SubTel Forum Issue #33 - Subsea Technologies & SubOptic Wrap-up

& s e gi sue o l no up Is h ec apT ea c Wr s b i Su Opt b Issue 33 Su July 2007

Submarine Telecoms Forum is published bi-monthly by WFN Strategies, L.L.C. The publication may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publishers.

Submarine Telecoms Forum is an independent com­ mercial publication, serving as a freely accessible forum for professionals in industries connected with submarine optical fibre technologies and techniques.

Liability: while every care is taken in preparation of this publication, the publishers cannot be held responsible for the accuracy of the information herein, or any errors which may occur in advertising or editorial content, or any consequence arising from any errors or omissions.

The publisher cannot be held responsible for any views expressed by contributors, and the editor reserves the right to edit any advertising or editorial material submitted for publication. © WFN Strategies L.L.C., 2007 Contributions are welcomed. Please forward to the Managing Editor: Wayne F. Nielsen, WFN Strategies, 19471 Youngs Cliff Road, Suite 100, Potomac Falls, Virginia 20165, USA.

Welcome to the 33rd issue of Submarine Telecoms Forum magazine, our Subsea Technologies and post SubOptic stress edition!

The hubris of our tri-annual conference has waned; the dog days of summer have returned in the north; the Tour de France is once again in full swing. All’s right with the world…

We have as always some excellent articles to fuel your brain.

Alan Robinson reprises Baltimore memories, while Fiona Beck looks back to the future for SubOptic. Inge Vintermyr describes a quick and reliable connection between cable and auxiliary subsea equipment, while Geoffrey Thornton details the future of the supply industry. Stewart Ash asks if SubOptic heralded the rise of supplier power, as Daryl Chaires highlights amplification enabling cost-effective unrepeatered applications. Chris Butler questions whether the industry is working smarter, and Merrion Edwards, Rita Rukosueva and Sergey Ten purport a new era in submarine technology. Jean Devos returns with his ever insightful observations, and of course, our ever popular, “where in the world are all those pesky cableships” is included as well. Lastly, we enclose our Author’s Index – our annual “you said what?” compilation.

Tel: +[1] 703 444-2527, Fax:+[1] 703 349 5562.

Email: wnielsen@wfnstrategies.com

Bon tour,

General Advertising Email: sales@wfnstrategies.com Designed and produced by Unity Marketing

Issue No 33 July 2007

Newsnow Letters To The Editor

5-8 9

Reflections and Memories of SubOptic 2007 Alan Robinson

10-11

Waterborne Samaritans Captain Nick Parker

12-13

“Sub Optic – The Olympics of our Community” Fiona Beck

15-18

A Fibre Optic Cable End Module Inge Vintermyr

19-21

Pricing, Profits and the Future of the Supply Industry Geoffrey Thornton

23-25

All-raman Amplification Enables Cost-Effective Unrepeatered Applications Using “Non-ideal” Fiber Daryl Chaires

27-29

Did SubOptic 2007 Herald the Rise of Supplier Power? Stewart Ash

31-34

The Cost of Doing Nothing Chris Butler

35-37

CTC

26

General Offshore

37

Global Marine Systems

14

Great Eastern

38

Nexans

22

OFS

5-8

STF Advertising

45

STF 2008 Calendar

30

Submarine Networks World 2007

44

Xtera

9

WFN Strategies

4

Repeatered Submarine Fiber Technology – A New Era Merrion Edwards, Rita Rukosueva and Sergey Ten

39-43

Tracking The Cableships

46-64

Author Index

65-74

Letter To A Friend Jean Devos

75

Upcoming Conferences

76

19471 Youngs Cliff Road, Suite 100 Potomac Falls, Virginia 20165 USA Tel: +[1] 703 444 2527 Fax:+[1] 703 349 5562 www.wfnstrategies.com Engineering of submarine and terrestrial optical cable, microwave/WiMax, mobile, satellite and RF systems for telecom, oil & gas and government clients

Fujitsu Signs Contract for the Upgrade of Japan-US Cable Network A synopsis of current news items from NewsNow, the weekly news feed available on the Submarine Telecoms Forum website.

ARCOS, Transatlantic Cable Out, CANTAT-3 Back in Service

The ARCOS cable in the Caribbean has been cut, affecting Internet access in Colombia, Panama, Venezuela, Costa Rica and Nicaragua. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

Asia Netcom, China Netcom to Power 2008 Games with New Qingdao Connection

China Netcom and its former subsidiary, Asia Netcom, have officially announced the launch of a new connectivity solution linking China and the rest of the world. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

Brasil Telecom GlobeNet Sets Another Record Year of Growth

In response to record market demand, Brasil Telecom GlobeNet, who owns and operates the lowest latency submarine fiber-optic cable system serving the Americas, announces today that 2006 was the second year in a row the company has doubled its on-net capacity sales.

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/1_july_2007.htm

General Cable to Acquire NSW

Columbus Networks Announces Colombia-Florida Cable

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/6_may_2007.htm

Columbus Networks has announced that it is installing a new multi-million dollar undersea fiber route that will link Colombia directly to Florida and offer users improved network redundancy, reliability, performance, and bandwidth availability throughout the Pan-Caribbean and Americas Region. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

Brasil Telecom GlobeNet Selects Alcatel-Lucent to Upgrade Network

Fujitsu Limited recently announced that it has signed the contract for the upgrade of the Japan-US Cable Network, a submarine fiber-optic cable system, with a consortium represented by seven telecommunications carriers, including AT&T Corp, KDDI Corporation, NTT Communications Corporation, Qwest Communications International Inc., Reach Global Networks Ltd, Softbank Telecom Corp., and Verizon Business.

General Cable Corporation has announced that it has agreed to acquire Norddeutsche Seekabelwerke GmbH & Co. KG (NSW), located in Nordenham, Germany, from Corning Incorporated.

Global Crossing Selects Alcatel-Lucent for Global Maintenance Services Global Crossing has selected Alcatel-Lucent to dramatically reduce their global network maintenance costs and improve network operating efficiencies.

Alcatel-Lucent has signed a contract with Brasil Telecom GlobeNet, which owns and operates GlobeNet -- the lowest latency submarine network serving the Americas -- to upgrade the existing 22,000-kilometer system linking the United States with Latin America.

CTC Marine Projects appoints two new Senior Managers

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

CTC Marine Projects Ltd., part of the DeepOcean group and a leading subsea service provider, has announced the appointment of two new Senior Managers, promoting two of its established team members.

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/1_july_2007.htm

Infinity West Africa Signs MOU with VSNL

Infinity Worldwide Telecommunications Group of Companies (IWTGC) and VSNL International Pte Ltd. , the international arm of Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited, have executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) as a first step towards VSNL International assisting IWTGC in its West Africa fiber optic submarine cable project.

Global Marine Launches New ROV Training Facility

Global Marine Systems Limited has launched a new Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) training facility designed to meet increasing demand for experienced ROV-trained personnel within the subsea industry. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

GlobeNet Signs Extension with IT for Sentinel Cable Maintenance Program International Telecom (IT) has announced that GlobeNet Telecom Brasil, the leading provider of communication between South and North America, has joined International Telecom’s Sentinel Maintenance program for an additional three years. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

Global Marine Systems Limited and Huawei Technologies Co Ltd to establish Joint Venture addressing Submarine Telecommunications Market

Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (“Huawei), a leader in providing next generation telecommunications network solutions for operators around the world, and Global Marine Systems Limited (“Global Marine”), the independent marketleading subsea cable installation and maintenance company, today announced they have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the intent to establish a joint venture (JV) to deliver end-to-end competitive submarine network solutions to reliably deliver highly advanced global communication capabilities. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

NEC and Alcatel-Lucent Win Contract to Supply AAG Submarine Cable NEC Corporation and Alcatel-Lucent will jointly deploy the Asia America Gateway (AAG), the first direct Terabit submarine cable network between Southeast Asia and the United States. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/6_may_2007.htm

Hibernia Atlantic Adds 80 Wavelengths to Meet Rising Demand

Hibernia Atlantic has announced that the company has upgraded their network by adding 80 wavelengths of capacity onto its diverse and secure backbone, including the Canadian and European terrestrial routes as well as its transatlantic dual ring cable crossings. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

Hibernia Atlantic Selects Huawei for Upgrade

Hibernia Atlantic and Huawei Technologies USA, have announce that Hibernia Atlantic has selected Huawei to further upgrade its 24,520 kilometers of submarine and terrestrial network throughout U.S, Canada, UK and Europe. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

New Range Of Workclass ROV Garages For Subsea 7

SMD Hydrovision has completed another contract for i-Tech, a division of global subsea contractor Subsea 7, for several GARAGE TMS (Tether Management Systems) suitable for handling the Centurion QX Work Class ROV. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

New System Planned for Hawaiian Islands

Paniolo Cable Company, LLC, has filed with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission for authority to land and operate a high capacity fiber-optic non-common carrier submarine cable system, the Paniolo Fiber-Optic Cable (PFOC), linking the five major Hawaiian Islands. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

Proactive Cable Reburial for GlobeNet

OCC Receives Submarine Cable Order for Russia-Japan Project OCC, the world’s only independent optical submarine cable manufacturer, has received an order to supply the cable for all submarine and terrestrial segments of an optical fiber cable project that will connect Russia with Japan from NEC Corporation, one of the world’s eminent suppliers of submarine cable system solutions.

Pacific Crossing Appoints Senior Vice President of Sales and Marketing

Pacific Crossing Limited (PCL), a provider of transpacific bandwidth and carrier-class managed network services, has announced it has appointed Paul Fernes senior vice president of sales and marketing for the company.

The Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education (CORE) and the Joint Oceanographic Research Institutions (JOI) announced today that they have agreed to merge their staff and operations.

The consolidated organization, to be called the Consortium for Ocean Leadership, will have a staff of more than 60 scientists, educators, program managers and policy experts. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/8_july_2007.htm

PTI Plans Upgrade of Submarine Cable

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

Pacific Telecom Inc. (PTI) has announced that it will be conducting a 10-day maintenance work and upgrading to its submarine fiber optic cable, starting June 15 until June 24, 2007.

PacRimEast to Be Reused for American Samoa

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

Oceanographic Research Organizations Join Forces To Form Consortium For Ocean Leadership

Brasil Telecom GlobeNet and IT International Telecom have announced the completion of a cable reburial project securing GlobeNet’s New Jersey-to-Bermuda section of its dual-ring fiber optic network. This section of the cable network runs along the Continental Shelf, ranging from 20 to 600 meters in depth, in an area known for a significant amount of commercial fishing activity.

American Samoa, which has been looking for a way to build a submarine cable to connect to the global network, is about to reach an agreement to use a decommissioned cable for the link. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/8_july_2007.htm

Seacom Marine Survey Underway

Tyco Telecommunications has begun work on the marine survey for the Seacom East Africa submarine cable system. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/1_july_2007.htm

Phoenix Recovers Australian Submarine Rescue Vehicle

Phoenix International, Inc. announced its successful recovery of Australia’s Submarine Rescue Vehicle, REMORA, from 460 feet of seawater (fsw) offshore Rottnest Island, Western Australia. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

Service Established on Maldives’ First Domestic Submarine Cable

Dhiraagu has announced that the Maldives’ first domestic submarine cable connecting two atolls has been fully completed by Dhiraagu and put into service. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/6_may_2007.htm

Vietnam Sets Stiff Penalties for Submarine Cable Thieves

SLT Hong Kong Limited Launches Services

Sri Lanka Telecom (SLT) has announced inauguration of services of its subsidiary SLT Hong Kong Limited in Hong Kong. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

StarHub Joins Consortium to Establish Asia-America Gateway StarHub has announced that it has joined a consortium made up of 17 parties to build the first high-bandwidth optical fiber submarine cable system linking the South East Asia region directly to the United States. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/20_may_2007.htm

TVH Repairs Completed Ahead of Schedule

Vietnam Posts and Telecommunications (VNPT) has announced that the Thailand-Vietnam-Hong Kong (TVH) submarine cable has been repaired and is again carrying traffic.

SMD Hydrovision announced that Tetis Pro Ltd has purchased a Quantum workclass ROV system for delivery in the fourth quarter of 2007. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/10_june_2007.htm

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/8_july_2007.htm

Vietnamese Carriers to Work Together if SEA-ME-WE-3 Is Cut

Tyco Electronics Separates from Tyco International

www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

On Friday, June 29, Tyco Electronics Ltd. officially became an independent, publicly traded company, completing its split from Tyco International. Tyco Electronics, which has been trading under the ticker symbol TEL on a when-issued basis since June 14, 2007, began trading the regular way on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) on Monday, July 2. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/8_july_2007.htm

Tetis Pro Ltd order a SMD Hydrovision Quantum workclass ROV system

The Vietnamese Ministry of Posts and Telematics has proposed that the government ban exploitation of all kinds of telecom cables, including undersea fiber optic cables, and allow it to take back the volumes of telecom cable that police confiscate from fishermen.

Vietnam Arrests Sixteen for Cable Thefts

Six people have been imprisoned in Vietnam’s central province of Quang Nam, while ten people have been arrested in the southern province of Ba Ria - Vung Tau, all for cutting or possessing telecom cable. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/1_july_2007.htm

Meanwhile, the saga of most notorious of all of the submarine cable outages – the theft of a large portion of ThailandVietnam-Hong Kong (TVH) by fishermen looking to sell the cable as scrap, continues.

Xtera Announces the Introduction of Nu-Wave ES and Redefines Ondemand Pay-As-You-Grow Optical Networking Xtera Communications announces the introduction of NuWave ES, its latest high-performance all-Raman optical line system, designed to significantly lower the start-up cost of highly scaleable optical networks and redefine the pay-asyou-grow paradigm. www.subtelforum.com/NewsNow/24_june_2007.htm

Spectacular job putting Dr. William J. Barattino this together...it’s very Bill Brock, For Global Broadband impressive.

America Product Solutions, LLC Dr. William J. Barattino, Global Broadband Solutions, LLC Thanks for a gr and even though It was quite informative business I isdo “wa and interesting. no where think that you the willmusic be wherever that m willing to provide such It was quite informative there is always an information services and interesting. I do not at the for end a oflon t think that you will be free of charge cable. willing to provide such time. an information services Mike Wiseman, E Best regards, free of charge for a long time.

Sumio Yamano, Sumitomo Ocean Development Best regards, Good work & on th Engineering Co. Ltd. edition.

Sumio Yamano, Sumitomo Ocean Development & Les K. Valentin Engineering Co. Ltd. Norway

Thank you for y and the short c Submarine Telec I briefly visit Spectacular job putting website and fou this together...it’s ver information to impressive. interesting.

Emails to Emails to the Editor the Editor

Dear Wayne, Thank you as always for publishing an interesting range of articles and especially your support for SubOptic 2007. When we met in Baltimore I was glad to note that you felt the event had been another success, though as you pointed out we only attracted a small audience from the oil/gas community.

Two things I wanted to raise.

The first was your comment in Exordium about SubOptic becoming grander and cost becoming less of an issue. Baltimore was chosen as a location for SubOptic 2007, precisely to counteract the exuberance that some attendees felt

had occurred at previous events including Monaco.

The cost of registration at Baltimore was substantially less than for Monaco and the cost of exhibition booths, especially for the first one, was well under half the price. The hotel price Tyco Telecommunications negotiated with the Marriot was also substantially lower than that we managed at Monaco, with the rate in USD being even lower that the Euro rate we managed then. As Baltimore was three years later, we all think the price issue was well managed.

There is always going to be an issue of the price we charge and what it includes, but generally most attendees we talk to like the packaged deal approach, with all the social activities included, as this supports the all important networking element of the event.

We are a nonprofit making organisation and we only

seek to cover our costs, not make a profit.

You are right however to raise this issue and we will need to reflect upon our pricing structure and whether it is still appropriate, especially for emerging submarine cable players, as we move towards the planning for our next conference. I suspect we will never please everyone, but we need to please enough to make our events a success.

The second issue, was that in my article I forgot to include my email address, john-horne@ btconnect.com and would just like to encourage any SubOptic 2007 attendees, who wishes to comment on Baltimore, to contact me on this.

Keep up the good work.

John Horne Secretary to the SubOptic EC

Reflections and Memories of SubOptic 2007

By Alan Robinson Another SubOptic has come and gone, and in the quiet of retirement I have been asked to do ‘just one more article’ on my observations and reminiscences of those few days back in May. For those of you who attended the conference, I hope we provided the sort of gathering and meeting place that the subsea industry has come to expect over the last two decades. And for those of you who did not attend, may I recommend that you rethink your budgets and timetable for 2010 when Fujitsu and NEC will host the next event in Asia

and friendship. As every night came to an end there appeared to be an insatiable demand for the Irish Bar round the corner from the Marriott, where the owners must have been overwhelmed by the ability of the conference attendees to continue debating and discussing

The feedback from the attendees in Baltimore is still being analysed to help the next hosts and EC reflect upon the good and the bad, the memorable and the forgettable. But whatever the results this produces, please be assured that SubOptic will go from strength to strength whether the industry is on a high or a low, or hopefully on a steady, even keel, with sustainable growth prospects and profitability.

On the more humorous and lighter side, the professional and social networking yet again proved to be a relay of excellent hospitality

the rich pattern of employment within our industry into the early hours of every morning!

And when the last Irish ballad had been sung and the last ‘wee dram’ partaken, the security

staff of the Marriott were on hand to guide and assist the weary networker to more impromptu revelry at whatever location could be found to host the final, final dance of the evening! And so another SubOptic came to an end, leaving a trail of bonhomie and good will, merely mirroring and building upon the bonhomie and good will of Monaco. This friendship is the very spirit of each event.

And on a more serious note, may I recommend all readers to this magazine to take the opportunity – whether you were at the conference or not – to go onto the SubOptic website and click on the link on the home page to ‘Telecommunications Online’ or go direct to ‘www. telecommagazine.com’ to view the series of interviews that were conducted by Steve McClelland as webcasts, to get the thought provoking views from a wide range of managers covering just about every sector of our industry. These interviews are a first for SubOptic and represent a lasting commentary on the state and future of the industry as seen from a wide range of very experienced operators in May 2007.

These interviews are splendidly edited and presented by Steve, together with his article in 10

fortune for the 2010 event.. This team will, of course, have John Horne, the secretary to the EC, to guide and steer them through some of the difficult planning that is needed to launch the next event. John orchestrates the entire cast with a cool professionalism and years of valuable experience. Then there is the programme which is central to each event. The participants who contribute the papers, take part in Round Tables, or present posters are the key ingredients to a successful conference.

Without this dedicated effort by those who give of their time so enthusiastically, there would be no SubOptic.

June in Telecommunications Online, which summarises the content of the discussions.

If you had no knowledge of the background, history and future of the international subsea market, as seen from suppliers and customers, then you could do no better than appreciate the depth of knowledge and experience that is portrayed in the webcasts……..essential viewing. John Horne and Steve came up with this idea as an extra to the agreed programme and the outcome adds real value to the conference proceedings. John will ensure that the webcasts will be transferred to the SubOptic

website later in the year, together with all the conference presentations (rather than papers) that Dave Robles has gathered together.

And now to the future. Firstly the conference in 2010 is in very safe hands with Fiona Beck taking up the Presidency. I am delighted she has committed her boundless Kiwi enthusiasm to this role. She has already summarised where she wants to take the next conference in this edition of SubTel Forum and I would like to take this opportunity to wish her, the new EC and Fujitsu/NEC all the very best of good

SubOptic gives anyone in the industry from whatever sector, and from whatever position, the chance to contribute their views, research or experience. And in doing so, this fosters the education and debate which enhances the breadth of the conference. This formula has stood the test of time, and I am convinced that, having very successfully survived the last lean seven years, the future for 2010 is very bright.

It has been a privilege and a pleasure to work with the SubOptic community….and on many occasions, a great deal of fun, also! Thank you to everyone for making the 2004 and 2007 events such a success and I look forward to 2010 in whatever location is chosen, just as long as the Irish Bar is within an early morning stroll!

11

Waterborne Samaritans

by Captain Nick Parker, CS Cable Retriever

Global Marine’s CS Cable Retriever was on passage back to Batangas. It was a quiet May morning; seas were calm with a breeze from the northeast.

While sitting in the Captains chair a Fishing Vessel caught my attention. It was natural to zoom in with the Binoculars. There had not been much traffic recently and interest is always high for anything new.

I saw a cheery fellow waving to us. Then another. And then another on the crafts’ monkey Island above its bridge, waving a container. How very curious!

The waving does not stop and the fishing vessel is now well astern. I looked at the Bridge Officer, Rick Rommele, and without saying a word we decided it was time to turn our ship around.

Engines brought back to manoeuvring speed while turning around brought forth a

cobble off the Fisherman’s deck (small round boat used for managing fishing nets) with Rick in the DP seat armed with radio, a bullhorn conversation starts from the Foc’stle as we stop a short distance from the cobble.

No English but vigorous nods to the word “Gas”.

The Pilot ladder lowered, cobble latched on like a limpet and one crewman is received onboard.

Still no English…

Up to the Cable Retriever’s bridge we go, another cobble is seen being dispatched by the Fishing boat which now appears to have about seven men, this time loaded with containers.

