U.S. Airlines to Offer In-Air Wi-Fi

"Within the next year, US Airlines are going to be offering Wi-Fi service onboard flights. VoiP calls will be banned initially, but the article mentions that lifting the ban on cellphones may still be a possibility. 'AirCell will install equipment on airliners that will act as a WiFi hotspot in the cabin and connect to laptop computers and devices like BlackBerrys that have WiFi chips. In all, it will cost about $100,000 to outfit a plane with less than 100 pounds of equipment, and the work can be done overnight by airline maintenance workers, AirCell says. What makes the service particularly attractive to airlines is that they will share revenue with AirCell. The service will cost about the same as existing WiFi offerings. Mr. Blumenstein says it will charge no more than $10 a day to passengers. It will also offer discounted options for customers and tie into existing service programs like T-Mobile, iPass and Boingo. Speeds will be equivalent to WiFi service on the ground.'"

About time this came around.

[Kranfer]

I can't say how happy reading this made me. I tend to travel a lot, and as such, I never get to use my laptop in flight because really... airlines suck at technological upkeep. out of the 25 flights I have taken in the last 18 months, I have been on ONE plane with some sort of airline adapter to plug into for power... Hopefully now when I get into first class I will be able to be online, and actually have power to keep my energy hungry machine going for awhile. Woohoo!

Re:About time this came around.

[FunOne]

Maybe you should try a bit harder to pick your flights & airlines. American Airlines has seat power on all of its airplanes.

This should help:
http://www.seatguru.com/ [seatguru.com]

Re:

[kkwst2]

Umm, no. I flew 4 times in the past two weeks on AA. One of them was an America West flight. But the rest were regular AA. None of them had seat power in coach. Maybe 1st class.

Re:

[tdischino]

AW = no, AA = yes. Not in every row in coach, usually alternating rows, extending about 2/3s of the way back. There is usually a visual indicator next to the row number on the overhead if there is in-seat power. The power jack is like a car lighter, with a flip up cover over it. Most laptop manufacturers sell an adapted power cord for this.

Re:

[Ucklak]

Even according to your link, there is only power every 4th row after 15 on AA.

Re:

[Andy Dodd]

I've flown AA a number of times in the past few years, always on a plane with power available in some rows, but never in a row that actually had power.

Re:

[PitaBred]

Perhaps you should look into a non-energy-hungry machine? I have a 14" laptop that includes a GeForce Go7600 and a Core 2 Duo 2.16GHz, 2GB of RAM, and it runs for 3 hours on battery, when I'm not cranking down on performance stuff. Almost 2 hours watching a DVD.

Re:

[blueskies]

Denver to Boston is a 3hr 40 minute flight and that isn't the whole way across the country.

Here's hoping they keep phone calls banned

[Al Dimond]

I hope phone calls stay banned. Airline flights are bad enough without having to listen to one side of a hundred phone conversations.

Re:Here's hoping they keep phone calls banned

[ingo23]

Will it help if I turn the speakerphone on?

Re:Here's hoping they keep phone calls banned

[peipas]

The Onion said it best [theonion.com] the last time this issue came up: "If they lift the ban on cell-phone use, they better lift the ban on passengers beating the shit out of each other, too."

Re:

[Mattintosh]

Good luck to the airlines in banning SSH or VPN to use a home VoIP server to send/receive calls.

No need to bother.

[raehl]

sub service_passengers {
foreach my $passenger (@passengers) {
if (passenger_talking_on_phone($passenger)) {
stewardess_action($passenger,PHONE_USE);
}
}
}

sub stewardess_action {

my $passenger = shift;
my $action = shift;

switch ($action) {
case EMPTY_GLASS:
fill_glass();

Re:

[drinkypoo]

I hope phone calls stay banned. Airline flights are bad enough without having to listen to one side of a hundred phone conversations.

Have they taken the seat back phones off all the planes, too? If not I can just put on a headset so I can use skype or what have you, and hold the phone up to my head to make it look like I'm using it.

Last time I checked, the reason the airlines didn't want cellphones on planes was so they could force you to use their in-flight phones which cost dollars per minute.

