Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Europe Clears Mobiles On Aircraft  
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10891 posts, RR: 37
Posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3176 times:

I wonder how the different airlines are going to manage this. Will cell phone use be allowed in one part of the cabin with a quiet (no cell phone use) area in another?
Knowing how peope use their cell phones for anything and everything, this is going to be a problem in a relatively tight space such as airplanes. Not everybody wants to have to deal with cell phones ringing during flights.

Europe clears mobiles on aircraft
The use of mobiles on planes flying in European airspace has been given formal approval by the European Commission.
The decision means that mobiles could be used once a plane has reached an altitude of 3,000m or more.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7334372.stm


There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNaritaflyer From Japan, joined Apr 2006, 549 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3172 times:

Most cell phones don't work at 30,000 feet anyway. There is no signal that high up.

User currently onlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3159 times:

As I said in another thread on this mobiles should be allowed in Business class as people travelling on business might have a legitimate reason to be using one. There should maybe be an area of the plane, say around the toilets or something where all other pax can use them. I would NOT like to spend the whole flights listening to someone talking about how great his stag night in Barcelona was or something similar. Planes are mostly fairly quiet places and I like that. You can think, read, look out the window if you are on your own or have a nice quiet chat to your friend if you are travelling with someone.


Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10654 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3147 times:

A modern nightmare: a stressed manager on a nightflight trying to manage a crisis via cellphone.
Or a guy in love on the phone with his girlfriend totally forgetting about everything around.

God beware, please let airlines not allow this.


User currently offlineSignol From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2007, 2996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3137 times:



Quoting Naritaflyer (Reply 1):
Most cell phones don't work at 30,000 feet anyway. There is no signal that high up.

The aircraft will have a mini cell repeater on board, that connects to the gorund via a satellite link. As well as specialist shielding for the important equipment that the signal could affect.

signol



Flights booked: none :(
User currently offlineSketty222 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1776 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3129 times:

I think is a bad thing to happen. Aeroplanes are one of the only mobile free places in society today.
I for one would not want to pay £3000+ for a Business/First ticket for some erky business man sitting next to me shouting into his mobile for the entire journey(well that above 3,000m anyway)



There's flying and then there's flying
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10891 posts, RR: 37
Reply 6, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3114 times:

If the use of cell phones on board flights becomes wide spread - and I think it will over some period of time - flying might very well be a real nuisance with ring tones all over the aircraft especially on quiet frames such as the A380.

How will we be able to get some rest (if not sleep) on long haul flights? Take a SFO-HKG flight for example. It is already difficult enough as it is. Not all of us can afford to fly in Business or First.



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineAirevents From Germany, joined Jan 2002, 873 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3100 times:

I can really only hope that airlines who do not want to allow mobile phones on board will stick to their decision, as one of them is the company I work for.... Would be such a nuisance!


www.airevents.com
User currently offlineStarGoldLHR From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3038 times:

I thought both BMI and Ryanair are signed up to offering this ASAP ?


So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
User currently offlineEcb747 From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3009 times:

If the airlines should offer this, I hope they only offer it in Business Class. And maybe they could offer it for a given time of the flight, let's say a 1/2 an hour window for calls and that's it?
Listening to 60 people in cattle class shouting in their mobiles because of bad reception is not the way I would like to travel. Make the call before take-off, listen to the voice-message after touch-down and that should be the end of it.


User currently offlineAisak From Spain, joined Aug 2005, 762 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2980 times:

People. for the first time, this is a even more secure system than banning phones at all. The devices allow the crew to know exactly how many phones are on any given time. This comes in handy prior to take off and landing.

And for crying out loud.. Do you really REALLY think these calls are going to be toll free? Even when an Orange UK user travels to France and uses the Orange network gets charged a fairly amount of money in roaming fares. These calls will cost no less than the current eurorate of 0.49E/min and I bet they will be closer to cruise ships 6E/min than the eurorate.

Planes do ALREADY have usable phones and are bloody expensive. The mechanism to make the mobiles work will be the same so the price will be similar...

Quoting Sketty222 (Reply 5):
I for one would not want to pay £3000+ for a Business/First ticket for some erky business man sitting next to me shouting into his mobile for the entire journey

But you happily accept that biz class passenger sitting next to you using the embedded seat-phone...

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 6):
with ring tones all over the aircraft especially on quiet frames

These devices can be programmed to ban incoming calls during certain periods

Quoting Ecb747 (Reply 9):
Listening to 60 people in cattle class shouting in their mobiles

First, I don't think the pico cell would have the capacity to serve 60 simultaneous calls. And I don't see cattle class passengers having paid cheapo ticket, who don't pay 5E for a sandwich, to pay the same amount of money per minute of conversation.

