Slashdot Mirror
Wireless LAN Onboard Passenger Aircraft
KjetilK writes "Scandinavian Airlines System announced today that they will start testing a wireless LAN based on IEEE 802.11b, onboard their aircrafts this year." It sounds like they have might have some restrictions in web sites available and such, but this is a darn cool idea. Of course, SAS isn't doing any domestic US flights but... *sigh*
802.11b is showing up everywhere. Think about this for a couple of minutes and you might feel inclined to breathe a sigh of relief. This is an area where a number of players would have liked to establish a de-facto standard, potentially a closed and monopolistic one. It didn't happen. 802.11b happened, with ordinary TCP/IP and DHCP running over it. Do you realize what an impediment to Linux users it would have been, if "the standard" ended up being a closed one? I'm thankful for this. I'm looking forward to a time in the not-too-distant future where I'll be able to boot my Linux-based laptop in lots of different places -- coffee shops, airplanes, offices, perhaps even my home if I feel so inclined -- and just be on the net without any further consideration. This is one of those futuristic things that really looks like it's going to pan out just the way the dreamers imagined it. My hearty congratulations go out to the people who made it happen.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
this isn't really access. it sounds like they will have a couple of sites that are uploaded to the plane. the plane will sync w/ the groundstation "at regular intervals". you can probably send email to anywhere (message size restricted???) but you won't be able to "surf"
Am I the only person posting in this group who thinks this idea is a waste of money?
I mean, I'm as nerdy as the next guy; I really am. But cummon, who really takes that many flights longer than 2 - 3 hours. Isn't it enough that you can sit there and use your computer and get work done, do you have to be able to do real-time research and communicate with people for that whole three hours? Stuff like this can't wait until you land and take 4 minutes to get inside the airport, "Our customers already have access to wireless communications in our SAS lounges through Telia HomeRun"
In the end, any modifications the airline makes to the plane are going to raise the price of airline tickets. I don't want to pay more money for my flights so joe-asshole on his $8.00/min cell-phone can also type while I'm trying to get an hour or two of sleep.
Is there such thing as a business job that requires you to travel *and* get so much work done that you can't take a 3 hour break from being connected to the outside world? Not even a break from working, just a break from being connected... it sounds like 'too much hype' to me.
It reminds me of all the "business men" I used to sell Palm Pilots too back in my hay-day as a fledgling guru. "Whoa! I can connect to the internet with that!? anywhere?!". Guess how many of them actually do that 3 weeks after they get one... I think 90% of the guys running with leading-edge technology are actually wasting their time (and often other peoples time) figuring out how to be more efficient with their new technology.
ie: Hey, this palm pilot lets me get my email anytime i want, now I can check it on my way to work instead of when I get there. They then spend 4 hours setting it up, and save 5 minutes in their work day for a month or two until something new comes out.
Ace
"Cockpit Hacked, Plane Diverted To Amsterdam"
Let's just hope they give the flight controlls an IP.
I am become Troll, destroyer of threads
That may be one reason, but the reason I've always heard was that, on the ground, cell phones can only "see" a few cell towers at a time. At 35,000 feet, it can see hundreds, and will switch cells every few seconds (given how fast the airplane is moving). This tends to play havoc with cellular systems as a whole. The ban on cell phone use in airplanes originated from the FCC, not the FAA.
A better example would be AM/FM radios. We've been told that years that radios shouldn't be used on airplanes, because they can cause problems with navigation equipment. I find it hard to believe that a passive receiver can cause more problems than an active 802.11b transmitter.