Re:

[tabdelgawad]

I know the parent sounds like common sense, but cell phones are *not* banned on Amtrak trains in the US (except in the 'quiet car') and people are generally considerate. There will always be those who abuse the opportunity, but that's not a good enough reason for a total ban.

Re:

[element-o.p.]

Nah. Any geek worth his salt will just establish an SSH tunnel to his home network and run his VoIP call through the tunnel :)

But at least then you would only have interesting calls (for geeks, anyway).

You mis-translated from PR-speak

[ivan256]

"Wi-Fi internet access" means "sandboxed and filtered web access over 802.11".

New technology, after all, needs to be beaten into submission before it's deployed to ensure it has no impact on existing revenue streams. The idea of allowing a new technology to (along with it's primary function) make an existing revenue generator obsolete because it would make that new technology popular enough to more than make up for revenue losses is the MBA's equivalent of a Roman numeral zero.

Re:

[timeOday]

I doubt the connection will be good enough for VOIP, but I also doubt they can block it. They would have to prevent all secure communications. That would exclude email (yes, at least 99% of business are smart enough to require VPN or at least ssl for email access).

Re:

[mpe]

Any geek worth his salt will just establish an SSH tunnel to his home network and run his VoIP call through the tunnel :)

Or a "road warrior" who's machine automatically makes a VPN connection...

Sweet... just what I need...

[Anonymous Coward]

A jerk talking on his cellphone while I'm trying to enjoy a quiet plane ride.

Re:

[vertinox]

A jerk talking on his cellphone while I'm trying to enjoy a quiet plane ride.

Personally, I'd rather have a cell phone jerk on a plane sitting next to me than a screaming child ten rows away from me.

Of course with the "THINK OF CHILDREN!" attitude, no one throws unruly children off the plane. Oh wait... They did once [msn.com]

But I personally wish people they would have an airline that allowed only those 10 or older and charge a bit more. I don't know why movie theaters do that either...

Cellphone ban lift? PLEASE NO!!!

[mdobossy]

Imagine a 5 hour cross country flight, sitting next to some idiot yapping at the top of his voice on his cell phone. That after having to strip down, empty your bags, and submit to a body cavity search just to get through security. That cross country road trip is sounding better and better every day...

Re:

[drinkypoo]

I just wish that airlines would start offering free ear plugs, so we could all stop listening to the incessant whining of a bunch of intellectually challenged self centered ass holes.

Ear plugs give me a headache, and I have used many different types including molded-to-my-ear, stuffy foam, and pre-molded-plugs. I just wish you would go fuck yourself instead of suggesting solutions that don't work for me.

I agree that people should be able to make phone calls on airplanes. I think the solution to the whiny

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Sir, you have a disability. When you have a disability, you have to live with the fact that the world does not revolve around your disability, and that you may have to work harder to make the solution that works for the rest of us, work for you.

What? You do realize that in the US you are required by law to make all kinds of allowances for the disabled, right?

They don't seem to think that it is their own responsibility to make themselves comfortable, and think that anyone not catering to them is being rude

Re:

[bilbravo]

Look in the mirror! You think everyone should be tolerant of your desire to yap on the cell phone. It may be a "public" place, but there is common courtesy. An emergency call is one thing, but just yip-yapping away will get old--fast. People are TOO attached to their phones.

Re:

[bilbravo]

I don't mind the "emergency" calls, as I said in another post. However, as many others have pointed out, phones on the plane would be abused. I understand what courtesy means, and I'm not a neo-luddite (whatever you mean by that). I simply do not think that others should be talking on their cell phones unnecessarily the entire flight while others (read: not one person, but many others) on the plane do not want to listen to this call. It has nothing to do with having others "doing what I want", but rathe

Re:I'm thinking about...