Out with the Chart: They’re from Vietnam.

Tanoy for anyone who can speak Vietnamese. No luck … so, out with the paper and pencils, lots of nods and lots of drawings.

12

What about food?

“Yes, yes.”

We gave them some rice and oranges.

They smile.

We hand their captain a telephone and he calls home. Four minutes pass, and the receiver is hung up.

Captain Nick Parker

It seemed that they had been at sea for 33 days, had had no fuel for 10 days and had been drifting to a sea anchor for this time.

Whilst we gave them some fuel, we made a quick calculation of distance and surmised that they were about 240 miles from home. 200 litres ought to do it.

What about water?

“Yes, yes.”

Case of bottled water handed over.

Our Bosun reports a Marlin has arrived at the Pilot Ladder; it seems they never stopped fishing! Back down to the Pilot Ladder, all smiles now as the last of the fuel containers is lowered to the cobbles.

The skipper is waving, his engines running and he brings the boat close to, down the ladder go the fisherman, but wait, wait, another cobble - a letter and 10kg of fresh squid (they definitely didn’t stop fishing!)

Then its goodbye; fishing boat last seen heading west, with their captain waving…

Captain Nick Parker has worked at sea since 1981 and obtained his 3rd Officer’s Certificate in 1986 before joining BT Marine in 1993, where he obtained his Masters certificate in 1996.

Career highlights include working as a 2nd officer during a route clearance project from Plymouth to India aboard the Mercury and Chief Officer on the Pacific Crossing, in Antigua and St. Kitts during a cable installation. Nick lives in Cornwall with his wife and three children and, in addition to extreme sports and diving, also enjoys more leisurely pursuits such as gardening and DIY.

13

“Sub Optic – The Olympics of our Community”

By Fiona Beck Sub Optic is one of those conferences that, like the Olympics, has a sufficient gap between events to make it much anticipated. The 2007 conference was no exception. We had almost 700 attendees; up 15% on the last Sub Optic. This reflects more buoyant and positive industry conditions. Sub Optic is different; it’s the only conference I go to where I make sure I attend all the sessions. I think Sub Optic is a learning and networking experience unlike any other.

Sub Optic 2007 was hosted by Tyco Telecommunications in Baltimore, MD. The conference got off to a great start when Jaron Lanier provided his assessment of why video conferencing has fallen flat. It’s always fascinating to see someone, like Jaron, who is “out there”, a visionary, and who can also talk his socks off without any speech notes.

As you’ll remember video conferencing started with a hiss and a roar, but has since dropped away dramatically. Jaron’s answer was that video conferencing does not permit the non-

verbal signals that are so important in face to face communication. Jaron certainly had some interesting ideas about how to capture some of those non-verbal signals and from there the conference was truly launched.

Like the last Sub Optic, our 2007 conference prominently featured the poster session. The poster session is truly coming into its own and gives people a chance to discuss their ideas with authors on a one on one basis in a more relaxed environment (this time with drinks!!)

15

The exhibition hall and exhibits also really came into their own this time. Events, such as the opening ceremony, were held in the exhibit centre and this gave every one a better opportunity to kick the tires with suppliers and companies.

One of the benefits of having the event in a hotel which accommodated not only the conference but also conference delegates was that it gave a greater sense of community, it kept everyone together. This is something I am keen to see repeated going forward.

As the incoming president I am honored to lead Sub Optic into 2010. It was one of those happy but sad situations. I was sad to see Alan Robinson step down after leading the organization so capably and being so great to work with over the years but also excited and somewhat awestruck at the task in front of me.

The expectations for Sub Optic are very high, and as I said in my speech I want Sub Optic to be great. Good is not good enough.

Sub Optic is the pinnacle organizational body for the Submarine Fibre Optic community and I intend to see it maintains that standard of quality and value.

I frequently get asked: • What is Sub Optic?

• Why should I go to it?

• What value will I get out of it?

In my view Sub Optic fulfills five important roles.

1. As a forum for exchange. One of the distinguishing features I have always found of Sub Optic is that it’s a place where people go to find out about the new things going on. Whether that is new technology, commercial standards, environmental permit issues, or new industry applications.

At the conference we had standing room only in a finance tutorial and in an oil and gas tutorial. It’s about learning new skills and new applications if we are to adapt and to grow.

2. As a place for carriers to advocate their needs. I believe if carriers don’t get involved then we don’t shape the industry. We need to help direct and support the suppliers to deliver products and services that we want. If you don’t advocate then you very probably won’t get what you want.

3. As a catalyst for research. This has been the backbone for Sub Optic for some time and we need to re-energize this and support our research efforts. Maybe we need to see what can also be done ”out of the conference cycle” to encourage a more balanced industry wide perspective which has the support of all industry participants.

4. As an organization for networking. It’s the only time we really get the critical mass of the industry together, to take the time to reconnect and to find out what’s new and for suppliers to find out about your needs.

I also think the social program developed this year has been excellent and we need to continue to talk but let’s not turn this into a meeting venue where the conference happens on the side. Sub Optic is the main course and not the side dish; be there, attend it, and learn. I personally make sure my team has meetings outside the general conference session times as much as possible.

16

5. Finally as a body for the development of standards. I’d like to think if you get accepted here then you have a quality paper or product. Also this is a place to help the industry gain alignment on common issues whether that’s in relation to technical matters or about business relationships and partnerships.

often than not provide some sort of sales pitch.

Sub Optic is about supporting the people that do the work, that really understand what’s going on and gives them an opportunity to promote their ideas in a non competitive manner.

The second is to be inclusive. We need to involve a broad community of interested parties in the work of Sub Optic. From those that produce and lay the cable to financiers, regulators and customers. So the question we must ask ourselves is who is our audience, what do they want from us how can we demonstrate we add value and how do we get you involved, it is after all done on a volunteer basis so what would it take to make you want to contribute more actively to the organization.

sessions running concurrently as they wanted to go to several things at once. Other comments were • • • • • •

• Now there are two aspects to Sub Optic where we face challenges.

The first is research and development. We need to ensure we generate a dialogue which facilitates research and which also helps us reach a shared understanding on pressing industry concerns in what is a very competitive environment when peoples time is precious and money is limited. Sub Optic should be the industry voice and catalyst to facilitate industry change. If you’ve ever been to other conferences it is usually the senior executives that get up and give a presentation and more

•

At our 2007 gathering I asked a few people what they thought of Sub Optic and I got some really positive responses; a number of first time delegates who hadn’t attended the conference before were surprised how big it was and how much gets covered. They struggled with the

It’s the only vehicle we have to express our new ideas, We need to look to do things differently and this conference helps me do that That people were surprised (in a positive way) with the quality of the organization It’s the champion league of conferences It’s a real sense of community and family something I never get anywhere else I have a really difficult time getting travel approval to attend - it almost takes me three years to get it but now I’ve got here I’m really pleased I made the effort Please make sure the conference remains central to the theme, it’s only once every three years and it needs to remain special.

Try telling someone what you do - no one knows we exist.

That last comment was interesting as it reminded me that perhaps the overall promotional and public relations needs of our entire industry remain important. Ask a group of laypeople how Internet traffic gets from Japan to Los Angles, and a large number of them are likely to respond with “satellites.” Many people have never considered the question, and don’t even 17

realize submarine cables exist or, if they do, they believe they are old rather than class leading technology.

While the popular image of our industry may not seem important for everyday business, raising the public’s consciousness of the existence and benefits of a well functioning and class leading submarine infrastructure can only be advantageous in developing business cases, obtaining permits, negotiating with regulators and stakeholders, and in many other areas touched by our industry.

This conference is for the industry, you need to not only participate but be committed to it. Give

us your feedback to make the conference better.

Go back and tell people what you learned, write a paper for the next conference, think about being involved in the various committees.

Remember this is your organization, your industry. If you didn’t attend, let’s hear from you as well. Why didn’t you attend? What would it take to get you involved?

The industry is looking very positive and I believe we are in a very buoyant cycle again. I think in 2010 when we have the next Sub Optic it will be time for us to reflect on how much we have achieved and what new options are on the table for us. My commitment is for a great Sub Optic in 2010 and I need your help to deliver that. So please, when you get the email asking for your comments, be proactive – don’t just sit there. You can make a difference so get involved.

It’s what Sub optic is about.

It’s all about you.

Fiona Beck is the new President for Sub Optic following the Baltimore 2007 conference. She has previously been a member of the Programme committee for Sub Optic 2004 in Monaco and more recently a member on the Executive Committee of Sub Optic. Ms Beck is the President and Chief Executive Officer for Southern Cross Cable Network. She was appointed to this position in May 2001 where prior to this she represented Telecom NZ as a Director on the Board of Southern Cross Cables and various other major companies such as EDS (NZ) and ConnecTel. She is a chartered accountant and holds a Bachelor of Management Studies (Honours) degree in Accounting and Finance from Waikato University, New Zealand.

18

A FIBRE OPTIC CABLE END MODULE

By Inge Vintermyr

1

ABSTRACT

This paper describes the concept of a Cable End Module (CEM), enabling quick and reliable connection between a Fibre Optic (FO) cable and auxiliary sub-sea equipment. The CEM comprises a FO cable mechanical termination, a cable joint, up to three FO ROV operable wet mateable connectors and ROV operable FO jumper cables.

2

In the oil and gas industry, sub-sea FO installations are often realized by including one or more FO cable elements in an umbilical, whose main function is to transfer electrical power, hydraulic fluids and chemicals. Typically, the FO connectors are integrated in the umbilical termination head (UTH).

The FO connections are made up in a separate ROV operation, in which the ROV connects jumper cables between the UTH and the permanent subsea equipment.

INTRODUCTION

Increasing demand for communication, control and monitoring of offshore oil and gas fields has called for fibre optic links connecting to stationary surface plants, to land or intra-field. The applications taking advantage of such high capacity connections include permanent seismic monitoring, measurement of down-hole parameters and sub-sea production equipment.

New applications, as well as retrofit and maintenance and repair of existing installations call for the use of dedicated FO cables. This paper describes the functions, design and qualification of the termination equipment required, enabling quick and reliable connection between the FO cable and the permanent sub-sea equipment. For the purpose of this document, the termination equipment is denoted “CEM” (Cable End Module). See Figure 1.

3

FUNCTIONAL DESCRIPTION

The CEM shall have the following main functions: § It shall form a fixed structure for an armoured FO cable, § Its weight and mechanical stability shall be compatible with forces arising from cable laying, currents and installation. § It shall contain ROV operable wet mateable FO plugs. § It shall contain up to three connectorized jumper cables. Their storage shall enable an ROV to detach and mate connectors with permanent sub-sea equipment.

19

of detachable ROV hooks. The CEM sea bed installation facilitates both first-end and last-end FO cable laying procedure.

Figure 1. CEM main structure.

4

Maximum depth: 3000 m Operating temp.e range: -5 °C to +45 °C (Limited by connectors) Dropped object protection: 20kJ impact energy Corrosion protection: Sacrificial anodes 5 MODULARITY CEM can be adapted to various soil conditions, from rock fillings to soft mud. CEM may accommodate various FO cable designs, including aramide and triple steel armoured cables. The unit can also accommodate a variety of wet mateable FO subsea connectors, who may be diver or ROV operable.

6

Figure 3. ROV in the process of optically mating two CEM’s

ENVIRONMENT SPECIFICATION

SEA BED INSTALLATION

CEM is deployed using a vessel crane. The deployment requires close monitoring of the FO cable centenary, in order to avoid interference with lifting wire. See Figure 2. Once positioned on the sea-bed, the lifting wire is detached by means

Figure 2. CEM deployment.

7 ROV INTERVENTION CEM accommodates up to three connectorized jumper cables, each of typically 10 m length.

Typically, one connector of each jumper cable is premated in a receptacle, while the opposite connector is inserted in a “parking place” whose function is to facilitate ROV handling of the connector. See Figure 3. The “parking place” may be replaced with a fibre loop-back receptacle for continuous cable quality monitoring in the cable laying process.

CEM is supplied with ROV “grab-bars”.

8 FIBRE OPTIC TERMINATION UNIT (FOTU) All Nexans Norway FO sub sea cables include one or more steel tubes, in turn comprising the optical fibres. The design offers the best chemical and mechanical protection of the fibres, and also implies that the fibres reside in an environment close to atmospheric pressure. On the other hand, wet mateable FO connectors are generally designed for a limited differential pressure between their mating optical surfaces and the fibre inlets. This motivated the development of a Fibre Optic Termination Unit (FOTU), whose function is to form a pressure tight interface between up to three wet mateable fibre optic connectors and up to three FO elements. See Figure 4 and Figure 5.

FOTU consists of two oil filled chambers separated by pressure tight fibre penetrators. One chamber 20

is pressure equalized while the second chamber is atmospheric.

FOTU can be adapted to a wide range of FO cables and FO connectors.

Figure 4. Fibre Optic Termination Unit (FOTU)

FOTU Specifications: Operational depth, max.

3000 m

Temperature range

-10 °C to +35 °C

Weight, approximate

6 kg

Dimensions

Length: 535mm OD: 95mm

Main structure

Superduplex

Estimated min. lifetime

25 Years

No. of fibres, max.

48

Total optical maximum

0.2 dB at 1550 nm

attenuation,

Mechanical vibration

Three axis, 5 g, 5 Hz – 150 Hz and random vibration 20 Hz – 2000 Hz.

Mechanical shock

Both directions in each of three axis, half sine, 30g, 11 ms duration

Pressure cycling, external pressure

Four cycles between 1 bar and 330 bar

Pressure, long term external pressure

Figure 5. FOTU (top) with two jumper cables (one blinded) and one wet mate-able connector.

FOTU is integrated in the CEM, thus enabling connection of one fibre optic cable to up to three wet mate-able connectors.

9

test,

14 days, 330 bar

Pressure/temperature cycling

Pressure cycling 1 bar - 330 bar in temperature range -10 °C - +70 °C

Reverse pressure

Fours cycles between 1 bar and 25 bar

FO element fixation

Short term: 300 N up to 45° from axis. Long term: 100 N up to 45° from axis

CONCLUSION

Nexans Norway AS has developed a Cable End Module which enables quick and reliable connection between a Fibre Optic cable and permanent sub sea equipment. The sea bed installation of the involved components may be take place at widely separated times, which may be required for operational reasons.

A Fibre Optic Termination Unit (FOTU) has been developed and qualified; enabling the connection of up to three pressure compensated wet mate-able FO connectors to on FO cable.

Inge Vintermyr graduated from the Norwegian Institute of Technology in 1989 with a Ph.D in Materials Science in 1989, and joined Nexans Norway AS (previous Alcatel Kabel Norge AS) the same year.

He has been working with research and development of steel tube based cables and umbilicals since 1991. In 2000 he was appointed Technical Director for the Telecom cables division.

21

scanpartner Trondheim Foto: SPOT og Getty Images

rine depths a m b u , Ne xans goe deeper At s s

Erik Rynning Sales & Project Manager Offshore: “We produced the so far world’s deepest umbilical which was installed at 2350 metre in the Gulf of Mexico.”

Nexans was the first to manufacture and install a 384 fibre submarine cable. Nexans has qualified and installed their URC-1 cable family for fibre counts up to 384 fibres.

For further information please contact: Nexans Norway AS P.O. Box 6450 Etterstad N-0605 Oslo Norway Phone: +47 22 88 61 00 Fax: +47 22 88 61 01

Telecom: Rolf Bøe Phone: +47 22 88 62 23 E-mail: rolf.boe@nexans.com

Oil & Gas: Jon Seip Phone: +47 22 88 62 22 E-mail: jon.seip@nexans.com

"ECAUSE SO MUCH OF YOUR PERFORMANCE RUNS THROUGH CABLES 'LOBAL EXPERT IN CABLES AND CABLING SYSTEMS

Pricing, Profits and the Future of the Supply Industry

By Geoffrey Thornton

It is well known that when you are more than knee deep in alligators it is difficult to remember that the original objective was to drain the swamp.

Equally when the P&L account is heavily in the red and competitors are driving prices even further down the fact that a business will only continue to exist in the long term if it is making enough profit to allow the owners to continue to invest in it tends to seem rather theoretical.

And in the swamp there is a stark reality. The bigger the alligator, the more food it needs and even if the swamp is getting bigger (all that global warming, you understand) the alligators

are growing faster than the swamp. So the number of alligators that the swamp can support is reducing all the time.

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution there has been a very clear pattern to the introduction of a major new technology. From the railways and the canals through cars and aeroplanes to computers, the pattern is the same. The new invention opens up huge new market opportunities. Many join in hoping to get rich from them. Invariably there are more than the market, even though it is expanding rapidly, can support. And with the passage of time the weaker

fall by the wayside. But it is a characteristic of technology that the R&D associated with any one generation is greater than its predecessor, and on the production side economies of scale make break even capacities higher and higher.

As the market matures the escalating costs of R&D and the increasing capital investment in manufacturing combine to reduce the number of suppliers that the market will support. In the submarine cable case we have an industry that after many years of (profitable) stability has been transformed as a result of changes in technology and its market place. But the same dynamics apply – escalating R&D costs and improved production methods that require higher volumes to reach a break-even point.

If we compare the global submarine cable system supply industry of today with that of 30 years ago the contrast is striking. Then there were 6 suppliers, annual cable making capacity of around 25,000 to 30,000km per annum and the industry was profitable. Today there are 4, demand is greater than 30 years ago and last year the market had recovered to a level which is probably the average over a cycle. Yet the industry was not profitable.

This is important because the health of an industry depends on its being profitable. Without profit there will be no investment and ultimately a business will go bankrupt when its owners cease to be willing to finance its losses. They may of course in the meantime decide to cut their losses by selling out but the overall result is still a reduction in the number of suppliers.

23

The descent into unprofitability was caused by a combination of factors. With the dot.com boom the industry’s cable making capacity increased by a factor of ten and the collapse of the market in 2001 led to cut throat price cutting for such business as was available. At the same time new customers entered the market who were (and are) quite happy to see their suppliers cut each other’s throats. This is all a far cry from twenty years ago when the suppliers were either owned by major carriers (AT&T and KDDI) or were seen as national champions (STC, Submarcom, NEC and Fujitsu) and therefore supported by the dominant (usually monopoly) carriers. It should also be noted that the major marine assets were owned by major carriers.

What is of concern in the present situation is that by 2006 the market had recovered to a level that is likely to be about average for the next few years. If profits cannot be made at this level then we are heading for more changes. The classic solutions to losses are to cut costs and/or aim for a bigger market share. But costs have already been cut throughout the industry. Factories have been closed and overheads reduced as the suppliers have been drawn back into their parent telecomm businesses rather than operate as self-contained independent businesses.

There are limits to what cost cutting can achieve and there comes a point beyond which it is unwise to go or the whole industry will suffer. Typical effects are a loss of quality, and cut backs on R&D leading to less reliable systems and a slow down in innovation. Neither of these is good for the customer!

An industry which is unprofitable as a whole is inherently unstable. In the case of the submarine cable system industry there are a number of factors that exacerbate this. Two companies (OCC and Global Marine) have been bought by private equity and that means that the owners will be looking for an exit in 3 to 5 year time. Tyco’s break up is converting a conglomerate into 3 focussed businesses and the submarine activities do not fit into what is essentially an electronics component business. The Alcatel-Lucent merger has started with some disappointing financial results and this suggests that the management are less likely to be tolerant of poor financial figures. All this indicates that there will be even more pressure on the individual businesses to perform financially and the only way left is for prices to go up. The issue is when and how.

There are a number of possible scenarios and they are not mutually exclusive. In brief the possibilities are 1. A war of attrition to the last man standing, who then has a monopoly 2. A pre-emptive acquisition by a major carrier 3. In a market peak one supplier holds his nerve and wins a contract at a higher price as the only one able to offer an acceptable RFS 4. A dominant supplier raises his prices and the rest follow 5. A supplier leaves the market having cost reduced to the extent that his quality drops to unacceptable levels 6. Consortium bids on major transoceanic

systems need to establish a price satisfactory to all parties.

7. A major realignment in the industry leading to a concentration of submarine skills in one or two companies with an increased number of system suppliers providing the transmission equipment and system knowledge but drawing on the submarine skills companies for the underwater content Examining these in turn, (1) seems unlikely. The current instability of the industry suggests that there will be major changes if the present price war continues and other factors will cause prices to move upwards before any war of attrition is persued to its ultimate conclusion. Equally (2) seems unlikely in the short term – as long as the present suppliers are prepared to take business at a loss there is no obvious immediate gain to a carrier in making an acquisition. But that does not rule it out in the longer term. Of the other possibilities (5) can be said to have happened already to KDDI, though there is no immediate indication of problems with any other supplier at this stage.

However in recent months there have been signs of price increases and there have been elements of (3), (4) and (6). It is reported that one carrier offered a contract to the supplier of a recent system on condition that he would hold the price levels of the previous contract and the offer was refused. TPE was won by a consortium of 3 of the 4 system suppliers at better than the lowest prices seen and with the number of new systems currently being planned and contracted 24

we are approaching capacity constraints against the RFS dates that purchasers will want to see.

