"British Airways has reached an agreement with the Civil Aviation Authority which will allow passengers to use an aircraft’s in-flight entertainment system from the moment they reach their seat to when they arrive at their destination."
"The change, which begins on Saturday, will also end the ritual of cabin crew collecting headsets from passengers during the closing stages of the flight."
This only applies to aircraft fitted with the new Thales system.
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
FaddyPainter From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2010, 126 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 11163 times:
So what is it that is particular about this Thales system as compared to others which may not be used until after takeoff? I would have thought that all fixed aircraft IFE would be stringently tested for electromagnetic compatibility etc regardless of whether its use is intended during critical phases of flight or not.
Are the certification requirements really so different for take-off and landing use?
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19695 posts, RR: 56 Reply 4, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10861 times:
Quoting nighthawk (Reply 3): I noticed this recently on a United flight into Glasgow - the IFE remained on right to the gate.
This has been the case with UA for as long as I can remember (though not for main cabin screens, just audio and perhaps PTVs). JetBlue also keeps their TVs running from gate to gate (though the pay-per-view movies don't start until after takeoff). I suspect it's a US vs. EU regulation thing.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
longhauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, RR: 36 Reply 5, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10831 times:
Quoting nighthawk (Reply 3):
Why is this not done more often by other airlines?
It is dependent upon the laws of the country governing the airline/aircraft. In this case, as stated above, it was a change in air regulations as administered by the Civil Aviation Authority.
Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
akelley728 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2101 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10832 times:
I've had the AVOD on to the gate on Delta flights as well. Delta uses a Panasonic system. Not sure what the big deal is?
jr From United States of America, joined May 1999, 958 posts, RR: 7 Reply 9, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10724 times:
Quoting akelley728 (Reply 6): I've had the AVOD on to the gate on Delta flights as well. Delta uses a Panasonic system. Not sure what the big deal is?
I can only remember a couple of times when I have had the delta AVOD gate to gate. They typically start it after take off, but in most cases they have let it run till reaching the gate at the destination, although sometimes it is shut off prior to landing.
Was on a domestic 763 just this past Saturday, and they started it after 10,000 feet, and we had the programming run till we got to the gate at ATL.
pegasus1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 10532 times:
Frontier also run their IFE until arrival at the gate. I had the dubious pleasure of watching the documentary on the Hudson ditching on my last flight with them (a while back now), with the computer simulation and footage of the US Airways Airbus approaching the Hudson showing on screen as we descended into La Guardia. Eerie, to say the least, and 'perfect' timing! The FAs had instructed us all to remove headsets in preparation for landing (not strictly enforced) but left the IFE and screens on until we reached the gate.
As a general note, though, I thought the rationale behind the turning off of all electronic devices once seat belt signs are on - and the removal of headsets, earphones and earplugs - was more to do with trying to ensure passengers were not distracted at what is considered a critical stage of the flight, rather than any perceived danger from the use of electrical devices per se. Happy to be corrected, but if this is the case, then allowing passengers to remain absorbed by the In Flight Entertainment rather defeats this objective.
Fabo From Slovakia, joined Aug 2005, 1111 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10467 times:
My best guess the decision to forbid the use of IFE before takeoff originally had to do with the line of thinking "the passengers need to pay attention to crew, not PTVs". Not like they do it anyway.
The light at the end of tunnel turn out to be a lighted sing saying NO EXIT
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19695 posts, RR: 56 Reply 12, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10399 times:
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 10): As a general note, though, I thought the rationale behind the turning off of all electronic devices once seat belt signs are on - and the removal of headsets, earphones and earplugs - was more to do with trying to ensure passengers were not distracted at what is considered a critical stage of the flight, rather than any perceived danger from the use of electrical devices per se. Happy to be corrected, but if this is the case, then allowing passengers to remain absorbed by the In Flight Entertainment rather defeats this objective.
