Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

FCC, FAA Still Don't Want Cell Phones on Planes

Posted by Zonk on Wednesday April 09, @03:51PM
from the probably-a-terrorist-plot dept.
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."

Related Stories

[+] U.S. Airlines to Offer In-Air Wi-Fi 252 comments
"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.'"
[+] Mobile: Cell Phones To Be Allowed On UK Planes 217 comments
Matty the Monkey writes "The British regulator in charge of air travel has approved cellphones for use on airline flights, reports the BBC. Airlines will be allowed to activate base stations in the plane's tail after takeoff, creating a zone of mobile coverage around the plane. 'The services could stop working once aircraft leave European airspace. Initially, only second generation networks will be offered but growing interest would mean that third generation, or 3G, services would follow later, said Ofcom. The cost of making a mobile phone call from a plane will be higher than making one from the ground.'"
FCC, FAA Still Don't Want Cell Phones on Planes More | Login | Reply
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Please Log In to ContinueClose 25 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by dattaway (3088) on Wednesday April 09, @03:53PM (#23016450) Homepage
    Imagine a two hour flight with everyone talking to their hands. Or the ones with blinking blue cockroaches in their ears talking to the seat in front of them. No thanks.
    • by bcat24 (914105) on Wednesday April 09, @04:00PM (#23016544) Homepage Journal
      I couldn't agree more. Don't get me wrong, I love my cell phone as much as the next guy. It's just that there are some places where non-emergency phone calls are inappropriate. Plane flights are bad enough without people chatting on their cell for hours on end.

      In-flight wifi, on the other hand, sounds far more promising. I can imagine it being used for some really awesome things, like movie rentals that work directly with your laptop.
      • "In-flight wifi, on the other hand, sounds far more promising. I can imagine it being used for some really awesome things, like movie rentals that work directly with your laptop.

        Or voice over IP via a bluetooth headset paired to the laptop.

        Wait a minute... D'OH!

      • by Alinabi (464689) on Wednesday April 09, @05:10PM (#23017484)
        Actually, plane flights are so bad, that nothing can make them worse. Someone talking on the phone next to me is nothing compared to the 4 year old kid behind me kicking my seat for 7 hours in a row. At least now I can use the dead time to call my mother, who always complains I don't call enough. The only question is: will I be able to take my knees out of my mouth to reach for the phone in my pocket?
        • by gnick (1211984) on Wednesday April 09, @04:45PM (#23017140)
          Exactly. I generally dislike cells - I think they're obnoxious, but acknowledge that they're great in emergencies and useful for people who want/need to be plugged-in all the time. Personally I find use in restaurants, etc. is a nuisance to other patrons. But that should not influence federal regulations. If enough patrons want a phone-free airline, I'd like to believe that we'd have phone-free flights (unlikely, but not enough reason to legislate). The only issues that should be considered by the FAA/FCC are safety and interference.

          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.
    • by Caligatio (1064234) on Wednesday April 09, @04:05PM (#23016606) Homepage
      Yea, this would drive me absolutely batty. Of course, if WiFi is OKed, that means that VoIP is possible.
      • by walterbays (1136723) on Wednesday April 09, @06:26PM (#23018336) Homepage

        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:

        • "Oh you're right about that. I wouldn't put up with it for a minute. You should just tell him where to go."
        • "How long has your sister had this disease?"
        • "That's great news for you. I sure hope none of your competitors find out that you're going to bid 20k. Will you give me a call later and tell me how it comes out?"
      • by MoxFulder (159829) on Wednesday April 09, @04:37PM (#23017032) Homepage

        Is a bunch of people talking on phones any different than a bunch of people talking to each other?
        Yes. People talking on cell phones seem to lack a basic situational awareness and volume control. I don't mind real-life conversations all around me, not at all. But people on cell phones always seem to talk too loud, say inappropriate things, and have no awareness of the real world around them. I know I'm guilty of it myself...
        • by mcmonkey (96054) on Wednesday April 09, @04:54PM (#23017272) Homepage

          When people talk on cellphones they are LOUDER for some reason. Most people like to yell at their phones.

          Cell phones do not give the same feedback as most land line phones.

          When you talk into a regular phone, your voice repeats back through your earpiece. This not only provides feedback on the clarity of your voice, it also provides psychological assurance that you can be heard.

          When you talk into a cell phone, you voice is not repeated back to you. Since you have a hard time hearing yourself (compared to when talking on a regular phone) you naturally speak louder to compensate.

          There is also the issue of the cell phone on the other side. Think about it, and you will probably catch yourself doing it automatically--when the person you are speaking with is using a cell phone, you add a little volume, presuming your audience does not have as clear a connection than they would have using a land line.

