FCC, FAA Still Don't Want Cell Phones on Planes

mattnyc99 writes "Last month we learned that the UK has approved in-flight mobile, effective immediately. Popular Mechanics has a follow-up on why the phones-on-planes ban is here to stay in the United States. Statements from the FCC and FAA confirm that any chance to overturn it remains dead on arrival — even though new "pico-cell" networks cut down interference with phones on the ground. American Airlines is looking like it will have onboard Wi-Fi within the next couple months, just the same. PM does note, however, that if the European mobile rollout is a success, US carriers might just have to give into demand."

Comments

I don't want cell phones on planes.

[dattaway]

Imagine a two hour flight with everyone talking to their hands. Or the ones with blinking blue cockroaches in their ears talking to the seat in front of them. No thanks.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Caligatio]

Yea, this would drive me absolutely batty. Of course, if WiFi is OKed, that means that VoIP is possible.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[dotfile]

Amen, brother. I won't fly without my cell, but for God's sake don't make all of us listen to every idiot on the plane yelling into their effing phone. It's noisy and uncomfortable enough as it is.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[MoxFulder]

Is a bunch of people talking on phones any different than a bunch of people talking to each other? Yes. People talking on cell phones seem to lack a basic situational awareness and volume control. I don't mind real-life conversations all around me, not at all. But people on cell phones always seem to talk too loud, say inappropriate things, and have no awareness of the real world around them. I know I'm guilty of it myself...

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Omestes]

I don't fly that often, but I've noticed that planes are rather quiet most of the time. When people talk to each other on planes they do so in a conversational tone, or lower.

When people talk on cellphones they are LOUDER for some reason. Most people like to yell at their phones.

Cellphones also encourage people to babble constantly like idiots, for some reason.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Xenious]

I don't want calls available, but SMS and 2.5 or 3G data connectivity sounds good to me. I guess wifi would work just the same.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[LWATCDR]

The babies don't bother me. The Adults tend to be 10 times worse. I used to fly a lot. I never had a terrible problem with babies. Yes sitting next to a 450 lbs woman that thought a beach umbrella was carry on luggage. A jerk that not only yelled at me for putting my bag in the over head because it might crush his cell phone. A bodybuilder that started to cry when we hit a little rough air.
The wost had to be the guy that yelled at the two nuns with orphans. They made a tiny bit of noise and this guy started yelling them to shut them up.
Just being in the same plane with that guy has got to be really bad karma.
Babies? Heck they are babies, they don't know any better. It is the adults that make the flights hell.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[xstonedogx]

Yes, for a few reasons:

1. It's well established that it is more difficult for people to tune out one-sided conversations.
2. People use louder voices when talking on their cellphones than when talk to someone next to them.
3. Talking on the cellphone brings the focus outside their current environment, making cell-phone users less considerate of those around them.
4. People traveling alone generally don't talk with other people on the flight since they don't know anyone. So more people are going to be talking.

About the only positive cellphones can bring to airplanes in terms of annoyance is that the single travelers who feel they must talk to the person sitting next to them will finally have someone else to talk to.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[gnick]

Exactly. I generally dislike cells - I think they're obnoxious, but acknowledge that they're great in emergencies and useful for people who want/need to be plugged-in all the time. Personally I find use in restaurants, etc. is a nuisance to other patrons. But that should not influence federal regulations. If enough patrons want a phone-free airline, I'd like to believe that we'd have phone-free flights (unlikely, but not enough reason to legislate). The only issues that should be considered by the FAA/FCC are safety and interference.

I think that forcing private businesses to disallow smoking is BS too, but at least they were trying to justify it through employee health complaints. Several of these comments seem to condone federal legislation to ban an annoyance in the name of safety. Gross.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Alinabi]

Actually, plane flights are so bad, that nothing can make them worse. Someone talking on the phone next to me is nothing compared to the 4 year old kid behind me kicking my seat for 7 hours in a row. At least now I can use the dead time to call my mother, who always complains I don't call enough. The only question is: will I be able to take my knees out of my mouth to reach for the phone in my pocket?