Is being distracted by a book any different from being distracted by a TV screen? I'd tend to think not. So if distraction is really the issue, then people should be forbidden from having anything out during takeoff and landing. But if they're going to let books, newspapers and magazines go, then the argument for preventing distraction falls apart.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
RyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 2496 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10369 times:
As said above, this is something that varies by jurisdiction. Some authorities allow IFE to run from emplaning to disembarkation, some from takeoff to landing, others a mixture of the two.
In this case, this is "noteworthy" because, until now, CAA have only allowed IFE between take-off and landing.
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 10): I thought the rationale behind the turning off of all electronic devices once seat belt signs are on - and the removal of headsets, earphones and earplugs - was more to do with trying to ensure passengers were not distracted at what is considered a critical stage of the flight, rather than any perceived danger from the use of electrical devices per se.
I always thought that as well, but CASA and (I think) NZCAA both allow IFE to be used with headphones from gate to gate. What strikes me as odd about this is that if you're listening to your iPod you have to take your earphones off for landing, whereas if you are watching a movie you are allowed to keep them on.
UA772IAD From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 1635 posts, RR: 3 Reply 15, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10296 times:
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 13): I always thought that as well, but CASA and (I think) NZCAA both allow IFE to be used with headphones from gate to gate. What strikes me as odd about this is that if you're listening to your iPod you have to take your earphones off for landing, whereas if you are watching a movie you are allowed to keep them on.
Difference is the PA system overrides the audio feed of the IFE. Ipods aren't connected to the aircraft's PA system so individuals can truly be in their own world... Remember the scene from Home Alone II where Kevin (Macaulay Culkin) is listening to his TalkBoy with earphones and misses the "welcome aboard our flight to New York" announcement? (How's that for a throwback! )
pegasus1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 10271 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 12): Is being distracted by a book any different from being distracted by a TV screen? I'd tend to think not. So if distraction is really the issue, then people should be forbidden from having anything out during takeoff and landing. But if they're going to let books, newspapers and magazines go, then the argument for preventing distraction falls apart.
I tend to agree, except that you would not normally be wearing headsets etc if reading a book or newspaper, therefore you are more likely to hear emergency announcements etc than if you are absorbed, with headgear on, watching a film or listening to music, especially given the excellent noise-cancelling qualities of many modern-day appliances. Indeed, as cabin crew, I have difficulty attracting the attention of many passengers these days just to offer them something to eat or drink (presumably a welcome and 'eagerly-awaited' distraction), often having to touch their arm or wave my hand in front of their face to attract their attention, so I guess you could argue that they would not be aware of an emergency situation as early as other passengers who are not wearing such gear.
In a way, I think the whole question is moot. I tend to think that, whatever someone is doing, they'd soon become aware if an emergency were to arise and would quickly catch up with others in any situation where their life was in danger.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19695 posts, RR: 56 Reply 17, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 10141 times:
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 16): I tend to agree, except that you would not normally be wearing headsets etc if reading a book or newspaper, therefore you are more likely to hear emergency announcements etc than if you are absorbed, with headgear on, watching a film or listening to music, especially given the excellent noise-cancelling qualities of many modern-day appliances
Unless such announcement comes over the PA system, in which case they'd be more likely to notice it than they would be if they were reading a book.
Ultimately, I'd tend to think that if the situation is dire enough that immediate evacuation is necessary, the passengers will be aware that something is going on. A failure that would wipe out the PA system should wipe out the IFE as well, so those paying attention to it would be alerted.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
pegasus1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 10135 times:
Quoting readytotaxi (Thread starter): "British Airways has reached an agreement with the Civil Aviation Authority which will allow passengers to use an aircraft’s in-flight entertainment system from the moment they reach their seat to when they arrive at their destination."
