Undersea Cable Map Shows Where The Data Pipes Are 97
"Greg Mahlknecht has built a free map showing the world's submarine telecommunications cable systems. The map, which took Mahlknecht several months to complete, is free of charge and will remain so.'" (At least until it gets shut down as a security threat.)
Looks like the old telegraph maps (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
VERY interesting. Thanks for sharing that link. Aside from the new cables between the US and Asia, you're absolutely correct in that most of it is very similar.
Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
New Zealand's south island had telegraph but doesn't have broadband? Me thinks this new map is incomplete!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cable landing points are usually chosen in quiet areas: no shipping means less chance of some doofus dragging his anchor through the cable and causing the nautical equivalent to backhoe fade.
Guam and Hawaii are main structural differences (Score:1)
Anyone that can tap a line could build this map (Score:5, Informative)
Who is this Greg Mahlknecht? He's just a random guy doing this as a hobby, which means he has no particular propreitar/secret inside information from AT&T or some other. It would be trivially easy to anyone that has the resources to tap a underwater comms line to just build this map from the same source data, summarized as follows in TFA:
Mahlknecht has drawn his data from a variety of sources. “Wikipedia has a ‘submarine communications cables’ category and I used this as a starting point before going to each cable’s homepage and gathering alternative information."
Another note is that this data is very general. It's generally straight lines from landing to landing. You couldn't take this map or the KML data he's pulled together, send a submarine down straight from some point on the map and be able to spot the cable. It's going to take some work.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of them are pulled directly from GIS data and are probably accurate down to a few meters.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Who is this Greg Mahlknecht?
A guy who saw that there was a really cool poster that cost money, and decided to make himself a free version. Of course, had he asked the people who sold the poster, he might have found out they have an electronic copy available to download at no cost.
Ah well.
Re: (Score:1)
US Navy routinely tapped Soviet and likely still taps Russian Federation undersea communication cables.
This is the boat that most likely does it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Jimmy_Carter_(SSN-23) [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ivy_Bells [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Tubes (Score:5, Funny)
So it is a series of tubes. I knew it.
Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:2)
Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:4, Funny)
That is obviously where the secret UFO base is located.
Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_Undersea_Cable_System [wikipedia.org]
Its capacity is used by NASA, the United States Department of Defense, the European Space Agency, UNIS and others.
Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:5, Funny)
Up there? That's the department for keeping track of who's been naughty, and who's been nice.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You gotta figure the naughty proportion of the bandwidth is over 90%.
Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:4, Insightful)
just like the rest of the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:4, Informative)
Svalbard is an island in the Arctic Circle, with no permanent population.
There are over 2000 permanent residents [wikipedia.org] that disagree :)
Re: (Score:3)
And those residents need their porn. And lots of it!
It's not like they can go outside and not freeze to death or anything
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not quite ... including all the publically available information I can find (from that map and other sources), Australia's current international undersea capacity is comprised of:
JASURAUS – 5Gbit/s
SEA-ME-WE-3 – 960Gbit/s
PIPE-PACIFIC-1 – 1.92Tbit/s
AUSTRALIA-JAPAN-CABLE – 1Tbit/s
GONDWANA-1 – 640Gbit/s
SOUTHERN-CROSS – 2.4Tbit/s (2 paths, in a ring, 2x 1.2Tbit/s)
TELSTRA-ENDEAVOUR – 1.28Tb/s
Total capacity: 8.205 Tb/s
That capacity is not all lit either - it's enough for t
Re: (Score:3)
It explains everything in the Wikipedia link [wikipedia.org] shown right in the "More Information" section on the map...
"The earth/ground station on Svalbard is a key site for collecting remote sensing data from polar orbiting satellites, such as those from NOAA, due to its close proximity to the north pole."
But even if it was an easy answer, it was one I didn't know existed, so I'm glad you asked it ;)
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe the satellite station.
I was curious so did your searching ;)
per wikepedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotellneset):
"It is the location of Svalbard Airport, Longyear and the port for shipping of coal from Longyearbyen. Above Hotellneset is Platåberget, which is the location for Svalbard Satellite Station."
I guess that satelite station is one of the ground stations responsible for Gallileo system.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.rss.html?pid=37249
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite
Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (Score:4, Informative)
5TB does seem a bit excessive, but perhaps it handles a little bit more then just GPS. Or maybe they figured if they're running wires they might as well put room for growth?
