US in-flight calling can't catch a break, ruled out for "foreseeable future"

As the long-running fight for US in-flight calling (or the lack thereof) rages on, it seems that we're finally getting a definitive answer on the matter -- for the time being, of course. According to Telegraph Travel, Les Dorr, of the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), stated that "proposals to lift the ban on in-flight mobiles had caused such an outcry [that] they had been dropped." Furthermore, it was noted that aviation authorities had "ruled out the use of mobile phones on planes for the foreseeable future." Unfortunately, there was little exaggeration beyond that, but it seems that in-flight calling on US flights is on hiatus for the time being.

[Via Textually]

[Totalfixation @ Oct 8th 2007 8:55AM]

I think more importantly would be to get wifi working. Then maybe cell phones on the plane wouldn't be as such a big deal, people could just use Voip. Also wouldn't the plane company want this not to pass as they can charge and arm and a leg for there in flight calls?

[--Ed @ Oct 8th 2007 9:23AM]

Even if wi-fi is working you can still block VOIP which I would hope they do. It will be a sad day when they allow people to yap their heads off on a phone in a plane. It will probably be a violent day too as passengers beat the crap out of the annoying idiot next to them yelling into their phone for 3 hours.

[suv4x4 @ Oct 8th 2007 9:40AM]

---Even if wi-fi is working you can still block VOIP which I would hope they do. It will be a sad day when they allow people to yap their heads off on a phone in a plane. It will probably be a violent day too as passengers beat the crap out of the annoying idiot next to them yelling into their phone for 3 hours.---

It's exaggerations like these which have caused a pointless ban. There's no technical reason for the ban, it's just freaks like you raising voice to hell and back about the horror we'll need to endure, should someone talk right next to us.

Why BAN it, what happened to simple politeness, and instructions "please don't talk for extended times during travel, as this may annoy some of your co-passengers", or whatever.

And look at me here, trying to reason with you. Should've just banned you.

[John Doe. @ Oct 8th 2007 10:59AM]

"Why BAN it, what happened to simple politeness, and instructions "please don't talk for extended times during travel, as this may annoy some of your co-passengers", or whatever"

Because the concept of being polite is dead. Today it’s about me. Me, me, me, me. How dare you tell me that I can't be on my phone as long as I want. *Spouts out something about freedom, our founding fathers, and such bullcrap that doesn't pertain to phones.* When I can go into a theatre and someone is sitting 3 rows down yapping on their phone. You can't ask people to be polite. Now a days you need to force them. Personally I wish we could force them at the end of a gun barrel.

[Jean-Michel Decombe @ Oct 8th 2007 12:39PM]

So bitching works, eh? Let's all keep on bitchin', and we can keep them friggin' yakkers out of our planes for the next two centuries.

[culbeda @ Oct 8th 2007 1:07PM]

I doubt that blocking will even be required if WiFi is made available on airplanes. The latency latency and intermittent lag of the connection to the rest of the world will make VoIP impractical.

As the technology and latency improve, then block it. You'll always have one smart-ass tunneling it or proxying it though.

I never thought I'd say it, but sometimes high-latency can be a GOOD thing. ;-)

[TSM @ Oct 8th 2007 8:56AM]

Thank the Lord in heaven. I can't see why anyone would want this? Aren't crying babies, small seats, and fat people enough to piss you off, now you want to listen to, "...and he was like, totally, then I was like no way, and he was like way..."

[Clinton.Ward @ Oct 8th 2007 9:05AM]

Those are my same thoughts...Some(most) people lack tact while on cell phones. Voices raise up two or three octaves for no apparent reason. You are trying to sleep and the idiot beside you is talking about nothing for the next two hours, louder than the outside noise.

[Daniel @ Oct 8th 2007 9:27AM]

Sigh. Why don't we allow each airline to decide their own policy regarding cell phone use on their planes? I'm sure the private sector would come up with some neat ideas, like private call rooms or no-phone sections. Why is the government even involved in this?

[suv4x4 @ Oct 8th 2007 9:42AM]

>> Voices raise up two or three octaves for no apparent reason. You are trying to sleep and the idiot beside you is talking about nothing for the next two hours, louder than the outside noise.

[a ham sandwich @ Oct 8th 2007 10:37AM]

idk my bff jill?

[Lucas @ Oct 8th 2007 9:05AM]

Thank you Jesus!! I'd only be OK with this if it were like the last 10 rows ONLY and NOT IN BUSINESS CLASS.