Thus in the short term we are already seeing, or are about to see three of the elements that will cause prices to increase.

In some ways the more interesting aspect is the likely scenario for the medium and longer term. As described above the current structure is inherently unstable and on top of that we have more suppliers trying to enter the market.

We must recognise too that the nature of the industry is changing. The advent of DWDM with the potential for 100+ wavelengths on a single fibre pair has attracted newcomers to a sector of the market where the barriers to entry are much smaller. The real barrier to entry is in the area of submerged plant but if those skills and products were more freely available then there is the possibility that an Azea or an Xtera could in the longer term develop a system supply capability. Neither NEC nor Fujitsu have in house cable supply and the ownership of laying and maintenance vessels is diffuse. It is difficult to see any of the cable ship owners other than Global Marine to whom the ships can be considered core business. With that, and with Global Marine in the hands of private equity, the range of possibilities is wide. Equally the cable supply side looks ripe for major changes. Tyco’s situation has already been mentioned, and one has to ask how core is cable manufacture to AlcatelLucent? Alcatel disposed of its other cable manufacture some years ago – how long will they want to go on making submarine cable? We have OCC owned by private equity and suppliers of cable for unrepeatered systems looking at the

market for cable in repeatered systems. Beyond that we have a clear effort by Chinese companies to enter the market – Huawei for systems and ZTT for cable Partly as result of DWDM and partly as a result of a process of focussing on core businesses, the industry will evolve towards a structure where the skills and assets associated with the submerged element of systems will be concentrated in a small number of companies with a larger number of system companies buying in the submerged element. The dividing line between terrestrial systems and submarine systems will be gradually blurred – in principle all you need at the beach is PFE. Economic forces will limit the number of marine specialists. What is not clear is the mechanism that will ensure a situation in which the marine side is generally available as opposed to limiting its customers to a small number of customers – or even worse just a single in-house customer.

Geoffrey Thornton has spent 20 year in the submarine cable industry. He joined just before STC achieved FSA for its last co-axial system and was STC Submarine Systems last Sales and Marketing Director prior to its merger with Submarcom to form Alcatel Submarine Networks.

Since leaving Alcatel he has worked as a consultant in the Don Quixote Consultancy. Previously he had held a number of Marketing and General Management positions in components and military microwave. He has an M.A. in Economics from the University of Cambridge.

25

All-raman Amplification Enables Cost-Effective Unrepeatered Applications Using “Non-ideal” Fiber

During the recent SubOptic 2007 conference, held in Baltimore, Maryland, a joint paper between Cable and Wireless and Xtera Communications provided insights into the considerations for using non-ideal fiber for deployments of unrepeatered submarine systems.

As indicated in the paper, “Raman Opens Up Bandwidth on Non-Ideal Fibres for Unrepeatered Systems,” service providers deploying the latest advancements in all-Raman amplification are now well-equipped to overcome the impairments of nonideal fiber and improve their return on investments.

This improvement results from lowering the cost of deploying new services, delivering significantly more services and gaining a time-to-market advantage by using existing fiber assets. There is a growing demand for a cost-effective solution to providing bandwidth-intensive applications to offshore communities. These communities continue to seek improved communications to the rest of the world and the potential economic benefits of making these services available to resident, business, and government offices. Service providers continue to seek innovative methods to cost-effectively and quickly respond to these requirements.

Non-ideal fibers

By Daryl Chaires

To understand the opportunities for deployment of non-ideal fiber, we must decipher the term non-ideal and understand the challenges of using the fiber to offer higher quantities of bandwidth-intensive services. The paper presented at SubOptic 2007, characterized non-ideal fiber as “not optimal in

design or characteristics for the purposes in which they intend to be used; this could be due to their loss, their chromatic and polarization mode dispersion or their susceptibility to non-linear effects.” From a practical standpoint this could be: (1) A section of fiber optic cable which was designed or “intended for use” on one system, but used on another. In this case, excess cable is re-directed for use on a new unrepeatered submarine link.

(2) A section of fiber optic cable, which was both designed and deployed on a repeatered submarine network. In this case, the cable may have been deployed, decommissioned, and recovered for use on a new unrepeatered link.

In each of the two scenarios given above, the fiber optic cable was designed for a repeatered submarine network. A cable that is designed for a repeatered application is not generally wellsuited for deployment on an unrepeatered route.

Dispersion shifted fiber, for example, was often used, a in submarine cables to transmit a single 2.5 Gb/s service over a long distance. The low loss of the cable (0.2 dB/km) along with transmitting on a wavelength near “the carefully screened zerodispersion wavelength prevented pulse broadening,” as noted in the SubOptic 2007 paper, and helped to maximize the length of transmission. “DSF also made the implementation of these systems fairly cost-effective by eliminating the need for expensive dispersion compensation units.”

27

However, since DSF is not well-suited to support WDM transmission, at least in the wavelength range for which the systems were originally designed, it is non-ideal for today’s applications which require multiple wavelengths over long distances. “Because of the very low dispersion and the small effective area (~50μm2) of dispersion shifted fiber, the presence of two or more wavelengths at power levels typically used in submarine applications could generate strong nonlinear effects, such as Four Wave Mixing (FWM) and Cross Phase Modulation (XPM), that would drastically reduce the power budget of these installed links,” according to the SubOptic 2007 presentation.

Even cables which accommodate transmission of multiple wavelengths become non-ideal once they are designed and assembled for a specific route. A cable designed for a repeatered submarine application consists of segments that are spliced and laid to overcome a set of challenges specific to a fiber route. For example, the cable will be designed with the armor of various segments chosen based on the ocean terrain where it will reside. These segments are spliced together to span thousands of kilometers. Both the armor, which varies by segment, and the splicing will affect the loss of the cable. The segments will also be designed with varying dispersion characteristics. This may include alternating sections of positive and negative fiber dispersion arranged to manipulate or limit the broadening of an optical signal. This mapping of dispersion is influenced by both the length of the system and the requirements of manufacturer specific transport equipment. Both the loss and the

specific dispersion design make it non-ideal for deployment on a route other than the one for which it was intended.

In addition to the aforementioned challenges, recovered cables are non-ideal primarily because their performance profiles change after deployment.

The three factors affecting the change include: § Excessive jointing during the cable lay, in particular in beach segments and in armored cable sections § Cable suspension and cable kinks § Cable repair operations Recent reports have described successful cable recoveries. The reason for recovery may include environmental or economic benefits. But once recovered, it’s nice to know that the technology exists to allow redeployment of at least parts of the cable.

All-Raman amplification overcomes impairments of non-ideal fiber The challenges of deploying non-ideal fiber have made it difficult in the past to provide a costeffective method to use these fibers in situations other than that for which they were initially designed. However, that has changed with the introduction and continued improvements in allRaman amplification. Raman technology provides the flexibility to overcome loss impairments, dispersion challenges, and non-linear affects.

Raman amplification arises from the transfer of power from one optical beam to another and can

be induced in any fiber type over a very wide spectrum. It is currently being deployed with a 100 nm spectrum that provides the flexibility to select fibers and wavelengths to “reset” the characteristics of a system, resulting in very high performance in otherwise non-ideal conditions.

There are two types of Raman amplification— distributed and discrete. Discrete Raman amplifiers are primarily used to increase the capacity of fiber-optic networks, opening up new wavelength windows for wavelength-division multiplexing.

This is beneficial in a number of ways. In the case of dispersion-shifted fiber it provides the flexibility to select wavelengths that are not close to the zero dispersion point of the fiber and thus helps to avoid wavelength regions that are susceptible to four-wave mixing. In addition, since Raman amplification occurs in all fiber types, allowing discrete amplifiers to be customized by selecting dispersion-compensating fiber to alter the non-ideal characteristics to match the new deployment. As part of the amplifier, the dispersion-compensating fiber is used as the gain medium and generally results in a net gain for the system, instead of introducing additional loss into the network.

Distributed Raman amplifiers improve the noise figure allowing for longer amplifier spans, higher bit rates, closer channel spacing, and operation near the zero-dispersion wavelength. The gain spectrum can be tailored by adjusting pump wavelengths to customize the signal spectrum. Customization using distributed Raman gain helps to over come loss without overly increasing the transmit power and optimizing the signal based on the spectrum being 28

used. This technique maximizes the transmission distance while avoiding non-linear penalties like four-wave mixing.

The paper presented by Xtera Communications and Cable & Wireless at SubOptic 2007 provided details of a case study using Raman amplification on SMFLS™ fiber to demonstrate how the impairments of a redesigned system can be compensated. The effects of cable aging and repair were simulated in the laboratory and the ultimate capacity demonstrated.

The case study, which shows that all-Raman technology overcomes the challenges of a redesigned system, is being bolstered by deployments that are accelerating service suppliers’ time-to-market and maximizing their use of existing assets.

Reasons for using non-ideal fiber There are a number of reasons that an unrepeatered submarine network operator might consider using non-ideal fiber. The first is economics. Assuming that the service provider already owns excess cable, he does not have to invest additional funds for an additional cable for the unrepeatered network. A second reason could be time-to-market. Often, multiple service providers race to meet the growing bandwidth needs of an offshore community. These communities cannot generally support multiple cables, so the first deployed cable, often makes it difficult to justify a second cable.

For cables that have been deployed and decommissioned, the impetus to redeploy would come from maximizing use of existing assets.

Decommissioned cables that have not approached their 25-year life span maintain revenue potential if “relocated” to the right area. Aside from the economic impact, it may be environmentally advantageous to recover an unused cable and reuse portions of it.

The case study described by the SubOptic 2007 paper showed that all-Raman amplification enabled the performance required to successfully deploy a state of the art system supporting large quantities of bandwidth-intensive services over what was previously defined as non-ideal fiber.

In summary, the advancements made in all-Raman amplification technology enables the performance required to successfully deploy a state of the art system supporting large quantities of bandwidthintensive services over what was previously defined as non-ideal fiber. The technical details of how this is accomplished is provided in the case study, “Raman Opens Up Bandwidth on Non-Ideal Fibres for Unrepeatered Systems,” presented jointly by Cable & Wireless and Xtera Communications during SubOptic 2007.

Daryl Chaires is the Marketing VP for Xtera Communications. He is responsible for product requirements, new product introduction strategies, and product positioning. Daryl has been an active member of the telecommunications community for more than 20 years. He began his career as a systems engineer, where he designed, installed, and tested microwave radio networks for North American carriers. Daryl expanded his system engineering knowledge to include operational support systems (OSS) and optical transport systems prior to his transition into technical marketing. His ability to communicate the business as well as the technical benefits of emerging technologies propelled him into marketing in the late 1990s. He now communicates Xtera’s end-to-end value proposition to established and emerging entertainment and communication service providers. Daryl frequently contributes articles to various communication publications and speaks at both technical and business conferences around the world. He is currently focused on communicating the benefits of Xtera’s all-Raman amplification products for unrepeatered submarine applications as well as the company’s recently introduced Nu-Wave ES which provides extended scalability for submarine and terrestrial optical transport applications.

29

Submarine Cable Industry Calendar 2008 Submarine Telecoms Forum is seeking like-minded sponsors to contribute their corporate images to the 2008 Submarine Cable Industry Calendar.

The 2008 Submarine Cable Industry calendar will be provided free of charge to Submarine Telecoms Forum’s subscriber list, encompassing some 3000+ readers from 85 countries, including senior government and international organization officials, telecom company executives and team, support and supply company management, and technical, sales and

purchasing staff, field and shipboard personnel, academicians, consultants, financiers, and legal specialists.

The Submarine Telecoms Forum industry calendar will be printed in full colour on high quality 200gsm silk art paper, approx 600 x 300mm, giving sponsors an area of approx 300 x 300mm to display their corporate image.

Sponsorship Cost: $7,500 per monthly membership.

For further information, reservations and information contact: Tel: +1 (703) 444 2527 Fax: +1 (703) 349 5562 Email: 2008calendar@subtelforum.com

Did SubOptic 2007 Herald the Rise of Supplier Power?

By Stewart Ash

SubOptic 2007 was held in Baltimore Maryland between 14th and 17th May inclusive. The conference itself included 3 keynote addresses, 3 round table forums, 8 oral presentations, 10 tutorials, a poster session and the usual supplier’s exhibition.

In addition, each evening there were sponsored receptions providing plenty of opportunity to network.

Not to mention the informal gatherings at the ubiquitous “Irish Pub”, in this case the James Joyce. As a consultant, I would have to consider

the conference an unqualified success, as it afforded me the opportunity to hear about the latest issues challenging the great and the good of submarine fibre optics industry and to catch up with ex-colleagues and old friends to canvas their views on the current state of our market.

For me, SubOptic 2007 was encapsulated in Richard Karlgaard’s keynote speech on Thursday 17th May. Paraphrasing, his message was, that at the macro level, all the economic

indicators tend to show that telecoms in general, and submarine cables in particular, has a very healthy future. However, he also forecast that this growth would inevitably come through continued change to the market model. In other words the way business is conducted in the future will be very different from the way it is carried out today. Some companies will thrive, some will survive and some will go under, depending on the strategies they adopt in the coming months and years. So, for individual companies it’s good news if you get it right and bad news if you get it wrong. The stability of the pre-boom industry is gone forever and therefore the challenge for most delegates in the auditorium was to try and glean some hint from what he was saying that would indicate whether or not their companies were getting it right. In summary, I think his view was that the future is bright, if uncertain, but it will be exciting as long as you are prepared to embrace change and take some risks.

So what were the major drivers for change in the market model that manifested themselves during SubOptic 2007? Well, for me, there were three that stood out, that could, and probably will, initiate significant change. These are the future profitability of the system supplier base, potential expansion of the market to incorporate non-traditional applications and future provision of marine maintenance services.

31

Over the past few years, excess design capacity on major routes has resulted in a number of changes to the system supply market. These include the emergence and growth of the “Upgrade” market, and with it, new entrant companies that require no marine capability. In addition, the lack of investment in new systems and recently the reuse of decommissioned systems have contributed to the downsizing and rationalisation of manufacturing capacity for submarine cable, repeaters and PFE worldwide. In some cases, system suppliers have been forced out of the market altogether. One feature of this change process has been that, wherever new projects have come to market through competitive tender, aggressive pricing has occurred. This was caused by the remaining suppliers being anxious to secure some income, any income, to support what remains of their businesses. Their customers, the system operators, who now find themselves in an extremely competitive market, unsurprisingly, welcomed and actively encouraged this reduced pricing. Despite the rationalisation carried out by the major suppliers in the downturn to reduce overheads, industry observers have stated that pricing levels are now at a point where the supply business is not profitable and if price levels do not increase it will be unsustainable in the long term. Whether this is true or not, only the suppliers themselves actually know, but there is little doubt that over the past few years the supply of systems has been dominated by “purchaser” power.

However, all the signs are that the market for

new systems is on the way up again, especially when one considers the number of forecast projects for the Pacific region. Whether this is just a peak in the new demand cycle, the start of sustained growth or the start of a new boom bust scenario, only time will tell. What is certain, however, is that if the majority of these planned projects come to fruition then, demand will very quickly outstrip the ability to supply, and power will shift from the purchaser to the supplier. How the suppliers will handle this situation and how prospective purchasers will counter the potential threat of monopoly supply, consortium proposals, etc. and their effect on price levels, will be very interesting.

The possible scenarios are numerous and far too complex to go into here, but if you are interested in this subject or it has the potential to affect your future plans, I would recommend you read, if you haven’t already done so, the Don Quixote paper entitled “Towards a profitable supply industry”, an overview of this paper was presented to stimulate discussion on the subject at the round table forum on Wednesday 16th April May. Geoff Thornton also addresses the very same issue in this edition of SubTel Forum with his article entitled “Price, Profits and the Future of the Supply Industry.”

The product portfolio for, the market segmentation of, or even the basic definition of the optical submarine cable industry (however you care to look at what constitutes the total community of interest), is also inextricably linked

to future supplier profitability. For decades the industry was categorised by the turnkey supply of repeatered systems and dominated by transoceanic projects, the troughs between the major systems being filled by regional repeatered and repeaterless systems. However, today there are other areas of business for the suppliers to consider. I have already mentioned the growth of the upgrade market, but now to this we can add offshore oil and gas telecoms networks and subsea scientific arrays. These were little more than theoretical opportunities when discussed in Monaco in 2004 but are now a reality, with projects like Mars, Neptune & Venus and BP’s Gulf of Mexico Network under contract.

Whether the emergence of these applications of submarine fibre optic technology, at a time when suppliers had empty factories, was serendipity or was due to a long term supplier strategy is open to debate. The fact remains that the major system suppliers have stimulated these markets, taking the trouble to understand the very different client base and their requirements. In addition they invested R & D dollars in some new and often sophisticated technologies in order to deliver these optical telecoms systems.

It is clear that both types of project will provide these suppliers with opportunities to smooth out the peaks and troughs of and become less dependent on the traditional telecoms systems market.

At SubOptic 2007, these systems were given fair coverage with their own Oral Session 32

entitle “Non-Telecom Applications”. I find this is an interesting choice of title since these are clearly telecommunication networks; they are just not supplied to traditional telecoms operators or operated on the same commercial basis as traditional systems. In addition to the Oral Session, there was a tutorial on oil & gas applications on Monday 14th May that generated a lot of interest from delegates (standing room only). It will be interesting to see how the attitude of the system suppliers develops towards these new customers as orders for the more traditional systems return. Also, how the traditional system purchasers cope with not being the only customer in town and having to compete for manufacturing capacity and marine facilities. Whether these systems will be seen as part of a system suppliers’ product portfolio, different segments of the submarine cable supply market or different markets altogether will be something that will emerge in the fullness of time.

The final area of potential major change is in the supply of marine maintenance or repair services. This is an area of the market that has been dominated almost exclusively by the club or zone agreements and once again, in recent times, the members of these agreements have taken advantage of the oversupply of ships to drive prices down. This over supply has gradually diminished, due to vessels being retired or converted to work in other markets.

At the same time some enterprising ship’s

operators have offered alternative private agreements, in competition with the zones. This has attracted some cable owners away from the clubs, increasing the costs for the remaining club members. When the zones were first set up the ships that supported them belonged to subsidiary companies of the major members of the clubs. Today it is very different; very few cable ships are owned by telecoms operators.

The vast majority of vessels now belong to system suppliers or independent ship operating companies. The other key factor to consider is, as cable system owners divested themselves of their marine subsidiaries, they also downsized their in house support and outsourced much of the management of their marine maintenance operations to the new marine service providers.

These contractors now supply a much enhanced service package compared to that provided in the past, and the current cable ships owners have no other incentive than to make profit from what they do. So, at a time when the demand for installation vessels is on the rise, and when much higher pricing for these types of vessels can be commanded in the offshore oil and gas industry, securing maintenance contracts at current market pricing is unlikely to be attractive to cable ship owners. Vertically integrated system suppliers are likely to get a better return on their assets through installation projects. The independent operating companies, who have to protect their share holder investment and their employees, will almost certainly go where the best margins can be obtained. It would appear

once again that, the purchaser power that has been exercised very vigorously over the last few years is likely to be replaced by supplier power, in the near future. Given this situation, the way that the negotiations develop for the new ACMA agreement will be very interesting and may give some indication as to the changes in market model that will take place and possibly to the future ownership of maintenance cable ships. The maintenance zone is perhaps the last bastion of the traditionalists, and short of a reversion to system operator owned cable ships, the model for marine maintenance service provision is bound to change radically in the next few years. Once again, SubOptic 2007 gave this topic a fair amount of coverage, including its own Round Table Session that included five papers on various aspects of the subject.

I believe that, changes in the supplier base, the market model and supply of marine maintenance will also have a direct impact on the future of SubOptic itself. SubOptic is intended to be the showcase of the current/future market and therefore will have to respond to the changes in the market that it represents. The new president, Fiona Beck and her team will have much to consider before SubOptic 2010 in Asia, if it is to remain the industry’s leading conference as it undoubtedly is today.

SubOptic tries to provide, for all of the interest groups involved, with a balanced forum for 33

debating the major issues of the day; whether they are commercial, environmental, legislative, operational or new technological developments.

I believe SubOptic 2007 achieved this, but whether delegates took full advantage of the opportunities afforded to them is open to debate.

The range of subject matter is becoming wider at each successive conference and the danger is that SubOptic will try to cover too many subjects and by so doing dilute the quality/quantity of the contributions and therefore the potential for debate. The specification of what fits under the umbrella of SubOptic for the future will be a key factor and an interesting challenge. Will it be the traditional telecommunications market only or will SubOptic fully embrace the so called “Non-Telecoms” applications?

The SubOptic administration should be congratulated for the way it has been able to maintain a balanced conference, despite being a non-profit making organisation that relies almost entirely on sponsorship. The host is always one of the major system suppliers and as such the leading sponsor; the other major sponsors are also leading suppliers. For example, the main sponsors for SubOptic 2007 were Tyco (host), Alcatel-Lucent, Global Marine Systems, Fujitsu, NEC and Xtera. There is little or no system owner sponsorship and therefore one would assume limited influence over the content and structure of the conference. It is a suppliers’ conference and will have to continue to meet the aspirations of the major suppliers or

the sponsorship will not be forthcoming. What happens to the supplier base over then next few years will, therefore, have a direct impact on SubOptic. The other thing to bear in mind is that, for some time, the supplier market has not been the collaborative environment it used to be.

