Slashdot Mirror
In-flight Broadband Internet Access Trial's Success
flash_cube writes "Boeing Co.'s 'Connexion' business unit finally demoed its in-flight WiFi (802.11b) service this weekend ... even as (noted in this previous /. article) struggling U.S. carriers pull out of the joint venture. Still Boeing promises availability on other airlines in 'early 2003.'"
The question remains: Why are cellphones forbidden while WiFi is obviously allowed in planes?
Possibly because cell phones operate on completely different frequencies and can reach much higher power levels than Wi-Fi?
Actually I think it's because the cellphones were trying to access towers on the ground directly while the wi-fi may be linking to some sort of bridge on the plane and then to the towers or satellites. That branch off might be a factor.
I think there is a big difference in the transmitting power of Mobile phones vs. 802.1b (Wi-Fi) or Bluetooth. Mobile phones transmit at a much higher power (600 mW to 3000 mW) compared with 802.11b (Wi-Fi) at 100mW, and Bluetooth, which with a lower-powered radio, transmits at only 10mW. These lower-powered wireles data transmissions have a reduced ability to wreak havoc with other wireless data transmissions. This is one of the key difference between Mobile phone technologies and Wireless LAN or Wireless PAN technologies.
Also, unlike mobile phones, both 802.11b (Wi-Fi) and Bluetooth technologies are operating in the unlicensed (ISM band) frequencies. These frequencies are free for everyone, even consumers, to use for wireless communication, without licenses. Mobile phones, on the other hand, use the frequency spectrum licensed by the mobile phone network (carrier).
These are the good old days you'll be telling your children about. Make them worthwhile.
Didn't think to read the article either, now did you?
Not cheap, but just might be worth it for a 12-hour stretch of terminal (har!) boredom... at least if there's AC power for the laptop as well. And the target audience is notCheers,
-j.
According to this ZDNet article costs are £15 - £21 ($25 to $35), which I'd pay for an 8 to 12 hour journey.
Only downside is that the article reports the service as being a bit slow and patchy - I guess they'll nail that in time.
On an airliner WiFi wins over wired because:
Wires are heavy the few hundred meters of cable required hubs etc would weigh much more than a WiFi rig, every extra kilo costs fuel every time the plane flys. After fitting the WiFi hubs only users add weight (ie the adaptor cards)
WiFi is cheap to fit, just lob the boxes in and configure, wired installation would need to be done during a big refit and would require skilled fitters to string the wires (more cost!)
WiFi is cheap to remove (you really don't want deadweight on a airliner!)
I recall hearing that an 'airline' was playing with fuel numbers and found that if the crew did not wear shoes on their flights they could save $200,000/year in fuel, can anyone provide a source for that?
LH418 - Frankfurt to Dulles (departs 1:10pm local time)
LH419 - Dulles to Frankfurt (departs 5:55pm local time)
Also, starting tomorrow, British Air will have a 90-day demo on 2 flights between Heathrow and JFK:
BA175 - London to JFK (departs 11:00am local time)
BA112 - JFK to London (departs 6:30pm local time)
Trying is the first step towards failure.
Well, according to Apple, the 12" TiBook is 8.6" deep, and the 17" TiBook is 10" deep (measured when folded). So, the big 'un is much wider, but not dramtically taller. It is, for instance, shorter than the various 15" screen PC laptops, which are also much thicker in the base.
And, while we're on the subject, Yao Ming wouldn't fit very well in coach class anyway, would he?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
The notion that this is a safety concern is a popular misconception. The law that forbids cell phone use aboard aircraft was created by the FCC, not the FAA.
The following information is second-hand; I can't promise its accuracy, and unfortunately, I can't track down the source anymore. I do know that it's from a private pilot who tried to use his phone while airborne and ended up with some insane roaming charges.
Cell phones are designed to be used on the ground, and really bizarre things can happen to them in the air. Cell towers radiate RF mostly horizontally and very little vertically. This means that in the air, your phone can't see the tower directly beneath you, but it can see towers hundreds of miles away. And it can see lots of them. Imagine your cell network doing a handoff from a tower in Chicago to one in Louisville, then to Dayton, Detroit, St. Louis, and Nashville. Now imagine it doing that over and over again, and it's easy to see why using a cell phone on a plane is a bad idea.
irb(main):001:0>
is available on commsdesign.com