[39731] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Update: CSX train derailment
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brian Wallingford)
Sat Jul 21 13:05:26 2001
Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2001 13:03:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Wallingford <brian@meganet.net>
To: up@3.am
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10107211248490.73214-100000@richard2.pil.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0107211258340.1702-100000@ripple>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
:> > I would think that if fiber can be run across oceans without using tunnels
:> > or bridges, that it could be run across some rivers much the same way, no?
:>
:> the biggest exposure to cut for wet fiber is shallow water. anchors,
:> idiots, ...
:
:Yes, I can see that; but I imagine you could handle this much the way
:fiber is handled near the shoreline. Bury it a few feet under the mud or
:sand.
One complication of traversing rivers underwater is that, depending on the
locale, many rivers have a dredged shipping channel which can be _much_
deeper than the rest of the riverbed, and is often relatively very
narrow. I'm not sure this is an issue which couldn't be overcome based
solely on financial incentive, however.