This is the worst idea in the world.

[JC @ Oct 8th 2007 11:17AM]

I don't think he had anything to do with it.

[Lucas @ Oct 8th 2007 11:21AM]

Me either, actually.

God and Santa are the same person.

[Sean Donnellan @ Oct 8th 2007 9:16AM]

Sorry, but just how far away is the "foreseeable future", and how are the FCC "seeing" this.

Where can I buy a foreseeable future machine?

[t-bone @ Oct 8th 2007 9:21AM]

This is a bad thing how?

[Tom Boucher @ Oct 8th 2007 9:33AM]

THANK YOU PEOPLE WHO VOTED AGAINST IN FLIGHT CALLING!

You're crammed on a plane, with people you don't know for hours. Sure, some will be discrite and all but there are plenty of older deaf business folks that SCREAM into their phone. It would drive one insane to be flying across the US sitting next to someone screaming into their headset because of all the noise on a plane.

[Chris @ Oct 8th 2007 9:34AM]

I'll start by saying that I COMPLETELY AGREE with the sentiment of the posters above. I do not want to listen to crying babies, sit next to fatty sweat hogs, etc. I just want to read a book in peace and quiet on a plane and enjoy my ginger ale and pretzels. I am, however, against the regulation for the following reason. It is not the federal government's job to be regulating to 'protect' people from annoyances. This is extreme overreach (in an ideological sense, not a legal one).

However, I have no problem at all with the airlines establishing their own rules for in flight cell phone calls such as, calls cannot last longer than 10 minutes, texting only, or perhaps have a cell phone 'lounge'.

Deregulate and let the market sort it out. Then I can choose which airline I wish to fly. It is the best way to a non-government imposed, heavy-handed, regulation based solution. I don't know about you, but as a general rule, I don't want a panel of government employees deciding what is right for me.

[Peter @ Oct 8th 2007 9:43AM]

Chris - "Deregulate and let the market sort it out. Then I can choose which airline I wish to fly."

That would be great if you had a reasonable assortment of choices. Here in Philly US Airways owns 80% of the flights, so if you don't want to use them you get a flight with 3 connections that takes all day or you pay 3 times as much.

I don't think it's too much to ask people to sit quietly and not annoy others for a few hours. If more people would learn that skill it would make life in general a lot more pleasant.

[suv4x4 @ Oct 8th 2007 9:45AM]

- I'll start by saying that I COMPLETELY AGREE with the sentiment of the posters above. I do not want to listen to crying babies, sit next to fatty sweat hogs, etc. -

Looks if we let those who banned phones, they will also ban babies and overweight people.

[Chris @ Oct 8th 2007 10:02AM]

Peter, you're right, it isn't too much to ask, but it is too much to force by law. I feel bad for you having to deal with Philly's airport! (what a nightmare that place is) But I have to believe, however, that the national trends will drive US Air to a good solution. Even if it doesn't it is still a preferable situation than more government imposed regulation by a non-elected body.

If I may be so pompous as to quote from Tocqueville---It is especially dangerous to enslave men in the minor details of life... It does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to surrender the exercise of their own will.

@suv4x4 - The point I was making was that I hate annoyances on a plane (and in general) as much as the next guy, but my opinion is that we should not sacrifice personal freedoms even if it is something we agree with, because next time, it could be something that you enjoy or need to do that is confiscated by the government.

[David @ Oct 8th 2007 10:20AM]

@TSM

It is actually quite different. The consequences from throwing a crying baby out from a restaurant compared to out from an airplane are a wee bit more severe.

[Chris @ Oct 8th 2007 10:27AM]

@TSM - I see no problem either, as long as it is the airline's policy, not a federal mandate.

And of course, an unelected federal body has not banned screaming babies in theaters. Although the laws allow the theater to establish rules defining acceptable behavior of its patrons.

[TSM @ Oct 8th 2007 10:08AM]

I see no problem with banning babies who scream nor overweight people who do not buy two seats. Most movie theaters kick babies out immediately who are screaming (If you notify an attendant) and nice restaurants have people leave if they cannot quite their children. This is no different.

[skins0304 @ Oct 8th 2007 9:52AM]

I think a lot of people don't realize that is this also to benefit the flight attendants and allow them to maintain control over the flight and the passengers. If everyone on a flight is on their cell phone, there is no way they can relay important information to the passengers in case of an emergency. The flight attendant unions will never let this happen. And I would know. My mother has been a flight attendant for about 6 years now.

