Slashdot Mirror
Boeing Connexion, No More Wi-Fi at 30,000 ft?
symonty writes "After 6 years and one billion dollars, Boeing is evaluating whether or not their wifi for planes connectivity business can be a viable business. " I've never had the actual pleasure of evaluating it or not; some folks, however, have said it's a great service.
Who is going to pay for an Internet connection on a really long flight when their laptop battery can't carry a charge long enough to use it all the way? I could use my LifeDrive, but that's not the best browsing experience. I wish AMTRAK would get wifi, as they have power outlets next to every seat and their trains take longer than aircraft.
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
How on earth did they manage to spend a *billion* on wifi? The systems in the plan are still wired, so you should only need to shield the cockpit and any more backwards-mounted instruments if you're worried that wifi operation at a completely different frequency to aircraft systems will affect the instruments, autopilot or ILS in any way. I'm astounded that it even cost a few million, let alone a billion. What the heck have they been doing with all that money?
Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
I fly a lot and I have yet to be able to get a WiFi connection on a plane. And given the astronomical prices of in-flight phone service, I suspect it would be too expensive even if I could.
If Boeing wants WiFi to happen on planes, they need to make sure it's universally available, they need to include it free in first/business class, and they need to charge 128kbps) in economy class.
If a suitable deal could not be reached, Boeing would be prepared to shut Connexion down, even though the service works as advertised and is used by a handful of international airlines on long-haul flights, one of the sources said.
Boeing has not said how much it has invested in Connexion, but people familiar with the situation say it is about $1 billion, according to the Journal.
Some industry officials say the business, because of lack of interest among U.S. airlines in outfitting their fleets with the system, may be worth no more than $150 million, the report said.
It's amazing that after 6 years with a working system, Boeing won't stick with this. It's been inevitable that Internet access would extend to airplanes and Boeing has it and now plans to give it up. I suspect someone will buy it on the cheap and turn around and make a profit on it in short order. Boeing may rue the day it turned its back on a potentially lucrative market all for lack of patience.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I was fortunate enough to have enough miles and therefore went with a first class seat. They had cigarette-style power plugs, and I had a car adapter for my laptop. They gave a free 1 hour coupon for Connexion, and I paid the full price for the 5 hour flight. What a godsend having the ability to surf while in the air, it makes the flight go much faster. Without a power plug, as is still standard for coach class, I wouldn't buy the service. That's the gist of the problem.
Charging $27 to use the service on a coast to coast flight might have something to do with the poor uptake on the service. If that's close to what it's really costing them to provide the service then they were bound to lose and if it's several multiples over cost, they deserve to lose.
So they lose either for being stupid or being greedy.
Surely it would be cheaper and easier to simply ensure that the inflight entertainment has a decent porn library.
Can you see the average flight attendant understanding that your bluetooth skype phone isn't a cell phone? Also, it only takes one wizzard that decides the flight from DC to Dallas is the perfect time to download Superman Returns instead of watching it like decent folks to screw everyone on the plane that paid for the service.
STFU & GBTW
I've used it or some service like it (no idea if there's more than one; these flights are on an Airbus not Boeing) on flights between Japan and Europe, and believe me, it's worth every penny.
Twelve hours of slow agony is transformed into an almost pleasant experience. When you can email and IM friends and family; check all your regular sites; search and read up on research you didn't have time for earlier; check out an endless variety of flash-games and other trivia. The mediocre in-flight movies just can't compete.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
My girlfriend and I had the opportunity to use this onboard Lufhansa flights between the US and Germany a couple of times, and it's really a nice way to pass the time. Well worth the 30 bucks, for us anyway.
Plus freaking out the other business class passengers when we set up a live stream and demonstrated the various positions you can put the seat into live from 30,000 feet to our friends back home :-) Considering that the connection is via geo-sync satellite and double-NATed, I was surprised at how well the streaming worked; only about 2 secs rtt, and we managed to push 200 kbit/s.
There's... someone on the LAN! Some... thing!
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
First they took away the free peanuts. Now the paid Wi-Fi is going away too. What's next? The seats?
Boeing was at its best when there was competition. I think the Boeing 747 was/is the greatest airplane ever designed. Now only 2 state sponsored (Boeing with military contracts, Airbus with direct subsidy) remain. Monopolies seem to be such a huge drag and waste so much money it is not even funny. I am European and even though the new shiny Airbus 380 is pretty interesting technology wise I cringe every time I have to think of the billions of subsidies that went into it.
at $19.95 flat, Japan Airlines offered me unlimited access using Connexion at true broadband speeds. Sure the latency is low, but it's a huge boost for productivity. And seriously, how many internet cafes you know offer 13 hours of service for only $20 ?
it'll be really sad if Boeing cancels the service, cuz Connexion is one of my primary reasons I'll fly JAL or Lufthansa.
Now I might have to read a... a... a.... book!
Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.
It wasn't terribly fast, but once I read that it'd be available, I charged up a few extra batteries for my flight from Chicago to Copenhagen (SAS Airlines).
Also keep in mind that most airlines have power outlets in their higher-class seats. Some even have them in every seat. Check out http://www.seatguru.com/ to see the ammenities in various airlines' planes.