[Mr. Underbridge]

I'm thinking about the 5 hour cross country flight, sitting next to the the ass that is either so stupid that he can't figure out that a $.50 pair of ear plugs would solve his problems,

Game theory, buddy. You making your incessant inane calls gives you slight benefit while annoying the hell out of about 100 people around you. Thus, not worth it. If everyone talks constantly on their phones during a long flight it's worse for everyone.

or is so self centered that he thinks everybody else should modify their behavior in public places because trying to force his desired behavior on everyone else

It seems to be the desired behavior of the masses - I've never seen anyone who enjoyed listening to a cacophony of cell calls - so that's democracy for you. Forcing societal norms on assholes since 1776.

seems like a better idea than putting in a $.50 pair of ear plugs.

Sure does, that's not particularly comfortable. I don't want to have to stick shit in my ears for 5 hours because you can't shut the **** up for 10 consecutive minutes.

You're not so damned important that you can't wait until you get on the ground. In the rare case that someone is, their company will reimburse them for the exorbitant back-of-the-seat phone.

I just wish that airlines would start offering free ear plugs, so we could all stop listening to the incessant whining of a bunch of intellectually challenged self centered ass holes.

The self-centered one is the dipshit who thinks his desires are more important than those of the 100 people around him. That would be you.

Re:

[nojomofo]

Odd. So do you think that people shouldn't be allowed to talk to other people on airplanes? It should be no easier or harder to block out than people talking on phones. Or is the problem that you can't listen to both ends of the conversation so it's no fun to eavesdrop when somebody is on the phone?

Re:

[bilbravo]

It's probably because most cell phone users think that today's technology still requires them to yell into the phone for others to hear them. :-)

Re:

[dkf]

So do you think that people shouldn't be allowed to talk to other people on airplanes?

That would be very nice, yes. Speaking as someone who's been on far too many flights in the past few years, making a long flight more peaceful is a good goal indeed. (I'd also like to ban the person in front of me from jamming his or her seat back into my knees. That would help a lot making *me* feel more peaceful...)

Re:I'm thinking about...

[FuryG3]

People, generally, speak very differently to others while in their presence than they do while on the phone. Let's look at the example of a moderately busy restaurant at lunchtime (not, say, TGIF during happy hour or kids-eat-free day at IHOP). Most of the time the "annoying" people in the restaurant are people on cell phones.

Why do these cell-phone-people stand out, and why is this even trickier on planes? Several theories:

1) restaurants (and planes) are areas where it has traditionally been impossible and/or impolite to be on the telephone. People are paying quite a bit of money to enjoy their meal/trip, and expect some level of decorum from those around them.

2) When conversing with someone who is next to you, they can also observe the atmosphere and tailor the conversation (content, volume, laughter, emotion) to be appropriate. One party is probably not on the plane, and the party who is tends to get lost in conversation and converse without this regard. Is it the person on the planes responsibility to be polite? Yes. Do cell phones foster this behavior? I say no.

3) WHAT?!?!??! I'M ON THE AIRPLANE? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?

4) In a restaurant and in an airplane people often try to converse, get business done, and eat. But planes have other considerations also. People try to watch movies (and no, headphones don't cancel out loud talking), sleep, read, or work diligently on their laptops. Some of these things are pretty hard to do when a large percentage of people are on the phone.

5) Extremely confined spaces mean people can be more irritable, and also require more consideration of others. Airplanes make quite a large number of people nervous, since they often combine numerous phobias/anxieties into one ordeal. Activities which foster respect, quiet, calm, and polite behavior should be fostered (such as movies, reading, sleeping, eating, headphone-music), and activities which don't shouldn't be (everyone on their cell phone, first-class vs coach rugby, or a lan party). Although those things may be rather fun on a plane, they're not exactly calm-enducing :)

Is there a middle road? Yes, and the airlines have a responsibility to try to promote it. Loud cell phone conversations should be given warnings, and then barred from use on 2nd or 3rd offense. On long haul flights, specific blocks of time should be set aside as no-cell-phone period, say when the lights go out for nap time or a movie is playing. Having some mention of these things by the crew serves a reminder that cell-phone politeness is really important on a plane. Staff shouldn't lie about why cell phones aren't allowed during certain periods, though, that's counter productive.