It's a great pity that, while they were at it, BA didn't get the CAA to remove the restriction on the use of mobile phones immediately after landing. The UK is now so out of step with many major jurisdictions, including the USA and Australia, where their use is not only PERMITTED but actively ENCOURAGED via announcements made after landing, advising passengers that it is now safe to use mobile phones.
At BA, passengers are now in the ridiculous position of being able to fly one way with a OW Alliance partner such as American or Qantas and use their phone on landing, and have to sit on their hands at the end of the sector they take with BA.
Hopefully, with the change in the rule described in today's announcement, the relaxing of rules regarding mobile phone use isn't too far off....
N62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3671 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8977 times:
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 10): I had the dubious pleasure of watching the documentary on the Hudson ditching on my last flight with them (a while back now), with the computer simulation and footage of the US Airways Airbus approaching the Hudson showing on screen as we descended into La Guardia.
Reminds me of that scene in the movie "Airplane!" where the in-flight movie being shown is of an airplane crashing!
BE77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 8585 times:
AC and WS both allow IFE gate to gate, with the restriction that you need to be using only earbuds, and only connected to the aircraft IFE, not your own systems...that way they control the volume for the announcements, etc. works well.
Both also allow cell phones once off the runway upon arrival.
LLA001 From Turkey, joined May 2005, 33 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7936 times:
I wish they showed the video of the cockpit as well
however, to be able to finish a movie would be great. At the end of the long flight, you cant really calculate the exact time when they are going to go to landing sequence. Where on the other hand you know the time you are going to land and you are able to calculate how many movies you can watch with precision ( yes i try to watch too many movies on the airplane )
ba319-131 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 8263 posts, RR: 56 Reply 26, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4926 times:
Quoting shamrock321 (Reply 1): Customers in Club and First will still have to stow their screens during taxi, takeoff and landing so not exactly gate to gate.
- I don't think most First and Club passengers will be that worried, it's those in the lower classes that need distracting from their surroundings
qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2198 posts, RR: 14 Reply 27, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4495 times:
AA has IFE gate-to-landing on the 777 (only a/c w/ AVOD). The system automatically begins its close out once the aircraft lands, so the AVOD discontinues when the mains touch the ground.
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 18): At BA, passengers are now in the ridiculous position of being able to fly one way with a OW Alliance partner such as American or Qantas and use their phone on landing, and have to sit on their hands at the end of the sector they take with BA.
We're told that the use of cellphones after landing is only permitted in the US and its territories, but I rarely see anyone enforce the cellphone ban after landing in other countries. It's such a nuissance, the flight crew doesn't bother -- mainly for the reason you give... pax can use them on one flight, but not the other. It becomes an enforcement nightmare.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
skyhawkmatthew From Australia, joined Oct 2005, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 28, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4326 times:
Qantas' entertainment on the A380 has always been available gate-to-gate.
Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 27): We're told that the use of cellphones after landing is only permitted in the US and its territories, but I rarely see anyone enforce the cellphone ban after landing in other countries.
On every international flight I've taken with Qantas, we've been able to turn on our phones while taxiing in – in Australia, Tokyo, Singapore, Bangkok, London, Frankfurt, Los Angeles.
Heathrow757 From UK - England, joined Jan 2011, 16 posts, RR: 0 Reply 30, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4212 times:
That's Good although as many of you say, nothing new.
My recent flights to CCU via DXB from LGW with EK on their 777-300/300ER allowed us all to watch film's etc from gate to gate. Their 330 didn't allow this, understandable though as the equipment on the 330 was a lot more dated.
It's interesting the article mentions that the new system has had testing and doesn't interfere with the normal running of the aircraft. Obviously older systems do?
It mentions the pilot can override the system for important safety announcements. From experience, all in flight systems freeze when any announcement is made and played through both loudspeaker and headphones? So don't see what's new there.
Lets hope it continues to be rolled out so we can all finish our films!
cipango From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2009, 285 posts, RR: 0 Reply 31, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3630 times:
Yes EK do allow this.
