7 ms·

What's the difference in price between 1km of fiber vs 1km or single pair wire? It might play a role in this solution being cheaper than immediately apparent.

eru 4y ago
I don't think the wire itself would be the expense, but the laying of it?
- voakbasda 4y ago
  The cost of laying wire is virtually the same as laying fiber, so the difference really comes down to the material costs. The only good reason to use wire would be existing installations, as you sidestep that cost entirely.
  - eru 4y ago
    Whatever EUROCARE said about existing installations applies. Though what I had in mind was that when I was handling optical fibre as a layman (we have fibre to the living room here in Singapore), that fibre is a lot more delicate, so would require a bit more care to handle than copper. But I guess that's probably not a major cost factor, if eg you have to dig a trench for your cable.
  - EUROCARE 4y ago
    But perhaps the wire is already there. I don't think anybody advocates for building entirely new datalinks using this. Laying another 1km of cable is much more expensive than 2x200 USD to reuse existing cable.
DannyBee 4y ago
The fiber is much cheaper because it's so much more common. For example: I/O fiber is about 0.10 cents a foot or less for 2 fiber cable. (12 fiber is only 20 cents a foot). OSP gel-filled direct burial is 0.55 cents a foot or less for 2 fiber cable. (12 fiber is only 65 cents). This is micro-armored OSP cable, resistant to chewing/damage as well. Basic 18 awg single pair shielded direct burial wire is about 0.80 cents a foot. Can't even find a non-expensive armored version 10km single fiber transceivers at 10gbps are 40 bucks. 10km dual fiber transceivers at 10gbps at 29 bucks. It would be much cheaper, more effective, and a better result to just use fiber for 1km here. You could easily bury 12 fiber cable and use it for the price you will pay to use single-twisted-pair.
- p1mrx 4y ago
  > 0.80 cents a foot Isn't that 80 cents/foot, or 0.80 dollars/foot?
- Aloha 4y ago
  When everyone prices fiber, they fail to include the termination costs. How much are the termination costs on that fiber, per run? Also, you'd never install single pair direct burial, and almost never shielded (unless its audio and not phone type) - it'd be 4/6/12 pair direct bury gel-filled cable.
  - DannyBee 4y ago
    Termination is basically a non-cost anymore. The price a pack of 10 sc/apc field terminations (IE that a random DIY'ers could do) is <20 bucks, and to your question, the same as a price of a pack of 10 ez-r45 connectors. The loss and ease of mechanical connectors has gotten good enough (0.15 db or better) that most of the folks i know will only fusion splice when they really have to. I agree it wouldn't make sense to do single pair or single fiber, but that's the actually the comparison at which 10baset-1l is at all competitive. I have buried a lot of fiber, and a lot of network cable over the years :) I was just trying to be fair and present the best case for 10baseT1L In practice you can do 12/24 strand fiber (or 6 strand fiber + power + whatever) for less than the price of whatever particular set of 18 awg twisted pair (which is what the spec requires at 1km) + other things you wanted. The cable would be smaller, and if you use A3 or B3 fiber, it would be more flexible/support a lower bend radius than the 18 awg twisted pair. By far. IT's not even close.
    - Aloha 4y ago
      This product is a special service product for private line service within a facility, likely over existing cable. There are reasons why copper and coax exists though, which is what I was pointing out.
  - xenadu02 4y ago
    Besides what DannyBee says about termination being a lot cheaper and easier when you can tolerate small losses (which is most people): Big infrastructure often orders the cables pre-terminated, eg an ISP will order their arial cable with built-in termination at certain intervals. No muss, no fuss. You're right about single pair though. If you're putting in two strands might as well do 6. If you need 6 might as well do 24. Never hurts to have spares and extra capacity. Especially if it involves stringing poles or digging holes.
rkangel 4y ago
It comes down to whether the cable is there already. If you were laying it, you'd probably go for fibre. But if you've got 1km of some poor quality cable there already, then spending $200 to get usable bandwidth might be a lot cheaper than laying something new.
withinboredom 4y ago
A copper wire can be bent in just about every which way (such as tangled when being tethered to an underwater drone), while fiber cannot.

