Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Portables United States Wireless Networking Hardware

Cell Phones In The Air? 521

Posted by timothy from the outrage-will-be-muted dept.
jumbledInTheHead writes "Are you ever annoyed when someone near you talks unnecessarily loud on their cell phone? Or even worse, when it is in a tight, enclosed space and you can't walk away? The problem is about to get worse the next time you take a flight; the FAA is considering removing the ban on cell phone use on airlines."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Cell Phones In The Air? More

Cell Phones In The Air?

Comments Filter:

  • Is this really a big deal? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MrRTFM ( 740877 ) * on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:38AM (#11071344) Journal
    So they can let phones on planes - big deal. Exactly how is this different:
    'some wanker talking loudly to the person next to them'
    'some wanker talking loudly to a person on the phone'

    That's right - there is stuff all difference. People use phones (rudely sometimes), but so what! If they are a loud, rude person then they will be loud and rude no matter what technology you limit them to.
    I hardly ever use my mobile, but on a plane I imagine it would be really useful (Hi Honey - I'll be in late, or booking rooms or whatever)
    • Isn't it really hard to get signal when you're flying? I'd imagine this would only be relevant near takeoff and landing.

      • Re:And anyway (Score:4, Informative)

        by Dunarie ( 672617 ) * on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:52AM (#11071422)
        Actually, the problem is that it's really easy to get a signal, because you have a clear shot to a crap load of cells at the same time while you are up in the air.

        • Re:And anyway (Score:5, Informative)

          by sg3000 ( 87992 ) * <sg_public@ma c . com> on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:20AM (#11071559)
          > Actually, the problem is that it's really easy to get a signal,
          > because you have a clear shot to a crap load of cells at the
          > same time while you are up in the air.

          This is the big problem. If they use the existing cellular infrastructure, this will greatly increase interference and make voice quality even worse than it is today for everybody.

          For existing cell phone towers, any cell phone in the air will be likely above the antenna mid-line. Since most antennas have a down-tilt of around 3-degrees (so they point slightly towards the ground), any coverage above the mid-line will be from one of the normally minimized antenna nodes that point up.

          Antenna manufacturers try to make these nodes small because it's just wasted energy. One would rather have that energy pointed to where the traffic is. So the cell phones that are in the air will have moderate to poor signal strength which will require the cell phone and the base station radio to transmit at their highest power settings. For the base station, that's not too bad, but for the cell phone, you're suddenly going to have this giant source of interference because the phone will be broadcasting at its full power setting from nearly two miles above the surface. Since voice quality is indirectly proportional to the level of the noise floor in an area, cell phones service will get even worse.

          However, the article talks about how they'll mitigate this. Airlines will install very small, low power base stations called "Picocells" aboard the plane. Thus, the cell phone will communicate with this nearby base station, reducing power levels significantly and minimizing the interference effect.

          However, this will do nothing to mitigate the annoyance of listening to the person next to you screaming on their cell phone because they can't hear their voice over the roar of the engine.

          • Re:And anyway (Score:3, Informative)

            by bsd4me ( 759597 )

            Antenna manufacturers try to make these nodes small because it's just wasted energy. One would rather have that energy pointed to where the traffic is. So the cell phones that are in the air will have moderate to poor signal strength which will require the cell phone and the base station radio to transmit at their highest power settings. For the base station, that's not too bad, but for the cell phone, you're suddenly going to have this giant source of interference because the phone will be broadcasting at

            • Re:And anyway (Score:3, Informative)

              by sg3000 ( 87992 ) *
              > I'm not sure if this is really true. Currently, cell phones operate
              > totally without any line of sight component in a multipath
              > envirinment (ie, a Rayleigh signal model).
              > I haven't see a a Smith chart for a cell tower antenna in a
              > while, but while the main lobe is basically horizontal, there
              > will be a side lobe pointing up.