Therefore the risk, which has always been there, that the host supplier could take advantage of its position by using the conference as a vehicle for its own marketing, is now probably greater than it was in the past.

All the signs are that, within the submarine cable industry, influence is shifting from the purchasers to the suppliers. If SubOptic continues to be run on the same model then, I believe that more than ever before, its structure and content will be defined by the sponsoring suppliers, whoever they may be. They will influence what fits under the umbrella, what topics are on the agenda and which get the highest profile.

Stewart Ash has worked in the submarine cable industry for 35 years.

After graduating from Kings College London, he joined STC Submarine Systems as a development engineer, designing terminal equipment.

By 1980, he was their senior field installation manager responsible for all major loading and laying operations. With the advent of optical technology he headed up the Installation division responsible for all turn key installation, delivering 12 major international systems. In 1993, he joined C&W Marine focusing on the development of cost effective installation solutions for the repeaterless systems market. In 1999, he was appointed General Manager of Global Marine’s Cable Services division, running their engineering and training facility at Boreham and becoming their senior representative in the Universal Jointing Consortium. He joined WFN Strategies in 2005 as Marine Design & Installation Manager, and has supported submarine telecom projects in the Gulf of Mexico, North Sea and West Africa.

34

T h e c o st o f d o i n g not hing

By Chris Butler

“I know we’re smarter,” Haw said, “but we don’t seem to be acting smarter at the moment…” - Who Moved my Cheese?

It is a demanding environment, and it has been necessary for suppliers and service providers to raise their game. My question is – collectively or individually; have we? Or, is it just more of the same?

Everything we do is driven and motivated by money.

Whether that is profit, revenue, overhead recovery, the next pay pack, next job offshore, KPI’s or targets - it drives us. Do we admit this is a fact? No, not normally. We hide behind words and phrases such as budgets, customer requirements, value for money, compliance, cash flow, etc., etc.

What actually appears to be going on is a never ending downward spiral of efficiency drives and cost cutting

measures of one sort or another, but there is a limit on how long simple cost cutting can be sustained.

So let me pose another question. When did you last count the cost of not doing something?

Whether our customer is the purchaser from a national PTT or the person about to write our objectives and review our salary, they all want more for less. Like deaths and taxes; it is a fact of life.

The motivation behind General Offshore comes from a group of lifetime-dedicated personnel, mainly engineers, who were, and still are, motivated to put the customer first, carry out a first class installation or offshore operation, oh, and like the rest of you, make money. There is no point doing it if we don’t make money. One of the major strengths of the company is that we all work together, we all have one objective and we don’t deviate.

We are adroit at managing our own risks – after all that is our job we have been doing it a long time and we are proficient at it. We produce Procedures, PEPs, Risk Analysis’, Organagrams, HSE documentation and Quality Plans. We develop plans of work, make site visits - and consider what should be considered.

Everything that is within our control is thought about and planned for. Everything that is outside our control 35

to provide a plan and price for a project will lead to a number of assumptions that are going to effect the price – mainly due to uncertainty. However, by adding another 96 hours many of the uncertainties can be resolved. In my specific example the extra time resulted in a reduction in price of over 25% percent.

Now, is it not too much to ask that the technical and commercial halves of an organisation talk to each other? And, how about allowing adequate time for planning?

Insufficient time causes inefficient results, creates the potential for delays, which results starting at the beginning of another vicious circle. is also thought about – weather, local authorities, local importation and restrictions, other seabed and surface users and these factors are planned for too.

It comes down to money once again. Has anyone asked how much will it cost if the things mentioned above are omitted? Has anyone asked how can we reduce the total cost? Has anyone taken the time to ask the suppliers of services how the costs can be reduced apart from using a big stick? No, No, and No. Is it important? After all it is just the shore end!

Each cable has at least two ends - and sometimes more. At the commencement of each new submarine cable system it is decided which POPs will be used, what destinations the traffic is going to and we all know that the end of the cable is going to start on land with a wet bit before the other end magically appears at a land mass near you.

Millions and millions are spent on optical technology, deepwater burial technology, cableship technology, cable and fibre technology (shall I go on?). But when it comes to the ends - arguably, yes - they are the weakest link. There is pretence: specifications, requirements, scopes of work, terms and conditions – in fact there are more and more of them all the time.

So, it is now the time and the right environment to be smarter. Is it inconceivable to involve the shore end contractors in sufficient time ahead of deadlines to consider the best plans, arrange permits and customs clearances, etc? Or is it the case that this information is considered to be power over the shore end contractor?

Provide too much information and the price might go up. That is not my experience. Risks are reduced; plans are in place and projects executed with the minimum of fuss.

Doing things at the last minute in a reactive environment costs money. So why do we continue to do it? Let me give you an example. Given 48 hrs

It doesn’t have to be like that of course; we can continue having unsatisfactory periods for planning.

After all, we enjoy the repeated challenge of finding

ways to release equipment from customs and the inordinate costs associated with doing it on the hurry up. We relish searching high and low for just the right local resource to support the project, which we know was there last week. And how we reminisce about the joy of throwing heaps of people at a project to get it done in time, when it all could have been so easy.

Why can’t we get smarter?

In the overall scheme of a project the shore end costs will vary as a percentage and may not be insignificant. But, rather than leaving the activity to the last minute, how much better if the overstretched system provider had an additional resource to relieve him of the burden. A resource that would work with him to reduce the cost. Is it such a far-fetched idea?

In the halcyon days, this would have been an internal resource called upon as required - a professional team working in the interests of their company. Just because these resources are now outsourced does not mean the same objectives and benefits do not apply.

The industry has strived to improve the results of, 36

“I know we’re smarter,” Haw said, “but we don’t seem to be acting smarter at the moment. Things are changing around here, Hem. Maybe we need to change and do things differently.” - Who Moved my Cheese?

Chris Butler has an 18year background with the commercial and contractual aspects of submarine cable installation.

Technically qualified, he has the advantage of looking at the industry from the eyes of system owner, system supplier, shallow water specialist and deep water installer and has enjoyed the responsibilities of Product Management, contract negotiation and profit & loss. Chris rejoined General Offshore Limited in 2006 and is currently Commercial Director.

and interpretation from route surveys, spent countless dollars on developing BAS technology - all in order to make the final product better and more secure.

General Offshore is not alone in having a wealth of specialist knowledge[,] in its own field, covering most of the globe. Is now not the time to consider what is the cost of not utilising this available resource?

If it because, as shallow water contractors, we are at the end of the food chain and, therefore, could be considered unimportant, then why the fuss and palaver about all that surrounds it. If what we do is considered important then please give us the time to do a proper job.

37

Shallow Water Turnkey Solutions For Fiber Optic Cable Systems From Shallow Water Installations To Terminal Station Design & Fabrication

www.greateasterngroup.com

1.0

Repeatered Submarine Fiber Technology – A New Era

Introduction

The harsh environment associated with submarine networks inherently pushes optical transmission technology to the limit. Every submarine network link is different and each link must be custom designed in order to maximize the link performance and reliability while minimizing system cost. As a result, submarine networks have continually been at the forefront of optical transmission technology and were one of the first places where hybrid fiber transmission lines were trialled. The resurgence of the submarine market is now well established. The year 2006 saw significant demand for unrepeatered and short- haul repeatered networks in areas such as the Caribbean, Middle East, Africa and also in Asia. At the same time there were indications that this renewal of submarine system demand would extend to long-haul repeatered networks and in particular to transoceanic systems. Those early market indicators have now been realized and this year several major transoceanic submarine projects have started in earnest with dispersion managed fiber technology adopted and being considered for some of these projects, a solution that is at the very forefront of optical transmission technology.

2.0 The Submarine Market Environment

By Merrion Edwards, Rita Rukosueva and Sergey Ten

Up until 2001 the overwhelmingly dominant driver for cable demand was the transoceanic market where submarine links exceed 6500 km. Large quantities of transmission capacity were installed during a prolonged wave of submarine installations such that when the telecom market stalled in 2001, it was predicted that it would be a very long time before demand outstripped supply for transoceanic transmission capacity.

However, even though the market stalled, the growth in broadband applications and internet connectivity did not. This coupled with the strong growth in the economies of India and China has led to an early shortage of submarine capacity serving Asian countries in particular. In 2005 and 2006, as the submarine market re-emerged from the crisis of 2001 we saw a significant number of regional submarine deployments. However, as internet connectivity and the broadband market continue to grow it is evident that the next few years will see a massive growth in demand for bandwidth between the major Asian centers and between Asia and the rest of the world, which will cause an overall shortage of capacity on transoceanic links. The recent occasional shortage of capacity between China and the US that causes bottlenecks in internet traffic is an early indicator of this. The 2008 Olympics in Beijing and the unavoidable necessity to provide adequate communication capacity to support global and secure coverage of the games is another factor in this equation.

Furthermore, the Taiwanese earthquake on December 26, 2006 has had an instrumental influence on opinion with respect to submarine cable redundancy in the Asia Pacific region. This earthquake, according to China Telecom and China Netcom, caused the disconnection of nine undersea communication cables resulting in major disruption to Internet traffic for over two months. The Internet traffic was diverted to the U.S. though Europe and Australia as well as using satellite and landlines. The earthquake highlighted the serious vulnerability of the existing network of transoceanic and intra-continental cables in the Asia Pacific region to natural disasters.

39

The predicted internet and broadband driven large scale growth in bandwidth demand is not purely restricted to the Asia-Pacific region. In Africa, a strong desire to increase intra-regional and international connectivity in order to spark economic growth is driving demand for increased submarine cable capacity.

The capacity demand indicators in the Asia-Pacific region and the lessons to be learned from the Taiwanese earthquake are not being ignored. The deployments and announcements of new intra-continental and regional networks continue with links such as the following being pursued: Vietnam - Hong Kong , Hong Kong - Taiwan, Indonesia – Singapore, India – Singapore, Vietnam – Singapore, Russia – Japan, Australia - New Zealand. In addition there continues to be significant activity in intra-continental and regional network plans and deployments in the Caribbean and the rest of the world. But of most significance is that for the first time in many years a cluster of new transoceanic projects have recently been announced. This is a major stepping stone in the recovery of the submarine market, wiping away the myth regarding the perceived excess of transoceanic capacity. The focus of attention for the majority of these projects is in the Asia Pacific region, but the strong desire to increase Africa’s connectivity has resulted in significant activity off the east coast of Africa also. There are many projects that are still at the proposal stage and do not have funding or a contract in place. However, there are a number of projects that are underway as shown in Figure 1a and 1b.

Asia-America-Gateway: In June 2006, Telecom Malaysia and Reach, together with a number of other telcos, announced their plans to install a major new cable connecting Asia with the U.S. The proposed

20,000 km cable to be called the Asia-AmericaGateway is planned to run from Malaysia to Hong Kong, the Philippines, Guam, Hawaii and on to the U.S. Branches are also proposed to connect Singapore, Thailand, Brunei and Japan and it is proposed that the system is completed in 2008 with an initial capacity of 1.28 Tb/s. The route of this cable is planned such that it will avoid some of the areas most prone to seismic activity. The contract worth approximately 500 million USD for this project was awarded to NEC Corporation and Alcatel-Lucent in April 2007.

EASSy-NBIN: Alcatel-Lucent has been contracted by the East Africa Submarine System (EASSy) consortium (that now includes the Nepad Broadband Infrastructure Group (NBIN)), to lay the region’s first international undersea cable link. The EASSy project will span nearly 10,000 km and will initially link eight countries from Sudan to South Africa, via Djibouti, Somali, Kenya, Tanzania, Madagascar and Mozambique. There will also be links to other major submarine systems to provide important international gateways. With completion scheduled by the end of 2008, the EASSy submarine network, initially delayed by financial disputes, is now moving ahead and will deliver a regional capacity of 320 Gb/s allowing consumers to benefit from more accessible and affordable broadband internet services.

Trans-Pacific Express Phases I and II In December 2006, U.S. operator Verizon signed an agreement with five major Asian telecom carriers to build the Trans-Pacific Express (TPE) Phase 1, to create a high-speed trans-Pacific undersea cable system that directly links mainland China and the U.S. with landing points in China, Korea, Taipei and the U.S. Consisting of both a Northern and Southern

cable (one 10,000 km link and a second 16,500 km link), the system will have inherent redundancy and protection. Operating at 10 Gb/s with up to 64 wavelengths available per fiber over an 8 fiber count cable, the system is planned to initially have a capacity of 1.2 Tb/s but will be upgradeable to 5.12 Tb/s. Verizon’s partners include China Telecom, China Network, China Unicom, Taiwan’s Chungwa Telecom and South Korea’s FT Corp. The contract for construction of this system for Phase 1 has been awarded to Tyco and construction has already begun with the project being scheduled to be completed in time for the 2008 Beijing Olympics. TPE Phase 2 award is expected by the end of 2007.

Sydney – Hawaii: Telstra, the Australian incumbent telco, announced plans for a link between Australia and Hawaii in October 2006, with the intention that this cable will link into the Trans-Pacific Express and provide Telstra a means to meet its soaring demand for bandwidth to the US. The 9000 km long trans-oceanic link already has a contract in place with Alcatel-Lucent.

TPE Phase I & Phase II L.P.: China, Korea, CH. Taipei, USA Cable length: 26,000 km System: 10G x 64W x 4fp Service in : 2008 Mid.?

AAG (Asia-America Gateway) L.P.: Malaysia, Hong Kong, Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, Guam, Hawaii, USA

Cable length: 21,000 km System: 10G x 64W x 2fp Service in : 2008 Mid.?

Japan-USA L.P.: Japan, North America Cable length: 9,000 km System: 10G x 64W x 2fp Service in : 2008 Mid.?

Australia-Hawaii L.P.: Sydney, Hawaii Cable length: 8,800 km System: 10G x 64W x 2fp Service in : 2008 Mid.?

Figure 1a: Several Trans-Pacific networks are progressing

submarine

40

strength in order to be utilized on wide scale. One such technology is dispersion managed fiber also known as dispersion flattened fiber. Corning Optical Fiber has had a submarine dispersion managed fiber product since 2001 named Vascade® R1000 fiber. It has been selected for several 2007 TransPacific projects and it is likely that dispersion managed fiber will be used more often due to a number of features that give designers superior flexibilities in system design.

L a rg e

Hybrid

3.0 Repeatered Submarine Network Technology – A New Era While, the market downturn of 2001 affected business profitability, in hindsight it is clear that growth in bandwidth demand remained unperturbed.

Similarly, the market downturn did not drastically effect the advancement of technological innovation in the telecommunications industry. True, a shortage of capital may have slowed the pace of innovation but some key advances in transmission system technology were made during that period. Some of those technologies have been waiting for the telecommunications industry to regain its financial

Repeatered submarine networks systems vary greatly in distance, data rate requirements and landing station configuration. As a consequence, no two networks are alike and each project requires different optical attributes of transmission fiber. Submarine fiber suppliers must have a broad Repeatered U p to 1 3 ,0 0 0 k m and diverse U n re p e a te re d 450 k m 3000 k m portfolio of Regional Transoceanic 150 submarine 1 4 0 TransAtlantic fibers to enable TransPacific 130 n e t w o r k 120 designers 110 Dispersion to deliver Manag ed 100 Fiber a cost and 90 Large performance 80 Effective optimized 70 A rea solution.

As 60 shown in Figure 50 40 2, the choice of L ow D ispersion 30 fiber/fibers is U ltra Slo pe 20 L ow very dependant 10 Lo ss on two factors; 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 overall network Link distance (km) length and the number of Figure 2: Fiber choice depends on customer specification and network design. Distance and channel channels (per count (capacity) are two key factors.

Channels

Figure 1b: The EASSy network of the east coast of Africa

fiber). For repeatered systems of less than 3000 km, in general, a single fiber type is sufficient, but the fiber type still has to be chosen appropriately. The choice typically is between two non-zero dispersion shifted (NZDS) fibers, that have negative dispersion and positive dispersion slope. For a high channel count system a fiber with a larger effective area is most appropriate. It provides lower nonlinearity due to larger effective area. However, NZDSF fibers with larger effective areas typically have higher dispersion slopes, which lead to accumulation of dispersion for the edge channels. This accumulated dispersion results in detrimental nonlinear effects that overcome the advantage of the larger effective area. For systems that extend beyond 2000 km then a fiber with a low

L a rg e E f fe c t i v e AA r er e aa

E f fe c t i v e

L oL w ow

on D i sDi p s e per rs is oin Slope

S lo p e

41

dispersion slope may be more suitable. It has lower dispersion slope (0.05 vs 0.12 ps/nm2-km) but it also has lower effective area (50 µm2 vs. 70 µm2). .

Typically, for systems that exceed 3000 km both larger effective area and low dispersion slope is required but is impossible to realize in a single fiber. It is here that submarine systems move into a world of their own in terms of optical fiber transmission systems. Submarine links of greater than 3000 km typically deploy hybrid fiber solutions that consist of two aforementioned NZDS fibers combined in a clever way (as shown in Figure 2), in order to simultaneously achieve the desired attributes. The most simple of these is a hybrid span that uses a combination of a large effective area NZDSF followed by an NZDSF with a low dispersion slope. The fiber with the large effective area is placed at the beginning where the optical power is highest to minimize non-linear effects associated with high powers, followed by the low dispersion fiber at the end of the span which reduces the overall accumulated dispersion slope i.e. dispersion for the channels at the edges of the channel plan. However, it is worthwhile noting here that both of the constituent fibers have a positive dispersion slope and that the hybrid solution delivers an overall dispersion slope for the span that is somewhere between the values of constituent fibers (depending on the ratio of their respective length). The actual overall effective area of the hybrid span gravitates towards the effective area of larger effective area fiber since optical power is launched into the larger effective area fiber and by the time it reaches the lower effective area NZDS fiber the signal power is attenuated and does not contribute towards nonlinearities.

Submarine systems deployed over hybrid fiber have

been deployed up to trans-Atlantic distances for many years now, but for trans-Pacific distances (≥9000 km) the performance of the basic hybrid fiber solution was not sufficient to deploy wide-band (e.g. full Cband), high- capacity (e.g. >80 channel at 10 Gb/s per channel) systems. Starting with the deployment of Tyco’s Global network link in the Pacific Ocean (2002-2003), dispersion managed fiber became a fiber of choice for long (trans-Pacific distances), high capacity (up to 1 Tb/s per fiber) systems This technology effectively improves the performance of the hybrid solution and reduces the overall equipment requirements, thereby reducing capital and operational expenditure.

Figure 3 is a graphical explanation of the concept of a dispersion managed fiber span which consists of a large effective area, positive dispersion fiber with a positive dispersion slope, concatenated with a second fiber with a negative dispersion and a negative dispersion slope. The relative dispersion of these fibers, defined as the ratio of dispersion slope to dispersion at a reference wavelength is approximately equal. Therefore, with appropriately chosen lengths of these two fibers, one can achieve flat, near-zero dispersion across a band of operation [1]. Similar to traditional hybrid fiber solutions, the signal in a dispersion managed fiber solution is launched into the fiber with larger effective area, thereby

minimizing fiber non-linear impairments, making it an “effective area managed solution” as well. Total span dispersion also defines the non-linear properties of the system and is designed to be small but nonzero (typically a proprietary parameter that is specific to a particular system vendor). Although the overall dispersion of each span is small, the individual fibers still provide the high local dispersion that is required to enable high channel count systems by reducing non-linear effects. By creating a transmission line with a small overall dispersion and small accumulated dispersion slope, dispersion managed fiber provides equal performance to all channels of the channel plan and virtually eliminates the need for per channel dispersion compensation at the receiver thereby reducing the complexity of the system and simplifying its installation and maintenance.

Figure 3: Design of a fiber span using dispersion managed fiber

42

The increased system margin can be used to extend span lengths and or reduce the required amplifier power.

Hence a transmission system based on dispersion managed fiber enables higher power, greater repeater spacing and longer system reach with less equipment.

The result is greater performance for lower cost; an attractive solution for today’s transoceanic networks which require more capacity while at the same time need to meet the rigorous financial targets set by investors in the more investment cautious world of telecommunications. It comes as no surprise therefore that the fiber being deployed for the Trans-Pacific Express is a dispersion managed fiber solution.

As shown in Table 1, dispersion managed fibers have now taken their place in the broad portfolio of submarine fibers that is required by submarine network designers to deliver bespoke designs that are cost and performance optimized.

Corning Fiber

Attenuation (1550 nm) [dB/km]

Ultra-Low-Loss Fiber

Vascade® EX 000

0. 7

Large Aeff NZDSF

Vascade® LEAF®

0.2

Low Dispersion Slope NZDSF

Vascade® LS+

0.20

Hybrid

Vascade® Hybrid

0.205

Dispersion Managed Fiber

R 000

Fiber Solution

Vascade® L 000

0. 87

Vascade® S 000

0.24

Table 1: Dispersion managed fiber has become part of the broad portfolio of optical fibers required for submarine network design.