          The solution is, when speaking, to concentrate on what you are saying and not how you hear your own voice. You can't rely on the feedback from your cell phone to regulate your volume. You have to assume the other person would tell you to speak up if they can't hear you.

      • by LWATCDR (28044) on Wednesday April 09, @04:41PM (#23017088) Homepage Journal
        The babies don't bother me. The Adults tend to be 10 times worse. I used to fly a lot. I never had a terrible problem with babies. Yes sitting next to a 450 lbs woman that thought a beach umbrella was carry on luggage. A jerk that not only yelled at me for putting my bag in the over head because it might crush his cell phone. A bodybuilder that started to cry when we hit a little rough air.
        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.
  • Funny that. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Wowsers (1151731) on Wednesday April 09, @03:53PM (#23016454)
    What a strange co-incidence, I don't want phones on a plane either. I don't want to hear 400 calls of "Hello, you never guess where I'm calling from."
  • by OYAHHH (322809) * on Wednesday April 09, @03:55PM (#23016490)
    > US carriers might just have to give into demand

    Well, as far as I'm concerned, they already have. I don't want some blabber-mouth next to me trying to yell over the jet's noise for a cross country trip.

    Now, if they want to instigate a cell-phone free area at the front or rear of the plane like they used to do with smoking versus no-smoking sections then I say go-for-it...
  • The concern is.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by esocid (946821) on Wednesday April 09, @04:03PM (#23016586)
    I can't remember who I remember hearing this from, but during some flight I recalled some flight personnel talking about it and the reason behind it being that not all cell phones are alike and not all plane equipment is alike. The testing needed to be completely sure that there wouldn't be any sort of interference would be horrendously laborious, not to mention that something new comes out just about every month. I can't vouch that this is absolutely true, but I do see where they are coming from.
    Plus like one of the above posts said, I don't want Mr. "I'm an important asshat" blabbing on his bluetooth earpiece while I'm trying to sleep. People don't have common sense so let's just leave it at that.
    • Re:The concern is.. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Sandbags (964742) on Wednesday April 09, @04:56PM (#23017300)
      The issue was with old, pre-CDMA cell phones and extremely old avionics, like those found in small and mid-sized non-comercial aircraft about 40 years ago.

      Modern cockpits have been retrofitted with systems that shield from various types of this radiation and signal interference, and the older touchy meters are only found in old, personally owned aircraft today. Also, not a single one of those old phones that DID cause the interference is in use today since those old networks were dismantled years ago.

      This is what happens when people who do not understand technology are allowed to make decisions for people that do.

      People forget to turn on or off their cell phones on every flight I've been on for years... I'll hear voicemail chimes start going off about a mile from the ground, typically about 10 minutes or so before landing. I'll also catch kids whipping out phones to play games in-flight, phones that I know for certain don't support radio-off airline operation modes.

      Not one plane has complained about avionic radio interference. With tens of thousands of people in the air every day, and at least one person on every flight forgetting to turn it off (or leaving it on on purpose), we'd have heard about an issue.

      If the medical industry was held to the standards of the FAA, we'd just now be seeing asprin appear on store shelves for the first time.... 45 billion test cases, not one single failure, but ya never know... we need to do more testing....
  • by manekineko2 (1052430) on Wednesday April 09, @04:04PM (#23016600)
    It's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly pro-tech, the average reader is also very hostile to the idea of in-flight calls based on past stories on this.

    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.
      • by Original Replica (908688) on Wednesday April 09, @05:00PM (#23017342) Journal
        If there are no safety issues involved, then the FCC and the FAA have no place in the discussions.

        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.
  • by dontmakemethink (1186169) on Wednesday April 09, @04:34PM (#23017004)

    There was a Mythbusters episode (season 4 episode 6) where they got serious interference under test conditions with actual airplane instruments, but were unable to interfere with the instruments on an actual plane. They concluded that even though they couldn't create a hazardous situation, it would be an extremely bad idea to take the risk, since it is plausible and there's only one way to find out!

    They also made a good point that air travel would be prohibitively expensive if insurance companies required airlines to verify that every component of every plane in their fleets were impervious to cel phone interference. That makes the $5 plane phone seem a lot less sinister.

    • by smooth wombat (796938) on Wednesday April 09, @04:05PM (#23016608) Journal
      Except for the fact that in the case of one plane, the one that went down in PA, some people on the plane were able to call out and notify authorities of their hijackings and provide some information as to the number of hijackers, weapons, etc. In the case of the hostesses, they used on board phones, not cell phones, but some passengers did call their family and/or authorities.

      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."