Do I think airlines care about these things? Maybe. They probably care more about money, though, and that's why they're going in the direction they're going (i.e., no VoIP on wifi, pay for cell phone service, encourage seat-back phone use, etc). As someone who tries to get things done on a plane (business, reading, etc) I welcome the option to use my cell phone at a reasonable rate, but I also feel that I'd be less-productive if everyone (including myself) turns plane rides into Verizon commercials.

Re:

[PitaBred]

So, you don't mind if I'm halfway in your seat, or have bad breath I insist on blowing your way, farting, and generally being an obnoxious prick while sitting next to you in a crowded, unexitable area for a long period of time?

It's about respect. I shouldn't have to change MY behavior to make up for YOU being an obnoxious douchebag. Keep the phones off the plane. And if they don't, hell, I suppose I can talk loud enough about nothing to make it a pain in the ass for you to have a thought to yourself, o

Re:I'm thinking about...

[onkelonkel]

It may be a "public" place but the poor bastard next to you can't just get up and walk away if your talking irritates him. Your "right" to talk and his "right" to peace and quiet are going to conflict. How you both deal with that will be interesting, especially if your seat-mate is as reasonable, accommodating and willing to compromise as you seem to be.

Re:I'm thinking about...

[KurdtX]

Sounds a lot like the argument die-hard smokers make about their "right" to smoke.

Yes, you could issue earplugs to everyone, but why should they alter what they're doing because you're being offensive? If you happen to riddle your speech with profanity, and go to a grade school, the accepted solution is not for you to expect all the children to wear earplugs, it's for you to recognize the social norms of the environment you're in and modify your behavior to match.

Of course, why is the guy next to you an ass for being bothered by your behavior? He's not doing anything offense, he's reacting to something you're doing he finds offensive.

You don't have a right to talk on a cell phone, and you do have a responsibility to your fellow humans.

Laptops and phones on planes

[Malc]

I've been curious for a while about mobile phones versus laptops on planes. We have to turn the phones off, but who even thinks to turn off the 802.11 or Blue Tooth in their laptop? Perhaps the 2.4GHz range doesn't coincide with navigational frequencies or something.

Re:

[Embedded2004]

I've been on many flights where they specifically tell you to turn off the wireless radios in your portable devices.

Re:

[Joe The Dragon]

the cell phones mess up the cell towers at that hight / speed

Re:

[Morgor]

Well, 802.11b/g doesn't mess up the navigational systems, but 802.11a does, if you have any of that legacy equipment. It uses 5.5Ghz which is also the spectre in which radar is broadcasted. This is also the frequency many unlicensed WiMAX connections used, although primarily in countries where the original 3.5ghz spectrum is not available for licensing.

Re:Laptops and phones on planes

[Belial6]

I have a hard time believing that. If a WiMAX connection messed up airline naviagtion, the towers on the ground would be screwing them up whether a device was on the plane or not. Now, I know that they are not a definitive source of info, but the Mythbusters episode where they tried to interfere with an planes instruments with cell phones and other radio equipment, they showed that it is just not going to happen. They had to do some pretty serious work to get the plane's equipment to a state that it could be affected by non-intentional interference. Look at it this way. If you could crash an airplane by hitting it with consumer level radio waves, don't you think we would be seeing a lot more planes going down? Why take a shoe bomb on a plane. Just turn on a battery operated radio transmitter.

sweet

[mastershake_phd]

So all I need is a big antenna in my backyard and some tracking software and I can have free wifi!

Sweet!

[Cornflake917]

Now I can play Metroid: Prime Hunters and other DS multiplayer games online!

Re:

[bilbravo]

If the service is like those in most hotspots, where you get into a proxy and have to enter CC info at a website, I doubt you'll be able to play your DS... Boo Nintendo for not including a browser. I also would enjoy some DS wifi on the plane!

Counter strike

[vivaoporto]

Playing counter-strike will now be even more realistic. Imagine the kids screaming "haha, I'm going to blow this plane, you faggots!!!11" inside the plane. And the real CT squad goes berserker and pull their weapons. Pure pwnage!

Re:

[raehl]

Sure would be funny to freak out the passenger next to you by constantly playing cs_747.

W00T!

[eviloverlordx]

Spam at 10,000 feet!