Summary Extensive submarine network deployment execution and proposals in many regions of the world, notably Asia-Pacific, Africa and the Caribbean, have signalled the return to strength of the submarine market. While the downturn of 2001 caused the markets to stall, the growth in bandwidth demand continues, as does the development of innovative technological solutions for the submarine industry. However, many of these innovations have had to wait for the recovery of the market to start to be used on a wide scale. One such technology is the dispersion managed fiber solution.

Available as a product since circa 2001, it has been only recently, with the announcement of several new transoceanic networks, that the industry has been able to benefit from the enhanced performance and lower capital and operating costs that this technology enables.

Today the new Trans-Pacific Express submarine cable is benefiting from the advanced Dispersion Dispersion Aeff Slope technology of a (1550 nm) [µm2] [ps/nm-km] [ps/nm2-km] dispersion managed fiber solution that + 8.5 +0.06 76 has enabled this -4.0 +0. 2 70 system to carry more traffic over a -3.0 +0.05 50 longer distance on a lower cost structure 65-69 -3.5 0.085 than ever before. + 8.5

+0.06

0

-37.0

-0. 2

27

Dr. Merrion Edwards is currently the Manager, Market Development, EMEA for Corning Optical Fiber. She has over 16 years of experience in the field of telecommunications and has expertise in broad range of telecommunication applications including long-haul, metro, premises, FTTH and submarine.

Prior to joining Corning, Edwards conducted research into photonic devices for telecommunications and sensing with BICC Cables, Ltd. in the United Kingdom. Edwards holds a PhD in Optoelectronics from Southampton University. She lives with her husband and three children in North Wales in the United Kingdom.

Rita Rukosueva is currently the Submarine Products Manager for Corning Incorporated. She has been with the corporation for over 8 years. Prior to her current position, Rukosueva was the Market Development Engineering Manager where she made numerous contributions in the development of next generation optical fiber products.

Rukosueva holds a M. S. degree in Physics from Moscow State University in Russia.

Sergey Ten was born in Rostov-on-Don, Russia and graduated with honors from the physics department of Moscow State University. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Arizona in 1996 and joined Corning in 1997 as a Senior Scientist, concentrating on the physics of light propagation in optical fibers.

Sergey worked for Tyco Submarine Systems Ltd. in 2000-2001 and in 2001, he re-joined Corning Incorporated as the manager of the transmission test bed group, investigating high data rate transmission in optical fibers. Currently, he is a Market Development Manager, concentrating his efforts on uncovering new services and optical fiber types for emerging technologies.

43

Featuring key speakers Bill Barney CEO Asia Netcom, Hong Kong Ajay Chitkara Chief, International Business Bharti Airtel Limited (Enterprise Services), India William So COO China Netcom (HK) Operations, Hong Kong Gudmundur Gunnarsson Managing Director FARICE, Iceland

Owen Best President, Asia Pacific FLAG Telecom, Hong Kong

World 2007 3 - 5 September 2007, The Oriental Hotel, Singapore

Intelligent Infrastructure

It’s all about global connectivity!

• Asia’s most established global telecommunications infrastructure conference • High level and strategic conference featuring 28 carriers and cable owners, 2 regulatory bodies, 5 project updates, 3 round tables and 1 great event!

• An exciting conference that provides up-to-date information on global infrastructure with a special focus on business continuity, regulatory framework and the Middle East and Turkey Platinum sponsor:

Takanori Uchida Director Global Networking Department, Global Business Division NTT Communications, Japan Yali Liu Director, Asia Pacific Network Planning & Engineering Verizon Business Byron Clatterbuck Vice President Business Development & Carrier Strategy, VSNL, Singapore

Don’t Miss!

Post Conference Executive Summit!

The future of bandwidth pricing – Will the balancing of supply and demand lead to an increase in price?

5 September 2007, Wednesday 10.00am - 4.00pm

Cables & cabling system partner:

Registration sponsor:

Refreshment sponsors:

Cocktail sponsor:

Luncheon sponsor:

Speed networking sponsor:

Endorsers:

Sunmarine Network World 2007

Organised by:

FAX (+65) 6226 3264

� I am interested in attending the conference. � I am interested in sponsorship/exhibiting at the event. � Please send me the conference brochure

Media Partner:

Name: ______________________________________________________________________________ Designation: _______________________________________________________ Organisation: ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Tel: ________________________________ Fax: _________________________________ E-mail: _______________________________________________________________________

www.terrapinn.com/2007/snw

S

ince 2001, Submarine Telecoms Forum has been the platform for discourse on sub­marine telecom cable and network operations. ­ Industry ­professionals provide editorial­ ­ content from their own niche and focus.

Each bi-monthly edition includes commentary and information on system and service ­ provision, and ­ issues critical to the ­industry.

Advertising Rates Magazine pages Rates US$ 1x 2x 3x 4x 5x 6x Page 2,787 2,703 2,620 2,536 2,452 2,369 2/3 page 2,055 1,994 1,932 1,870 1,809 1,747 1/3 page 1,326 1,286 1,247 1,207 1,167 1,127

Website Banners Post your web linked banner to the home page, as well as News-Now sections of the Submarine Telecoms Forum website, where some 5000+ readers can come as often as every week to view the latest news feed, or our bi-monthly magazine.

Rates US$ Home Page

3 Months 6 Months 12 Months 933

1,555

2,488

News-Now Page 1,400

2,333

3,732

Both

3,500

5,599

2,101

Feature Section Sponsorship Available at full-page advertisement rate, section sponsors are identified with a banner (link) at the beginning and end of the featured ­section.

All advertising rates effective as of January 2007.

Advertising enquiries Tel: (703) 444 2527 Fax: (703) 349 5562 sales@wfnstrategies.com

A global guide to the latest known locations of the world’s cableships*, as of July 2007. Information Provided by Llyods List.

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

9242376

Tyco Durable

6/17/2007

9242376

Tyco Durable

6/1/2007

9242376

Tyco Durable

5/29/2007

9242376

Tyco Durable

5/7/2007

9242376

Tyco Durable

9242376

Tyco Durable

9242376

Tyco Durable

8306591 8306591

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

6/20/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

6/7/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

5/29/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

5/24/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

5/1/2007

5/7/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

3/3/2007

3/6/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

1/17/2007

1/18/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

Lodbrog

6/17/2007

6/25/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

Lodbrog

3/23/2007

3/23/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

2/12/2007

2/12/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

1/10/2007

1/10/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

9017070

KDD Ocean Link

1/25/2007

1/25/2007

Keelung

Taiwan

9165188

Segero

3/24/2007

4/6/2007

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

9165188

Segero

1/17/2007

1/20/2007

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

9207065

CS Fu Hai

2/24/2007

4/15/2007

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

9207065

CS Fu Hai

1/21/2007

2/24/2007

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

9207065

CS Fu Hai

1/19/2007

1/21/2007

Y

B

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

9207065

CS Fu Hai

1/18/2007

1/19/2007

Y

B

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

Y

Y

A

A

9207065

CS Fu Hai

1/6/2007

1/12/2007

Shanghai

People’s Republic of China

9165188

Segero

3/7/2007

3/10/2007

Busan

Republic of Korea

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

6/2/2007

6/2/2007

Busan

Republic of Korea

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

4/17/2007

4/17/2007

Busan

Republic of Korea

9194115

Geo Challenger

4/4/2007

Walvis Bay

Republic of Namibia

7424786

DP Reel

4/25/2007

4/30/2007

Y

B

Walvis Bay

Republic of Namibia

7424786

DP Reel

4/7/2007

4/25/2007

Y

B

Walvis Bay

Republic of Namibia

9205720

Skandi Neptune

3/5/2007

3/6/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

* Over 1000 tons

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

9205720

Skandi Neptune

2/17/2007

2/17/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

9248100

Rene Descartes

3/25/2007

3/26/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

9248100

Rene Descartes

3/3/2007

3/5/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

9248100

Rene Descartes

1/25/2007

2/25/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

9194115

Geo Challenger

3/31/2007

4/2/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

8418631

Manta III

3/27/2007

4/7/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

8418631

Manta III

1/23/2007

1/24/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

8125064

Peace in Africa

4/16/2007

5/2/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

8125064

Peace in Africa

1/16/2007

4/14/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

7347718

Chamarel

6/22/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

7347718

Chamarel

3/3/2007

6/20/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

7347718

Chamarel

2/20/2007

2/21/2007

Cape Town

South Africa

8418631

Manta III

4/10/2007

4/28/2007

Port Elizabeth

South Africa

8418631

Manta III

3/4/2007

3/9/2007

Port Elizabeth

South Africa

9199854

Team Oman

5/28/2007

6/6/2007

Limassol

Cyprus

9199854

Team Oman

4/27/2007

5/24/2007

Limassol

Cyprus

8027781

Peter Faber

1/23/2007

1/23/2007

Grenada

Grenada

8027781

Peter Faber

1/15/2007

1/15/2007

Grenada

Grenada

8027781

Peter Faber

1/11/2007

1/11/2007

St. Vincent(WI)

St. Vincent & Grenadines

9019602

Teneo

4/8/2007

4/8/2007

Barbados

Barbados

9242352

Tyco Dependable

4/7/2007

9242352

Tyco Dependable

4/7/2007

9236494

Tycom Reliance

9236509

Tyco Responder

4/14/2007

Frederiksted

American Virgin Islands

4/14/2007

Hovensa

American Virgin Islands

5/29/2007

5/29/2007

San Juan(PRI)

Puerto Rico

6/11/2007

6/11/2007

San Juan(PRI)

Puerto Rico

Y

A

Y

B

9247041

Ile de Batz

A

1/8/2007

1/9/2007

Fujairah Anch.

United Arab Emirates

7814436

Eclipse

A

3/16/2007

3/16/2007

Fujairah Anch.