[keleko @ Oct 8th 2007 9:58AM]

Cell phones can get service during flights? News to me. I've never seen it happen with mine when I've forgotten to turn it off. I turn it off to save power since it'll otherwise hunt for non-existent service the whole flight and chew up battery. If your phone works at 30,000 feet, I'd love to know what phone and provider you're using (satellite phones don't count).

[BrettB @ Oct 8th 2007 10:19AM]

Wow, a lot of hatred of "fat people" and "fatty sweat hogs" on this board. Have a little love and realize everyone is different. It's not their fault that airline bean-counters decided to put ridiculously narrow seats in planes so they could milk every last penny out of every flight.

[TrentD @ Oct 8th 2007 10:44AM]

My father is overweight, and when he rides on the plane, it's an inconvenience that causes a discomfort both for him and for those next to him. He's my dad, and I love him, but I realize this is unfair to the person next to him.

Should the person next to an overweight individual have to sacrifice 30% of their seat to accommodate them? I don't think so. Except in extreme cases, overweight people are overweight by their own choice. Airlines should not have to increase seat size (therefore cutting the number of seats per flight and raising everyone's ticket costs to make up) just because someone doesn't exercise or regulate their food intake.

I also agree with this cell phone decision - air travel is unfriendly enough without a valley girl or wanna-be-exec blabbing their head off for three hours.

[BrettB @ Oct 8th 2007 1:34PM]

TrentD, of course the neighbor shouldn't be forced to sacrifice 30% of their seat, but if the seats weren't so narrow, this wouldn't be a problem. And while it's unfortunate for the neighbor, it's also tough for the "fatty sweat hog" that is forced to try to squeeze into a seat that was designed for a waif. I'm a little overweight myself, but more than that, I have an athletic build. If I simply rest my back on my seat, my shoulders spill into the neighboring seats. No matter how much weight I lose, this won't change. I try my best to request an aisle seat so I can lean to the side for 3 hours so I don't inconvenience my fellow travelers, but everyone wants an aisle seat and it's often impossible so I end up in the middle. Airlines need to recognize that many travelers need a wider seat, and not just because of weight. First class isn't an option for most people as it is way out of our price range. Sorry to hijack the thread, but this is one of those pet peeves for me.

[Blue @ Oct 8th 2007 10:42AM]

Thank god! It is annoying enough having to listen to self-important pricks talking loudly on their phones in every other place you visit over the course of the day, at least we could preserve the airplane as a place of general quiet.

Now if we can just ban them from restaurants, theaters, and cars I'd be a happy guy.

[Craig @ Oct 8th 2007 10:40AM]

I'm a little bit confused by everyone here who seems to think that an airplane should be some kind of peaceful sanctuary, or a hotel where they should be able to sleep. Face it, an airplane is neither of those, it's really no different from a bus (only worse, because it's more cramped). Flying is already a miserable experience. Your fellow passengers talking on their phones aren't going to make it very much more so. At least with cell phones one might be able to get a little bit of work done and they time you spend on a plane won't be totally wasted.
If it bothers you so much, order yourself a pair of Quiet Comfort headphones from the SkyMall and the next time you fly, you won't have anything to complain about.

[Blue @ Oct 8th 2007 10:45AM]

I guess the concept of basic courtesy escapes you. Just because you feel the need to have an "important" phone call doesn't mean the people around you should have to be forced to listen to it. If you can't make a 3-4 hour flight without talking on your phone, then I honestly feel bad for you.

[TrentD @ Oct 8th 2007 10:49AM]

::If it bothers you so much, order yourself a pair of Quiet Comfort headphones from the SkyMall and the next time you fly, you won't have anything to complain about.::
So if someone graffitis on your block, do you just close your eyes?

There are standards of human decency that include being considerate - unfortunately people violate those standards, and rules like this have to be set.

[Mitch @ Oct 8th 2007 11:15AM]

People allowed to talk on cell phones during airplane flights = very bad idea.

Wi-Fi + IM + SMS = very good ideas.



For the people unconvinced that banning cell phone conversations is a good idea - think about this. Imagine a plane where half the people on it were listening to iPods or DVD players with speakers (instead of headphones). It would be a completely annoying. Having a a lot of folks yapping on their phone would be even worse.