eru 4y ago

I don't think the wire itself would be the expense, but the laying of it?

voakbasda 4y ago
The cost of laying wire is virtually the same as laying fiber, so the difference really comes down to the material costs. The only good reason to use wire would be existing installations, as you sidestep that cost entirely.
- eru 4y ago
  Whatever EUROCARE said about existing installations applies. Though what I had in mind was that when I was handling optical fibre as a layman (we have fibre to the living room here in Singapore), that fibre is a lot more delicate, so would require a bit more care to handle than copper. But I guess that's probably not a major cost factor, if eg you have to dig a trench for your cable.
- EUROCARE 4y ago
  But perhaps the wire is already there. I don't think anybody advocates for building entirely new datalinks using this. Laying another 1km of cable is much more expensive than 2x200 USD to reuse existing cable.

DannyBee 4y ago

The fiber is much cheaper because it's so much more common. For example: I/O fiber is about 0.10 cents a foot or less for 2 fiber cable. (12 fiber is only 20 cents a foot). OSP gel-filled direct burial is 0.55 cents a foot or less for 2 fiber cable. (12 fiber is only 65 cents). This is micro-armored OSP cable, resistant to chewing/damage as well. Basic 18 awg single pair shielded direct burial wire is about 0.80 cents a foot. Can't even find a non-expensive armored version 10km single fiber transceivers at 10gbps are 40 bucks. 10km dual fiber transceivers at 10gbps at 29 bucks. It would be much cheaper, more effective, and a better result to just use fiber for 1km here. You could easily bury 12 fiber cable and use it for the price you will pay to use single-twisted-pair.

p1mrx 4y ago
> 0.80 cents a foot Isn't that 80 cents/foot, or 0.80 dollars/foot?
Aloha 4y ago
When everyone prices fiber, they fail to include the termination costs. How much are the termination costs on that fiber, per run? Also, you'd never install single pair direct burial, and almost never shielded (unless its audio and not phone type) - it'd be 4/6/12 pair direct bury gel-filled cable.
- DannyBee 4y ago
  Termination is basically a non-cost anymore. The price a pack of 10 sc/apc field terminations (IE that a random DIY'ers could do) is <20 bucks, and to your question, the same as a price of a pack of 10 ez-r45 connectors. The loss and ease of mechanical connectors has gotten good enough (0.15 db or better) that most of the folks i know will only fusion splice when they really have to. I agree it wouldn't make sense to do single pair or single fiber, but that's the actually the comparison at which 10baset-1l is at all competitive. I have buried a lot of fiber, and a lot of network cable over the years :) I was just trying to be fair and present the best case for 10baseT1L In practice you can do 12/24 strand fiber (or 6 strand fiber + power + whatever) for less than the price of whatever particular set of 18 awg twisted pair (which is what the spec requires at 1km) + other things you wanted. The cable would be smaller, and if you use A3 or B3 fiber, it would be more flexible/support a lower bend radius than the 18 awg twisted pair. By far. IT's not even close.
  - Aloha 4y ago
    This product is a special service product for private line service within a facility, likely over existing cable. There are reasons why copper and coax exists though, which is what I was pointing out.
- xenadu02 4y ago
  Besides what DannyBee says about termination being a lot cheaper and easier when you can tolerate small losses (which is most people): Big infrastructure often orders the cables pre-terminated, eg an ISP will order their arial cable with built-in termination at certain intervals. No muss, no fuss. You're right about single pair though. If you're putting in two strands might as well do 6. If you need 6 might as well do 24. Never hurts to have spares and extra capacity. Especially if it involves stringing poles or digging holes.

rkangel 4y ago

It comes down to whether the cable is there already. If you were laying it, you'd probably go for fibre. But if you've got 1km of some poor quality cable there already, then spending $200 to get usable bandwidth might be a lot cheaper than laying something new.

withinboredom 4y ago

A copper wire can be bent in just about every which way (such as tangled when being tethered to an underwater drone), while fiber cannot.