It's about time we could zap someone over from A to B so we won't have that problem anymore.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FCC Chairman to End Plans to Allow In-Flight Cellphone Calls
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Pretty hilarious how many people here are buying into Pai's propaganda on this. This has nothing do do with people talking on their phone, and everything to do with protecting the monopoly the airlines currently have on in-flight internet access, which they would lose if you could access the internet through your cellular connection.
That is the point though. Make it so ridiculously expensive that no one even thinks about using that service.
[doublepost=1491853464][/doublepost]
I don't think that would matter. I am sure it would just be some form of WiFi calling, and you would still have to pay for wifi to use it.
Unless your carrier has towers that emit signals high enough, which I have observed via AT&T and theirs do not have ANY signal during most flight time, then this is a mute point anyways.
[doublepost=1491853625][/doublepost]
According to the FAA, massive cell signals can interfere with communications equipment and for all I gather GPS as well. The reason we turn off cellular phones is to limit cell interference during take off and landings as the com needs to be clear for the tower to communicate.
I've seen phones accidentally left on in flight and at high, cruising altitudes, I have never seen any cell service. I'm glad they nixed it. If you have ever worked in a cube farm, you will know that hearing only one side of the conversation is very distracting because your mind tries to fill in the other side of the conversation.
Yes, the ban is because of business reasons. however, I bet that some of the flight attendants jumped on the ban because they are concerned that they would have to deal with complaints from about the loud obnoxious talkers throughout the flights.
Being stuck in a sitting in a seat about the size of an apple pie pan is awfal, also having to listen to the loud talkers sitting all around me is all that much worse.
A have been stuck in a grocery shopping line with people droning on about the most inane topic and just started interjecting myself into their conversation, until the point was made and they shut up. When its obviously talking to a child about an important topic or business, I am more sympathetic and don't interject.
Ummmmm... Ya, this has nothing to do with people talking, I remember several years ago airplanes having the phone headsets built into the back of the seats.....
This particular FCC chairman is a corporate shill there to make the consumer pay as much as possible. How much you want to bet there will be a service fee for phone/device storage on flights that will allow it.
What you and some others are apparently missing is that the FCC did not mean using your cell phone by itself. That wouldn't work very well above 10K feet, if at all.
The original idea was for airlines to SELL YOU AIRTIME on their per-airplane repeater cell. In other words, this was an airline money maker.
No. This is people siding AGAINST big business going for money over our comfort. I only wish we had as much advocacy when it comes to seat sizes.
Banning obnoxious callers IS exactly what's on the table. This wasn't opposed by the airlines, who would make more money by charging for voice calls. It was opposed by all the people in the plane who would've had to suffer.
AGAIN, THIS WAS ABOUT ALLOWING THE AIRLINES TO OFFER EXTRA-COST CELL-REPEATER SERVICE.
"The proposed rules maintain and expand the existing ban on cellular service in-flight on planes unless the aircraft is equipped with new specialized onboard equipment. If adopted, airlines, consistent with FAA and USDOT rules, will ultimately decide whether to offer passengers these services – not the FCC – and how best to manage it, including whether to enable voice services." - original FCC proposal
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed. While former Verizon Executive now FCC Chairman Pai is almost certainly doing this due to the vested commercial interests of the airlines and providers who have those onboard phones you can use for alot of money, I think it probably is the right decision just from a passenger experience standpoint.
Last edited:
has anyone actually seen a person using the in flight phones? I fly often and have never seen it.
Great idea but the flight attendents don't want to have to deal with enforcement. They already think they are overworked with all the other things they have to do while staffed with lower than ideal numbers (the executives do love to use lower staffing numbers).They should allow phones but no talking - texts and sign language only
What about a ban on dragging someone off a flight that has paid for their seat so an employee can take the seat? Hmmm???? *cough* United *cough*
To me, "safety" means reducing the incidence of airline rage, which I'm guessing was a big factor in this decision: If the person next to me was gabbing into their phone for hours on end, I would undoubtedly resort to violence.
As for the other half of the equation, I agree with others here that airlines lobbied successfully to keep the monetization of data entirely in their hands, by continuing to prevent cellular data usage.
Why does the government get to decide what I can do with my phone on a commercial flight, barring take-off and landing when there are public safety concerns?
The "moment of quiet" line is the most inane thing I've read in quite some time. Are you going to ban engine noise and screaming babies, too, Commish?
The "moment of quiet" line is the most inane thing I've read in quite some time. Are you going to ban engine noise and screaming babies, too, Commish?
Industry written public statement. The airlines don't offer services, they sell them at a very high price.