Quoting EMA747 (Reply 2):
I would NOT like to spend the whole flights listening to someone talking about how great his stag night in Barcelona was or something similar.

Well, i would. In fact I would pay the company my airfare made double if I can see the face of the guy when he receives his phone bill.

[Edited 2008-04-07 06:19:26]

User currently offlineBA319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8506 posts, RR: 55
Reply 11, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2948 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Sketty222 (Reply 5):
I think is a bad thing to happen. Aeroplanes are one of the only mobile free places in society today.

- Agreed, one of the many things I like about flying.

M



111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77L,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333
User currently offlineSmokeyrosco From Ireland, joined Dec 2005, 2112 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2907 times:



Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 6):
How will we be able to get some rest (if not sleep) on long haul flights? Take a SFO-HKG flight for example. It is already difficult enough as it is. Not all of us can afford to fly in Business or First.

The system that FR and AF are looking at will allow the crew to disable voice or data or both so I imagine that they will shut them off if your flying through the night. This will allow for less interference as mobile/cell phones will still be connected to the mini-cell in the aircraft and not go actively looking for other cells but the cell can 'bar' incoming/outgoing voice or data calls.



John Hancock
User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2847 times:



Quoting EMA747 (Reply 2):
As I said in another thread on this mobiles should be allowed in Business class as people travelling on business might have a legitimate reason to be using one. There should maybe be an area of the plane, say around the toilets or something where all other pax can use them. I would NOT like to spend the whole flights listening to someone talking about how great his stag night in Barcelona was or something similar.

I absolutely beg to differ and, indeed, in many ways your comments could be seen as somewhat insulting to many. Please enlighten me as to why someone in Business Class "might have a legitimate reason to be using one", while I for example (if perhaps travelling in Economy) do not? Please enlighten me as to what exactly is deemed 'legitimate' and who determines it?
Whilst I don't think many people, like yourself, would want to spend a whole flight listening to talk of a stag night in Barcelona I for one likewise would not like to spend the flight listening to someone in Business Class talking most of the time on a mobile......is there a difference why you feel you shouldn't have to put up with such people (your implication, not mine!) in Economy, and me having to put up with something I might find equally annoying in Business Class? If I'm paying for Business Class (which I would remind you, most travelling in it aren't) why should I have to put up with constant chatter on mobiles? I'm afraid I see nothing 'legitimate' about it, but what I do see is egomania from such a suggestion!


User currently offlineIluv747400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 371 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2836 times:



Quoting EMA747 (Reply 2):
As I said in another thread on this mobiles should be allowed in Business class as people travelling on business might have a legitimate reason to be using one

This is a ridiculous statement.

Who is to say someone in business class has a more legitimate reason to use a mobile phone in flight than someone in coach? What's a legitimate reason? You also incorrectly assume that only people sitting in business class are traveling for business reasons.


User currently offlineNEMA From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 710 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2811 times:



Quoting Iluv747400 (Reply 14):
This is a ridiculous statement.

Who is to say someone in business class has a more legitimate reason to use a mobile phone in flight than someone in coach? What's a legitimate reason? You also incorrectly assume that only people sitting in business class are traveling for business reasons.



Quoting AirNZ (Reply 13):
I absolutely beg to differ

I have to agree that your statement EMA747 has either come across the wrong way or it is really not appropriate. The two posts quoted here cover my thoughts entirely.



There isnt really a dark side to the moon, as a matter of fact its all dark!
User currently offlineDoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3401 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2800 times:

This is great news Bose and anyone else in the active noise cancelation headphone business.

...But seriously, do those things work ok in getting rid of people talking and higher pitched rings, or are they only effective against lower pitched constant noises (like the engines and airflow)?



When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently onlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2777 times:



Quoting NEMA (Reply 15):

I have to agree that your statement EMA747 has either come across the wrong way or it is really not appropriate. The two posts quoted here cover my thoughts entirely.

Calm down guys. My post was badly worded but all I meant was that there is a world of difference in talking to clients to arrange a business meeting and chatting about something that can wait til you land. I personally don't really want to hear anyone chatting on the phone on a plane/train/bus but if it's going to be allowed there should be areas you can buy a ticket in if you feel you need to use the phone and areas where they are not allowed at all. The trains I sometimes get have a couple of coaches that allow mobiles the others have a coating or something on the windows to stop mobile signals altogether. The mobile coahes are full of business men and not much else though.