I was once delayed 3 hours on board my flight to SYD from DXB before we even left the gate, but not many people minded as we were able to watch TV shows and Movies.
There's nothing worse than the landing cutting off the last few minutes of a movie. Happens every time.
JQflightie From Australia, joined Mar 2009, 878 posts, RR: 1 Reply 32, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3461 times:
we at QF have been doing this for about 2years now, we call it 'Gate to Gate' IFE there is 1 exception to this and that is B737-800's that have 'drop down entertainment' from the PSU's, as this would impeed in an evacuation if the IFE screens are still down.
Next Trip: PER-DPS-LOP-CGK-KUL-PVG-LHR, LCY-MAD-VLC, BCN-LYS-TLS-IST-JED-KUL-SGN-CAN-MEL
lhcabincrew From Germany, joined Nov 2011, 8 posts, RR: 0 Reply 33, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3150 times:
On Lufthansa you can also watch TV from the moment you board the aircraft until landing, when normaly, the connections are being presented. Cabin crew will collect headphones on descend.
pegasus1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (5 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2865 times:
Quoting JQflightie (Reply 32): we at QF have been doing this for about 2years now, we call it 'Gate to Gate' IFE there is 1 exception to this and that is B737-800's that have 'drop down entertainment' from the PSU's, as this would impeed in an evacuation if the IFE screens are still down.
This brings us to another interesting point.
On every airline I've flown (including the one I work for), the drop-down screens are stowed for boarding, take-off and landing, except one - Swiss. I don't know if they still do it (I'll find out next June), but up to the last flight I took with them about 2 years ago (all European routes operated on the A320 family), they left the screens down throughout the whole flight, including boarding and disembarkation. At first I thought the crew had forgotten to stow them, but it happened consistently on every flight I took over a three year period.
Like you, I'd always assumed they would be stowed for take-off and landing so as not to impede an evacuation, but this doesn't appear to be an issue at Swiss...
Norcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1277 posts, RR: 12 Reply 36, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2384 times:
As an airplane enthusiast, I could care less. I am more focused on watching the wing-flex on take off, watching for other planes on taxi etc so even though UA has had this forever, it doesn't really make a difference for me...not that I'd fly BA anyways
aircanada014 From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 1492 posts, RR: 0 Reply 37, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2376 times:
If I recall Air Canada was the first airline to offer the service turning their IFE on from gate to gate??? Air Canada also allows passengers to use their cell phone after touch down???
pegasus1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 38, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2327 times:
Quoting babybus (Reply 35): What's the difference between watching the aircraft camera show, as avidly as I do, and watcing a film? None, I think.
The difference, as has been discussed already, is that if you're watching a film, you are wearing a (noise-cancelling?) headset, which, in theory, could prevent you from hearing emergency announcements over the PA. This would not be the case if you're simply watching the aircraft land on a TV monitor in the ceiling (or on the bulkhead or wherever it happens to be for your section of the cabin).
Norcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1277 posts, RR: 12 Reply 40, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2278 times:
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 39): I take it you mean "Couldn't care less" i.e., I care so little [about the issue in question], that I couldn't care any less than I do...
Just checking....
Ha.. You remind me of Pierce Morgan and his English Pet Peeve but you're right, I couldn't care less is what I meant
I'll have to look him up and investigate. Sounds like it could be right up my pedantic English street!!
By the way, any particular reason you wouldn't fly BA? (Or should we save that for another thread?! Lol!)
You might enjoy their new approach...
I'm also interested to hear how this new policy will work in different cabins. For example, will First and Club pax be allowed to keep their screens open until they reach the gate or will they have to watch at a funny angle?
RyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 2496 posts, RR: 2 Reply 42, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2229 times:
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 39): I take it you mean "Couldn't care less"
To go OT, but as someone who lived in the UK for 16 years and now lives in the USA I can attest to this being a difference between British and American English.
