Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: Optical Connectors

To all,

As a user, I would like to focus the discussions.

Having a large number of connector options is only beneficial in that it
should allow for the "best" solution to rise to prominence.  From my
perspective this has already occurred, at least for the current round of
small form factor offerings.

For non small form factor connectors, the SC is obviously the connector.

For small form factor connectors, the LC and the MT-RJ are the leading

You can argue about what the benefits of any of the designs are, but the
reality is that only the LC and the MT-RJ seem to be capturing the bulk
of the market.  I have seen no market reports that dispute this
position, or that predict this will change over time.

I would note that between the three connectors (SC, LC, and MT-RJ), I
believe that a complete solution set exists for all customer
requirements, in particular,
	1.  Installed plant compatibility - SC
	2.  Small footprint - LC and MT-RJ
	3.  Optical performance - I'll just say the three should encompass this
	4.  Cost - all are cost effective
	5.  Install flexibility - SC and LC are factory or field installable
	6.  High density capability - MT-RJ

and the list goes on for whatever attributes you want to include.

I think this group should seriously consider acknowledging the state of
the market.  Inclusion of these connectors as preferred within the
standard will help focus both the customers and suppliers and ultimately
reduce costs for all.


mittalr@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Roy, I do not believe your assesment is correct. I can give you name of at
> least 6 other BIG companies who are doing LC. That is more than you can
> count for MT-RJ, I'm sure.
> I think it will be instructive to give people a feel of the various pros and
> cons of various small form factor devices. Please let me know if anything is
> amiss. Lets try and mantain objectivity here.
> LC
> ---
> Fiber pitch: 6.25mm (simple and easy to manufacture)
> Insertion loss 0.1-0.15dbm
> Return loss: 50-60dbm
> Mu
> ---
> Very similar to LC
> Only difference is lack of latch which might be advantageous/disadvantageous
> depending upon whom you talk to
> -----
> Fiber pitch: 0.75mm(difficult to manufacture)
> Insertion loss 0.15-0.2 dbm
> Return loss: ~40dbm
> VF (volition)
> ----
> Fiber pitch: 4.9mm(special cabling reqd.)
> Insertion loss 0.5dbm
> Return loss: ~20dbm
> Thanks
> Rohit
> ps: I agree with a lot of people on this reflector that it doesn't make
> sense to get into these discussions on and on. Everyone has their own
> favourite connector and the protocol is anyway independent of whether you
> use SC or LC or MT-RJ.
> _______________________________________________________
> Say Bye to Slow Internet!

Naval Surface Warfare Center                          
Code B35                                               PH:  540-653-1579
17320 Dahlgren Road                                    FAX: 540-653-8673
Building 1500 Room 110A
Dahlgren, VA 22448-5100