              You're correct in that multi-path governs cellular communications, particularly for spread spectrum systems like IS-95 CDMA. However, wouldn't the fact that the d

              • Re:And anyway (Score:4, Informative)

                by bsd4me ( 759597 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @10:25AM (#11072402)

                You're correct in that multi-path governs cellular communications, particularly for spread spectrum systems like IS-95 CDMA. However, wouldn't the fact that the device is flying above the skyline with no objects for the signal to bounce off of minimize multi-path effects? It's almost free air space with no obstructions when you're pointed at an airplane.

                The only real way to be sure is to take field measurements, but I am pretty sure that this would be a Rician model (line of sight with multipath) with a fairly big Doppler shift. My reasoning is that since the mainlobe of the antenna is horizontal or pointing downward, it will pick up building and ground reflections. Since they are doing picocell and retransmitting, then can precompensate for the Doppler, though, by measurements on pilot channel. This topic has come up several times on comp.dsp. The general consensus was that the LOS component really helps things more than you think.

          • I thought the problem was that turning on a cell phone would instantly make the airplane fall out of the sky as all the avionic gear fails. I guess the airlines have cycled out all of the broken designs now?

            (Sitting here thinking about the _Far Side_ cartoon showing a switch on one passenger's armrest: "Wings Stay On/Wings Fall Off")
        • 37,000 feet is seven miles -- beyond the range of cell tower & phone antennae, even if they were pointing straight up. I don't know if the aluminum pressure hull or floor deck give significant attenuation. For service at other than take-off and landing, the aircraft will have to be equipped with some sort of repeater system. That adds weight and sucks power from a very limited gen system.

          • I have attempted to use a cell phone on a plane before, as a scientific experiment. I have not tried it with my new 3g phone, but with my old TDMA phone, service was good for about five minutes after takeoff and before landing. Otherwise, you're high enough that you can't get signal. I'm sure that some of that is from the metal airframe, but even sitting next to a window didn't help.

            Those who say its easy to use a cell phone on a plane have obviously never tried it.

      • Re:And anyway (Score:3, Informative)

        by LucidBeast ( 601749 )
        It is propably impossible when you are crossing Atlantic, but I saw few weeks ago in the news that they (if I remember right Airbus) are planning on having the link onboard the aircraft, which will then connect to satellite over sea and ground bases when flying over land or something.

        This will have the additional safety benefit that the signal from the phones doesn't have to be at full power, since the distance to the link is only ten or so meters instead of over 10km at cruising altitude and so the chance

    • Probably because if they are talking to a person they just met(more than likely on a plane), they won't talk about whatever discharges are coming from whatever orafices like they do on phones :P
    • Exactly how is this different:

      'some wanker talking loudly to the person next to them'
      'some wanker talking loudly to a person on the phone'
      Quite different. Some people feel the need to shout on the phone, especially when it's a long distance call. I suspect they don't realise that the phone converts the sound to electrical signals and sends those to the other person.

    • Re:Is this really a big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:44AM (#11071376)
      Well the difference is that when someone is talking loudly to the person next to them they are both in the same location and receiving the same information. They can both see the annoyed faces on the people. The person behind them can kick both of there seats. When a person is using a cell phone there is one party that is in a different environment. And he leads the conversation which can keep the person loud because the guy in the plain is imagining himself in the same environment. And forgets to use his inside voice. Also if there is any interference in the line our natural responce is to speak louder while in reality if we talk softer we would probably get a better transmission.
      • When a person is using a cell phone there is one party that is in a different environment. And he leads the conversation

        Have you ever had the urge to turn down the volume of your phone when talking to someone you don't like and making them shout?

        *I* haven't done this, but it makes for good times I bet.

        -Adam

    • The difference (Score:5, Interesting)

      by pedestrian crossing ( 802349 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:46AM (#11071388) Homepage Journal

      They only have two people next to them on the plane to talk to, and if they are talking loudly, that's going to stop pretty quickly.

      With a cell phone, they can talk loudly to anyone they can reach by phone.

      So instead of maybe an hour before their seatmate gives them a hint that maybe it is time to shut up, they can conduct "business" in a loud voice for 8 hours straight (or as long as their battery lasts).

      Long-distance air travel is already annoying enough, this is going to crank it up a notch!

