FCC, FAA Still Don't Want Cell Phones on Planes 300
mattnyc99 writes "Last month we learned that the UK has approved in-flight mobile, effective immediately. Popular Mechanics has a follow-up on why the phones-on-planes ban is here to stay in the United States. Statements from the FCC and FAA confirm that any chance to overturn it remains dead on arrival — even though new "pico-cell" networks cut down interference with phones on the ground. American Airlines is looking like it will have onboard Wi-Fi within the next couple months, just the same. PM does note, however, that if the European mobile rollout is a success, US carriers might just have to give into demand."
I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ill pass, thanks. (Score:2, Insightful)
The actual reason... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ill pass, thanks. (Score:5, Insightful)
And when I make VoIP calls using a microphone..?
Re:The actual reason... (Score:2, Insightful)
Government Intervention (Score:5, Insightful)
Moreover, it's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly anti-government regulation, when it comes to things they want the government to regulate, like banning in-flight cellular phone use, they're generally more than happy to acquiesce.
Unless the cell phones present a safety concern, I don't see any reason whatsoever for the government to be involved in banning in-flight cell phone use. If the free market turns out to be interested in having quiet flights without cellular phone use, then I'm sure carriers will be more than happy to offer flights and/or cabins that ban cellular phone use. There are already laws that make not complying with flight attendants a crime. If the market turns out to be more interested in the convenience of using phones on planes, then who are you to be telling them through the use of legalized government force to prevent airlines from serving those markets?
Other than the interference with navigational controls and ground based towers, which are supposed to be eliminated with the pico-cells, and which we'll soon get to the bottom of with the UK legalizing, I haven't heard of a single legitimate reason to involve governmental intervention in this. The blurb about terrorism concerns and remote detonating bombs sounds like more pointless scare-mongering with no increase in security. The article itself admits that people are already surreptitiously using cellular phones.
It's nice that most Slashdoters don't want cell phones on planes, but it's downright screwed up to use governmental force to make everyone go along with it without a public purpose behind it.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The actual reason... (Score:5, Insightful)
I realize you mean the other way, someone calling you, for why cell phones shouldn't be used on planes due to the panic issue, but I'm still against them being used. Not that I have any inclination to fly anytime soon but if I did, I get enough of someone else's yammering walking around stores. I don't need to be confined for a few hours with no way to get away from, "Yeah, I be tellin her dat she ain't gonna be good wif him. Uh huh."
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The actual reason... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:3, Insightful)
When people talk on cellphones they are LOUDER for some reason. Most people like to yell at their phones.
Cellphones also encourage people to babble constantly like idiots, for some reason.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:5, Insightful)
The wost had to be the guy that yelled at the two nuns with orphans. They made a tiny bit of noise and this guy started yelling them to shut them up.
Just being in the same plane with that guy has got to be really bad karma.
Babies? Heck they are babies, they don't know any better. It is the adults that make the flights hell.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:3, Insightful)
1. It's well established that it is more difficult for people to tune out one-sided conversations.
2. People use louder voices when talking on their cellphones than when talk to someone next to them.
3. Talking on the cellphone brings the focus outside their current environment, making cell-phone users less considerate of those around them.
4. People traveling alone generally don't talk with other people on the flight since they don't know anyone. So more people are going to be talking.
About the only positive cellphones can bring to airplanes in terms of annoyance is that the single travelers who feel they must talk to the person sitting next to them will finally have someone else to talk to.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that forcing private businesses to disallow smoking is BS too, but at least they were trying to justify it through employee health complaints. Several of these comments seem to condone federal legislation to ban an annoyance in the name of safety. Gross.
Re:Government Intervention (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometime when people are forced to stay in close proximity to very annoying people, safety becomes a concern. I've seen tensions escalate very quickly when someone on a subway tells another passenger to turn down their headphones, and subway rides usually last less than half an hour. However, as the repercussions for getting into a fistfight on an airplane are more severe, so too must the regulations on other behaviors be more severe, since the normal coarse for the societal correction of unacceptable behavior is being artificially suppressed.
While many passengers would be grateful for the first person to punch out some cell phone screamer an hour into the flight, that person would still be facing serious legal trouble upon landing. As a fistfight between passengers is not a danger to the airplane's ability to complete it's flight, that would have to be unregulated along side the no cell phones rule.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I hate loud stupid Cellphone users (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bad reasons (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:4, Insightful)
Rightfully so, since those devices (AKA jammers) are illegally broadcasting on licensed frequencies. I don't generally care much for the business practices of the wireless industry but they did spend billions of dollars for those licenses and have legitimate grounds to be pissed if you throw your jammer onto their spectrum.
If you don't want people using cell phones in your establishment then make that a policy and ask people to leave who can't follow it. Or retrofit your building with a Faraday Cage (some theaters are doing this with new construction). Those are your legal options.
Re:Ill pass, thanks. (Score:5, Insightful)
Based on my observations, no one has gotten within 20 feet of a TSA agent with one on their person.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:3, Insightful)
No, VoIP will be blocked (Score:5, Insightful)
They'll block VoIP in the initial sky Wifi: http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1506 [zdnet.com]
I read a suggestion that when someone has a loud "private" conversation, you simply join into the conversation as they clearly intended all their neighbors to do by talking so loudly:
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:2, Insightful)
Your need to be on call is your problem. It is not the proprietor's problem. It is not the government's problem. Why would you rely on either to take care of your responsibility?
If you need to be on call buy a device or service that notifies you when you are out of range. You'll be paying for the service you need and not forcing other people to take care of your responsibility at their own cost.
Re:I don't want cell phones on planes. (Score:3, Insightful)
30 years ago, when you flew somewhere, every ticket cost the same price, a price set by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Since no airline had a price advantage, they competed on service.
You had free drinks, free meals and whenever something fucked-up, they really took care of you.
But the best side of regulation was that US airlines had the newest fleet in the whole world! Now, how does this sounds in terms of safety? It's pretty significant.
Then, they deregulated. The "frea mahkit" decided everything. US airlines were free to do as they chose. So, instead of buying aircraft, they bought airlines. The net result? After 20 years of deregulation, US airlines went from the youngest fleet to having the oldest fleet in the world! And if you wanted to fly on a godforsaken place well outside of the profitable networks, you got to pay through the nose.
It is cheaper for me to fly to Europe than to fly to my sister's, even though she lives a 12 hour drive away!!!
Airlines bleed money, and too much of this money is taxpayer's money. Enough is enough, the "frea mahkit" has amply demonstrated it's utter, total, absolute, complete and indomitable failure. Bring back regulation; that's the only thing that will prevent the emergency nationalization of airlines.