Re:

[Akaihiryuu]

10000 ft is kind of low, unless you're talking about a relatively short fight. The flights I've taken (OH to WA and OH to AZ) generally cruise at 30000 ft.

It's not a revolution folks!

[webword]

The DEFINITIVE guide to Airline WiFi and Internet Access [otbeach.com].

Not so new. Rather than true progress this is merely a catch up.

How do you do that?

[Daishiman]

What's the point of banning VoIP? How is a VoIP packet different from any other packet? A VPN or an SSH tunnel is all you need to thwart that.

Re:How do you do that?

[jfengel]

Didn't you hear? VoIP packets interfere with the navigation of the plane. Do you want to kill us all, you fool?

Re:

[antifoidulus]

So I don't have to sit in a confied space and hear people yapping about the various venerial diseases they picked up on spring break.

Re:How do you do that?

[jrumney]

It interferes with the profit centers on the plane.

Nice try, no donut!

[zappepcs]

I seriously don't think that $10 per day for WiFi connection will satisfy the stockholders/investors.
$4,500,000,000 - At only $100k per plane x 4500 planes that fly in the North America area. (guess)
$xx millions - Wireless spectrum

Well, even with simplified math, that works out to hundreds of millions of user-day revenue just to pay back infrastructure investment. Where is the business plan for that?

Re:

[anotherone]

The business plan is probably a million users/day for more than a hundred days.

Re:

[LunaticTippy]

Maybe it is expected to be a perk that would increase loyalty. They used to give out meals and so forth for the same reason.

Your comment made me sad. I liked it better when every little thing wasn't evaluated against the bottom line. Thinking like you leads to no dinner, offshored customer service, ads on tray tables, barf bags and overhead bins.

Re:Nice try, no donut!

[donutello]

100,000 x 4500 = $450,000,000 (You had one too many zeros)

A simpler way to look at it, however: 6% interest on $100,000 is about $20 per day. If you depreciate the equipment over 5 years, that adds another $60 or so per day. If you figure that the average user will take about 2 flights in a day, you earn about $5 per user per flight. Your average airplane makes about 10 flights in a day giving you a potential customer base of 200 x 10 = 2000. You only need to sell to about 16 of those to pay for the capital costs. If you think you're going to get a higher attach rate than that (and I think you are), this is worth doing. Put in intangibles such as product differentiation and customer loyalty and you're far ahead of your costs.

Re:

[raehl]

Your average airplane makes about 10 flights in a day

What planet are these planes flying on?

That's 2.4 hours per flight. I've spent 2.4 hours on some flights just sitting on the tarmac.

Short routes you MIGHT get 8 flights per day once you factor in not flying at night. Longer routes you get 4.

online is online

[Itninja]

So what will keep someone with an internal wireless (cellular) broadband card in their laptop from using it, and claiming they are on the planes wi-fi network? To the passive observer, there would really be no way to tell the difference. Using cellular in a plane makes it explode or something, right?

Re:

[yolto]

No, its pretty unlikely that using your cell phone will cause any problems.. Banning cell phone use is mostly a safety precaution "just in case" the spectrum your phone is using interferes with the planes avionics. Mythbusters did a test where they jacked up the power of a cell phone over 1000 times and it had no effect on the cockpit instruments. Check out http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/04/episode_49_cell phones_on_plane.html [kwc.org]

Now they may ban you from using your phone since they want you to pay for THEI

Re:

[dlhm]

I think haveing some jackass sitting next to me talking loudly into his phone for an hour will be a huge security risk. Or rather I might become a security risk to him.

WiFi speeds on the ground?

[TheDarkener]

Speeds will be equivalent to WiFi service on the ground

So....how about the bandwidth actually going upstream to the INTERNET? I sure am happy that I'll be connecting to the access point at 11/54Mbps, but....that won't help much when downloading pr0n!

$10 a day?

[AeroIllini]

Good God, how long are these flights?

Re:

[bilbravo]

A lot of hotspots (Barnes & Noble, Starbucks) charge a few dollars per hour/session. A flight across the U.S. could easily exceed $10 at those costs.