      • Re:The difference (Score:2, Insightful)

        by HeghmoH ( 13204 )
        I don't quite understand this. Does the cell phone create a magical energy field which prevents the seatmate from telling them to shut up?

    • Re:Is this really a big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by a24061 ( 703202 ) * on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:47AM (#11071393)
      You're right. I think people using common transport should either converse very quietly or shut up and read.

      I hardly ever use my mobile, but on a plane I imagine it would be really useful (Hi Honey - I'll be in late, or booking rooms or whatever)

      True: I use mine regularly to advise my wife of my train time---by text message, not by talking.

      • But how many times have you gotten a good book picked out and sit down to start reading on the flight, and get that "so whatcha reading?" And next thing you have heard their entire life story. You kept your face down in the book trying to discourage them. So I am not sure what is worse, having them drone on endlessly trying to talk to you or drone on endlessly talking to someone else. Either way it is extremely annoying.
        • Placing on your headphones works wonders, I've done it myself a few times :) Just plug them in but with the sound turned DOWN. A problem is you don't notice when they fall out.
        • But how many times have you gotten a good book picked out and sit down to start reading on the flight, and get that "so whatcha reading?" And next thing you have heard their entire life story. You kept your face down in the book trying to discourage them. So I am not sure what is worse, having them drone on endlessly trying to talk to you or drone on endlessly talking to someone else. Either way it is extremely annoying.

          That's why God made headphones. They're pretty clear way to say "Do not Disturb."

    • Re:Is this really a big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Munra ( 580414 ) <(ku.oc.evolnahtanoj) (ta) (todhsals)> on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:50AM (#11071410) Homepage
      There is a difference.

      See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3643477.stm [bbc.co.uk] for details.

      Basically, people get more annoyed when they can only hear one side of the conversation.

      Manta

    • Re:Is this really a big deal? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SenseiLeNoir ( 699164 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:51AM (#11071415)
      Recently (June), I flew from London to Sri Lanaka. A Person nearby forgot to turn off his GSM cellphone, and it was recieving text messages throughout the flight as it passed over various countries. At that point i decided to give my cellphone a try, I switched it on, and sent a text to my parents saying I was arriving early, and asked if they could send the taxi 1 hour earlier to Colombo Airport. Cost = 20p (compared to $5 per min using the seat phone) and no wait at Colombo airport.

      It can be handy.
      • Fascinating.. I always thought that GSM would not work if the cell phone is moving faster than 220 km/h... so, to me, it seems very suprising that cell phones work in planes.
        • Fascinating.. I always thought that GSM would not work if the cell phone is moving faster than 220 km/h... so, to me, it seems very suprising that cell phones work in planes.

          Well I don't know that much about GSM or RF, but maybe it's because the plane isn't moving faster than 220km/h relative to the GSM base station, due to the huge altitude..

          • it's because the plane isn't moving faster than 220km/h relative to the GSM base station, due to the huge altitude..

            I strongly suggest you take some math and physics courses. That's like claiming a boat traveling 30 knots is not traveling over the ocean floor at that same speed. It makes absolutely no sense.
        • The speed problems are mostly related to roaming between towers since it's a matter of how fast the call can be handed off to the next tower and the phone can switch over while the phone is in contact with both towers. The large altitude means clearer path to any given tower, so that probably offsets some of the problems related to high speed roaming.

          Even if his phone couldn't hold a call when hopping cells at that speed, the text messaging probably would have been more reliable since it just needs to do a
    • I guess one way it's different is that when I'm trying to sleep I'll be woken up by someone's cell phone ringer every 5 minutes instead of just by a screaming baby every 30 minutes...
    • You don't yell at the person next to you because you can *see* she hears you, you do yell at the person on the other end of the transmission chain because you *feel* he can't hear you. Most people don't say they want 3G phones, but many would like decent voice phones.

    • People on phones are annoying because only half the conversation is audible, so it is intermittent and thus more intrusive than continuous conversation as with someone nearby.

