Concrete time frames for undersea cable

An interesting upbeat article.

The operational deadline for the SEACOM cable is 30 June 2009.
Click to expand...

Pity it's still so long away, but still cause for hope that we're not doomed to forever be in the broadband backwaters. (And it's no surprise that both the NEPAD and Infraco cables are looking more dead in the water every day.)
 
Dead in the water indeed...good pun.

The article mentions the time consuming aspects of regulatory delays etc. I think this is the crux of the matter: Regulation is stifling new cable prospects. All the other aspects like cable manufacture, survey, laying etc will just happen if the project is given the go (which thankfully it seems like it has) But the years it took to get here is just mind blowing.
 
Shocking, politics holding South Africa back...noooo...wow, I didn't realise that...:rolleyes:
 
I just wonder how far they are with the surveying of the seabed, as they said that takes up to 18months :eek:
 
Concrete time frames for undersea cable

Talking of concrete...can't we just place Poison Ivy's feet in some and use her to weigh down the cable? :D
 
The SEACOM project has moved relatively tirelessly but it will still have taken a full four years to be completed, raising questions as to whether other systems like InfraCo – a project that has been marred by political wranglings – have set realistic time frames.
Click to expand...

It would appear not... And the key word is 'political', the timescales have little to do with reality, rather more to do with political manoevering and wishful thinking. I'm sure that our esteemed politards do actually want South Africa to succeed (if for no other reason than to keep the 'facilitation fees' flowing into their businesses), and BB cables will be part of that success.

But hey, when has the reality influenced the marketing and sales literature?:D
 
In our favour, government has got a huge stick beating them and that is 2010.
If they want to save face like all govments do, they will ensure that there is sufficient bandwidth for FIFA.
The only concern, is at what expense. We that tax payer could well fit the bill to establish a network because of they are dragging their heals now.
 
Another reason why private sector >> public sector, if given the chance.
getafix33 said:
The only concern, is at what expense. We that tax payer could well fit the bill to establish a network because of they are dragging their heals now.
Click to expand...
I'd rather fit the bill for bandwidth than the renaming of streets, airports and cities :)
 
During the World Cup in Germany ... 2 of the 5 (yes five!) undersea cables failed during the competition at one stage. I read that in Africa Communications and an article relating to the need for sea cables. :(

It makes no difference whether SAT3 can handle a 1000 TB's per second! Cables fail! It happens. Specially when they being used in ways they wouldn't normally be used. Which is exactly why alternate undersea cables are so badly needed.

I cannot for the life of me understand how Gov. are so layed-back with this.
 
Cable?

Why should the cable be different then the SNO?
 
Will these new cables offer lower international pings (like < 30 ms) or just bring down the cost of broadband?
 
Dont think it'll decrease the Lag to less that 30ms, ever (considering I get 40ms to a LOCAL server...)

just make bandwidth cheaper
 
hmmm, so does that mean I will never ever ever ever ever...be able to play FPS's on international servers? Incidently is that some sort of a physical constraint or what?
 
Kompete said:
hmmm, so does that mean I will never ever ever ever ever...be able to play FPS's on international servers? Incidently is that some sort of a physical constraint or what?
Click to expand...
Speed of light in a vacuum= 300,000km/s
Length of SEACOM=15,000km
Minimum round trip ping time=2*15,000/300,000=0.1s=100ms.

This excludes latency to the actual landing \ remote sites.

[Edit]
Should be a bit higher actually because light travels slower through fiber than through a vacuum...
 
Last edited:
I would not be surprised if the feasibility studies of one or more of the cable projects came back "negative" given the fact that other cables would also be laid. Could be a reason why govt suddenly brought ownership issues to the fore. In the end, all this causes more delay. IMHO, of the remaining undersea cables, only Eassy has a greater than 50% chance of being operational by 2010. Infraco and Nepad ICT project (they will probably be the same) will most likely only be operational in 2011 or 2012, or when they are proven to be feasible.
 
Rkootknir said:
Speed of light in a vacuum= 300,000km/s
Length of SEACOM=15,000km
Minimum round trip ping time=2*15,000/300,000=0.1s=100ms.

This excludes latency to the actual landing remote sites.

[Edit]
Should be a bit higher actually because light travels slower through fiber than through a vacuum...
Click to expand...

wow...that sort of puts it into persepctive.

Also given that my local ping times are normally at least 30ms (and assuming the longest traveling distance is 1,500km JHB-CT, the theoretical achievable ping time should be about 10ms), I should reasonably adjust the theoretical ping time by a factor of 3...that means achieving a 300ms ping time on international servers (15,000km) is reasonable.

There goes my hopes of ever playing a decent FPS with my cousin in the UK :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X