Jet lag

[LiquidCoooled]

The article says that the wifi will cost the same amount per day as regular wifi.
Does that mean it will cost less if you are flying East?

Um, $100,000 ?

[tehwebguy]

Why does it cost 100 grand for a plane?

Re:

[badboy_tw2002]

I'm sure its

1. Regular Netlink Router - $45
2. $999,955
3. Profit!

Or maybe they have special hardware approved for avionics. Remember the crash where the in-flight gambling computers caught fire and downed the plane? I'm sure it costs a bundle to get things approved for commercial flight.

Re:

[Blakey Rat]

The wi-fi access point in the plane is the easy part. The hard part is the infrastructure required to get a low-latency, high-bandwidth connection to an object moving at several hundred miles an hour at an altitude of 42,000 feet.

And when I say "easy part", that's relatively speaking. There's still tons and tons of tests to ensure that the wireless access does nothing to interfere with the plane's instruments or communication.

Install outlets throughout the plane first

[iamacat]

Otherwise WiFi is useless on flights over 3 hours, where its actually needed. Weather its a regular outlet, cigarette ligher adapter or some fixed voltage DC source, notebook makers will come up with adapters. Alternatively, show me a notebook that can last 10 hours while actually working - hardrrive/CPU on - AND using the network.

Re:

[Blakey Rat]

Not that it answers your requirement, but my 14" iBook got a solid 6 hours with the backlight on low, DVD drive empty, but wifi on, when it was new. Now it's down to about 4, or 2.5 if I play DVDs.

Doesn't Jetblue offer this already?

[stefanlasiewski]

A few months ago we were driving up I-5 in California.

We were stuck in a traffic jam on the road, a good 20 miles from the nearest town. I pulled out my laptop to scan for wireless signals, and see exactly how 'isolated' this area was.

Surprisingly, I found several Access Points with names like 'JetBlue1203' and 'JetBlue1609'. These signals would start at low-strength, the signal would grow stronger, peak for about 5 minutes, and then drop off in strength--- almost as if they were coming from an Airplane overhead.

I suppose these AP's could have come from some other car on the road; but people generally don't run Access Points in their Car.

Traffic was at a standstill--- if the signal was coming from a nearby house or from a car on our side of the road; I would expect the signal to remain level for a longer period of time.

If the signal was coming from a car on the opposite side of the road, I would expect the signal quality to rise and fall quickly. In fact, I could detect a number of 'Ad-Hoc' wireless signals from some misconfigured Laptops-- those signals would zoom by pretty quickly (other side of the road), or remain stable (My side of the road).

I never investigated these further, but I always assumed these 'JetBlue####' Access Points were from JetBlue Airplanes, and I was lucky enough to be within line-of-sight of these signals. The airplanes were a few miles above us, which seems pretty distant for a Wifi signal... But still these Access Points had names like 'JetBlue'. What the heck were they?

So they've been lying to us?

[gsfprez]

Which in the hell is it?

Are wireless devices going to cause the plane to crash or not?

If i can cause the plane to crash using my iPod during takeoff, why can i now use WiFi during the flight?

This all goes to show you why the asshole that refused to put away his iPod or laptop when told to was always right, and the stewdresses and do-gooder sheeple sitting around the cabin ratting them out are the real dumbasses.

Has the equipment gotten lighter?

[Critical Facilities]

From TFA:
In all, it will cost about $100,000 to outfit a plane with less than 100 pounds of equipment, and the work can be done overnight by airline maintenance workers, AirCell says.

However, according to the article [nwsource.com]in this post [slashdot.org]:

Paradoxically, he said, the change will reduce weight. "We're putting in about 50 pounds of wiring and taking out about 200 pounds of other gear" including wireless antennae, wireless access points and thickened ceiling panels, said Sinnett.

So I'm wondering, what's chan

On an airplane . . .

[cashman73]

So, when you use the internet on an airplane, you're not downloading p0rn . In fact, you're UPloading p0rn to your computer,...

And, when flying Aeroflot in Soviet Russia: P0RN UPLOADS YOU!

