SouthWest Airlines working on in-flight WiFi

A tipster sent us a recent corporate presentation at SouthWest Airlines that twice mentions that "Inflight wireless internet connectivity" is being looked at. Rather predictably for an airline, this is mentioned on a slide discussing future revenue opportunities -- hey, dems airlines gotta get paid! -- but at least they're thinking about it, right? As such, we can probably expect the in-flight rates for said "wireless internet connectivity" to be equivalent to the altitude of the plane. We'll know more as soon as SouthWest starts getting specific on the deets: when they do, we know which airline we'll be booking the next time we have to fly internal.

[Rahul @ Jul 8th 2007 11:18PM]

i bet you its going to cost us like any other wifi hotspot

[madd_matt @ Jul 8th 2007 11:30PM]

Where they have a complete monopoly in the sky? Where they have to get expensive satellite systems?

No, they're going to charge you. I wonder if they'll have tiered pricing depending on where you sit.

Actually, I can see that being a big incentive if they want people to pay the premium to fly business class.

Also, they could do ethernet if they can't get approved to fly with wifi. That certainly wouldn't make its way back to coach.

[Craig @ Jul 8th 2007 11:38PM]

southwest has only coach. but way to speculate.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Jul 9th 2007 6:54PM]

I can't believe it, the airline known for it's no-frills service is actually adding frills to their service!

[Ethan Stone @ Jul 8th 2007 11:40PM]

Southwest may charge but Jetblue "Unlike Southwest's plan to increase revenue through such services, "We prefer to make any option free to our customers—we learned a lot from the Connexion by Boeing experience," Neeleman said. "The Connexion product offered broadband access for a fee, and the number of people who used it was very limited. Not enough people were willing to pay for the service. An expensive product needs a lot of customers, and it just didn't work out.""

http://www.btnmag.com/businesstravelnews/headlines/frontpage_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003581088

[bolgposts_taf @ Jul 8th 2007 11:41PM]

Skype, anyone?

This is a very interesting can of worms they will be opening.

I look forward to it, even if does cost me $10~20 for the flight (more than that, and I'll sleep, thank you).

[eqsf @ Jul 9th 2007 1:43AM]

wifi on southwest? most of their flights are under 3 hours, i don't think it's worth it. i'd be more looking for wifi on long-haul international flights.

[just.Rob @ Jul 8th 2007 11:43PM]

seeing as Virgin America has been cleared by the FAA, I'm gonna call bullshit on anyone from Engadget flying anything but, domestically at least.

Nice try Conrad.

[Nick Catalano @ Jul 9th 2007 12:25AM]

Yes, but Southwest is actually really, really, really inexpensive... even if it is $10-15/flight, that will still be a cheaper flight than Jetblue and/or Virgin America...

[Big @ Jul 9th 2007 12:27AM]

With Wifi on an aiplane you'd have access to VOIP if you had one of those Skype phones?

That would pretty much allow people to use "cell phones" in the air probably cheaper than they would be using them if cellular signals were supported up there.

You'd also have instant access to the Internet via laptop and be able to play with your PSP.

I could damn near spend my upcoming flight from NYC - Beijing (15 hours) playing WARCRAFT or HALO 2 on a laptop.


I'm not sure what the future of in-flight communications will be but for safety's sake I hope the FAA won't be stupid enough to allow real time news reporting from the ground cause with terrorism the way it is, we don't need AIR RIOTS on planes and public panic.

[Fitz @ Jul 9th 2007 12:44AM]

"we don't need AIR RIOTS on planes and public panic"

Scaremonger much? Seriously... All the potential that in-flight WiFi offers, and you focus on people rioting because of some news story? Puh-leeeze.

[James @ Jul 9th 2007 8:08AM]

RE: Skype, remember wifi =/= broadband -- they may have a few hundred kbps (maybe even tens of kbps?) to split between the entire plane full of passengers.

They haven't talked pricing yet, either -- as some other commenters have pointed out, they could charge an arm and a leg, or even charge per KB or per minute. I will be pleasantly surprised (but very surprised nonetheless) if this turns out to be a good deal.

[killinterpol @ Jul 9th 2007 12:05PM]

Well, it's a little faster than that, but you're right. And no it doesn't use "expensive satellites" like the guy up top said. They're probably going to use GlobalLink VHF or something similar. That's what Virgin is using (AFAIK).

[Josh @ Jul 9th 2007 12:55AM]

I would prefer people to no be using phone in flight, after recently sitting on a relatively short 4 hour flight from vancouver, i can honestly say i enjoy the relative quiet that can be had in the air.

As for internet access, the more availability the better, it will give me something to do in the air besides listen to music.

[James @ Jul 9th 2007 1:04AM]

Boeing implemented and pulled this from the market two years ago. It was pretty good, but basically no-one used it. I did a skype test call on it, and the results weren't that great. For IM though, it was pretty decent!

[Froggy @ Jul 9th 2007 10:25AM]

the system worked great, except that with no way to plug in your laptop, you basically had between 3-5h or connection, depending on how good your battery was. So in the end, $30 for 3h was a little much for people. Get people the possibility to plug in, and you've got yourself a major revenue generating option - I bet you at least 25-30% of passengers would pay the "unlimited option."

[zac @ Jul 9th 2007 1:55AM]

Although it might be expensive for the occasional flier, i think you'll be able to purchase accounts and maybe pay a monthly fee for access, which would be great for those that use Southwest regularly.

[felahughes @ Jul 9th 2007 5:48AM]

I used the Lufthansa/Boeing service a few times when I flew to the US on business. Worked pretty well and I thought it was pretty reasonable at $30 for the 10 hr flight. I also used it heading south to Africa but coverage stopped somewhere over the northern Sahara so it was back to paperware for the rest of the flight. I think it didn't take off (no pun intended) because your average busy cabin crew really is the worst salesperson/techsupport for wifi you could get. Plus there's other stuff to do on a plane as well....

[Keith Myers @ Jul 9th 2007 7:28AM]

I hope it may be a free incentive to fly with southwest?

[NHAnimator @ Jul 9th 2007 8:01AM]

I fly SW whenever possible, in part because their pillows are free, snacks are free, changing my itinerary is free, their employees are friendly, they get me where I'm going on time, I can sit wherever I want and I can do it all affordably. Oh, and they're not afraid to give me peanuts.

I can certainly live w/o internet access for a few hours and hope that SW chooses NOT to implement this service OR at a minimum, restricts accessible sites. (Yes, censor us.) I don't need to see the guy next to me d/l'ing porn. I also don't need people getting upset when they find out that there are delays in landing at the destination airport, their team is losing, their stock is tumbling, etc.

[Froggy @ Jul 9th 2007 10:26AM]

so i guess you could get to use your iPhone over wifi

[Anth @ Jul 9th 2007 1:38PM]

No, because there is currently no way to turn on WiFi and turn off the cellphone.

Apple needs to update their software to allow you to turn off just the cell phone radio.

[toy2ski @ Jul 12th 2007 5:52PM]

And who enforces whether you turn off your cell phone during flight? Have you ever forgotten to turn off your cell during a flight?

So, yes, you could use your iPhone over wifi. You might run your battery down if it keeps searching for signal.