Brits say "I couldn't care less" and Americans say "I could care less". Think of it as another "tom-ar-to" or "tom-ay-to" quirk of the English language.
Personally I think the British version is a lot more grammatically accurate!
pegasus1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 43, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2162 times:
Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 42): Brits say "I couldn't care less" and Americans say "I could care less". Think of it as another "tom-ar-to" or "tom-ay-to" quirk of the English language.
Well, we risk going completely off-thread with this and having our knuckles rapped, but it's not really the same as the tomato example, as that is simply a difference in pronunciation. This is a difference in sentence formation and, therefore, meaning.
To me, to say you 'could care less' doesn't convey accurately what you're actually trying to say. It means you COULD care less than you do, which is not what is meant.
My other bugbear is its and it's, where the apostrophe is not required, and I've noticed that that is used extensively - and wrongly - on BOTH sides of the Atlantic.
"The aircraft landed on its nose wheel". No apostrophe required, although many people erroneously write 'it's nose wheel' etc...
The rule, as I remember it is: Unless you are contracting 'It is or it has', no apostrophe is required.
As I said, we're off thread, so better save this for another time....
blrsea From India, joined May 2005, 1227 posts, RR: 3 Reply 44, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2143 times:
Quoting lhcabincrew (Reply 33): On Lufthansa you can also watch TV from the moment you board the aircraft until landing, when normaly, the connections are being presented. Cabin crew will collect headphones on descend.
This was not my experience on LH SEA-FRA-SEA flights on A330 this summer. The IFE was turned on, but there was no way to go past the home screen, as no buttons would work. Only after the aircraft took off was I able to watch shows on the PTVs. Same while landing too, all the programs stopped before landing.
Norcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1277 posts, RR: 12 Reply 45, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2045 times:
Quoting pegasus1 (Reply 41): By the way, any particular reason you wouldn't fly BA? (Or should we save that for another thread?! Lol!)
Because Star Alliance is in my blood and should be a Million-Miler on UA soon if I keep flying at this rate. I've also flown BA on both J and Y a few times and I wasn't impressed. They're a good airline for sure but for my Europe needs, LH is awesome
Quoting blrsea (Reply 44): This was not my experience on LH SEA-FRA-SEA flights on A330 this summer. The IFE was turned on, but there was no way to go past the home screen, as no buttons would work. Only after the aircraft took off was I able to watch shows on the PTVs. Same while landing too, all the programs stopped before landing.
I just flew them two days ago FRA-IAD on the 748 and it was on from the time I sat down to the time we pulled up to the gate.
qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2198 posts, RR: 14 Reply 47, posted (5 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1868 times:
I didn't write that to mean only the US allows it, rather, as an airline, AA only technically follows US laws allowing their use in the states. Since the laws vary from country to country, it'd be difficult to keep up with who allows it and who does not. It's because of the confusion you generally won't see flight attendants say something to somebody who turns their phone on after landing. We actively promote their use after landing in the states. We don't when we land elsewhere, and in fact, make the after landing P.A. that says, "All electronic devices must remain off until we are parked at the gate."
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
FI642 From Monaco, joined Mar 2005, 1056 posts, RR: 2 Reply 49, posted (5 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1300 times:
As long as the briefing and crew announcements can override it what difference does it make? Many flights I've been on I've seen folks on their ipods from the second they get on until the second they get off. If safety isn't compromised, who cares?
737MAX, Cool Planes for the Worlds Coolest Airline.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 2596 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2008, 1547 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 4987 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19695 posts, 
From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4275 posts, 
From India, joined May 2007, 264 posts, 
From Slovakia, joined Aug 2005, 1111 posts, 
From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 2496 posts, 
From Turkey, joined May 2006, 1407 posts, 
)
From UK - England, joined Jan 2011, 16 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2009, 285 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2011, 8 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2011, 46 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 21464 posts, 
From Monaco, joined Mar 2005, 1056 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