Ban the cell phone

[DaMattster]

Planes are cramped enough as it is. They manage to shoe horn people into coach (steerage) at six total people per row (minus two at the emergency exit) on a medium range jet like an A320, 737, or 757. So, things are fairly claustrophobic and, mix in the woman that yaks endlessly about nothing for hours at a time and you have a recipe for air rage. I for one would be ready to yank the cell phone out of her hand and smash it against my knee. I am sure that cracking sound would be accompanied by the applau

Who has room?

[CohibaVancouver]

I find all this talk of internet access in economy hilarious. On most flights with the seat pitch what it is I can barely open a paperback book on the tray table. My laptop? Forget it!! It stays in the overhead bin.

$50 bucks to the first person.....

[failedlogic]

Who catches the RIAA president using BitTorrent on their laptop to exchange "files"!

OLDDDDDD NEWS

[Kagato]

This would be news worthy is not for the fact that Boeing already had a wifi internet service. It came out years ago. It did SO well that they discontinued it!

Re:Why are phones still banned

[lucabrasi999]

Phones should always be banned on a plane. I can't think of anything more annoying than listening to dozens of conversations going on around me while I try to sleep.

"Hi Mom!"

...

"No, the plane just took off"

...

"Well, it was all right, but our flight out of Amsterdam was delayed. I have NEVER seen an airport backed up like that before"

...

"All-in-all, the trip was OK, but I am SO GLAD it is over"

...

"Well, for one, Linette was SUCH a B-I-T-C-H for this ENTIRE trip. I was so happy when she caught her connecting flight at JFK."

...

"Well, she used to be so nice, but, ever since her an Darren broke up, it has been a nightmare"

...

"He cheated on her!

...

"I KNOW! And he seemed to be so nice"

...

"He slept with NICOLE, of all people"

I beg the powers-that-be to never, ever allow the use of cell phones on a plane. It will be enough for many of us to slit our wrists.

Re:Why are phones still banned

[blueskies]

I can't believe they are going to let people talk to each other on planes. Just think how bad it is going to be when you hear both sides of the conversation.

That will be twice as much chatter!!!!

Re:

[aschlemm]

I for one predict an increased demand for noise reduction headphones so you don't have to listen to the idiot next to you on their phone.

Re:

[manekineko2]

Or we could get the government (and people like you) out of regulating this and let the airlines make the decisions for themselves. If you don't want to share flight with people who can use cell phones, fine go to an air carrier that doesn't allow it. If enough people think like you, that carrier will be rewarded by the market. Meanwhile, people like me who have business to take care of on flights who want to use their cell phones can go to other airlines that choose not to restrict their passengers.

Re:

[raehl]

The restaurant industry already has a solution to this problem.

Airlines just need a cell-phone section and a no-cell-phone section.

Another way to look at it is the most obnoxious cell phone user can't be any worse than the crying baby. They really shouldn't let those things on planes.

Re:Why are phones still banned

[Doug Neal]

Alternatively people could just learn some manners and consideration for others. It's not hard to make/take a phone call in a public place discreetly and quietly without intruding on anyone else's day. That said, putting all the children together and all the phone users together (at opposite ends of the plane please - I'd much rather listen to a phone call than a baby) wouldn't be a bad idea at all.

Re:

[lucabrasi999]

Meanwhile, people like me who have business to take care of on flights who want to use their cell phones can go to other airlines that choose not to restrict their passengers.

I spent seven years traveling on a plane as part of my business. While it would have been nice to be able to conduct some business on the phone, the fact is, there are very few phone calls that can't wait for the three hours until you land.

I can imagine that right now, you are saying to yourself "Puh-leese! I HAVE to make that

Re:

[cbittle]

It will be enough for many of us to slit our wrists.

Perhaps the airlines will be so kind as to offer complimentary razorblades with each flight?

Re:Why are phones still banned

[superflytnt]

Use VoIP now. Just tunnel it through SSH or some other protocol. I hate people talking on the phone as much as the next guy, but I'd make a call just to spite them.

