Qantas extends testing of in-flight cellphone use

Qantas has already taken quite a few steps towards allow in-flight cellphone use (and more), but it looks like the Australian airline still needs a bit more time to get things just right, as its now extending a trial it first launched in April. That was originally supposed to run just three months but, according to PC World, it'll now wrap up in February of next year, although Qantas expects to have a preliminary report ready before the end of this year. What's more, these tests (and eventual implementation) are apparently limited to text and email services only, and not voice calling, which is a compromise we're guessing more than a few will be willing to accept.

[scolen2 @ Oct 29th 2007 11:51AM]

Yes, text only is a much better solution than having to punch each and every one of the teenyboppers chatting for the whole flight!

[SuperQ @ Oct 29th 2007 1:57PM]

Yea, I'd rather have in-flight phones banned so I can't use mine if it means I don't have to listen to people yap on their phones for hours. It's bad enough when I was on a flight where some guy was watching a movie on a portable DVD player WITHOUT HEADPHONES.

[alex @ Oct 29th 2007 11:53AM]

Cell phones on airlines just a bad idea .... No matter if its safety
issue for the aircraft or not. If this comes to pass you'll have
passenger safety issues...

[Kennyb123 @ Oct 29th 2007 12:04PM]

Watch out... here comes "Mile-High/High-Speed Laptop Pr0n"

[doctadjones @ Oct 29th 2007 12:28PM]

"Ray, there are no airlines that let you use cellphones."

"Qantas. Definitely, Qantas lets you use cellphones."

[Alex @ Oct 29th 2007 1:56PM]

Qantas never crashed. Yeah.

[waiownsyou @ Oct 29th 2007 1:25PM]

Everyone would worry less if all cell phones were CDMA. GSM frequencies = gg airplane

[Tacticus @ Oct 29th 2007 2:14PM]

WTF?
seriously what are you smoking
GSM is a fequency agile system and doesn't give a crap what you run it on (if the chip supports gsm works on the top of it just like cdma)

also the interference claims are pretty much for the benefit of the ground operators (oh look heres this phone talking to 30+ ground stations and i have nfi which one it should be talking too(and also interferring with comms on the other stations))

[CUBSWILLWIN @ Oct 29th 2007 6:58PM]

good thing i got sprint.

[Aaron S @ Oct 29th 2007 2:44PM]

and yet so many people managed to make calls on United93 9/11 before this technology existed.

[suhag @ Oct 29th 2007 2:53PM]

im tired of these mutha****** cells phones on this mutha****** plane!!!

[michael @ Oct 30th 2007 5:30PM]

lmao

[richard2121 @ Oct 29th 2007 3:33PM]

This using cell phone is so old news, back on the terrible envents of 9/11/2001 passengers of hijacked planes made phones calls to firends and family.

[jmsbar @ Oct 29th 2007 4:02PM]

>>This using cell phone is so old news, back on the terrible envents of 9/11/2001 passengers of hijacked planes made phones calls to firends and family.

Perhaps that's why the plane crashed

[rickane58 @ Oct 29th 2007 6:48PM]

ITS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!

[Sirocco @ Oct 29th 2007 7:47PM]

Do cell phones work when you're 5 miles up? Aren't planes out of range of the antenna towers when they're flying?

[jimmyfinch @ Oct 29th 2007 8:27PM]

Yes they are.

That is why nobody really made calls from the planes on 9/11.

They would have been about 2 seconds long before they got dropped, or the signal would not have reached at all.

[Alex @ Oct 30th 2007 3:27PM]

Texting/data ought to be allowed. Yakking on your cellphone, however, ought to be punishable by summary execution. Fair enough?