FCC Chairman to End Plans to Allow In-Flight Cellphone Calls

[gbc204]

People who aren't in the "millennial" generation certainly still talk on the phone. I love it how young people, most of which have next to zero in-person social skills as a result of growing up in the age of texting and social media think that talking on the phone is some outdated form of communication.

Well I'm certainly not a millenial, and am old enough to remember when all the cellphone companies were touting how many minutes you got each month to talk on the phone, and worrying whether it is in network or roaming. The point is, most communications these days (not all) do not require a phone call, and in many instances if you call (or even send an email instead of a text) you just look like a dinosaur.
People were so worried about other people talking loudly on the phone, but everyone is so aware of it at this point that it's almost an imaginary problem.

 

[Bigsk8r]

Perhaps I use a satellite phone, anyways that is beside the point. You are making up your own story, have a nice day.

Let us know how well your sat-phone works in an aluminum tube traveling 500 MPH at 30,000 feet.

I cannot believe how many people in here don't understand the technical and cost hurdles that are being nixed as well as the simple position that no one wants to sit next to an obnoxious phone talker for 3+ hours.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

Perhaps I use a satellite phone, anyways that is beside the point. You are making up your own story, have a nice day.

I'm not in the least. You just have zero argument as your original one was shown to be silly and pointless.

Use of satellite phones is currently allowed. They don't use the same mechanisms standard cellphones do.

 

[oldwatery]

Thank you FCC. I hate those bozos who think I want to listen in on their business calls or rants to their spouses. Get over yourselves and wait till you land. Pathetic humans!

 

[tongxinshe]

Good. Can you imagine sitting next to someone talking loudly on their phone the entire flight? Now multiply that across an entire plane.

If it's only about noise, say "no noise", why say it as "no electric device usage"? The same annoyance can be created by passengers chatting loudly, "creating noise" is what exactly needs to be banned.

 

[OldSchoolMacGuy]

If it's only about noise, say "no noise", why say it as "no electric device usage"? The same annoyance can be created by passengers chatting loudly, "creating noise" is what exactly needs to be banned.

Phone conversation lacks in visual cues —facial expressions, gestures, physical proximity (the presence of other party)— so people may raise their voice to feel trully engaged in the conversation and to lessen the chance of misunderstandings by the other people they talk with.

It also has to do with how you hear yourself. The speaker is quieter than your voice, so when you talk into it, it SOUNDS like you are being quieter than you are. This results in people on the phone talking louder.

 

[Geek#3821609158E]

Just how do they plan to prohibit phone calls using in-flight wifi? And what do they plan to do after someone files a freedom of speech lawsuit? It will be hard to make the case that it's allowed to disturb others by talking to your neighbor but not on your own mobile phone, especially when passengers are allowed to use the airline's phone. Will they start banning crying babies on flights, too?

My point is, this sounds like they're opening up a big can of worms without thoroughly thinking it through first. But that sounds about par for the course, considering who's running our country now.

 

[happydude]

so this ruling is made based off the personal preferences of the FCC chair, not rooted in science, facts or basic understanding of whether or not cell data causes safety issues with the plane.

to be sure, i do not want someone talking on a phone next to me during a flight, but if it isn't a public safety issue meant to protect people at large, shouldn't that be a policy decision up to each individual airline - i.e. let the market decide? the government shouldn't tell a business what to do based off some bureaucrats personal preference or comfort level.

what's next, the federal government specifically making it illegal to text in a movie theater?

 

[Rigby]

Just how do they plan to prohibit phone calls using in-flight wifi?

E.g. by blocking VoIP traffic.

And what do they plan to do after someone files a freedom of speech lawsuit?

Freedom of speech gives you the right to voice your opinion without government censorship. It does not give you a right to blabber away wherever and whenever you want.

so this ruling is made based off the personal preferences of the FCC chair, not rooted in science, facts or basic understanding of whether or not cell data causes safety issues with the plane.