PS I am not a businessman (and don't even know anyone who is) and I can't afford to travel anything other than economy.



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineBaron95 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1335 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2654 times:



Quoting NA (Reply 3):
A modern nightmare: a stressed manager on a nightflight trying to manage a crisis via cellphone.
Or a guy in love on the phone with his girlfriend totally forgetting about everything around.

And how is different than a couple sitting next to one another having an argument or long conversation during a flight? How is it different than two business associates traveling together and discussing a deal?

I tell you how. In the cellphone case you only hear 50% of the conversation "noise". In the in person case you hear 100%.

What about all the other noises on the planes. The endless announcements of certain FAs (if they happen to be AA and male, you know it is going to be a LOT of LONG announcements - these folks love to hear their voices on the PA). A child crying.

Face it. A plane is not a private sapce. Want to control your environment? Buy a private jet. People on cumuter buses, trains deal with cell phones just like any other conversation noise. People on planes will just do the same.

Besides, cell phones have much clearer connections now and the days of people yelling on the phone are over. People know how to adjust their speach level is the ambient is quiet. Most people are self-aware and don't want their conversations heard anymore than you want to hear them.

People making a big deal about cell phone on planes are just reactionary to change.



Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
User currently offlineBaron95 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1335 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2644 times:

What I want to know is where are all the folks that used to argue (against all available documented evidence) that cell phone/electronics use in a plane would cause all sorts of catastrophic events in the cockpit due to interference.

Maybe now they will accept reality?

[bait]
Nawh. 'They'll probably continue to argue that cell phones on planes are unsafe. But so far they are muted on this thread.
[/bait]



Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2873 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2624 times:



Quoting Ecb747 (Reply 9):
Listening to 60 people in cattle class shouting in their mobiles because of bad reception is not the way I would like to travel.

Actually, that won't be a problem, because:

Quoting Smokeyrosco (Reply 12):

The system that FR and AF are looking at will allow the crew to disable voice or data or both so I imagine that they will shut them off if your flying through the night. This will allow for less interference as mobile/cell phones will still be connected to the mini-cell in the aircraft and not go actively looking for other cells but the cell can 'bar' incoming/outgoing voice or data calls.



Quoting Baron95 (Reply 19):
What I want to know is where are all the folks that used to argue (against all available documented evidence) that cell phone/electronics use in a plane would cause all sorts of catastrophic events in the cockpit due to interference.

Maybe now they will accept reality?

There will be a problem though, because it will be hard for airline X to explain Joe Sixpack that his mobile phone is dangerous and should be switched off on one flight (without pico cell) whereas the week before they could use their phones just fine on airline Y. They'll be even sloppier with switching off their phones than they already are.



I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineAisak From Spain, joined Aug 2005, 762 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2605 times:



Quoting Baron95 (Reply 19):
What I want to know is where are all the folks that used to argue (against all available documented evidence) that cell phone/electronics use in a plane would cause all sorts of catastrophic events in the cockpit due to interference.

The situation has changed completely.

When you turn on a phone it will start desperately looking for networks. When time goes by, and no network is found, it increases the transmit power until it's set to its maximum.

Multiply this with the number of phones and you'll have 200 devices transmitting a RF field at maximum power (cause no network is found) inside a pipe acting as a waveguide. Believe me, that amount of field COULD make an interference, and that interference COULD make a circuit to change the information transmitted and that information COULD be important because the plane COULD be in a critical step.

I know it's a lot of coulds and of course the interference could set the IFE to play when it's already playing... no harm at all. But what if it changes the info displayed in the cockpit saying it's flying at 512 feet instead of 256. That's only one 1 of difference in a digital circuit, but possible consequences are not that simple.

That's why this system is more secure. It creates a pico cell coverage area inside the plane so mobiles can log onto the network with a minimal power signal. Also, as I said above, for the first time, the crew can know exactly how many phones are switch on any given time just by looking at the screen (or any other display) of this device. Now, you can only expect all mobiles are off when FAs say so.


User currently offlineTUIflyer From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 206 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2554 times:

Look's like a few news sites are picking up the story:

'Passengers travelling within the EU could soon be able to make calls on their mobiles during a flight after a new ruling from the European Union allowing inflight calls.

The European Commision has provided a new framework to allow all air travellers to send and receive voice calls and text messages whilst flying over European countries.'