The latter. Only 20 Gb/s is actually used - the rest is dark. But when you're running a 1300km stretch of cable, you may as well throw some extra in there. Far more cost effective than having to do it again in a few years.
I haven't read it in years and years... (Score:3, Insightful)
...but I recall Neal Stephenson's article [wired.com] on undersea cables was very interesting.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Calling it an article is quite the understatement. I've seen novels that are shorter. Still well worth the read though.
Antarctia? (Score:5, Informative)
Is there no cable to Antarctica? Hmm... (type, type, click, click) ... Oh, I see:
Antarctica is the only continent yet to be reached by a submarine telecommunications cable. All phone, video, and e-mail traffic must be relayed to the rest of the world via satellite, which is still quite unreliable. Bases on the continent itself are able to communicate with one another via radio, but this is only a local network. To be a viable alternative, the fiber-optic cable must be able to withstand temperatures of -80 C as well as massive strain from ice flowing up to 10 meters per year. Thus, plugging into the larger Internet backbone with the high bandwidth afforded by fiber-optic cable is still an as yet infeasible economic and technical challenge in the Antarctic.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Not much of a threat (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting how many of the cables seem to be fairly precise, and others are clearly guesses or approximations.
Look at the three lines that terminate in Seattle. One of them is extremely precise, with weaving and meandering even at the nearest zoom levels. One of the others is so approximate that it crosses over islands as it goes from point to point.
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty much due to how accurate the published data is. Some network operators have turn-by-turn directions of thier fiber paths in urban areas.. others only publish "it goes from pt A to B.. that's all you need to know".
Landfall locations (Score:2)
Interesting where it shows cables making landfall. In the Los Angeles area, it shows Diablo Canyon nuclear plant and Hermosa Beach. I was pretty sure the cable coming in south of LAX made landfall through ShitPipe, 4 miles north.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting where it shows cables making landfall. In the Los Angeles area, it shows Diablo Canyon nuclear plant and Hermosa Beach. I was pretty sure the cable coming in south of LAX made landfall through ShitPipe, 4 miles north.
The locations for those cables are schematic and not necessarily accurate. Don't know about the LA-area ones, but I believe the cable landings in the San Luis Obispo area are in the Morro Bay area and Grover/Shell/Pismo Beach area. At any rate, I remember that there is a major interconnect in the Los Osos area near Morro Bay where a couple of major undersea cables are hooked together.
Always wondered.. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
How do they lay out these cables? Are they on the bottom or floating & anchored? Are there repeaters? Anywone know where I can read about it?
Try the internet, I heard that there is a lot of information there:
http://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+undersea+cables+work [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This Wired article is very long but very informative and it's worth the time to read it:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.12/ffglass_pr.html [wired.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Someone else already posted it, but Neal Stephenson wrote a great article on just that subject a few years back (okay, over a decade ago - but still very good and interesting). You can find it here [wired.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Instead it's careless boat anchorage :]
Re: (Score:1)
It's because of careless whales that we had to hunt them nearly to extinction. If they had been more thoughtful, we could have avoided the whole dreadful affair altogether!
Re: (Score:3)
Guam is a hub because it's a US Terrority centrally located in the Pac Ocean. It's not like the people in Guam have 1000-count fiber into thier houses, it's just a landing facility.. much like
Re: SA->Africa: Someone(s) wanted it enough to pay/bond it.. so it got built.. *shrug*
Re: (Score:2)
What is the point of laying something like that?
Connecting to the rest of the world through a European telecommunication company instead of an American one? The point is it was probably cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're referring to ATLANTIS-2, it's a cable connecting South America to Europe, and the specific routing is because it's paid for by a consortium of companies from Argentina, Brazil, Senegal, Spain, and Portugal. By crossing the Atlantic where it does, it takes a route that minimizes the amount of deep-water cable needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Guam is simply a conveniently located switching point. A lot of capacity from Australia, for example, goes up to Guam, because it can then be split out and placed on one of the many US-Asia pipes across the north Pacific. Data can turn 'left' to go to Japan/Asia, or hang a right to go to North America.