It is actually based on the overwhelming input of affected people. To quote e.g. the Flight Attendant Union:

"Any situation that is loud, divisive, and possibly disruptive is not only unwelcome but also unsafe. Many polls and surveys conducted over the years find that a vast majority of the traveling public wants to keep the ban on voice calls in the aircraft cabin. In far too many operational scenarios, passengers making phone calls could extend beyond a mere nuisance, creating negative effects on aviation safety and security that are great and far too risky.

“Besides potential passenger conflicts, Flight Attendants also are concerned that in emergencies, cell phone use would drown out announcements and distract from life-saving instructions from the crew.”"

 

[Beerstalker]

"Any situation that is loud, divisive, and possibly disruptive is not only unwelcome but also unsafe. Many polls and surveys conducted over the years find that a vast majority of the traveling public wants to keep the ban on voice calls in the aircraft cabin. In far too many operational scenarios, passengers making phone calls could extend beyond a mere nuisance, creating negative effects on aviation safety and security that are great and far too risky.

“Besides potential passenger conflicts, Flight Attendants also are concerned that in emergencies, cell phone use would drown out announcements and distract from life-saving instructions from the crew.”"

But what does any of that have to do with radio waves? That is the FCC's job, to control radio waves in US airspace. The FCC has no business deciding to not investigate something just because people think that rude people on a plane might be a nuisance. They are supposed to base their rules on whether or not the radio waves produced by cell phone traffic will cause issues with the radio waves and other instrumentation the plane needs to fly safely.

The DOT/TSA would more likely be the ones who would make the rules on use based on feedback from airline companies/workers/customers.

Should the FCC decide that nobody can talk on a phone in a car? No that is not their business unless they have a study showing that cell phone radio waves can make a car fail to function safely. The DOT is the one making rules about cell phone use/texting while driving. Even then they have left it up to the states to pass their own laws in most cases.

Do I want to ride in a plane full of jerks talking loudly on their phones, no. But I also am sick of government officials/agencies making policies or rulings they have no business being a part of.

 

[Rigby]

But what does any of that have to do with radio waves? That is the FCC's job, to control radio waves in US airspace.

One of the FCC's areas of responsibility is specifically public safety, which flight attendants and pilots say is at risk.

 

[winglet69]

As someone noted earlier - what is being disallowed in the US has been around for years internationally. I worked for over a decade as a pilot at Emirates Airline, with a fleet of 160 B777's and 90 A380's. They have internet and cellular mobile services on every flight. Free for 10mb, and $1USD for 500mb. It's fast enough for a Skype video chat (even from the flight deck - ask me how I know! )

These are 3 - class flights. Economy, Business, First. I have never seen or heard of any issues with passengers and voice calls in any class. In an airline that moved over 51 million passengers last year. A user still has to pay mobile roaming costs, so that deters the vast majority from using it, just as very few people ever used the in-seat handsets. But if you really needed to the service, you'd be pretty happy it was there. As also pointed out, there are a multitude of noise irritants in flying. Singling out one is silly - particularly as it has been demonstrated to be a non-issue.

The fact is North America, while certainly prosperous and world-leading in many ways, lags far, far behind the rest of the world in other areas, such as the quality of cellular service and air travel. This is not unusual, as one region typically leapfrogs another as it develops, for example Africa has basically skipped the whole landline phase of telecoms and gone straight to massive adoption rates of 3G/4G for years, while the US and Canada struggle to finally offer it consistently. And if you've ever flown internationally on pretty much any decent airline like Emirates, Singapore, Cathay, and the like you'll know what I'm talking about in comparison to the shockingly poor product offered domestically in US and Canada.

Frankly it amuses me, the level of ignorance and fear over allowing a service that has been used successfully worldwide for ages, in the "greatest country in the world". The debate being had here was resolved years ago elsewhere, and determined a non-event. You are not leading, you are following.