      Consider:

      "The quality of mercy is not strained;"
      "It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven"
      "Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest;"
      "It blesseth him that gives and him that takes."
      "'Tis mighty in the mightiest;"
      "It becomes the thron&#232;d monarch better than his crown."
      "His scepter shows the force of temporal power,"
      "The a

    • the Japanese sorted this out ages ago (Score:4, Interesting)

      by conJunk ( 779958 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:00AM (#11071753)
      well, if it's such a problem, do what the japanese do... on the shinkansen (bullet train) which is essentially a slow airplane on wheels, the vestibule near the toilets is the required spot for all mobile conversations... if your phone rings, you leave your seat and have your conversation back by the loos, not in your seat

      it works because everyone respects not being an ass to others... whether or not this would work on airplanes is another matter, but the idea of a mobiles section in the same sense as smoking sections would be a step in the right direction

      • it works because everyone respects not being an ass to others... whether or not this would work on airplanes is another matter

        Whether it would work anywhere but Japan is another matter. It works in Japan because people there actually care about what random strangers think of them. Shame is not nearly as strong a motivating factor in most other cultures. (Which in this case is too bad.)

        I would almost go the opposite direction: instead of telling the noisy people to go to a particular part of the plane,

    • Because when some wanker is talking loudly to the person next to them, you can hear the other wanker talking back, and having both sides of the interaction it is much easier to tune them both out. When you are barraged with half a conversation it is much more distracting. "What? (pause) Yeah (pause) Yeah (pause) I know! (pause) Well that's what I said (pause) Oh get out!"
    • When I am on a plane flight, especially a long one, there is an expectation that most people are going to be quiet and many people will be trying to sleep. The absolute last thing I want is for a bunch of cell phones to be constantly ringing and a bunch of lame-asses endlessly talking.

      I'm sorry, but in my opinion, no one who flies on a commercial flight is that important to need constant cell phone connectivity. Get over it, and unplug for a while. Your life, and the lives of others will be better off for
    • The FAA has no business trying to keep people from being rude. Why should the FAA regulate rudeness. Should the FTC be concerned with people talking loudly or on cellphones in theaters? It should be up to the airline if phones are not to be used.

      Example: Excuse me sir, if you keep up the loud obnoxious cellphone talking, we'll be forced to tazer you and sit you between the three body odor offenders in row F.

      The FAA should only be concerned if there's a valid problem with equipment interferrance
    • I personally find the ringer tones (noise to me) of cellphones to be the most annoying...

      Even if one can tune out a person's conversation, it's very difficult to tune out the tones, beeps, etc of most cellphones - some are likely well in excess of 100db in loudness; perhaps not, but they sure seem that way.

      Ron Bennett

  • So many laws could be saved if it wern't for jerks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:38AM (#11071345)
    It is to bad we can't make laws to stop people from being jerks. The idea that if it is legal then I can do it mentality, so a bunch of people see that it is legal then they abuse the law then they people get annoyed with them then they make it illegal so people cant do it even why it is appropriate. It is the same with NY and people with Cell Phones while driving they started talking and driving all the time getting into accidents so NY made it illegal to talk on a cell phone and drive at the same time. Now if people take to heart the warnings that they give they should be smart and reduce there cell phone usage or whatever is annoying people. If not just to not be a jerk but to make sure you right to do this activity when it is really needed is maintained.
    • The people who want the laws enacted are worse than the jerks. Jerks are just annoying.

      People who enact laws are forcing you to act the way they want or they'll put you in prison. In other words, they're a dangerous threat to you.
    • It is the same with NY and people with Cell Phones while driving they started talking and driving all the time getting into accidents so NY made it illegal to talk on a cell phone and drive at the same time.

      Being in NY (Rochester) myself, I can say that nobody seems to care - I can't remember the last day I didn't see at least 2 people talking on their phones and driving. Not to mention all the times i've almost been sideswiped or t-boned by an obviously distracted person that I couldn't see clearly befor
    • If only we could block voice traffic and not text traffic on planes. Text messaging is a quiet, discrete, polite way to communicate when crammed like sardines into a metal tube hurtling through the sky at 800kph.