United Arab Emirates

9236509

Tyco Responder

5/28/2007

5/28/2007

Marshall Islands

Marshall Islands

8027808

Wave Mercury

3/20/2007

3/21/2007

Rabaul

Papua New Guinea

9105889

Teliri

P

W

6/1/2007

6/1/2007

Dardanelles

Turkey

9105889

Teliri

P

E

5/25/2007

5/25/2007

Dardanelles

Turkey

7382469

Salma

P

W

4/4/2007

4/4/2007

Dardanelles

Turkey

6514974

Certamen

P

W

2/7/2007

2/7/2007

Dardanelles

Turkey

6514974

Certamen

P

E

2/2/2007

2/2/2007

Dardanelles

Turkey

6514974

Certamen

Canakkale

Turkey

9105889

Teliri

P

W

5/31/2007

Istanbul

Turkey

2/7/2007

Y

A

2/9/2007 5/31/2007

Y

B

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

9105889

Teliri

P

E

5/27/2007

5/27/2007

Istanbul

Turkey

7382469

Salma

P

W

4/3/2007

4/3/2007

Istanbul

Turkey

7382469

Salma

P

E

3/26/2007

3/26/2007

Istanbul

Turkey

7382469

Salma

3/27/2007

4/1/2007

Galatz

Romania

9242352

Tyco Dependable

P

W

4/22/2007

4/22/2007

Panama Canal

Panama

9241712

Caesar

P

W

2/5/2007

2/5/2007

Panama Canal

Panama

9241712

Caesar

1/19/2007

1/28/2007

Veracruz

Mexico

9203306

Deep Endeavour

2/16/2007

2/18/2007

Tuxpan

Mexico

8710871

I.T. Intrepid

4/1/2007

4/13/2007

Halifax

Canada

8222941

Pacific Guardian

4/28/2007

5/5/2007

Halifax

Canada

8222941

Pacific Guardian

1/8/2007

1/10/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

5/11/2007

5/28/2007

Y

B

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

5/10/2007

5/11/2007

Y

B

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/29/2007

5/10/2007

Y

B

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/25/2007

3/28/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/25/2007

3/25/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/24/2007

3/24/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/23/2007

3/23/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/20/2007

3/22/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/20/2007

3/20/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/19/2007

3/19/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/18/2007

3/18/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/15/2007

3/15/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/12/2007

3/13/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/12/2007

3/12/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/10/2007

3/12/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/9/2007

3/10/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/9/2007

3/9/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/8/2007

3/8/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/6/2007

3/8/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/4/2007

3/5/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

3/4/2007

3/4/2007

Halifax

Canada

9131163

Emerald Sea

2/27/2007

2/27/2007

Halifax

Canada

9247039

Ile de Sein

6/14/2007

6/18/2007

Y

B

Calais

France

9247039

Ile de Sein

1/26/2007

2/9/2007

Y

B

Calais

France

Y

A

Y

B

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

9247041

Ile de Batz

6/17/2007

9247041

Ile de Batz

5/1/2007

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

5/7/2007

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

Calais

France

Calais

France

8302014

Giulio Verne

3/6/2007

3/16/2007

Gijon

Spain

9205720

Skandi Neptune

P

S

1/26/2007

1/26/2007

Cape Finisterre

Spain

9207053

Maersk Recorder

P

S

1/22/2007

1/22/2007

Cape Finisterre

Spain

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

S

2/13/2007

2/13/2007

Cape Finisterre

Spain

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

N

1/21/2007

1/21/2007

Cape Finisterre

Spain

8302014

Giulio Verne

P

N

2/27/2007

2/27/2007

Cape Finisterre

Spain

8813910

Acergy Discovery

P

S

1/26/2007

1/26/2007

Cape Finisterre

Spain

8108676

Leon Thevenin

5/4/2007

5/4/2007

Vigo

Spain

8108676

Leon Thevenin

4/17/2007

4/18/2007

Vigo

Spain

Vigo

Spain

Nagapattinam

India

9247041

Ile de Batz

3/22/2007

3/24/2007

7803566

Sarku Santubong

1/8/2007

6/8/2007

Y

Y

B

B

7824998

Setouchi Surveyor

2/23/2007

2/24/2007

Visakhapatnam

India

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

2/17/2007

2/19/2007

Yokohama

Japan

9017070

KDD Ocean Link

6/12/2007

Yokohama

Japan

9017070

KDD Ocean Link

6/1/2007

6/2/2007

Yokohama

Japan

9017070

KDD Ocean Link

4/21/2007

5/13/2007

Yokohama

Japan

9017070

KDD Ocean Link

1/29/2007

3/29/2007

Yokohama

Japan

9207065

CS Fu Hai

5/11/2007

5/14/2007

Hitachi

Japan

8306591

Lodbrog

3/16/2007

3/18/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

6/26/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

6/3/2007

6/5/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

5/19/2007

6/1/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

5/10/2007

5/13/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

4/18/2007

4/18/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

3/19/2007

4/16/2007

Moji

Japan

9017824

KDD Pacific Link

2/22/2007

3/12/2007

Moji

Japan

9188439

Subaru

5/16/2007

Wakamatsu

Japan

8306591

Lodbrog

3/18/2007

9199854

Team Oman

4/11/2007

9199854

Team Oman

8027781

Peter Faber

9247041

Ile de Batz

P

N

2/25/2007

7814436

Eclipse

P

N

3/27/2007

P

N

3/21/2007

Wakamatsu

Japan

Y

A

4/12/2007

Port Said

Arab Republic of Egypt

Port Said

Arab Republic of Egypt

Y

A

5/31/2007

Port Said

Arab Republic of Egypt

2/25/2007

Port Said

Arab Republic of Egypt

3/27/2007

Port Said

Arab Republic of Egypt

4/11/2007 5/23/2007

4/11/2007 Y

B

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

8027781

Peter Faber

P

S

5/18/2007

5/18/2007

Suez

Arab Republic of Egypt

9131163

Emerald Sea

P

S

6/7/2007

6/7/2007

Suez

Arab Republic of Egypt

9239355

Atlantic Guardian

P

S

1/24/2007

1/24/2007

7382469

Salma

5/10/2007

5/22/2007

7382469

Salma

3/14/2007

7382469

Salma

4/21/2007

Y

A

7382469

Salma

2/23/2007

Y

A

Suez

Arab Republic of Egypt

Y

B

Sfax

Tunisia

Sousse

Tunisia

5/10/2007

Y

B

Casablanca

Morocco

2/25/2007

Y

B

Casablanca

Morocco

3/14/2007

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

P

W

6/2/2007

6/2/2007

Brunsbuttel

Germany

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

P

E

5/14/2007

5/14/2007

Brunsbuttel

Germany

9207053

Maersk Recorder

1/14/2007

1/18/2007

Bremerhaven

Germany

9100748

Wave Sentinel

6/1/2007

6/17/2007

Nordenham

Germany

9100748

Wave Sentinel

3/4/2007

3/6/2007

Ymuiden

Netherlands

9100748

Wave Sentinel

2/27/2007

3/2/2007

Ymuiden

Netherlands

7616779

Calamity Jane

6/25/2007

6/29/2007

Ymuiden

Netherlands

7616779

Calamity Jane

5/9/2007

5/12/2007

Ymuiden

Netherlands

9250529

Pertinacia

3/14/2007

3/19/2007

Rotterdam

Netherlands

9250529

Pertinacia

2/3/2007

3/12/2007

Rotterdam

Netherlands

8418631

Manta III

6/18/2007

Rotterdam

Netherlands

8418631

Manta III

6/9/2007

6/13/2007

Rotterdam

Netherlands

8418631

Manta III

6/4/2007

6/5/2007

Rotterdam

Netherlands

6930520

Elektron

5/9/2007

5/11/2007

Rotterdam

Netherlands

9100748

Wave Sentinel

3/21/2007

3/21/2007

Y

B

Everingen

Netherlands

9100748

Wave Sentinel

2/9/2007

2/9/2007

Everingen

Netherlands

8108676

Leon Thevenin

6/7/2007

6/8/2007

Everingen

Netherlands

9247039

Ile de Sein

1/25/2007

1/25/2007

Everingen

Netherlands

9247053

Ile de Brehat

3/30/2007

3/31/2007

Everingen

Netherlands

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

4/14/2007

4/14/2007

Everingen

Netherlands

7229502

Pleijel

5/8/2007

6/4/2007

Landskrona

Sweden

5386411

Wartena

4/17/2007

Y

A

4/17/2007

Y

B

Karlskrona

Sweden

7229502

Pleijel

5/8/2007

Y

A

5/8/2007

Y

B

Karlskrona

Sweden

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

5/14/2007

Y

A

6/2/2007

Y

B

Karlskrona

Sweden

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

4/5/2007

Y

A

4/25/2007

Y

B

Karlskrona

Sweden

5386411

Wartena

3/20/2007

4/17/2007

Y

B

Kalmar

Sweden

5386411

Wartena

2/19/2007

2/25/2007

Kalmar

Sweden

7229502

Pleijel

4/3/2007

5/8/2007

Y

B

Kalmar

Sweden

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

7229502

Pleijel

1/30/2007

3/17/2007

Kalmar

Sweden

9247041

Ile de Batz

4/29/2007

4/30/2007

Caen

France

8108676

Leon Thevenin

6/27/2007

8108676

Leon Thevenin

6/18/2007

8108676

Leon Thevenin

8108676

Leon Thevenin

8108676

Leon Thevenin

8108676

Leon Thevenin

8108676

Leon Thevenin

8108676

Leon Thevenin

8108676

Leon Thevenin

9247053

Ile de Brehat

9247053

Ile de Brehat

9247053

Ile de Brehat

9247053

Ile de Brehat

9247053

Ile de Brehat

3/20/2007

9247053

Ile de Brehat

2/7/2007

9247053

Ile de Brehat

9247053 9247041

Brest

France

6/21/2007

Brest

France

6/9/2007

6/12/2007

Brest

France

5/6/2007

5/26/2007

Brest

France

4/13/2007

4/16/2007

Brest

France

4/7/2007

4/8/2007

Brest

France

3/31/2007

4/1/2007

Brest

France

3/17/2007

3/21/2007

Brest

France

2/14/2007

3/9/2007

Brest

France

6/23/2007

6/25/2007

Brest

France

6/18/2007

6/19/2007

Brest

France

5/5/2007

6/10/2007

Brest

France

4/4/2007

4/19/2007

Brest

France

3/21/2007

Brest

France

3/11/2007

Brest

France

2/1/2007

2/7/2007

Brest

France

Ile de Brehat

1/17/2007

1/21/2007

Brest

France

Ile de Batz

3/26/2007

3/30/2007

Brest

France

8813910

Acergy Discovery

1/15/2007

1/25/2007

Brest

France

9247041

Ile de Batz

1/9/2007

1/23/2007

Port Sudan

Sudan

9019602

Teneo

3/2/2007

3/3/2007

Stanley Harbour

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

2/21/2007

2/21/2007

Stanley Harbour

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

1/31/2007

2/1/2007

Stanley Harbour

Falkland Islands

9242340

Tyco Resolute

6/19/2007

Mar del Plata

Argentina

Y

Y

Y

A

A

A

8416889

Fjordkabel

5/31/2007

6/1/2007

Kirkenes

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

5/28/2007

5/29/2007

Kirkenes

Norway

6930544

Nordkabel

5/21/2007

5/22/2007

Harstad

Norway

6930544

Nordkabel

5/13/2007

5/14/2007

Harstad

Norway

6930544

Nordkabel

2/21/2007

2/22/2007

Harstad

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

6/5/2007

6/8/2007

Harstad

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

5/10/2007

5/11/2007

Harstad

Norway

6930520

Elektron

1/6/2007

1/6/2007

Verdal

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

4/28/2007

4/29/2007

Bremanger

Norway

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

9125140

Ocean Pearl

2/14/2007

2/16/2007

Bergen

Norway

9183867

Geowave Commander

5/12/2007

5/14/2007

Bergen

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

4/25/2007

4/26/2007

Bergen

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

4/11/2007

4/11/2007

Bergen

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

4/8/2007

4/9/2007

Bergen

Norway

7616779

Calamity Jane

2/22/2007

2/23/2007

Stavanger

Norway

7616779

Calamity Jane

2/9/2007

2/11/2007

Stavanger

Norway

9205720

Skandi Neptune

6/18/2007

6/20/2007

Stavanger

Norway

9205720

Skandi Neptune

6/2/2007

6/6/2007

Stavanger

Norway

9205720

Skandi Neptune

4/12/2007

4/13/2007

Stavanger

Norway

9205720

Skandi Neptune

3/28/2007

3/31/2007

Stavanger

Norway

9125140

Ocean Pearl

3/8/2007

3/24/2007

Y

B

Stavanger

Norway

6930520

Elektron

5/29/2007

Y

A

6/6/2007

Y

B

Stavanger

Norway

Y

A

4/25/2007

Y

B

6930520

Elektron

4/21/2007

Flekkefjord

Norway

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

4/4/2007

4/4/2007

Kvinesdal

Norway

6930520

Elektron

4/19/2007

4/20/2007

Kvinesdal

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/22/2007

3/23/2007

Kvinesdal

Norway

6930520

Elektron

2/22/2007

2/25/2007

Kvinesdal

Norway

Y

B

9100748

Wave Sentinel

4/6/2007

4/6/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

9215206

Maersk Responder

4/28/2007

4/28/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

4/22/2007

4/23/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

4/15/2007

4/15/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

6930520

Elektron

4/25/2007

4/25/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

6930520

Elektron

4/9/2007

4/9/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/13/2007

3/13/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/10/2007

3/10/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/8/2007

3/8/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/2/2007

3/2/2007

Kristiansand

Norway

9207053

Maersk Recorder

4/6/2007

4/12/2007

Arendal

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/13/2007

3/13/2007

Arendal

Norway

9063287

Cable Retriever

3/1/2007

3/6/2007

Batangas

Philippines

9063287

Cable Retriever

2/22/2007

2/23/2007

Batangas

Philippines

9063287

Cable Retriever

1/30/2007

2/3/2007

Batangas

Philippines

8027808

Wave Mercury

2/6/2007

2/12/2007

Batangas

Philippines

9063275

Asean Restorer

2/4/2007

2/6/2007

Batangas

Philippines

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

9063275

Asean Restorer

1/7/2007

9236676

Asean Explorer

2/12/2007

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

1/8/2007

Batangas

Philippines

2/13/2007

Batangas

Philippines

9236676

Asean Explorer

1/16/2007

1/17/2007

Batangas

Philippines

9215218

Maersk Reliance

6/7/2007

6/16/2007

Aberdeen(GBR)

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

4/1/2007

4/2/2007

Aberdeen(GBR)

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/15/2007

3/21/2007

Aberdeen(GBR)

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

3/24/2007

3/29/2007

Burntisland

United Kingdom

8936645

Sarku Clementine

2/14/2007

2/15/2007

Kemaman

Malaysia

8936645

Sarku Clementine

1/10/2007

2/14/2007

Y

B

Kemaman

Malaysia

8936645

Sarku Clementine

1/7/2007

1/10/2007

Y

B

Kemaman

Malaysia

8506062

Trinity Supporter

5/4/2007

5/5/2007

Kemaman

Malaysia

6930520

Elektron

6/17/2007

6/17/2007

Rosyth

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

6/6/2007

6/7/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

7814436

Eclipse

6/7/2007

6/14/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

7814436

Eclipse

6/1/2007

6/5/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

7814436

Eclipse

4/22/2007

5/30/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

7814436

Eclipse

4/12/2007

4/20/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/9/2007

3/12/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/5/2007

3/6/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/2/2007

3/2/2007

Leith

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

6/8/2007

6/9/2007

Hartlepool

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

5/29/2007

5/31/2007

Hartlepool

United Kingdom

7382469

Salma

2/21/2007

2/21/2007

Ibiza

Spain

7382469

Salma

4/16/2007

4/17/2007

Sagunto

Spain

7382469

Salma

1/30/2007

9247039

Ile de Sein

4/22/2007

Y

A

4/28/2007

7616779

Calamity Jane

4/7/2007

Y

A

4/19/2007

Y

7616779

Calamity Jane

3/21/2007

Y

A

4/6/2007

Y

7616779

Calamity Jane

3/11/2007

Y

A

3/16/2007

2/20/2007

Y

B

Sagunto

Spain

Port de Bouc

France

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

7616779

Calamity Jane

2/23/2007

Y

A

3/10/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

9205720

Skandi Neptune

3/31/2007

Y

A

4/7/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

3/11/2007

Y

A

3/28/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

9215218

Maersk Reliance

4/30/2007

Y

A

6/7/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

9215218

Maersk Reliance

4/6/2007

Y

A

4/24/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

7814436

Eclipse

6/15/2007

Y

A

6/17/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

Eclipse

6/5/2007

Y

A

6/7/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

Eclipse

5/30/2007

Y

A

6/1/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

7814436 7814436

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

7814436

Eclipse

4/20/2007

Y

A

4/22/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/21/2007

Y

A

4/1/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/12/2007

Y

A

3/15/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/6/2007

Y

A

3/9/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

3/2/2007

Y

A

3/5/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

2/22/2007

Y

A

3/2/2007

Y

B

continental shelf

United Kingdom

7229502

Pleijel

3/26/2007

Stockholm

Sweden

7382469

Salma

4/11/2007

Savona

Italy

8302014

Giulio Verne

5/4/2007

Anzio

Italy

8302014

Giulio Verne

4/3/2007

5/4/2007

Naples

Italy

8302014

Giulio Verne

2/3/2007

2/7/2007

New York

United States of America

9183867

Geowave Commander

1/20/2007

1/21/2007

Valletta

Malta

9247041

Ile de Batz

3/1/2007

3/1/2007

Valletta

Malta

9242364

Tyco Decisive

3/14/2007

4/15/2007

Portsmouth(NH USA)

United States of America

9236494

Tycom Reliance

4/30/2007

5/21/2007

Portsmouth(NH USA)

United States of America

9242364

Tyco Decisive

5/16/2007

Y

A

5/20/2007

Y

B

U.S. Gulf

United States of America

9242364

Tyco Decisive

4/29/2007

Y

A

5/15/2007

Y

B

U.S. Gulf

United States of America

9019602

Teneo

5/22/2007

Y

A

6/15/2007

Y

B

U.S. Gulf

United States of America

9019602

Teneo

5/16/2007

Y

A

5/20/2007

Y

B

U.S. Gulf

United States of America

9019602

Teneo

4/29/2007

Y

A

5/5/2007

Y

B

U.S. Gulf

United States of America

9231535

Normand Cutter

1/22/2007

Y

A

5/10/2007

Y

B

U.S. Gulf

United States of America

7636341

Telepaatti

1/30/2007

1/31/2007

Ventspils

Republic of Latvia

7636341

Telepaatti

1/29/2007

1/30/2007

Ventspils

Republic of Latvia

7636341

Telepaatti

1/25/2007

1/29/2007

Ventspils

Republic of Latvia

7636341

Telepaatti

1/23/2007

1/23/2007

Ventspils

Republic of Latvia

5386411

Wartena

4/17/2007

4/21/2007

Kaliningrad

Russian Federation

7382469

Salma

5/22/2007

5/28/2007

Molfetta

Italy

7382469

Salma

5/30/2007

6/4/2007

Koper

Republic of Slovenia

9242352

Tyco Dependable

5/7/2007

5/20/2007

Honolulu

United States of America

3/29/2007 4/12/2007 Y

A

5/13/2007

Y

Y

Y

B

B

B

9215206

Maersk Responder

4/17/2007

4/28/2007

Fredericia

Denmark

9215206

Maersk Responder

2/1/2007

2/1/2007

Esbjerg

Denmark

9207053

Maersk Recorder

4/13/2007

4/23/2007

Esbjerg

Denmark

9207053

Maersk Recorder

1/6/2007

1/13/2007

Esbjerg

Denmark

Y

B

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

9105889

Teliri

6/2/2007

6/3/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

5/23/2007

5/24/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

3/30/2007

3/30/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

3/15/2007

3/20/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

3/15/2007

3/15/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

3/1/2007

3/3/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

2/22/2007

2/22/2007

Kalamata

Greece

9105889

Teliri

2/11/2007

2/12/2007

Kalamata

Greece

8104199

Raymond Croze

5/8/2007

5/8/2007

Kalamata

Greece

8104199

Raymond Croze

4/30/2007

4/30/2007

Kalamata

Greece

8104199

Raymond Croze

1/28/2007

1/29/2007

Kalamata

Greece

8104199

Raymond Croze

1/19/2007

1/19/2007

Kalamata

Greece

8027810

Wave Venture

5/10/2007

5/31/2007

Victoria(CAN)

Canada

8027810

Wave Venture

5/8/2007

5/10/2007

Victoria(CAN)

Canada

6930520

Elektron

5/8/2007

5/9/2007

Schiedam

Netherlands

6/14/2007

Portland(OR USA)

United States of America

Portland(OR USA)

United States of America

Y

A

8027810

Wave Venture

6/1/2007

8900866

Global Sentinel

5/1/2007

8900866

Global Sentinel

2/24/2007

3/7/2007

Portland(OR USA)

United States of America

8900866

Global Sentinel

4/21/2007

4/21/2007

San Francisco

United States of America

8900866

Global Sentinel

4/2/2007

4/5/2007

San Francisco

United States of America

8900866

Global Sentinel

3/23/2007

3/28/2007

San Francisco

United States of America

9205720

Skandi Neptune

2/2/2007

2/2/2007

St. Vincent(CPV)

Republic of Cape Verde

Praia(CPV)

Republic of Cape Verde

Pasir Gudang

Malaysia

8108676

Leon Thevenin

4/24/2007

9248710

Cable Protector

1/24/2007

9236676

Asean Explorer

3/1/2007

3/2/2007

Pasir Gudang

Malaysia

9100748

Wave Sentinel

5/29/2007

5/29/2007

Portland(GBR)

United Kingdom

9100748

Wave Sentinel

4/17/2007

4/19/2007

Portland(GBR)

United Kingdom

9100748

Wave Sentinel

3/22/2007

3/30/2007

Portland(GBR)

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

6/2/2007

6/26/2007

Portland(GBR)

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

5/9/2007

5/30/2007

Portland(GBR)

United Kingdom

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

4/15/2007

5/9/2007

Portland(GBR)

United Kingdom

9236494

Tycom Reliance

3/26/2007

3/28/2007

9252462

Viking Forcados

3/7/2007

9125140

Ocean Pearl

5/2/2007

9125140

Ocean Pearl

4/25/2007

4/27/2007 Y

A

3/18/2007

Y

Y

B

B

Falmouth

United Kingdom

Apapa-Lagos

Nigeria

5/8/2007

Douala

Cameroon

4/27/2007

Douala

Cameroon

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

8108676

Leon Thevenin

2/11/2007

8108676

Leon Thevenin

2/5/2007

9247053

Ile de Brehat

9247053

Ile de Brehat

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

2/12/2007

Bristol

United Kingdom

2/6/2007

Bristol

United Kingdom

3/18/2007

3/19/2007

Bristol

United Kingdom

3/12/2007

3/14/2007

Bristol

United Kingdom

3/26/2007

Banten

Indonesia

Belfast

United Kingdom

7824998

Setouchi Surveyor

3/24/2007

8302014

Giulio Verne

6/28/2007

8302014

Giulio Verne

6/11/2007

6/14/2007

Belfast

United Kingdom

3/18/2007

3/22/2007

Iggesund

Sweden

1/7/2007

1/7/2007

Tarifa

Spain

1/15/2007

1/15/2007

Tarifa

Spain

5/31/2007

6/1/2007

Colombo

Sri Lanka

Catania

Italy

Catania

Italy

7229502

Pleijel

9248100

Rene Descartes

P

W

9183867

Geowave Commander

P

E

8027781

Peter Faber

9105889

Teliri

6/3/2007

9105889

Teliri

5/14/2007

9105889

Teliri

5/10/2007

5/11/2007

Catania

Italy

9105889

Teliri

4/5/2007

4/10/2007

Catania

Italy

9105889

Teliri

2/20/2007

2/22/2007

Y

B

Catania

Italy

9105889

Teliri

2/14/2007

2/20/2007

Y

B

Catania

Italy

8104199

Raymond Croze

4/9/2007

4/9/2007

Catania

Italy

8104199

Raymond Croze

4/2/2007

4/2/2007

Catania

Italy

6514974

Certamen

6/15/2007

Catania

Italy

6514974

Certamen

6/6/2007

6/15/2007

Y

B

Catania

Italy

6514974

Certamen

4/25/2007

4/28/2007

Y

B

Catania

Italy

6514974

Certamen

2/26/2007

2/26/2007

Catania

Italy

6514974

Certamen

2/10/2007

2/24/2007

Catania

Italy

6514974

Certamen

1/23/2007

1/30/2007

Catania

Italy

7382469

Salma

5/28/2007

5/30/2007

Chioggia

Italy

Portsmouth

United Kingdom

Peterhead

United Kingdom

Y

A

6/5/2007 5/23/2007

Y

B

7342940

Newton

3/1/2007

3/2/2007

7616779

Calamity Jane

4/19/2007

5/9/2007

7616779

Calamity Jane

4/6/2007

4/7/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

7616779

Calamity Jane

3/16/2007

3/21/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

7616779

Calamity Jane

3/10/2007

3/11/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

7616779

Calamity Jane

1/26/2007

1/29/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

7616779

Calamity Jane

1/18/2007

1/21/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

Y

B

9205720

Skandi Neptune

4/7/2007

4/7/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

9215218

Maersk Reliance

4/24/2007

4/30/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

6930520

Elektron

5/11/2007

7814436

Eclipse

6/17/2007

7814436

Eclipse

6/14/2007

6/15/2007

Peterhead

United Kingdom

9019602

Teneo

3/18/2007

3/18/2007

Port William

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

3/5/2007

3/7/2007

Port William

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

2/26/2007

2/27/2007

Port William

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

2/20/2007

2/21/2007

Port William

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

2/6/2007

2/10/2007

Port William

Falkland Islands

9019602

Teneo

2/1/2007

2/3/2007

Port William

Falkland Islands

9215206

Maersk Responder

5/27/2007

5/29/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

5/25/2007

5/27/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

5/4/2007

5/7/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

4/13/2007

4/14/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

3/28/2007

4/13/2007

Y

B

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

3/11/2007

3/28/2007

Y

B

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

3/5/2007

3/6/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

2/17/2007

3/5/2007

Y

B

Tees

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

2/10/2007

2/17/2007

Y

B

Tees

United Kingdom

9207053

Maersk Recorder

5/19/2007

5/26/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

9207053

Maersk Recorder

5/10/2007

5/11/2007

Tees

United Kingdom

5/11/2007

Y

B

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

Peterhead

United Kingdom

Peterhead

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

5/5/2007

5/7/2007

Immingham

United Kingdom

9205720

Skandi Neptune

4/18/2007

4/19/2007

Halden

Norway

9231535

Normand Cutter

6/4/2007

6/12/2007

Halden

Norway

8302014

Giulio Verne

3/16/2007

3/19/2007

Halden

Norway

9183867

Geowave Commander

1/9/2007

9205720

Skandi Neptune

2/2/2007

7424786

DP Reel

4/30/2007

9105889

Teliri

6/24/2007

7382469

Salma

4/12/2007

9247039

Ile de Sein

6514974

Certamen

9105889

Teliri

6/5/2007

9105889

Teliri

5/11/2007

9105889

Teliri

9105889

Teliri

Y

B

1/15/2007

Y

B

Dakar

Senegal

2/17/2007

Y

B

Pointe Noire(COG)

The Congo

Pointe Noire(COG)

The Congo

Genoa

Italy

4/14/2007

Genoa

Italy

2/19/2007

2/27/2007

Genoa

Italy

4/30/2007

6/4/2007

Genoa

Italy

Y

A

4/30/2007

Y

A

6/18/2007

Augusta

Italy

5/12/2007

Augusta

Italy

4/11/2007

4/11/2007

Augusta

Italy

2/13/2007

2/13/2007

Augusta

Italy

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

6514974

Certamen

2/9/2007

6514974

Certamen

1/22/2007

7382469

Salma

8418631

Manta III

7347718 8027781 9236509

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

2/10/2007

Augusta

Italy

1/22/2007

Augusta

Italy

3/16/2007

3/19/2007

Taranto

Italy

5/1/2007

5/6/2007

Durban

South Africa

Chamarel

1/29/2007

2/17/2007

Durban

South Africa

Peter Faber

5/6/2007

5/8/2007

Cadiz

Spain

Tyco Responder

5/9/2007

5/9/2007

Limetree Bay

American Virgin Islands

9247039

Ile de Sein

2/27/2007

3/10/2007

Nice

France

8027781

Peter Faber

3/11/2007

3/11/2007

Cozumel

Mexico

6930520

Elektron

6/13/2007

6/16/2007

Buckie

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

5/13/2007

5/18/2007

Buckie

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

5/3/2007

5/3/2007

Buckie

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

4/3/2007

4/6/2007

Buckie

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

3/31/2007

4/1/2007

Buckie

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

3/4/2007

3/6/2007

Buckie

United Kingdom

Y

A

8813910

Acergy Discovery

1/9/2007

1/11/2007

Dundee

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

6/20/2007

6/21/2007

Harwich

United Kingdom

9215206

Maersk Responder

5/15/2007

5/17/2007

Harwich

United Kingdom

9207053

Maersk Recorder

5/12/2007

9242364

Tyco Decisive

3/14/2007

5/12/2007 Y

A

4/15/2007

Y

B

Harwich

United Kingdom

Baltimore

United States of America

9236494

Tycom Reliance

4/9/2007

4/28/2007

Baltimore

United States of America

9236509

Tyco Responder

4/21/2007

4/26/2007

Baltimore

United States of America

6930520

Elektron

7/1/2007

7/1/2007

Tyne

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

5/12/2007

5/12/2007

Tyne

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

5/4/2007

5/4/2007

Tyne

United Kingdom

6930520

Elektron

4/2/2007

4/2/2007

Tyne

United Kingdom

7814436

Eclipse

1/22/2007

1/23/2007

Sohar

Sultanate of Oman

7814436

Eclipse

1/7/2007

1/22/2007

Sohar

Sultanate of Oman

9207053

Maersk Recorder

3/18/2007

3/18/2007

Luanda

Angola

9207053

Maersk Recorder

3/5/2007

3/10/2007

Luanda

Angola

9207053

Maersk Recorder

2/7/2007

2/8/2007

Luanda

Angola

7424786

DP Reel

4/2/2007

4/2/2007

Luanda

Angola

7424786

DP Reel

3/5/2007

4/2/2007

Y

B

Luanda

Angola

1/22/2007

Y

B

Hamriyah

United Arab Emirates

Fremantle

Australia

7814436

Eclipse

1/7/2007

9239355

Atlantic Guardian

4/30/2007

Y

A

5/11/2007

Y

B

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

9239355

Atlantic Guardian

5/23/2007

7382469

Salma

3/23/2007

9242364

Tyco Decisive

9242364

Tyco Decisive

9236509

Tyco Responder

6/17/2007

9236509

Tyco Responder

5/30/2007

6/9/2007

9236509

Tyco Responder

5/1/2007

9236509

Tyco Responder

8027781

Peter Faber

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

6/12/2007

Melbourne

Australia

3/25/2007

Diliskelesi

Turkey

2/17/2007

2/18/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

1/15/2007

1/16/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

5/7/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

3/19/2007

3/20/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

4/8/2007

4/12/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

8027781

Peter Faber

1/17/2007

1/21/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

9101132

Cable Innovator

4/18/2007

4/19/2007

Curacao

Netherlands Antilles

7382469

Salma

8110942

Texas Horizon

P

E

4/2/2007

8110942

Texas Horizon

3/3/2007

8110942

Texas Horizon

2/17/2007

8110942

Texas Horizon

2/7/2007

8110942

Texas Horizon

1/27/2007

9101132

Cable Innovator

3/30/2007

9101132

Cable Innovator

2/7/2007

9101132

Cable Innovator

2/1/2007

9242376

Tyco Durable

9207065

CS Fu Hai

1/29/2007

9207065

CS Fu Hai

9205720

Skandi Neptune

P

W

9125140

Ocean Pearl

P

W

9231535

Normand Cutter

P

W

9207053

Maersk Recorder

P

W

8108676

Leon Thevenin

P

W

8108676

Leon Thevenin

P

4/2/2007 Y

A

Sulina

Romania

Ciudad del Carmen

Mexico

3/6/2007

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

2/20/2007

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

2/13/2007

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

1/29/2007

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

4/6/2007

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

2/7/2007

Y

B

3/30/2007

Y

B

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

2/7/2007

Y

B

Coatzacoalcos

Mexico

2/1/2007

3/3/2007

Y

B

Hong Kong

People’s Republic of China

5/2/2007

5/5/2007

Hong Kong

People’s Republic of China

B

4/19/2007

5/1/2007

Hong Kong

People’s Republic of China

1/24/2007

1/24/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

3/24/2007

3/24/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

6/16/2007

6/16/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

1/19/2007

1/19/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

6/18/2007

6/18/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

W

6/8/2007

6/8/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

8108676

Leon Thevenin

P

W

3/15/2007

3/15/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

E

6/18/2007

6/18/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

W

2/9/2007

2/9/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

W

1/26/2007

1/26/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

9247053

Ile de Brehat

P

W

3/31/2007

3/31/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

9247041

Ile de Batz

P

W

5/7/2007

5/7/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

8302014

Giulio Verne

P

W

3/23/2007

7814436

Eclipse

P

W

4/9/2007

8813910

Acergy Discovery

P

W

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

P

W

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

P

W

8918629

C.S.Sovereign

P

E

8710871

I.T. Intrepid

8710871 9242376 9242376

Tyco Durable

8306591

Lodbrog

9063287

Cable Retriever

8027808

Wave Mercury

9063275

Asean Restorer

9063275

Asean Restorer

8222941

Pacific Guardian

2/1/2007

9101132

Cable Innovator

5/1/2007

9205720

Skandi Neptune

2/17/2007

Y

A

3/5/2007

Y

8418631

Manta III

3/9/2007

Y

A

3/27/2007

8418631

Manta III

1/26/2007

3/4/2007

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

3/23/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

4/9/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

1/13/2007

1/13/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

2/22/2007

2/22/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

2/8/2007

2/8/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

1/30/2007

1/30/2007

Dover Strait

United Kingdom

6/22/2007

6/29/2007

St. John’s(CAN)

