fiber for communication will travel at around 200 million meters per second. Or to put it another way, to travel 1000 kilometers in fiber, the signal will take 5 milliseconds to propagate."

?

Thork

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2011, 04:09:49 PM »
Was this done with your calculator?

I suggest you work on your FE calculator.
Oh wow, I feel silly now. My calculator is in km. I'll just change my post to reflect this.


I haven't seen any changes to your post to reflect this.

?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2011, 09:16:31 PM »
Was this done with your calculator?

I suggest you work on your FE calculator.
Oh wow, I feel silly now. My calculator is in km. I'll just change my post to reflect this.


I haven't seen any changes to your post to reflect this.
I did the calculations right in this post. The program outputted km, and in the other post I accidentally claimed the results were in miles. I fixed that in that post, and this post still stands.

Now, the official FE response is still bizarre conspiracy that can change the speed of light in cables to reflect RE latency times. I would appreciate a better explanation.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2011, 09:18:57 PM by momentia »

?

Thork

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #14 on: September 08, 2011, 01:44:13 AM »
I am still not happy with the calculator. From ENaG

Quote from: Mr Rowbotham in ENaG
Thus from purely practical data, setting all theories aside, it is ascertained that the diameter of the earth, from the Ross Mountains, or from the volcanic mountains of which Mount Erebus is the chief, to the same radius distance on the opposite side of the northern centre, is more than 10,400 miles; and the circumference, 52,800 statute miles.
. I have no idea why you thought the FAQ distance would be correct. We all hate the FAQ.

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #15 on: September 08, 2011, 02:05:18 AM »
Hmm. Can't seem to find any info on the overall cost of the programme. I would not be surprised if there were any 'unforeseen' cost overruns and spare cable purchases.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #16 on: September 08, 2011, 02:55:44 AM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17541
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #17 on: September 08, 2011, 03:24:39 AM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #18 on: September 08, 2011, 03:38:09 AM »
Even if they are payed by goverments, Bob, that will be an extra cost that obviously will be detected. Thatīs why economists exist
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #19 on: September 08, 2011, 04:27:00 AM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

Source?

BTW Tom, here is a source for undersea cable cost estimates from Stanford University, which estimates about $50,000 per km.
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

*

Conker

  • 1557
  • Official FES jerk / kneebiter
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #20 on: September 08, 2011, 04:29:37 AM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

Source?

BTW Tom, here is a source for undersea cable cost estimates from Stanford University, which estimates about $50,000 per km.

Thatīs what I said. Thanks for the source
This is not a joke society.
Quote from: OpenedEyes
You shouldn't be allowed to talk on a free discussion forum.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2011, 07:41:53 AM »
The role of this littoral cable as an article of globular propaganda is, as so often in the style of the Conspiracy, revealed by an unholy anagram.

Tyco's corporate motto ( http://www.tyco.com ) "A Vital Part of Your World", confers a secret message specifically about this very cable we are talking about, their raison d'etre - it spells "Ropy Littoral Vow: A Fraud".  Now "ropy" is clearly a play on words here, because the "rope" is the cable itself, but the measurements are clearly "ropy".
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2011, 08:03:11 AM »
The role of this littoral cable as an article of globular propaganda is, as so often in the style of the Conspiracy, revealed by an unholy anagram.

Tyco's corporate motto ( http://www.tyco.com ) "A Vital Part of Your World", confers a secret message specifically about this very cable we are talking about, their raison d'etre - it spells "Ropy Littoral Vow: A Fraud".  Now "ropy" is clearly a play on words here, because the "rope" is the cable itself, but the measurements are clearly "ropy".

The "A Vital Part of Your World" motto also anagrams to "Awful, dirt poor lavatory".

This is much less cryptic, surely?
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2011, 01:40:23 PM »
The role of this littoral cable as an article of globular propaganda is, as so often in the style of the Conspiracy, revealed by an unholy anagram.

Tyco's corporate motto ( http://www.tyco.com ) "A Vital Part of Your World", confers a secret message specifically about this very cable we are talking about, their raison d'etre - it spells "Ropy Littoral Vow: A Fraud".  Now "ropy" is clearly a play on words here, because the "rope" is the cable itself, but the measurements are clearly "ropy".

The only evidence anagrams provide is that you can rearrange the letters of a word to make something new.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2011, 01:41:56 PM by barrog »

?

Thork

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2011, 03:13:28 PM »
@momentia: I would still very much like the figures generated by your calculator now using Rowbotham's earth dimensions.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17541
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2011, 04:13:23 PM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

Source?

The fact that contractors charge for excess and overtime on a project is well documented.


?

momentia

  • 425
  • Light abhors a straight line.
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2011, 05:45:10 PM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

Source?

The fact that contractors charge for excess and overtime on a project is well documented.



But will try to put in as little cable as possible.

You still rely on a massive communication/travel conspiracy below the equator.
« Last Edit: September 08, 2011, 05:48:53 PM by momentia »

*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • Ding dong!
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #27 on: September 09, 2011, 12:33:10 AM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

Source?

The fact that contractors charge for excess and overtime on a project is well documented.

Source? (for undersea cable laying)
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

?

squevil

  • Official Member
  • 3184
  • Im Telling On You
Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2011, 03:11:40 AM »
With a super-fast Googleing, I found that Submarine Fiber-optic cable costs between $25000 and $50000 PER km. Do you really think any private company which itīs only moto is to earn money, will buy extra and expensive even for this kind of companies cable?
I donīt think so

Source for those figures? Maybe an experimental cable would cost that much, but undersea cable projects definitely don't run into the billions of dollars. The cost per km is much lower.

But even so, if the company needed more cable to complete the project then it will get it. The end of the cable sitting at the bottom of the sea isn't going to make them any money. They'll only get paid if the project is completed.

The private cable laying company is most often being contracted out by the government or a large telco. They'll add any excess to the bill. It's not coming out of their pocket.

Source?

The fact that contractors charge for excess and overtime on a project is well documented.

have you seen how the ships lay the cables? you cant just add an extra km if your a few short

?

Thork

Re: Underwater Cable Connecting South Africa and Malaysia
« Reply #29 on: September 09, 2011, 03:13:29 AM »
@momentia: I would still very much like the figures generated by your calculator now using Rowbotham's earth dimensions.