  • In other news... (Score:4, Funny)

    by sczimme ( 603413 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:40AM (#11071359)

    Brutal punch-to-the-head incidents are expected to rise eleventy kajillion* percent.

    * Margin of error +/- three kajillion.

  • Compromise (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Antony-Kyre ( 807195 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:41AM (#11071361)
    Divide up the seats into a cell phone and non-cell phone section. Kind of like a non-smoking and smoking section they have in restaurants.

    • Divide up the seats into a cell phone and non-cell phone section. Kind of like a non-smoking and smoking section they have in restaurants.

      True, but as there tends to be some smoke drifting into the non-smoking section there would likely be some noise spilling into the non-phone section. If there were a bulkhead between the two sections (with a heavy curtain over the doorway) this could work.
      • Kind of like how they separate first class from the rest?

        • Kind of like how they separate first class from the rest?

          Something like that, but the curtain would need to be heavier to dampen the sound. Unfortunately, on the last several trips I noticed that the flight attendants did not close the curtain [between coach and first class]. Forgetful? Intentional? Another half-baked security measure? I don't know.

          Actually a door between phone and non-phone would be even better, but I don't think that will fly (so to speak).

  • Specialized earplugs? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by a24061 ( 703202 ) * on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:41AM (#11071362)
    There's going to be a big market for noise-canceling headphones.

    I already wear earplugs on the train: they block the noise from the train itself quite effectively but don't muffle voices as effectively as I'd like. (I think they are designed to attenuate low frequencies.)

    Has anyone seen earplugs designed specifically to block human voices as well as low-frequency noise?

  • No problem... (Score:5, Funny)

    by node 3 ( 115640 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:42AM (#11071363)
    Just ask them to step outside.
  • I really hope they're not doing this because of pressure or pay-offs from the phone companies, just like with the tabaco companies making sure your right to have matches and lighters on the plane isn't stopped no matter how dangerous they are. If they lift the phone ban, it better be because a fair and impartial safety study has cleared it.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • If you thought Air Rage was bad before, letting people turn on cell phones will make it 10 times worse.
  • I saw this:http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/cellphones/shu t-up-already-027257.php [gizmodo.com] on Gizmodo over the weekend.

    Given what an addiction handys are here in Austria, I'm really thinking of making some auf Deutsch.

  • You mean to say my Sony Ericsson Flight mode [esato.com] no longer makes sense ??.I want my money back.
  • I figure out that Cell phone jammers can not be made portable, right?

    It would be extremely cool to make one and put it on your back pack!

  • Fight Back: Join the Society for HandHeld Hushing (Score:3, Funny)

    by null-und-eins ( 162254 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @07:59AM (#11071457) Homepage
    The fine folks at Coudal http://www.coudal.com/ provide cards that you can hand to your neighbor blarring into his cell phone:

    "Dear Cell Phone User, we are aware that your ongoing conversation with [ ] yer mother [ ] yer therapist ... about [ ] last night [ ] the game ... is very important to you, but we thought you'd like to know that it doesn't interest us in the least."

    I have aleady printed my bunch of cards and started handing them out. Reactions are quite positive.
  • Given there's been a ban for so long, it makes me wonder how many phones won't actually behave well when in flight. They might not be able to cope with the rapid change between cells. Not to mention there aren't any cells in range when flying over the sea?

    Of course, maybe cell tech can be fitted into the plane and transmitted some other way.

  • A few points (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sdo1 ( 213835 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:09AM (#11071502) Journal
    First, engine and wind noise provide natural noise masking. It will only be the few closest people that you'd be able to hear talking. And to be honest, I'd mostly prefer that they talk to someone on their cell phones rather than trying to strike up a conversation with me.

    Secondly, I'm surprised that the FAA and/or FCC is still concerned about the planes. I can't remember the last time I went on a flight and didn't hear a phone accidentally ring in flight. Oops. Forgot to shut off your cell phone. Yet despite most flights having at least some passengers who leave their cell phones on, it hasn't caused any problems. If it were an actual issue, it would be pervasive.