INFLIGHT CALLING SPECIAL REPORT: http://letsfindaflight.com/page_1181845192626.html

No guesses as to who the first carrier will be to introduce this and charge a fortune - FR!!!!


TUIflyer



Don't just travel, travel with a smile. . .
User currently offlineRbgso From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 587 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2526 times:



Quoting Baron95 (Reply 18):
And how is different than a couple sitting next to one another having an argument or long conversation during a flight? How is it different than two business associates traveling together and discussing a deal?

Correct, currently you hear arguments, casual conversation, the crew, etc. However, assuming those people make up 40% of those around you, now a percentage of the 60% that were quiet before will be yapping on the phone, so there will be an increase in noise.


User currently offlineNU From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2473 times:



Quoting Signol (Reply 4):
specialist shielding for the important equipment that the signal could affect.



Quoting Aisak (Reply 21):
Multiply this with the number of phones and you'll have 200 devices transmitting a RF field at maximum power (cause no network is found) inside a pipe acting as a waveguide. Believe me, that amount of field COULD make an interference, and that interference COULD make a circuit to change the information transmitted and that information COULD be important because the plane COULD be in a critical step.

So as all other safety matters are tested you will be able to point us to the evidence that there is a problem as you describe? If it is a problem, do the tests, get the evidence and then do something more than announcements to enforce such a serious safety issue. Otherwise get over the fact that this emperor was always running around naked.



Aer Maighdean abu
25 Smokeyrosco : Didn't airbus already test this?
26 ZRH : I don't like the idea of having to listen to all that nonsense people speak into their phones. Swiss Railways have a good solution on the intercity tr
27 Aisak : And we all know that a 33cl can of coke will explode. Not to mention Channel n5. That's why I have to travel with 100 ml of toothpaste, 100 ml of sha
28 Helvknight : As far as I know Airbus developed the technology. The DB have the same plus they have picocells or repeaters in some cars to amplify the signal. Mayb
29 Prebennorholm : Still people could, by using manual network selection, make calls via ground based stations while the plane is on the ground or at low altitude. Pers
30 Aisak : A ground base station is not generally aimed to transmit a signal beyond 3000m on the ground, so i don't think its signal can reach you while being 3
31 Aa757first : But they usually cost a few dollars a minute. I can't imagine anyone talking on them for a sustained period of time.
32 Baron95 : I mean no isrespect, but why exactly should I believe you? There have been NOUMEROUS ATTEMPTS (google the canadian cell phone tests on airplanes) to
33 Aisak : And what makes you think this would cost substantially cheaper? Not at all. That's part of any healthy scientific discussion. Not believing without p
34 Smokeyrosco : Yep but then your still probably left with the same amound of people that currently leave there phone on 'by accident' in flight anyway. plus as with
35 Sketty222 : How many times have you seen people use the inflight phone. I bet you could probably count it on one hand, This is due to the cost of using the infli
36 WILCO737 : I bet on every flight that's been taken: a few cell phones are still ON! But at a certain speed and certain altitude you won't have a signal anyway! B
37 Aisak : And you are so sure about this because.... When I use my French orange mobile phone in the Spanish orange network i get charged a not-so-cheap rate o
38 Post contains images BHXFAOTIPYYC : I would be delighted NOT to have 50 different ringtones and text alerts coming in on any flight. However, if they set up some rules like phones set to
39 WILCO737 : Yeah the good old times whith those HUGE cell phones You need to buy an extra seat for your cell phone then WILCO737 (MD11F)
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airport Leads Europe On Aircraft Tracking posted Thu Sep 7 2006 14:08:46 by BA1978
Question On Aircraft Call Sign posted Sun Apr 6 2008 20:59:42 by 87GROUNDED
Info On Aircraft At GLA posted Mon Mar 31 2008 14:32:50 by BMED
Sydney's Worst Laser Attacks On Aircraft posted Sat Mar 29 2008 21:24:34 by Schipholjfk
Franchised Food Service On Aircraft posted Sat Mar 1 2008 16:47:36 by XJETFlyer
The Results Of Expensive Fuel On Aircraft Size posted Thu Feb 14 2008 23:08:52 by KennyK
Europe's Trains Take On Planes posted Tue Jul 3 2007 16:25:55 by Laxintl
Dangerous Toxins Detected On Aircraft posted Fri May 25 2007 11:46:49 by Biddleonia007
Why Carpeted Floors On Aircraft? posted Sun Mar 25 2007 18:57:19 by Warreng24
United Leaves Passengers On Aircraft For 7 Hours posted Sat Mar 3 2007 03:54:10 by WMUPilot