Canada

I.T. Intrepid

5/13/2007

5/16/2007

St. John’s(CAN)

Canada

Tyco Durable

4/29/2007

4/30/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

1/9/2007

1/9/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

4/3/2007

6/12/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

1/8/2007

1/9/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

1/28/2007

1/29/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

4/3/2007

4/4/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

3/27/2007

3/28/2007

Kaohsiung

Taiwan

4/5/2007

Bermuda

Bermuda

Bermuda

Bermuda

B

Mossel Bay

South Africa

Y

B

Mossel Bay

South Africa

Y

B

Mossel Bay

South Africa

7382469

Salma

3/4/2007

3/6/2007

Viana do Castelo

Portugal

9183867

Geowave Commander

1/15/2007

1/15/2007

Algeciras

Spain

7382469

Salma

2/28/2007

9125140

Ocean Pearl

3/24/2007

9207053

Maersk Recorder

1/26/2007

6930520

Elektron

4/21/2007

6930520

Elektron

3/18/2007

6930520

Elektron

2/18/2007

7814436

Eclipse

3/7/2007

3/2/2007

Seville

Spain

Las Palmas

Canary Islands

1/26/2007

Las Palmas

Canary Islands

4/23/2007

Norrkoping

Sweden

Norrkoping

Sweden

Norrkoping

Sweden

Ajman

United Arab Emirates

Y

A

4/25/2007

Y

A

Y

A

2/22/2007

Y

B

3/19/2007 Y

B

3/15/2007

7814436

Eclipse

3/2/2007

3/5/2007

Ajman

United Arab Emirates

8302014

Giulio Verne

5/13/2007

5/17/2007

Civitavecchia

Italy

9207065

CS Fu Hai

6/20/2007

6/22/2007

Vanino

Russian Federation

9239355

Atlantic Guardian

2/4/2007

2/5/2007

Male

Republic of Maldives

9247039

Ile de Sein

Algiers

Algeria

9247039

Ile de Sein

Algiers

Algeria

O

3/12/2007

3/14/2007

3/12/2007

3/12/2007

Y

B

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

9248100

Rene Descartes

4/14/2007

9247039

Ile de Sein

4/7/2007 4/14/2007

ARRIVAL DATE EST

Y

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

A

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

4/14/2007

Ceuta

Spain

4/7/2007

Ceuta

Spain

9247039

Ile de Sein

Larache

Morocco

8027781

Peter Faber

P

S

5/23/2007

4/20/2007 5/23/2007

Y

B

Bab el Mandeb Strait

Yemeni Republic

9205720

Skandi Neptune

P

N

6/29/2007

6/29/2007

Skaw

Denmark

9205720

Skandi Neptune

P

S

6/23/2007

6/23/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930544

Nordkabel

P

N

1/21/2007

1/21/2007

Skaw

Denmark

9215206

Maersk Responder

P

N

4/28/2007

4/28/2007

Skaw

Denmark

9215206

Maersk Responder

P

S

4/16/2007

4/16/2007

Skaw

Denmark

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

P

S

6/23/2007

6/23/2007

Skaw

Denmark

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

P

S

6/14/2007

6/14/2007

Skaw

Denmark

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

P

N

4/25/2007

4/25/2007

Skaw

Denmark

7619458

Nexans Skagerrak

P

S

4/5/2007

4/5/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

6/21/2007

6/21/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

6/19/2007

6/19/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

5/21/2007

5/21/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

5/20/2007

5/20/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

4/25/2007

4/25/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

4/21/2007

4/21/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

4/9/2007

4/9/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

4/8/2007

4/8/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

3/21/2007

3/21/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

3/17/2007

3/17/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

3/9/2007

3/9/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

3/8/2007

3/8/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

3/2/2007

3/2/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

2/25/2007

2/25/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

N

2/22/2007

2/22/2007

Skaw

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

P

S

2/18/2007

2/18/2007

Skaw

Denmark

9105889

Teliri

P

S

4/19/2007

4/19/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

9105889

Teliri

P

N

4/11/2007

4/11/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

7382469

Salma

P

N

4/7/2007

4/7/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

8104199

Raymond Croze

P

N

5/10/2007

5/10/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

8104199

Raymond Croze

P

S

4/29/2007

4/29/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

8104199

Raymond Croze

P

N

4/9/2007

4/9/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

8104199

Raymond Croze

P

S

1/18/2007

6514974

Certamen

P

N

4/28/2007

P

S

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

1/18/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

4/28/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

4/25/2007

4/25/2007

Messina Strait

Italy

5/22/2007

5/23/2007

Tangier

Morocco

6514974

Certamen

9247039

Ile de Sein

9247039

Ile de Sein

5/1/2007

5/1/2007

Tangier

Morocco

9247039

Ile de Sein

4/20/2007

4/20/2007

Tangier

Morocco

9247039

Ile de Sein

4/13/2007

4/14/2007

Tangier

Morocco

9100748

Wave Sentinel

3/6/2007

9236509

Tyco Responder

3/8/2007

3/19/2007

Y

A

3/20/2007 Y

B

Eemshaven

Netherlands

Santa Marta

Colombia

8416889

Fjordkabel

6/13/2007

6/14/2007

Tromso

Norway

8416889

Fjordkabel

2/25/2007

2/26/2007

Tromso

Norway

9231535

Normand Cutter

6/12/2007

6/14/2007

Drammen

Norway

6930520

Elektron

5/22/2007

5/29/2007

Drammen

Norway

6930520

Elektron

4/27/2007

5/1/2007

Drammen

Norway

6930520

Elektron

3/15/2007

3/16/2007

Drammen

Norway

6930520

Elektron

1/9/2007

1/9/2007

Drammen

Norway

6930520

Elektron

5/20/2007

5/21/2007

Kalundborg

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

4/8/2007

4/8/2007

Kalundborg

Denmark

6930520

Elektron

3/9/2007

3/9/2007

Kalundborg

Denmark

9242376

Tyco Durable

3/25/2007

4/17/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

9248710

Cable Protector

3/18/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

7824998

Setouchi Surveyor

4/26/2007

4/30/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

7824998

Setouchi Surveyor

3/28/2007

4/1/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

7824998

Setouchi Surveyor

3/4/2007

3/7/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

8936645

Sarku Clementine

4/9/2007

4/14/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

8936645

Sarku Clementine

3/22/2007

4/9/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Y

B

9131163

Emerald Sea

6/24/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

9063287

Cable Retriever

5/6/2007

5/7/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

9063287

Cable Retriever

3/15/2007

4/2/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

7803566

Sarku Santubong

6/8/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

8027808

Wave Mercury

2/26/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

3/6/2007

8027808

Wave Mercury

2/17/2007

2/26/2007

8506062

Trinity Supporter

5/29/2007

6/16/2007

8506062

Trinity Supporter

4/28/2007

5/3/2007

8506062

Trinity Supporter

3/30/2007

4/28/2007

Y

Y

B

B

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

3/30/2007

Y

B

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

2/2/2007

3/3/2007

Y

B

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

6/9/2007

6/12/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

4/29/2007

5/30/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

4/9/2007

4/10/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

3/19/2007

3/22/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

3/1/2007

3/9/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

2/10/2007

2/20/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

4/28/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

4/4/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

3/4/2007

3/22/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

2/17/2007

2/28/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

8506062

Trinity Supporter

3/3/2007

8506062

Trinity Supporter

9063275

Asean Restorer

9063275

Asean Restorer

9063275

Asean Restorer

9063275

Asean Restorer

9063275

Asean Restorer

9063275

Asean Restorer

9236676

Asean Explorer

6/26/2007

9236676

Asean Explorer

5/28/2007

6/5/2007

9236676

Asean Explorer

4/25/2007

9236676

Asean Explorer

3/26/2007

9236676

Asean Explorer

9236676

Asean Explorer

9236676

Asean Explorer

1/8/2007

1/11/2007

Singapore

Republic of Singapore

9063287

Cable Retriever

2/23/2007

2/25/2007

Subic Bay

Philippines

7382469

Salma

4/21/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

7382469

Salma

7382469

P

W

4/21/2007 3/8/2007

3/8/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

Salma

P

E

2/25/2007

2/25/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9248100

Rene Descartes

P

W

5/28/2007

5/28/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9131163

Emerald Sea

P

W

5/28/2007

5/28/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9183867

Geowave Commander

P

W

5/2/2007

5/2/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

W

5/1/2007

5/1/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

E

4/22/2007

4/22/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9247039

Ile de Sein

P

W

1/19/2007

1/19/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

9247041

Ile de Batz

P

W

3/19/2007

3/19/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

8302014

Giulio Verne

P

W

6/5/2007

6/5/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

7814436

Eclipse

O

4/4/2007

4/4/2007

Gibraltar

Gibraltar

8104199

Raymond Croze

3/22/2007

3/28/2007

Valencia

Spain

8104199

Raymond Croze

3/22/2007

3/22/2007

Valencia

Spain

7382469

Salma

2/22/2007

7382469

Salma

2/20/2007

9242364

Tyco Decisive

9242364

Tyco Decisive

9242364

Tyco Decisive

4/15/2007

Y

A T

2/23/2007

Castellon

Spain

2/20/2007

T

Barcelona

Spain

5/20/2007

5/22/2007

Mobile

United States of America

5/15/2007

5/16/2007

Mobile

United States of America

4/29/2007

Mobile

United States of America

MOVE MOVE TYPE TYPE QUALIFIER

ARRIVAL DATE

ARRIVAL DATE EST

ARRIVAL DATE QUALIFIER

SAILED DATE

LR NO

VESSEL NAME

9019602

Teneo

6/15/2007

9019602

Teneo

5/20/2007

9019602

Teneo

9019602

Teneo

9231535

Normand Cutter

9231535

Normand Cutter

9215218

Maersk Reliance

9215218

Maersk Reliance

9215218

Maersk Reliance

9215218

Maersk Reliance

2/15/2007

2/23/2007

9215218

Maersk Reliance

1/29/2007

2/2/2007

SAILED DATE EST

SAILED DATE QUALIFIER

PORT NAME

COUNTRY NAME

6/16/2007

Mobile

United States of America

5/22/2007

Mobile

United States of America

5/5/2007

5/16/2007

Mobile

United States of America

4/15/2007

4/29/2007

Mobile

United States of America

5/10/2007

5/15/2007

Mobile

United States of America

1/16/2007

1/22/2007

Mobile

United States of America

3/29/2007

4/6/2007

Mobile

United States of America

3/8/2007

3/11/2007

Mobile

United States of America

2/23/2007

2/25/2007

Mobile

United States of America

Mobile

United States of America

Mobile

United States of America

Y

B

8110942

Texas Horizon

4/4/2007

5/9/2007

Tampa

United States of America

6930520

Elektron

3/29/2007

3/30/2007

Lerwick

United Kingdom

9183867

Geowave Commander

5/5/2007

5/8/2007

Santander

Spain

9227754

Geomaster

1/6/2007

Santander

Spain

7382469

Salma

6/9/2007

Alexandria(EGY)

Arab Republic of Egypt

8104199

Raymond Croze

5/30/2007

Alexandria(EGY)

Arab Republic of Egypt

AUTHOR INDEX

Author Andres, Dr. Jose and Nedbal, Dr. M., and Lipp, David Andres, Jose Annoque, Christian Arbi, Zatri Arnos, Guy & Doig, Russ Arnos, Guy; Nielsen, Wayne; Wells, Steve Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Ash, Stewart Bailey, Toby Ball, Geoff Bannon, Robert Bannon, Robert & Burnett, Doug Bannon, Robert & Burnett, Douglas Bannon, Robert & Burnett, Douglas Barattino, William Dr. & Harrington, William Baribeau, Yves & Poirier, Nancy Barnett, Pamela

Article New Tools For Cable Route Planning Improved methods of cable route planning The State of the Industry - Europe, the Middle East, Africa and India Telecom: Not To Be Taken For Granted Bandwidth in the Oil Patch Nobody Said It Was Easy From Elektron to ‘E’ Commerce – Part I From Elektron to ‘E’ Commerce – Part II From Elektron to ‘E’ Commerce – Part III From Elektron to ‘E’ Commerce – Part IV From Elektron to ‘E’ Commerce – Part V History of the Industry Optical Systems For Offshore Platforms Where does the UJ Consortium go from here?

Surviving the Telecoms Rollercoaster Deployment of Cabled, Incline Sensors, 3.5 tons in weight Homeland Security Technology Workshop Underwater Infrastructure Protection – Risk Mitigation and Proactive Prosecution Underwater Infrastructure Protection, Risk, Mitigation, and Pro-Active - Prosecution: Part II Underwater Infrastructure Protection, Risk, Mitigation, and Pro-Active Prosecution: Part III Broadband Communications for Maritime Users Viable. Flexible. Reliable - ITG’s branching unit You and PTC

Issue

Date

Issue 32 Issue 5 Issue 2

May 2007 October 2002 January 2002

Issue 18 Issue 22 Issue 16 Issue 14 Issue 15 Issue 17 Issue 19 Issue 20 Issue 22 Issue 32 Issue 25 Issue 4 Issue 23 Issue 17 Issue 23

January 2005 September 2005 September 2004 May 2004 July 2004 November 2004 March 2005 May 2005 September 2005 May 2007 March 2006 July 2002 November 2005 November 2004 November 2005

Issue 24

January 2006

Issue 25

March 2006

Issue 6 Issue 4 Issue 4

January 2003 July 2002 July 2002

65

Barney, Bill Bax, Andy Bax, Andy BenBenek, Jules Bishop, Jim Bishop, Jim Bishop, Jim & Walker, John Bland, Sir Christopher Boe, Rolf Borkey, Todd Borries, Puja Borries, Puja Brask, Debra Budde, Paul Budde, Paul Budde, Paul Burnett, Doug & Bannon, Robert Burnett, Douglas Burnett, Douglas Burnett, Douglas Burnett, Douglas & Bannon, Robert Burnett, Douglas & Bannon, Robert Butler, Chris Byous, Jim Byous, Jim Carragher, Daniel Carter, Bill

Welcome to the Digital Future – Again Global Marine Technology Update The Rise of Regional Submarine Networks Autonomous Submarines - Alternatives for ROV and AUV operations Back to the Future in Cable Jointing Is Submarine Cable WEEE? The Security Issues of Multiple Cable Landings Executive Forum Off-Shore Communications Seamless Integration of Undersea and Terrestrial Networks Of Strategic Importance to Business - Pacific Telecommunications Conference President of China Telecom at PTC 2003 Improving Time-To-Market and Reducing Risk Before and During Project Implementation Asia- Developments in Submarine Cable Networks International Infrastructure Developments in Asia Signs Of Resurgent Asia-Pacific Submarine Cable Market Underwater Infrastructure Protection – Risk Mitigation and Proactive Prosecution Cable Owners Challenge New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection New Developments on Out of Service Submarine Cables The Importance of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention to the Cable Industry Underwater Infrastructure Protection, Risk, Mitigation, and Pro-Active - Prosecution: Part II Underwater Infrastructure Protection, Risk, Mitigation, and Pro-Active Prosecution: Part III Pioneer with Experience Protection against financial aggression - System maintenance in today’s market Sea Change - Gulf Fiber System A Troubled Chapter - Chapter 11 leaves its mark So, where do we go from here?

Issue 29 Issue 25 Issue 20 Issue 9

November 2006 March 2006 May 2005 July 2003

Issue 14 Issue 20 Issue 25 Issue 17 Issue 20 Issue 7

May 2004 May 2005 March 2006 November 2004 May 2005 March 2003

Issue 1

October 2001

Issue 6 Issue 26

January 2003 May 2006

Issue 24 Issue 6 Issue 30 Issue 23

January 2006 January 2003 January 2007 November 2005

Issue 3

April 2002

Issue 19 Issue 26

March 2005 May 2006

Issue 24

January 2006

Issue 25

March 2006

Issue 4 Issue 5

July 2002 October 2002

Issue 10 Issue 9 Issue 5

September 2003 July 2003 October 2002

66

Carver, Roger Carver, Roger Case, James Case, Jim Chaires, Daryl Chba, Michel; Fevrier, Herve Chrisner, Ray Colonna, Jean Paul & Peuch, Alain Cooper, Graham Cooper, Graham Coughlan, David Crawford, Brian Creese, Catherine Cuccio, Frank Czajkowski , Igor Davidson, Mark Davis, Tom Davis, Tom and Mazzarese, David de Hoop Scheffer, Jaap Dean, Barbara Dr.; Gardner, Jeff Dr. Demeroutis, Basil; Fletcher, Ian; Wells, Steven Demeroutis, Basil; Fletcher, Ian; Wells, Steven Demeroutis, Basil; Wells, Steve; Fletcher, Ian Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean

Maritime Security Maritime Security - The Need for Awareness and Compliance Submarine Telecommunication Desktop Studies – A Route Less Taken Desktop Studies – Foundations for Cable System Data Unrepeatered Submarine Links Benefit From All-Raman Technology Reaping the Benefits - all-Raman Transmission Technology Branching Units Get Smart Continuous Burial Assessment of Cables: A State-ofPractice Marine Asset Management Vessel Automation Identification Systems (AIS) for Oilfield Operations Executive Forum Executive Forum The U.S. Naval Seafloor Cable Protection Office “Call Before You Dig!” Failure Was Never An Option – Marine Recovery Operations Upgrades: Theory and Practice BP to link Gulf platforms with fiber-optic cable Offshore Oil and Energy Systems Avoiding The “Bends” By Specifying The Correct Fiber Executive Forum: A view of the Industry Reliability by design - In practice and in the field Alchemy Restored Alchemy Revisited Alchemy – Reversed then Restored Letter to a friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend

Issue 17 Issue 10

November 2004 September 2003

Issue 30

January 2007

Issue 21 Issue 25

July 2005 March 2006

Issue 14

May 2004

Issue 27 Issue 6

July 2006 January 2003

Issue 12 Issue 16

January 2004 September 2004

Issue 13 Issue 20 Issue 29

March 2004 May 2005 November 2006

Issue 14

May 2004

Issue 27 Issue 28 Issue 16 Issue 32 Issue 23 Issue 11 Issue 13 Issue 12 Issue 19 Issue 2 Issue 4 Issue 5 Issue 6 Issue 7

July 2006 September 2006 September 2004 May 2007 November 2005 November 2003 March 2004 January 2004 March 2005 January 2002 July 2002 October 2002 January 2003 March 2003

67

Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean Devos, Jean & Thornton, Geoffrey Doig, Russ Doig, Russ & Arnos, Guy Douglas, Ian Drabble, John Duzevich, Gordon Eastaugh, Paulo Edwards, Dr. Merrion and Rukosueva, Rita Edwards, Katherine Eldridge, Murray Eldridge, Murray Ellis, Chris

Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a Friend Letter to a friend Letter to a friend Letter to a friend Letter to a friend Letter to a friend Letter to a friend The State of the Industry - Europe, the Middle East and Africa Technology Transforms the Oil Patch Bandwidth in the Oil Patch GMSL Case Study: Aniva Bay Submarine Cable Decommissioning: Assessing the Environmental Risks Global Asia Pacific Completes a Challenging Project TSS Moves Ahead Ultra-Low-Loss Fibers Enable Advanced Performance in Submarine Applications Countdown to Apollo Launch The world’s most advanced cable system So, Where Do We Go From Here?