    And finally, a huge number of people bring on laptops and although they might not be actively attached to a wireless connection, the computers are still sitting there probing the airwaves looking for connection points. Again, no problem there despite the fact that wireless computer technology is present and active on most flights.

    -S

    • Re:A few points (Score:4, Interesting)

      by FireFury03 ( 653718 ) <slashdot AT nexusuk DOT org> on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:44AM (#11071679) Homepage
      First, engine and wind noise provide natural noise masking. It will only be the few closest people that you'd be able to hear talking

      Or, they'll just speak a lot louder because of the noise...

      I can't remember the last time I went on a flight and didn't hear a phone accidentally ring in flight

      I suspect there's a big difference between a brief transmission while it rings and a dozen people yapping away for the entire flight.

      And finally, a huge number of people bring on laptops and although they might not be actively attached to a wireless connection, the computers are still sitting there probing the airwaves looking for connection points

      1. The laptop doesn't actually need to actively probe for networks, it can just listen for an access point broadcasting it's BSSID (unless it's trying to find an ad-hoc network).
      2. 802.11 will usually be transmitting at under 100mW (probably 35mW actually on most hardware), a GSM phone will transmit at up to about 4W.

  • Cell Phones Don't Work on Airplanes (Score:4, Informative)

    by iammrjvo ( 597745 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @08:13AM (#11071521) Homepage Journal

    As a private pilot, I always leave my cell phone on when I fly VFR. (So far I haven't flown into any mountains due to navigational system confusion.)

    The only way that I can get my phone to work is to descend very low in a rural area. If I'm up more than about 2000' AGL, then the phone doesn't work. I figure that it gets confused because it probably sees a dozen towers with strong signals.

    Commercial aircraft would probably have to install special equipment to receive the signal inside of the airplane and then connect to the phone network directly.
    • I've had no problems getting a signal (sending text messages) on major airliners... perhaps it's just your phone?
    • Commercial aircraft fly at 35,000 feet, which esentially avoids the confusion issue, by taking you out of radio range of most of the towers you're flying over until they're almost directly below you.
      Last time I was on a plane the guy behind me was on the cell phone talking from take off to mid flight.. despite the cell phone ban. Maybe because he was already conneted to a call the phone had an easier time, or maybe your phone just sucks and can't handle flying, not sure what the case is, but people have use

    • Depends on phone type (Score:3, Informative)

      by khrtt ( 701691 )
      I went through providers over the years. I don't pick them by the ability to get a signal on the plane, mind you, but it never hurts to do a little test:

      1. Verizon CDMA-800 kinda works when the plane's still low, and you might get a signal at cruse altitude every now and then. That phone also had analog roaming, and it picked up analog signal sometimes.

      2. TDMA works quite well.

      3. GSM-1800 doesn't work AT ALL.

      BTW, if any of you don't understand how come the FAA worries about something as insignificant
  • As always an unsubscribed item could be found at yahoo [yahoo.com]
  • So if they do this and you make a call which band are you charged under as if I'm in a foriegn country I know what I'm paying. If I'm flying over multiple countries does my billing change as I go along. Hopefully there would just be a flat rate anyway ($10/minute should be enough to keep people quiet)

    Rus
  • The reason cell phones are banned until aircraft are cruising at altitude, along with laptops, portable game consoles, DVD players, etc., is that their RF emissions supposedly interfere with the navigation and communication electronics on the aircraft.

    Cell phones are also banned during the full flight because it was thought that phones traveling across the landscape at 300-500mph would cause problems in the cell switching system, which expected that phones would stay within each cell for a longer period.

  • Now there can be an end to the airline's monopoly on in-flight Internet access. Gives us geeks something to do while sitting for hours on a plain.

  • Main problem I see is the very loud background noise on plans. People will be screaming into their cell phones just to be heard on the other end.

    I for one would love to have my cell phone (and accompanying data service) working on the place. Would love to e-mail and whatnot while in the air.

    Even if someone else is talking loudly on their cell phone, unless if they are right next to you, you probably won't be able to hear much of it and you should be watching the movie anyway..... :)

    -m
  • Download this [draplindustries.com].

    At least it'll make you feel a little better.