Re:Why are phones still banned

[rainman_bc]

From what I have read and heard airline employees saying, the signals can mess up internal electronics on the plane. I always thought that that was bull

That's not as funny as the cell phones can cause a gas station to explode myth... For cripes sake there's a battery under the hood of a car... And more electronics in a car than in a cell phone...

Re:

[Alpha232]

Not to be rude and shock you with reality... but what makes you think it will be any cheaper to use cell phones on board? There is almost no way that you will be able to use a cell phone with the network of traditional cell towers, the distance, speed, and hand-off issues will get you nearly every time as well as yes the interference generated by the cell phone cranking up the power to try and reach that tower it caught a glimmer of but has already passed.

That being said - they are most likely installing p

Re:I'd love to see...

[pipatron]

They don't need to block it, they just have to tell the guy on the phone to shut the fuck up.

Re:

[soft_guy]

Blocking everything but port 80, perhaps?

I hate it when some asshat blocks everything but port 80 and I can't use a real email client.

Re:

[Xenna]

May I suggest you use OpenVPN (VPN over TCP port 80/443) instead?
Much more flexible...

X.

Re:

[voice_of_all_reason]

Heck, just the sound alone if you neglect to turn it off or the headphone jack slips. I think an air marshall hearing an errant shotgun blast or rocket explosion would jump at the chance to increase his real life score by popping the guy right in his seat.

Re:Gaming on a plane

[Dynedain]

There is absolutely no way that a laptop carried on a plane can simulate the sound of a real shotgun or rocket.

Have you even heard a real gun before? I guarantee you that the air marshals have.

Re:

[voice_of_all_reason]

Could've fooled me. Let me go search a few news sites for the phrases "thought he saw a gun" or "thought he smelled marijuana" or "thought he heard a gunshot." I could limit it to this year only if slashdot comments have a line limit.

The "they're-coming-right-for-us!!" reflex always supercedes training. It would not surprise me if such a wild scenario eventually happened.

Re:$10 a 'day'?

[MaelstromX]

Maybe you didn't read the summary or you don't fly much but from the summary:

It will also offer discounted options for customers and tie into existing service programs like T-Mobile, iPass and Boingo.

Those services listed all cost about $10 per day and at most airports they are your only wireless internet options; for instance, here in Atlanta when you connect to the wireless network you can only access the airport information site and the menu of wifi providers so you can purchase one of their internet service packages. It sucks (especially since I used to live in Pittsburgh where they offer it for free), however, it seems like the market has shown that it will support a price of $10 to connect to the internet during your air travel, so it only makes sense that when they are extending the airport wifi structure to the actual airplane they use the same distribution mechanisms and the same pricing scheme.

Re:

[bilbravo]

I flew from BWI to Atlanta, then to Vegas. Vegas had free wifi, and that was good because my flight out of Vegas got delayed for 2 hours.

However, same thing happened in Atlanta with a 2.5 hour layover--BOO Atlanta! I slept.

Re:

[imemyself]

Wow, thanks for the tip. I'll have to remember that when I go through there next month.

Re:

[Ogive17]

I read about this about a year ago, but another reason cell phones are banned on planes is something to do with being in multiple cell tower areas at once, and constantly adding/subtracting the tower service area.

Re:

[duplo1]

How is the risk of a remotely activated device detonating any greater than detonating a tape recorder with a built-in timer (i.e. Pan-Am 103)? If the latter can't make its way past physical security then why should the former? Do remotely activated devices use invisible explosives? Are they in any way different from locally activated devices that make them somehow undetectable? In this case, the risk is inherrently in the payload NOT in the activation technology.

I agree that there are holes in the system,

Re:

[angst_ridden_hipster]

I think you've answered your own question.

Security is pretty pathetic. If you *really* want to get destructive devices on a plane, you could probably do it (e.g., this [9news.com].

There's no need to resort to some crazy cell-phone- or ethernet-based attack. In fact, it'd be detrimental to your mission, since it's more complicated and has more possibilities for failure. If you think that the potential terrorists are deterred because they don't want to die, they could much more simply make timer-based triggers than inter

Re:

[punkass]

What did he say, "Pics or it didn't happen"?