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Pig Hogger]

All they're doing is improving the airport's profits, and as a result, some of that will lower my ticket cost in the future...

Since you believe that improving an airline's bottom-line will yield cheaper tickets, there's that nice bridge in San-Francisco (complete with "Free Tibets" banners) I want to sell you.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Shakrai]

They have been cracking down on places like restruants that put in devices to block cell-phones

Rightfully so, since those devices (AKA jammers) are illegally broadcasting on licensed frequencies. I don't generally care much for the business practices of the wireless industry but they did spend billions of dollars for those licenses and have legitimate grounds to be pissed if you throw your jammer onto their spectrum.

If you don't want people using cell phones in your establishment then make that a policy and ask people to leave who can't follow it. Or retrofit your building with a Faraday Cage (some theaters are doing this with new construction). Those are your legal options.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[a whoabot]

They have the right to choose how photons movie in my house? I think it's reasonable to allow people to broadcast whatever frequencies they want in the range of their own property...

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[jackbird]

Because people just have to fucking yell into the things.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Martin Blank]

It's not reasonable, because you generally can't confirm that it is limited only to the building in which you broadcast the signal. You can put up a mechanism to block leakage from the jammer, but at that point, the need for a jammer is obviated, because the signal isn't going to get out anyway.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Anonymous Coward]

No. A proprietor would be wise to post such a sign, however...

Your need to be on call is your problem. It is not the proprietor's problem. It is not the government's problem. Why would you rely on either to take care of your responsibility?

If you need to be on call buy a device or service that notifies you when you are out of range. You'll be paying for the service you need and not forcing other people to take care of your responsibility at their own cost.

Re:I don't want cell phones on planes.

[Pig Hogger]

The whole system is in shambles, courtesy of the deregulation.

30 years ago, when you flew somewhere, every ticket cost the same price, a price set by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Since no airline had a price advantage, they competed on service.

You had free drinks, free meals and whenever something fucked-up, they really took care of you.

But the best side of regulation was that US airlines had the newest fleet in the whole world! Now, how does this sounds in terms of safety? It's pretty significant.

Then, they deregulated. The "frea mahkit" decided everything. US airlines were free to do as they chose. So, instead of buying aircraft, they bought airlines. The net result? After 20 years of deregulation, US airlines went from the youngest fleet to having the oldest fleet in the world! And if you wanted to fly on a godforsaken place well outside of the profitable networks, you got to pay through the nose.

It is cheaper for me to fly to Europe than to fly to my sister's, even though she lives a 12 hour drive away!!!

Airlines bleed money, and too much of this money is taxpayer's money. Enough is enough, the "frea mahkit" has amply demonstrated it's utter, total, absolute, complete and indomitable failure. Bring back regulation; that's the only thing that will prevent the emergency nationalization of airlines.

Ill pass, thanks.

[spotdog14]

i cannot imagine how horrible a 3 hour delay on the aircraft will be then! wifi i can see, laptops, internet = good. Cellphones = bad. Unless of course we all get 1st class seats and our own little curtains.

Re:Ill pass, thanks.

[Actually, I do RTFA]

i cannot imagine how horrible a 3 hour delay on the aircraft will be then! wifi i can see, laptops, internet = good. Cellphones = bad.

And when I make VoIP calls using a microphone..?

Re:Ill pass, thanks.

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Last time I checked, cluesticks weren't on the list of banned weapons.

Based on my observations, no one has gotten within 20 feet of a TSA agent with one on their person.

The actual reason...

[RJBeery]

It isn't cell tower overload - it's control over information. When there are problems with the plane that may be known by people on the ground the last thing they need is a bunch of cell phones ringing to cause absolute panic. Can you imagine being in the air on 9/11 and getting a phone call from your screaming family as they told you what was on the news?

Re:The actual reason...

[Duradin]

You mean getting told that the terrorist doesn't intend to hijack the plane and take it to Cuba, instead he means to fly it into a building and kill everyone on board? Ya, that's information I really don't want to know.