[mrobins @ Oct 8th 2007 1:12PM]

Does anyone else think that this ban should not be judged on the possibility of rude travelers and annoying flights? It is neither in the FCC's mandate to advocate politeness or to prohibit technology based on a possibility that its use may be deemed annoying to others. Banning phones based on rudeness would be similar to an FCC ban on cellphone use in restaurants in restaurants. Although the ban may be desirable, in the U.S. it's not the federal government's place to mandate and enforce it.

This issue should be judged on the risk that cell phones pose to air travel. Personally, I've read reports by pilots and officials going both ways, for both technical and "human" interference reasons, and I don't have an opinion on the safety factor.

I'm not going to argue that allowing cell phones in-flight may not make many trips more unenjoyable (especially those times when you forget to charge your iPod). However, I think that in a time when net neutrality is becoming an important issue, crying out against a ban for fear the person next to you might piss you off is shortsighted and counter-productive.

[Ronny @ Oct 8th 2007 12:46PM]

Strange, I thought cell phones worked on flight 93..?

[omf @ Oct 8th 2007 2:06PM]

I keep trying to figure that one out, too. They must've been flying VERY low at the time. I also thought that in-flight cell usage would be ALLOWED after that whole experience.

[John Doe. @ Oct 8th 2007 6:33PM]

They were using the airphones that are built into the back of some seats. Expensive as shit but at least it keeps the yacking to a minimum. That is what they should do on airlines....the cell network charges you $7 a minute. You want to talk. Go right ahead. It'll cost ya.

[JHosche @ Oct 9th 2007 3:32PM]

Look it up some time - at the altitude and speed they were going...the odds of a cell phone being able to grab signal from a tower that isn't pointing upwards at all...and hold that signal for a call...odds are insanely poor for that to have happened. It wasn't until like 2004 that with special equipment designed for airplanes was tested on an American Airlines flight...you can read the press release here: http://www.qualcomm.com/press/releases/2004/040715_aa_testflight.html So how does someone make phone calls at high speeds/altitudes in 2001 when it wasn't until 3 years later that it was finally successful?

Now this site is a bit more extreme in its line of thinking, but it does prove some good points: http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93

[omf @ Oct 8th 2007 2:04PM]

Personally, the idea of allowing people to make phone calls during flights sounds horrible. Some people will answer and *continue* a phone conversation in a movie theater these days! Maybe there could be "talking" and "no talking" sections on the airplane? =)

On the other hand, I really wish data access were available in-flight. I have no problem with that, or anything else that doesn't disturb others (SMS, etc.)

As for the "technical interference" fears of letting this happen, I don't understand why the issue hasn't been settled in all these years. Can it really be that hard to place a bunch of test equipment in some planes to give us some real numbers on this?

And, if a plane can be interfered with by something as weak as the WiFi radio in my laptop or the transmitter in my cell phone, then I think we have MUCH bigger things to worry about! What happens when there's solar flare? What happens if the plane flies over a radio tower? What happens with the thousands of cell phones and laptops that people simply forget or don't know how to turn off in flights every single day? Wouldn't this provide a simple and obvious security threat?

[BdgBill @ Oct 8th 2007 2:42PM]

Thank God! I have already cut back on my flights as much as possible. I don't think I could take a four hour flight of idiots yapping their heads off.

They should provide internet service and perhaps seatback terminals. This may actually shut some of them up.

[Ted @ Oct 8th 2007 4:48PM]

Just set your time machine back to 9/11/2001. It seems lots of people were able to use their cell phones on the hijacked airplanes to make calls to the ground.

[Paul @ Oct 8th 2007 5:33PM]

Actually only two of the phone calls were made from non-Airfones the rest were all made from the specialized airfone systems that is on nearly every airliner.

[JoeC @ Oct 8th 2007 8:48PM]

"simple politeness"??? Seriously?

A guy on a flight two weeks ago thought I was unreasonable when I asked him to turn off his blackberry until we reached 10,000 feet. The FAA and the FCC tell him to leave the goddamned thing off for the duration of the flight, but he's gotta break the law and check it every 20 minutes. Do you think the bozo is going to grant your polite request once the Feds tell him he can light it up?

I fly at least once a month, almost always in one of these tiny Embraer or Canadair pocket jets where the fuselage is about 8 feet in diameter and you spend the entire flight taking turns jamming your elbows into your seatmate or his/hers into yours. I am sincerely amazed that I haven't yet read of flights being diverted due to fistfights breaking out over seat space. If they make matters worse than they already are by allowing in-flight phone calls I cannot be held responsible for my actions.

(That said I wouldn't object to data/sms capability.)