  • Handouts (Score:3, Funny)

    by White Roses ( 211207 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:10AM (#11071822)
    Looks like I'll just have to make a bunch of these [draplindustries.com] to hand out.

    Go ahead, you know you want to, too.

  • What is it.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chanc_Gorkon ( 94133 ) <gorkon AT gmail DOT com> on Monday December 13, 2004 @09:17AM (#11071868)
    What is it with the frickin Jihad people have on using phones in a public place? Last I had heard, noone had legislated that being a inconsiderate assmunch was illegal. Here's my tips for blocking out people talkign loudly (it works on my wife, so it will work on your idiot cell phone user):

    1. Headphones man....put em on when you get to flight level and crank away my friend!

    2. Just ignore it. Get into something like a good book and you can block out most anything.

    3. Relax! It's ok dude! That person talking on thier cell phone is exercising their rights. You can't legistlate the rights of people to be idiots. People are going to be idiots whether they have their cell in their ear or not.

    Now, here's a list of cell phone usage rules for the idiots:

    1. Vibrate man.....put it on vibrate on the plane, in the theater or in a restaurant. If it's a quick call, take it. If it's going to get extended, head for the restroom and finish it up in there.

    2. USE YOUR INSIDE VOICE! If your in a bad cell, hang up, call later.

    3. If it's on audio ring, silence it quickly. No reason to hear more then the opening bar or two of music.

    4. If you simply need to make that call, then wait til you get to a private location. Don't make extended chattering calls in public. If it's simple hey we're running late calls, go ahead and make it or take it. If you feel the need for a cell convo to take your whole plane ride, don't. As you can see from the posts hear on slashdot, it annoys people.

    Lastly for everyone, TAKE A FRICKIN CHILL PILL! People are idiots with or with out cellphones, cars, bicycles, walkmans, bass thumpers, iPods, laptops....etc, etc....they will continue to be idiots when you take their toys away (in fact they willl be worse because now you have to listen to them whine about it).

  • Audio spam (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ngunton ( 460215 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @10:18AM (#11072322) Homepage
    Some people seem to be mystified as to why some others find obnoxious cellphone users so annoying. Personally, I think it's because those loud, one-sided conversations are a bit like audio spam. Not in the sense that it's trying to sell you something, but because the listener is effectively powerless to do anything about it (unless you want to get into a confrontation, which most don't). Think about it: Spam is annoying because there is this sense that someone can reach out and plant irrelevant messages in your inbox that you have to spend time and attention deleting. It's this feeling that someone else has power over you (despite the best filters, I still get a few every day) is what is so annoying. In the same way, it's that these people yacking in a very loud voice is effectively subjecting you to something that you have little or no control over, and you have to spend time and valuable "mental space" trying to ignore or block out. It takes effort. Noise can be very, very irritating, since it's so hard to screen out. The sense of hearing is one of those (like smell) that we cannot easily tune out, without substantial inconvenience (i.e. blocking out all other sounds).

    It's no coincidence that the most common [nydailynews.com] "quality of life" complaint is about noise from your neighbors.

    So, for all those people who are saying "just chill out, relax, tune it out", you should realize that this is pretty much the same response that spammers give when they are criticized for sending out thousands of useless messages to people who aren't remotely interested in what they have to sell. Saying "oh just chill out and don't listen to it" and "oh, just hit delete and relax" is pretty much the same thing. The key is to realize that even if you personally don't find it annoying, MANY other people do.

    I think that with all the loud background noise on planes, this would mean that people would talk even more loudly than normal on a cellphone. And, in my experience, there is always someone who seems totally oblivious to the loudness of their own phone voice. They are totally focused on their conversation, and simply don't care about the people around them. Or, perhaps they actually believe that other people are interested in what they are saying - I certainly think that this is the case sometimes. I have heard cellphone users talking loudly about stuff that seems purposely designed to be heard by the passers by, particularly when it pertains to something "cool" that the person did, e.g. a sexual conquest, or when the person is trying to be "wise" and demonstrate to everyone around them what a great person they are. There's something about having an audience that makes people behave a little differently. In a twisted way, they believe everyone else will be interested in what they have to say, just like those people who believe that everyone in the vicinity simply *MUST* love the song that's playing on their music system (of course, they totally forget that treble doesn't travel so well, so other people mostly just hear the thudding "dmpha dmpha dmpha" of the bass, like a bad headache), or the guys who drive around very aggressively with screeching tires for no apparent reason ("ooooohhhh, he must be *such* a great driver" is what is going through their little heads, methinks)...