Re:The actual reason...

[smooth wombat]

Except for the fact that in the case of one plane, the one that went down in PA, some people on the plane were able to call out and notify authorities of their hijackings and provide some information as to the number of hijackers, weapons, etc. In the case of the hostesses, they used on board phones, not cell phones, but some passengers did call their family and/or authorities.

I realize you mean the other way, someone calling you, for why cell phones shouldn't be used on planes due to the panic issue, but I'm still against them being used. Not that I have any inclination to fly anytime soon but if I did, I get enough of someone else's yammering walking around stores. I don't need to be confined for a few hours with no way to get away from, "Yeah, I be tellin her dat she ain't gonna be good wif him. Uh huh."

Re:The actual reason...

[daveo0331]

That's exactly what happened on flight 93, and those phone calls are a big part of the reason why that plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania instead of wherever the terrorists intended to crash it (speculation is they were heading for the US Capitol).

Government Intervention

[manekineko2]

It's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly pro-tech, the average reader is also very hostile to the idea of in-flight calls based on past stories on this.

Moreover, it's funny how despite the fact that the crowd at Slashdot is generally overwhelmingly anti-government regulation, when it comes to things they want the government to regulate, like banning in-flight cellular phone use, they're generally more than happy to acquiesce.

Unless the cell phones present a safety concern, I don't see any reason whatsoever for the government to be involved in banning in-flight cell phone use. If the free market turns out to be interested in having quiet flights without cellular phone use, then I'm sure carriers will be more than happy to offer flights and/or cabins that ban cellular phone use. There are already laws that make not complying with flight attendants a crime. If the market turns out to be more interested in the convenience of using phones on planes, then who are you to be telling them through the use of legalized government force to prevent airlines from serving those markets?

Other than the interference with navigational controls and ground based towers, which are supposed to be eliminated with the pico-cells, and which we'll soon get to the bottom of with the UK legalizing, I haven't heard of a single legitimate reason to involve governmental intervention in this. The blurb about terrorism concerns and remote detonating bombs sounds like more pointless scare-mongering with no increase in security. The article itself admits that people are already surreptitiously using cellular phones.

It's nice that most Slashdoters don't want cell phones on planes, but it's downright screwed up to use governmental force to make everyone go along with it without a public purpose behind it.

Re:Government Intervention

[Original Replica]

If there are no safety issues involved, then the FCC and the FAA have no place in the discussions.

Sometime when people are forced to stay in close proximity to very annoying people, safety becomes a concern. I've seen tensions escalate very quickly when someone on a subway tells another passenger to turn down their headphones, and subway rides usually last less than half an hour. However, as the repercussions for getting into a fistfight on an airplane are more severe, so too must the regulations on other behaviors be more severe, since the normal coarse for the societal correction of unacceptable behavior is being artificially suppressed.

While many passengers would be grateful for the first person to punch out some cell phone screamer an hour into the flight, that person would still be facing serious legal trouble upon landing. As a fistfight between passengers is not a danger to the airplane's ability to complete it's flight, that would have to be unregulated along side the no cell phones rule.

Re:I hate loud stupid Cellphone users

[russotto]

All of these cell-phone drones think that they should be able to do whatever they want just because they can, with no respect for others. To me this is the definition of selfish.

Imagine, being permitted to speak, in public no less???!!! Very selfish.

Re:Bad reasons

[The End Of Days]

I also have to wonder - why do 8000 crybabies get to set the policy for the rest of us? There is no right to be free of annoyance.

No, VoIP will be blocked

[walterbays]

They'll block VoIP in the initial sky Wifi: http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1506

I read a suggestion that when someone has a loud "private" conversation, you simply join into the conversation as they clearly intended all their neighbors to do by talking so loudly:

• "Oh you're right about that. I wouldn't put up with it for a minute. You should just tell him where to go."
• "How long has your sister had this disease?"
• "That's great news for you. I sure hope none of your competitors find out that you're going to bid 20k. Will you give me a call later and tell me how it comes out?"