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.'"
was'nt 56k dial up access about 50quid a minute or somthing? I dont want to even think what the cost of this will be.. :(
moo
I remember trying to send a few e-mails from the in-seat phone on a plane once (it was a long trip, from Toronto to Vancouver, a few years ago, and I was bored). The message took forever to send, the connection was so slow, and it was such a pain to set up. And the phone bill was huge at the end of it! I remember writing that it was costing me more per minute to send this e-mail message than it was to talk on one of those "Telephone Psychic" lines.
This sounds like a great idea... I'd love ot try it. This sure would make flights (especially long flights) more productive for me and less boring.
These are the good old days you'll be telling your children about. Make them worthwhile.
Possibly because cell phones operate on completely different frequencies and can reach much higher power levels than Wi-Fi?
As far as general interference is concerned, a slight frequency shift is not going to make any difference. Most digital cell phones nowadays actually transmit in the 2.4Ghz area, and while the frequencies are distinct, they are not significantly different from WiFi to create a different interference problem.
And as far as the power difference, cell phones automatically trim back their power when they are in favorable transmission conditions, such as, say, when you have direct line of sight with hundreds of towers from FL380. And on top of that- power/distance formula for electromagnetic waves will help you deduce that a 2.4872 Ghz carrier at 500mW (full power for every handheld phone I've owned in the past 5 years) will cause nearly identical interference to that of a 2.4025 Ghz carrier at 100mW. (common power for Wifi)
I've worked at quite a few companies that had radio controlled locomotives or overhead cranes, and many of them had a 'no cell phone on site' policy when cell phones first became popular. The claim was that they could interfere with equipment, creating a safety hazard (much like the airlines claim) After my supervisor asked me to research actual safety issues involved, and finding the protocols used for these digital radio control devices to be quite failsafe, it was determined by higher-ups that safety, in fact, wasn't an issue.
However, the no cell phone policy was redefined as 'except for business purposes' and the actual reasoning behind the original policy became obvious- they didn't want employees making personal calls during business hours. The policy was profit motivated, much as the airlines policy is. Yeah, they don't have in-seat phones on the little puddle jumpers- but they don't really want the customers to know what the motivation behind the policy is.
And before I get any responses about the FAA being the problem, not the airlines- remember, the government is a puppet of the corporations, and the FAA is definately NOT an exception.
I apparently forgot that sig != uptime...
Think about it this way. In order to cover an entire airplane, you'll need one or two access points for 802.11b access. In order for ethernet to work, you'd have to put jacks on every seat, which may mean replacing the entire seat. So, the difference is a couple of hundred bucks for two APs, or replacing every seat in the plane with seats with ethernet jacks.
How long do we have to wait until we have DNS servers flying above the country?
So, if I connect using my Airport equipped iBook, and share that connection with my friend back in coach who has a similar setup, we can split the cost, etc.
All it takes is one wisegeek per flight, and they'll find less paying customers than they expected. Oh well, nice while it lasted. My big worry is finding a way to keep running for those 12 hr. flights back to Asia.
This AP story has a different take on the matter. Seems that the broadband access isn't without significant issues. Excuse the pun but, I don't think that this service is going to fly.
Also, on a slightly different topic, has anyone tried using a laptop on a plane lately? While it is fine in a First Class seat, using a laptop in coach seats is a royal pain. Unless you have a really small laptop, there simply isn't enough room. With the new bigger screens that laptops have today, it is virtually impossible to open the laptop to a position that it can be comfortably viewed, while in a coach seat. And, if the seat in front of you is reclined you can completely forget it. Inspite of this we are still force fed this marketing about the use of laptops on aircraft. Most recently is Yao and Mini-Me using an Apple laptop with a 17" screen. Great for first class front row, impossible in the majority of seats.
To fill this with entertainment from magazines would cost $140 at your rate of $5 per magazine every two hours.
If the 3 long haul trips cost $25 each way to get internet access I'd have paid around $150 - throw in two magazines for the recent European trip and you've got $160 worth of entertainment.
Personally I think I'd prefer the Internet based entertainment as it enables me to keep up to date with the news (More and more important these days) and would enable me to get on with more work.
Compared to in-flight phones which can be used once or twice by a few people throughout a flight to get across important information (I had to cancel a mobile phone from a flight once as I had it stolen in the Airport) Internet access is a feature that offers long term benefits throught the entire length of a flight.
I welcome it. And thankfully B.A. and Lufthansa - my favourite airlines - are rolling it out
Matt Thompson - Actuality - Insert product here.
I assmue you've noticed that the seats in ariplanes and the windows don't match up. That's because the spacing for the seats is variable, as is the placement of the first-class/cattle-car divider. If the seats each had a 10*baseT jack, all those wires would have to be moveable. WiFi just hurts a lot less as far as installation and maintenance goes.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.