I even used a softphone (Cisco IP Communicator) and made a phone call from the flight! Sure, there was about a second of lag, but people around me were pretty amazed (even an SAS pilot sitting next to me - he had never seen such a thing..).
I paid the $30 for 8 hours of service and would gladly do it again.
of being able to AIM people:
me: OMGHI2U
friend: sup?
me: OMG GUESS WHERE I AM LOL!!!11one
friend: ??
me: THIRTYTHOUSANDFEETHIGH!!
friend: you got some good weed, man...
Yes, Boeing getting out of the broadband business, but they are not the only providers of air based broadband. Enter Aircell. They already offer an Iridium (satillite) based data connection products and services. Yes, it's dead slow. You're not going to be playing Doom3 or any other FPS over this link.
A few weeks back Aircell also picked up the spectrum currently used by verizons air-to-ground telephone service (Magnastar). Air-to-ground communications offers lower latency, higher speed data connections. Magnastar will be phased out starting in 2008, coinciding with Aircells new broadband service.
Aircell is poised to roll out a major broadband service by 2008.
If the concerns about internal systems being disrupted by WiFI are such as big deal, why not just build Ethernet ports into new / revamped airplanes?
I realize that some people's Palm Pilots, etc. don't have Ethernet jacks. But pretty much every laptop does. Wouldn't this at least make the concerns about WiFi-related interference of flight systems just.. go away?
> The biggest issue with these kind of internet connections is the price, which would certainly stop me from using it unless the company is willing to foot the bill (Anyway, I'd rather be watching a movie or sleeping than working).
Work? No. Company pays the bill? Yes! ;-)
I have a friend who does a lot of international travel. He uses and loves in flight WiFi. It costs him about $30 a flight. He uses it to check email (hence the company pays) and then plays WoW on it. And his latency is low (100-150). Now $30 sounds like a lot of money for a connection, but as all of us who play WoW know hours can seem like minutes. How much is it worth to you to make a 12 hour flight feel like a 12 minute flight?
--- Tolerance is the axiomatic "virtue" of those without convictions ---
ANA (All Nippon Airways) have normal plugs built into each seat. power comes on as soon as you're airborne, so does the internet - and guess what, it all works seamlessly. they'll even lend you a LAN cable if you haven't brought your own - and they also have great service. a bit expensive but well worth it if you fly Tokyo - NY.
just FIY.
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. -- G.B. Shaw
I would personally use this service on every single flight I take. I am Gold elite on Continental and with the exception of code shares w/ Korean air this service is simply not offered. I would even use this service on 1-2 hour flights. Please do not evaluate the viability of the business model when you don't have any adoption rates! Like the telcos / cable systems you will have to absorb an up front capital roll out cost to get the subscriber base. There are also a lot of other side industries here - WiFi enabled devices besides laptops could benefit as well. Think hand held multi-player gaming consoles. I sincerely hope to be able ot surf the web at 30k feet one day soon!
Yeah, I was shock too when he came on line from 30k feet with such low latency - I expected major lag. I really don't know what system was used, although I think it must have been Connexion as it was Lufthansa flight IIRC.
If you are looking into low latency mobilty satillite is typically not a good choice. I don't know if terrestrial networks are possible for you but I would seriously look into WiMax instead. I have had some involvement with it for the last couiple of years and it holds some amazing potentials.
Best wishes on your project
--- Tolerance is the axiomatic "virtue" of those without convictions ---
"It doesn't cost a whole lot for them to offer the service."
What do you base this on? FCC regulations require a dedicated air-to-ground system, which currently does not exist, or an air-to-satellite system. If you want to offer the service over water, then you need to support air-to-sat. If you want low latency over the ground, then you want air-to-ground. Boeing spent Billions setting up the system they have. Yes inmarsat offers a similar service with lower bandwidth. The FAA would not allow WiFi in the cabin unless you can prove that the system will not interfere with the avionics systems. Boeing spent the time and money developing an AP that does not. They did not go out and buy a Linksys WAP and connect it to a satellite transmitter/receiver and call it Internet service. Boeing, like any other business, had to pass the cost onto the airlines that wanted to use the service. So the statement that it does not "cost a whole lot for them to offer the service" is baseless and not well thought out.
Plane ticket from Munich to Bangkok: $950.00.
Connexion for the 11-hour flight: $19.95.
Mod points at 10,000 metres over Kazahkstan: priceless.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The service was based on leasing transponders ( around 8mb/s per transponder )
8mb/s on a 36Mhz transponder? Nope. You can run a full-duplex T3 (45Mbps) on a 36Mhz transponder using 16QAM modulation. It beats the hell out of the transponder, but it can be done.
Tie the AP into an one of the new 450Kb/s BGAN units from Inmarsat. There's full coverage over Europe and Asia with CONUS coming on line in a month or two and the device is no bigger than a laptop.
I used Skype on a flight somewhere over Siberia (on Lufthansa's Frankfurt-Osaka route). It worked fine, with quite tolerable latency.
If your comment title says 'Re: Foo', I'm not likely to read it.