*shrugs*

 

[barmann]

I am not saying if you have a 12 hour flight that people are on the phone for 12 hours. I am saying there's no difference between people talking to each other or on the phone. Actually, the difference is less noise when you're on the phone.

I've always found it much more annoying to hear people talk on the phone , than to other people .
There are psychological explanations for that, but I'm too lazy to google it right now .

As for the noise, people usually seem to talk quite a bit louder on the phone , especially when using a cell phone in a busy or noisy environment , for obvious reasons .
[doublepost=1491990265][/doublepost]

....
As also pointed out, there are a multitude of noise irritants in flying. Singling out one is silly - particularly as it has been demonstrated to be a non-issue.
....

I disagree ; different noises have a different impact on people .
On a plane there always is a fairly high noise floor ; that's not enjoyable, but a lot less annoying than , say , someone quietly whistling near you .

 

[nia820]

Thank god. I can't imagine sitting next to a fool yapping away on a 14 hour flight.

 

[vwj]

Good. Can you imagine sitting next to someone talking loudly on their phone the entire flight? Now multiply that across an entire plane.

Yes thank god that they have a separate section for small wailing children! Oh no that's right they don't. So when checking in, given a choice between sitting next to wailing sprog on an overnight flight, or person on mobile, which one do you think most people would choose? Anyway, most people have headphones.....problem solved! Unless you prefer the roar of the airplane engines or whoosh of the cabin pressure. Honestly some people need to get a life.

 

[Rigby]

As also pointed out, there are a multitude of noise irritants in flying. Singling out one is silly

It singled out because it's entirely avoidable (which crying babies are not).

particularly as it has been demonstrated to be a non-issue.

How has that been "demonstrated"?

A user still has to pay mobile roaming costs, so that deters the vast majority from using it, just as very few people ever used the in-seat handsets.

Yes, that's another way to solve the issue: Make it so expensive that almost no one uses it. But that's not what some posters in this thread seem to be hoping for.

 

[deadshift]

FCC has no business declaring loud talkers to be a nuisance. They are, but it's not FCC's job to deal with them. I also take trains, and the phone thing is minor. People are aware. ... and you can ask poeple to be quiet if it's a problem. Solving problems starts with understanding that there is a problem.

 

[Floris]

I've always found it much more annoying to hear people talk on the phone , than to other people .
There are psychological explanations for that, but I'm too lazy to google it right now .

As for the noise, people usually seem to talk quite a bit louder on the phone , especially when using a cell phone in a busy or noisy environment , for obvious reasons .
[doublepost=1491990265][/doublepost]

I disagree ; different noises have a different impact on people .
On a plane there always is a fairly high noise floor ; that's not enjoyable, but a lot less annoying than , say , someone quietly whistling near you .

Well, why can't they use their cellular data for the other 99% of the features on the phone? "Talking for noise problem" is just a stupid excuse. It's like these congress guys always saying when fighting piracy that there's underage content on pirate sites too, knowing nobody would then vote against it.

Saying it's a win for the Americans, blah blah, .. because of noise in the plane. Yeah, the fight of noise with US is real. Rolleyes. Look at the stats of americans in a plane on a day vs the rest of the world flying into the US, but you guys get to vote for it, obviously.. lol

It's got nothing to do with noise. But only those who feel there is someone once in a while (who these days get told off anyway by staff, if not beaten), obviously agrees with it. Yeah, I don't like loud noises in a plane either, like those idiots that bring their pets, or damn parents who have crying babies that nobody can complain about, blah blah. Someone on the phone is last on the list of annoyances on a plane.

 

[Analog Kid]

I realize you're being sarcastic and terrorists do not follow laws but security forces always need to minimize false positives in any situation. Same reason why drones cannot fly willy nilly nearby secured areas. It's that much harder to identify and take down one drone when 99 other drones are also flying around. This is only the first step. Soon, cell phone detection systems will be standardized in all passenger planes followed by full bans of our devices.

Now, I don't want to imply that security regulations are based in any way on effectiveness, but what you're describing sounds like a lot of work for no purpose.

