Subsea Cables & Internet Infrastructure

Nordunet's cost estimates are way off base. It is not a 200 million Euro project, but a half billion Euro project. It would require a special cable ship designed for Arctic climates together with two icebreakers to be on the safe side. The proposed paths are as long as many non-Arctic cables whose construction costs were in the $200 million to $300 million range. But those projects did not require specially designed cable ships nor icebreakers for deployment or for the necessary geophysical survey undertaken before construction. The cable would probably be double armoured and the design phase costs alone probably twice the norm.  So it is a given that upfront costs will be extraordinarily high. And here is the dagger in the heart: ice scouring. Floating glaciers scrape the bottom of the sea floor in the Arctic coastal areas. One or two meter burial won't be enough for the Northwest passage route raising the cost. But going deeper for burial may require special equipment or not...

The EU recently gave 6 million Euros to the Northern European Polar Connect Initiative which aims to build a subsea cable connecting Japan to Europe via the Far North. See the map below for routing. NorduNet is a network linking universities and research organizations in the five Nordic countries of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Sweden, and Norway. It is taking the lead on this project which is looking at two alternatives routes to reach Asia. One route would be via the North Pole and the other via the Northwest Passage. This would give Europe access to Asia without traversing the US or Canada and hence offer better privacy and more secure communication as well much lower latency. Because the proposed paths are highly diverse to the usual suspects of Atlantic cables landing in Canada or the US, they might be attractive for resiliency purposes. One can imagine carriers splitting their traffic between the Polar routes and the more traditional cross-US routes for Pacific/European traffic. C...

EXA has emerged as the dominant player on the Atlantic routes. Its original subsea network consisted of the the highly diverse North and South Hibernia cables complemented by the much faster and younger Express cable.  North EXA cable was RFS 2001. It connects London & New York via landings highly diverse to its competitors. North lands in Canada at Halifax and at Southport, UK. In contrast, most Atlantic cables land near New York City and in Cornwall near Bude. North's diversity makes it an excellent choice for network planners focusing on resiliency. Obviously, the cable's latency is high, but that is generally the tradeoff one must accept to achieve physical diversity. I think the RTD 60 Hudson/Telehouse London is probably 76 ms. dfs South EXA cable was also RFS 2001. It lands at the same CLS as North on both sides of the Atlantic. I believe the latency is slightly higher.  Express was built much later (RFS 2015). It is designed to be the lowest latency path f...

Type of Cable System: Spatial Division Multiplexing.  Consortium Members: Amazon, Facebook, Keppel, and Telin. Construction Status: Behind schedule due to permitting delays for Indonesian waters.  Number of Fibre Pairs: Main trunk has 12. Some branches have 6.  Estimated RFS: 1st or 2nd quarter 2025. Day One Aggregate Throughput: 125 Tbps.  Salient Features: First low latency, three digit terabit cable between Singapore and USA.  Bifrost is the name of the burning rainbow bridge that connects Earth to the Realm of the Gods in Norse mythology. This new 12 fibre pair system is a wide lane digital bridge between Southeast Asia and North America (lands in the US and Mexico). It is the first direct single subsea cable solution connecting Singapore, Indonesia, and Philippines to North America that does not touch China or Hong Kong. The key consortium members include Facebook, Telin, Keppel (a new subsea player providing the Singapore landing), and Amazon. Singtel has ...

Besides Scylla  and Zeus , Crosslake's CrossChannel is the only other new English Channel cable built in the last 20 years. There was a 1998-2002 subsea construction boom and in wake of the subsequent capacity glut affecting the Atlantic and Europe, all further building ceased until the last 5 years. Scylla and CrossChannel are similar in many respects : unrepeatered 96 fibre pair double armoured cables owned by private operators as opposed to consortiums and both backed by infrastructure funds. The consortium model is less common in North America and Europe because there are fewer barriers to entry such as monopoly or semi-deregulated telecom markets. So including the incumbents in order to facilitate landing a subsea cable is unnecessary. It is interesting that all three cables are unrepeatered. Prior to their construction, most or all of the English Channel cables were low fibre count, repeatered networks. I suspect improvements in fibre purity and more importantly coherent opti...