What Price Market Forces?

Hi-Tech Cables, Hi-Tech Project Management

Issue 8 Issue 9 Issue 15 Issue 16 Issue 17 Issue 18 Issue 19 Issue 20 Issue 21 Issue 22 Issue 23 Issue 24 Issue 25 Issue 26 Issue 27 Issue 28 Issue 29 Issue 30 Issue 31 Issue 32 Issue 1

May 2003 July 2003 July 2004 September 2004 November 2004 January 2005 March 2005 May 2005 July 2005 September 2005 November 2005 January 2006 March 2006 May 2006 July 2006 September 2006 November 2006 January 2007 March 2007 May 2007 October 2001

Issue 28 Issue 22 Issue 24 Issue 25

September 2006 September 2005 January 2006 March 2006

Issue 22 Issue 22 Issue 27

September 2005 September 2005 July 2006

Issue 2

January 2002

Issue 3 Issue 24 Issue 3

April 2002 January 2006 April 2002 68

Evans, Andrew Evans, Graham Faint, Dick Faint, Richard Faint, Richard Fevrier, Herve and Chba, Michel Fletcher, Ian & Wells, Steven Fletcher, Ian and Wells, Steven and Demeroutis, Basil Fletcher, Ian and Wells, Steven and Demeroutis, Basil Fletcher, Ian; Demeroutis, Basil; Wells, Steve Ford, Peter Foreman, Charles Frater, Simon Frisch, Tony Fullenbaum, Marc Gaitch, Ian Gardner, Jeff Dr. and Dean, Barbara Dr. Gibbs, Gary Golding, John Golding, John Grant, Paul Greenham, Derek Griffith, Scott Harrington, William & Barattino, William Dr. Hibbard, John Hibbard, John Hibbard, John Hoffman, Virginia Hoffman, Virginia Hollis, Rogan Hollis, Rogan

Unlocking the Broadband Opportunity — Middle East, India and Asia lead the way in industry recovery AUVs for cable route surveys In space no one can hear you scream . . .Trading in Cyberspace Risk Management: Who is Playing at What?

What Kind Of War Are We Looking For? Reaping the Benefits - all-Raman Transmission Technology When is a Bubble not a Bubble?

Alchemy Restored Alchemy Revisited Alchemy – Reversed then Restored Digital India – The Underwater Connection Interference in the ISM Band: Mitigation Strategies The Future for Cable Repair and Maintenance Technology in Long-span Submarine Systems Secrets and Lies in Regional Systems Electricity Market Spotlight Reliability by design - In practice and in the field From the Gulf of Mexico to Washington DC and Back Oil & Gas Market Opportunities Saving the Planet Means Being Green At Sea As Well: One Company’s Proactive Efforts in Sustainability GIS – The Power of Spatial Management A Chinese Tale: How SBSS Expanded Business from a Cable Installer to an Offshore Service Supplier It’s not all a bed of roses Broadband Communications for Maritime Users Asia Pacific Vantage Executive Forum Future Price Trends Project Logistics for Regional System Installations The Forgotten Mile Regional Reality Why Are Welshmen Wearing Kilts? A Personal Perspective on Atlantic Evolution

Issue 13

March 2004

Issue 4 Issue 5

July 2002 October 2002

Issue 7 Issue 29 Issue 14

March 2003 November 2006 May 2004

Issue 7 Issue 13 Issue 12 Issue 19 Issue 21 Issue 28 Issue 24 Issue 2 Issue 18 Issue 29 Issue 11 Issue 28 Issue 28 Issue 31

March 2003 March 2004 January 2004 March 2005 July 2005 September 2006 January 2006 January 2002 January 2005 November 2006 November 2003 September 2006 September 2006 March 2007

Issue 15 Issue 22

July 2004 September 2005

Issue 11 Issue 6 Issue 23 Issue 18 Issue 4 Issue 26 Issue 20 Issue 20 Issue 29

November 2003 January 2003 November 2005 January 2005 July 2002 May 2006 May 2005 May 2005 November 2006

69

Hollis, Rogan Horne, John Horne, John Horne, John and Robinson, Alan Hotchkiss, Adam and Romagnino, Richard Hua, Vivian Hynes, Mike Janaitis, Tim Jean Devos Jeffery, Karl Jones, Michael Kahn, Natasha Kasdan, John Kassay, Travis; Nikolopoulis, Nikos Kitamura, Ted Krebs, Georges Krebs, Georges Kwan, Wilfred Lambert, Neil Larsen, Vegard Briggar LeBoutillier, Anna Lécroart, Antoine Lentz, Steve Lentz, Steve Lichtman, Eyal and Schneider, Michael Lipman, Andrew Lipman, Andrew and Pin , Ulises Lipman, Andrew and Pin , Ulises Lipman, Andrew and Tanner, Troy Lipp, David and Andres, Dr. Jose and Nedbal, Dr. M. Manock, John

You get further with a Carrot and a Big Stick Suboptic 2007: “The Event And Beyond” SubOptic goes from strength to strength So How Was SubOptic 2004 for you?

Convergence of Terrestrial and Undersea Networks S.B. Submarine Systems – An Overview Upgrades - The Viable Alternative?

New Phoenix Offices Letter to a Friend Oil and Gas Fibre Optics Breaking with Convention - A Different Way of Laying Submarine Cables Bridging the Gap Déjà-vu Fiber Optic Cables vs. Fixed Satellite Services The State of the Industry - Asia A View of the Submarine Systems Supply Industry Executive Forum The Day The Internet Stood Still Key Driver - The Delivery of Broadband Remains the key driver in the Asia Pacific Region High Fibre Diet Telecom Conference 101 Emerging Markets for Submarine Cables NEPTUNE Canada – Deploying New Cabled Observatory Technologies in the Deep Ocean NEPTUNE Canada – Deploying New Cabled Observatory Technologies in the Deep Ocean Repeaterless DWDM – A 317km Caribbean Festoon Segment Upgrade Is an IRU a Safe Bet for Submarine Capacity?

Financing a New Private Submarine Cable Network How Are Submarine Cable Networks Of The Future Likely To Be Financed?

Cables Beware FCC Regulations can Bite New Tools For Cable Route Planning Back to the Future

Issue 12 Issue 32 Issue 11 Issue 14 Issue 13 Issue 18 Issue 13 Issue 22 Issue 8 Issue 28 Issue 9

January 2004 May 2007 November 2003 May 2004 March 2004 January 2005 March 2004 September 2005 May 2003 September 2006 July 2003

Issue 16 Issue 6 Issue 18 Issue 1 Issue 26 Issue 14 Issue 30 Issue 8

September 2004 January 2003 January 2005 October 2001 May 2006 May 2004 January 2007 May 2003

Issue 16 Issue 24 Issue 14 Issue 23

September 2004 January 2006 May 2004 November 2005

Issue 29

November 2006

Issue 27

July 2006

Issue 19 Issue 31 Issue 27

March 2005 March 2007 July 2006

Issue 10 Issue 32 Issue 20

September 2003 May 2007 May 2005 70

Manock, John Manock, John Manock, John Manock, John Manock, John Marra, William C Marra, William Dr. Matsudaira, Tsunekazu Mauldin, Alan Mazer, Robert Mazzarese, David and Davis, Tom McMullen, Scott Millar, David & Rein, Bruce Miller, George Miller, George & Sheedy, Sally Milstead, Matthew Munier, Rob Munier, Rob Murfett, Marianne; Winter, Charlotte Nedbal, Dr. M., and Lipp, David and Andres, Dr. Jose Nickelson, Richard Nielsen, Wayne; Wells, Steve; Arnos, Guy Nikolopoulis, Nikos; Kassay, Travis Nordgard, Olav Harald Oak, Siew Ying Peuch, Alain & Colonna, Jean Paul Pin , Ulises and Lipman, Andrew Pin , Ulises and Lipman, Andrew

Broadband Explodes Across the North Atlantic Industry Update Recovery Year behind Us with a Solid Book of Business Ahead Submarine Cables and Other Developments in West Africa The State of the Industry - The Americas Intelligence for the Coastline Protection Walking a Mile in Our Customers’ Shoes - Being a System Supplier with Owner and Operator Experience The Winds of Change Fueling Subsea Bandwidth Demand: Demand Drivers and Internet Traffic Growth From Circuits to Terabits Avoiding The “Bends” By Specifying The Correct Fiber Oregon Fishermen Offer Gear Calculator Cableawareness.com - An internet based awareness strategy Back to Basics A Bad Storm, Not a Perfect Storm - The Submarine Market in Context Executive Forum Back Seat Driver Mind the Gap What To Do When Things Go Wrong New Tools For Cable Route Planning A unique event - The PTC 2004: New Times - New Strategies Nobody Said It Was Easy Fiber Optic Cables vs. Fixed Satellite Services Executive Forum Cable Protector – A Specialized Deep Seabed Burial Barge Continuous Burial Assessment of Cables: A State-ofPractice Financing a New Private Submarine Cable Network How Are Submarine Cable Networks Of The Future Likely To Be Financed?

Issue 30 Issue 32 Issue 25

January 2007 May 2007 March 2006

Issue 22

September 2005

Issue 2 Issue 17 Issue 8

January 2002 November 2004 May 2003

Issue 4 Issue 28

July 2002 September 2006

Issue 31 Issue 32 Issue 7 Issue 5

March 2007 May 2007 March 2003 October 2002

Issue 4 Issue 3

July 2002 April 2002

Issue 12 Issue 23 Issue 3 Issue 17 Issue 32 Issue 11

January 2004 November 2005 April 2002 November 2004 May 2007 November 2003

Issue 16 Issue 18 Issue 16 Issue 18

September 2004 January 2005 September 2004 January 2005

Issue 6

January 2003

Issue 31 Issue 27

March 2007 July 2006

71

Pockett, John Poirier, Nancy & Baribeau, Yves Polishuk, Paul Polishuk, Paul Pugh, Tim Ramsden, Rex Ranahan, Doug Rawle, Julian Rawle, Julian Rawle, Julian Rawle, Julian Rawle, Julian Rein, Bruce & Millar, David Richardson, Alfred & Runfola, Jack Riga, Andy

Robinson, Alan Robinson, Alan Robinson, Alan Robinson, Alan Robinson, Alan Robinson, Alan and Horne, John Romagnino, Richard and Hotchkiss, Adam Rudde, Paul Ruddy, Michael Ruderman, Kurt Ruderman, Kurt Ruhan, Gabriel Ruhan, Gabriel

Partnering For Success Viable. Flexible. Reliable - ITG’s branching unit The State of the Industry - The Americas Unrepeatered Submarine Cable Technology and Its Impact on the Oil and Gas Industry Cutting the Gordian Knot - A Geoscience View of the Cable Industry Bandwidth The State of the Market Convergence Africans Are Doing It For Themselves (With A Little Help From Their Friends) Asian Pacific Overview Atlantic Tide Turning?

New life discovered in the Caribbean The Importance of Being Integrated Cableawareness.com - An internet based awareness strategy Security and Submarine Telecommunications Cable Telecom experts display market savvy - Entrepreneurs founded fibre-optic company, sold to a US giant and recently bought it back A Responsible Future Addressing the Future of the Submarine Cable Industry Recovery or Rationalisation: SubOptic - a tonic for the Hangover!

SubOptic 2004 SubOptic 2007 So How Was SubOptic 2004 for you?

Convergence of Terrestrial and Undersea Networks Major Submarine Cable Projects in Asia - The infrastructure of Asian cable systems Searching for a light in the fog - A future for the submarine cable industry?

O&G Wind Farm Energy Market Scientific Submarine Cable Projects Cable Technology Snapshot Global Marine helps install landmark seismic activity monitoring ‘Ocean Bottom Unit’

Issue 15 Issue 4 Issue 1 Issue 28

July 2004 July 2002 October 2001 September 2006

Issue 3

April 2002

Issue 2 Issue 5 Issue 32

January 2002 October 2002 May 2007

Issue 18 Issue 26 Issue 11 Issue 21 Issue 5

January 2005 May 2006 November 2003 July 2005 October 2002

Issue 24 Issue 9

January 2006 July 2003

Issue 26 Issue 12 Issue 8

May 2006 January 2004 May 2003

Issue 13 Issue 26 Issue 14 Issue 13 Issue 8

March 2004 May 2006 May 2004 March 2004 May 2003

Issue 2

January 2002

Issue 22 Issue 23 Issue 27 Issue 30

September 2005 November 2005 July 2006 January 2007

72

Rukosueva, Rita and Edwards, Dr. Merrion Runfola, Jack Runfola, Jack & Richardson, Alfred Russell, Robin Schneider, Michael and Lichtman, Eyal Schwartz, Larry Seip, Jon Shamburek, Steven Shaw, Andy Shaw, Nigel Sheedy, Sally & Miller, George Soja, Tom Soja, Tom Soja, Tom Soja, Tom Soja, Tom Spalding, Marsha Stronge, Tim Stroud, Doug Stroud, Doug Stuart, Bob Stuart, Bob Stubbings, Cate Tanner, Troy and Lipman, Andrew Thornton, Geoffrey Thornton, Geoffrey & Devos, Jean Tremblay, Pierre TSA Newsfeed

Ultra-Low-Loss Fibers Enable Advanced Performance in Submarine Applications A Simple View Security and Submarine Telecommunications Cable Strength In Diversity Repeaterless DWDM – A 317km Caribbean Festoon Segment Upgrade Executive Forum Fibre Optics in Offshore Communications Nets and the Internet Rising Anew From the Ashes General Offshore Ltd Back and working hard A Bad Storm, Not a Perfect Storm - The Submarine Market in Context Answer from a Friend Back to the Future — The rise of the regional systems market Internal Telecom Bandwidth - Drivers, opportunities and challenges Negotiating the Market’s Half Pipe - Part 2 Negotiating the Market’s Half Pipe - The market “adventure” over the last two years Survival of the Leanest Submarine bandwidth Deepwater Burial Record - Trencher Achieves Record in SE Asia Record Successes in Deepwater Cable Future Project Finance Structures The Perfect Storm Which Way Round the World?

Cables Beware - FCC Regulations can Bite A Passage to India The State of the Industry - Europe, the Middle East and Africa Mountain of Debt Bandwidth: Shattering the Myth - Carriers shatter the myth of the glut bears

Issue 27

July 2006

Issue 9 Issue 24 Issue 30 Issue 27

July 2003 January 2006 January 2007 July 2006

Issue 19 Issue 2 Issue 12 Issue 25 Issue 29 Issue 3

March 2005 January 2002 January 2004 March 2006 November 2006 April 2002

Issue 3 Issue 13

April 2002 March 2004

Issue 1

October 2001

Issue 10 Issue 8

September 2003 May 2003

Issue 6 Issue 4 Issue 3

January 2003 July 2002 April 2002

Issue 20 Issue 4 Issue 3 Issue 17 Issue 10 Issue 13 Issue 1

May 2005 July 2002 April 2002 November 2004 September 2003 March 2004 October 2001

Issue 3 Issue 1

April 2002 October 2001

73

Utsumi, Yoshio Walker, John & Bishop, Jim Wall, Bill Wall, Bill Wall, Bill Warnes, David Weisbruch, John Wells, Steve; Arnos, Guy; Nielsen, Wayne Wells, Steve; Fletcher, Ian; Demeroutis, Basil Wells, Steven Wells, Steven & Fletcher, Ian Wells, Steven and Demeroutis, Basil and Fletcher, Ian Wells, Steven and Demeroutis, Basil and Fletcher, Ian Wilkie, Alasdair Winter, Charlotte; Murfett, Marianne

Challenges For All The Security Issues of Multiple Cable Landings ITG completes Apollo burial Power Cable Installations Those other submarine utilities A Big Fish in a Small Pond - Market Liberalization Driving Demand for Bandwidth in Latin America System Rights-Of-Way and Permitting – An Exercise in Patience Nobody Said It Was Easy Alchemy – Reversed then Restored Is there light at the end of the tunnel? The current subsea marketplace When is a Bubble not a Bubble?

Alchemy Restored Alchemy Revisited Dublin is Attached to Boston What To Do When Things Go Wrong

Issue 7 Issue 25 Issue 5 Issue 22 Issue 11 Issue 3

March 2003 March 2006 October 2002 September 2005 November 2003 April 2002

Issue 31

March 2007

Issue 16 Issue 19 Issue 1

September 2004 March 2005 October 2001

Issue 7 Issue 13 Issue 12 Issue 9 Issue 17

March 2003 March 2004 January 2004 July 2003 November 2004

74

Letter to a friend from Jean Devos

My dear friend, The sun is rising from the East. Fiona is the new chairwoman of the SubOptic executive committee and the host of the 2010 event will be NEC and Fujitsu. We are all set for a new “Botany Bay” venture and we expect a lot from them.

My Dear Friend

I published recently a modest novel, whose title It seems to Itmeis that the existing format of Bay. the place in Australia where is Botany the SubOptic event has now shown its limitsa Alcatel established and it is time to reinvent the concept and come submarine cable facup with something completely different.

A bitof tory in 1989 as part like a wedding ceremony its which too often so contract foris the formalized, so normalized, so “formatised” Tasman 2 link. In this that you know in advance what going two to same bay,iswhere happen. I enjoy when a party is designed “out centuries before the of the box,” taking you by surprise, bringing French expedition you “somewhere” you “La hadn’t thought Pérouse” madeof. of Like many other attendees inships, Baltimore, you two La Boussole

escaped from most of the sessions to attend business meetings. You told me that the conference was a good one due to the people you managed to meet over there. But you also and l’Astrolabe, landed in 1788 to discover that mentioned that your customers were basically Captain Cook was already around bearing the absent and too few people from Asia, Middle British flag. So Botany Bay is now for me the East and Africa. You also stressed that you symbol of a dream which becomes a reality! have not really learned anything!

Tasman 2 has been yet another chapter in this long Anglo-French competition! The My suggestion for the future is to abandon award to Alcatel came out as a big surprise to the format of a “conference” and adopt the many, including inside Alcatel. Everybody was one of a “convention.” Instead of waiting for naturally expecting the British to win that batindividuals to present papers, the program tle, and such an expectation was at that time committee would decide of the Convention very logical. main topics. Example of possible topics: Africa There were so many and situation; Trans-Pacific status;difficulties Atlantic status; misunderstanding between and India; Marine maintenance; OilAustralia & Gas; UR France, the one being the French market; Themain Cable industry etc…

Forpresence each in the Pacific area, the worse being the nuclear of these topics a working group would be bomb experiment in Tahiti!

Rainbow established a year before the The eventsadwith the

Warrior event was still3 in everyone’s task to prepare a 2 to hours sessionmemory. on this It is forduring these reasons among others STC (UK) topic the convention.

Theirthat objective rejected to come with a should bethetoAlcatel‘s work suggestion out a comprehensive joint bid, to offer a “European” picture of their subject and they solution. should use One of the winning factors has been the different technique: Slides; Film; Witnesses; Port-Botany cable factory.debates; Such a factory was a Round table; Interviews; flyers etc. strong not requirement froma OTC (now Telstra) and I would have missed session describing Australian Government. inthe details the today situation in India, or in Alcatelespecially was the most East Africa, if themotivated. situation Such was a factory could expand its influence the Pacific described by independent people: inWho are the three other were historically thewhere players?

Status of players the existing cables? well established in thisare region, which represents Planned cables? What the issues?

Etc …

a large part of their market. They saw this factory a risk for the theirattendance existing facilities!

And toas stimulate these SubOptic ‘87 be in Versailles came at the rightthe time. session should plenary sessions, leaving It is where Australian teams discovered afternoon forthe separate meetings.

Attendancethe a close cooperation toFrench plenarymodel, morning sessions should be between made Alcatelcompulsory! and FT, exactly what they wanted to esmorally tablish in their country.

Another idea: things Why are notchanged a “SubOptic My friend, since, but association Awards”, the “Oscars” of the one thing stays true: When you offer something, Submarine industry, open all players the readercable can see between thetolines if you are who provide compelling product services. or not genuinely motivated andorsincere.

Then your offer becomes really attractive and this But let’s keep to this between you and me opens the route “Botany Bay.”

for the moment. I am sure that Fiona, at a certain See stage will look for advice. So we will you soon. be prepared.

Jean Devos

I hope to hear from you in the meantime.

Submarcom Consulting

Jean Devos

44

Conference

Date

Venue

www

Telecoms World Africa 2007

31 July – 2 August 2007

Johannesburg, South Africa

www.terrapinn.com/2007/telecomza/

Submarine Networks World 2007

3-5 September 2007

Singapore

www.terrapinn.com/2007/snw/

ITU Telecom Europe 2007

3-6 December 2007

Sofia, Bulgaria

www.itu.org

PTC’08 - The 30th Annual Pacific Telecommunications Conference & Exhibition

13-16 January 2008

Honolulu, Hawaii USA

www.ptc.org