So you've detected a phone turn on in the belly of your plane while you're in flight... What you gonna do about it?

Is cellular the only way to trigger a remote detonator-- why not use WiFi, or some narrowband signal, or an altimeter, or a timer?

Have you seen the size of a cellular modem? Will TSA be able to distinguish between a cell modem and your cars key fob?

Why not just detonate it with your car's key fob?

How does banning passengers with phones make the difference-- if you were going to detonate a bomb on a plane by making a phone call, wouldn't it be smarter to do it from the ground?

Do we need to ban phones on the ground now too?

Wouldn't it be a better strategy to scan luggage for bombs rather than phones?

Sooo many questions about where this idea comes from and how it's supposed to work...

 

[Tech198]

Yes, we want control

 

[wigby]

Now, I don't want to imply that security regulations are based in any way on effectiveness, but what you're describing sounds like a lot of work for no purpose.

So you've detected a phone turn on in the belly of your plane while you're in flight... What you gonna do about it?

Is cellular the only way to trigger a remote detonator-- why not use WiFi, or some narrowband signal, or an altimeter, or a timer?

Have you seen the size of a cellular modem? Will TSA be able to distinguish between a cell modem and your cars key fob?

Why not just detonate it with your car's key fob?

How does banning passengers with phones make the difference-- if you were going to detonate a bomb on a plane by making a phone call, wouldn't it be smarter to do it from the ground?

Do we need to ban phones on the ground now too?

Wouldn't it be a better strategy to scan luggage for bombs rather than phones?

Sooo many questions about where this idea comes from and how it's supposed to work...

I never said t was effective security. TSA is overwhelmingly about the theater of security. I'm sure it does deter some people from carrying out some plans which is about all we can really hope for. You're questions are way too logical in the context of security against terrorism.

 

[Tech198]

Now, I don't want to imply that security regulations are based in any way on effectiveness, but what you're describing sounds like a lot of work for no purpose.

So you've detected a phone turn on in the belly of your plane while you're in flight... What you gonna do about it?

Is cellular the only way to trigger a remote detonator-- why not use WiFi, or some narrowband signal, or an altimeter, or a timer?

In that case, The only way to prevent 100% then is to confiscate all handheld electronic devices before u go onto from security, then u can reclain yours electronic stuff where ever your distention is. (Take it to the extreme, so no airliner would do that) Or alternatively, easier way, pack in it your get passer to pack it in their luggage.... Even in the over head hold its not "safe" as if user has access to it, they can do whatever they like.


Hope they don't get to this stage.

 

[Jaish]

Actually all should sit facing backwards, it is much safer. But for some reason everyone wants to face forward, so thats how the airlines install the seats.

"Everyone wants to face forward"? Absolutely! I certainly feel more comfortable during take off being pushed INTO my seat vs. being pulled forward and onto the harness / seatbelt; never mind the angle of the plane at take off AND landing - especially when near the front.

 

[kdarling]

Actually all should sit facing backwards, it is much safer. But for some reason everyone wants to face forward, so thats how the airlines install the seats.

That brings back memories.

When I was a kid flying with my Mom and four brothers on Piedmont Airlines to meet my Dad back in the late 50s, early 60s, we would sometimes be assigned to an onboard family table with opposing bench seats. Something like this:

My favorite aircraft back then was, of course, the big three rudder, four propeller, TWA Lockheed Constellation Starliner with its long oval inset ceiling planetarium, made of black velvet with pinhole lights in the pattern of a known star constellation that each plane was often named for.

On one flight, the pilots brought me into the Connie cockpit and let me sit and "steer" for a few moments. I think I was about six years old at the time. Hmm. Wonder it's too late to put that in my logbook

Many years later, packed with a hundred other soldiers on a US Army chartered old TWA 707 jet flying to Korea, I was astonished to see the same kind of ceiling planetarium in that plane.

Yes, kids, flying used to be really quite an event.