This means a company can build a cable from Australia to Guam and then make use of the huge capacity to both Asia and the US from there. Multiple destinations for a single cable, compared to dedicated cables t
Capacity (Score:2)
By my count it looks like there is a total capacity of about 30 Tbps between the U.S. west coast and Japan, and only about 20 Tbps between the east coast of NA and all of Europe. Seems strange given the relative distances.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
(At least until it gets shut down as a security th (Score:1)
Looks like it's already been slashdotted, so they won't need to.
Missing Some (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? SXC (both halves of the loop) definitely appears on the map for me. As does SEA-ME-WE.
Look out West Africa (Score:2)
Yikes. I worked in West Africa for a few years, and we dreamed about the day when SAT-3 would bring us more than a couple of satellite T1s. Next year, they are getting over 10Tbps capacity, and almost more importantly, it's coming in separate, redundant cables.
It's hard to imagine what that's going to do.
Now, if they could only keep their cable landings and their terrestrial infrastructure working.
noticable difference between areas (Score:2)
In europe and north america the cables come accross the sea and then land at a small number of places.While in africa, the middle east and other underdeveloped areas they tend to follow the coast with loads of landings. It would appear that in these areas undersea cables are being used as a substitute for land based infrastructure because countries don't trust their neighbours.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also cheaper: most of the cost in the undersea cable will be paid for by companies outside the country (since the landing is only a small part of the cable).
And it's more reliable. Stringing a cable overhead through jungle/desert/what have you isn't exactly foolproof. Burying the cable is a huge infrastructure project, way too expensive for those countries.
Bad idea (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The routes are (a) made from sources publically available on the internet, and (b) not accurate enough to find from the map.
Even if they did know where a cable was, they're buried a meter deep in the ocean floor until they get into deep sea. The terrorists can't even make a set of exploding underpants, they're not going to be able to sabotage the cables!
What about Guam? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It has more bandwidth running through it than Hawaii. Is that for the world's largest K-Mart?
One explanation is the US Dept of Defense. Guam is a large military logistics center
Another point is that Guam is legally US territory, so US law applies there, whcih can be handy for certain commecial ventures, as well as for military/defense/intelligence data transit
Plus Guam looks to be a handy location in terms of landing a cable there as a reshape/regent/retransmission (3R) redistribution point prior to going back into the water (look at the geography)
wow.... (Score:1)
Guam (Score:1)
Do Not Anchor or Dredge (Score:2)
What security threat? You don't need a map. Just cruise the coast looking for signs that say DO NOT ANCHOR OR DREDGE. The US military figured that out decades ago.
And no you can not make them more secure by not putting up those warning signs because someone will anchor or dredge and cut the cable.
Not to be a dick or anything (Score:2)
... but the cablemap app was really annoying, it slowed Firefox down like hell, and there was no way (that I could discern) of easily seeing the whole world map at a high resolution, so I made some screen caps and put them together in Photofiltre. I gave the author credit in several places on the map.
http://db.tt/UEjKBo5 [db.tt]
Re: (Score:1)
In retrospect, saving it as a 16-color .GIF wasn't a hot idea, but it looked better before I saved (a bug in Photofiltre). I should've saved in 32 colors. Oh, well. It was only 31 caps and I still have all of those and the progress .BMP of composite-1-20 (eleven caps to go). If anybody was really interested in a better version, I could make it, but to tell you the truth, the actual thing isn't any more legible than the 16-color .GIF . . . just being honest.
Re: (Score:1)
If anybody was really interested in a better version, I could make it [...]
Thank you, good buddy. Will you please save one as .png and just let loss-less compression optimize for color-count?
Re: (Score:1)
*shrug* I never paid any attention to png. I thought it was like a step away from raw bmp or something, and hence was why it was always seen being used with tiny, tiny images.
If you can tell me why it would be better to save it as png rather than a 32-color .GIF (which, btw, is also loss-less compression, although from about ten years ago comes with a potential legal and financial liability) then I'll do so.
In either case, if you at least say you want to have the image in a better format no matter what form
Africa's hookup is interesting (Score:1)
Basically a bunch of fat pipes heading straight down to SA, and a series of drops at random locations on the way.
All this and... (Score:1)
Cryptonomicon (Score:2)
ALL LIES!