    I believe that if cellphones became formally permissable on planes then we are going to see an increase in "air rage" incidents because of the closed space and already somewhat tense environment. People are already primed to be annoyed by the time they step on the plane, what with all the parking hassles, lines, delays, security checks and other impediments to their getting from A to B. We certainly don't need to finally settle down into that airplane seat, only to realize that the asshat behind us wants to talk to Lenny in marketing about the latest sales figures. When that happens in the terminal, I simply get up and walk away. On a plane, not really an option.

    Just my opinion...

  • The Relative Peace and Quiet of Flight (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ReadParse ( 38517 ) <john AT funnycow DOT com> on Monday December 13, 2004 @10:53AM (#11072640) Homepage
    I don't pretend to think this is an original thought... I'll say it anyway. For each time that I wished I could make a call from a plane, there were probably 50 times that I was glad I had a rock-solid excuse for not being called by anybody, and there were probably a 100 times that I didn't even think about that I would have been disturbed by somebody else on their phone.

    Now the announcement from the crew will be "please put your phones on vibrate out of respect for your fellow passengers," and that will be largely ignored along with something about oxygen masks and floatation devices.

    I'm all in favor of dumb rules going away and freedom to use my phone when I really need to, but I really believe that I will miss the relative peace that came with knowing that nobody had a phone and there was nothing we could do about it.

    On another topic, I thought I heard that cell phone towers only have a range of a mile or two. So how is it that we expect to be able to use our cell phones at 30,000 feet (5.6 miles)? Just wondering.

    RP

  • FAA? What about the FCC? (Score:4, Informative)

    by nsayer ( 86181 ) <nsayer@kfu.cELIOTom minus poet> on Monday December 13, 2004 @11:34AM (#11072939) Homepage
    I thought the reason you couldn't use a phone on the plane actually had more to do with FCC regulations than FAA ones.

    Cell phones work by assigning a particular set of frequencies to a particular geographic area, and then reusing those frequencies further away where there is no chance for interference (phones that use spread spectrum work more or less the same way, only the frequency separation is more dynamic). When you take a phone operating within such an arrangement and suddenly raise its altitude a few thousand feet, it can suddenly be present in many, many cells. This causes interference in every cell where the phone is not actually communicating with that cell's tower.

    I have heard of plans to put micro-cells aboard planes. Such micro-cells would instruct the phones to use low enough power that this wouldn't happen. THAT is a much different scenario, but I wonder how many different modulation types (and therefore customer populations) will be able to be handled by such a scheme. Those who aren't covered by a cell in the plane should not be using their phones for the technical reasons described above.

    As for whether people can talk on a phone or not, I fail to see the distinction between talking on a phone and talking to a person next to you. I've seen drivers distracted by their fellow passengers with equal frequency to drivers distracted on a phone. I've seen loud, obnoxious boors talking way too loud to people 3 feet away with equal frequency to the same boors shouting into a phone. What's the difference? Rudeness is the same whether technology is involved or not.

  • Here's a Crazy Thought: Communicate (Score:5, Informative)

    by matthewcraig ( 68187 ) on Monday December 13, 2004 @11:57AM (#11073157)
    Having trouble with the fellow next to you talking too loudly? A cell phone user cussing out their employee? Here's a nutty thought: Ask them politely to keep their voice down. Now, I know that sounds a little wacky to those of you who would rather hang back silently judging, but let me tell you I have tried it many times successfully. It requires a little known ability called courtesy, but with practice, you may be able to acquire this skill, too. Good luck, and welcome to the wonderful world of talking to strangers!

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't panic.

Close