• On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
July 31, 2008 5:42 PM PDT

House committee moves to ban in-flight cell phone use

by Kent German
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 21 comments

Quiet please: A House committee has moved to prohibit in-flight cell phone use.

(Credit: Kent German/CNET Networks)

A House of Representatives committee threw another hurdle into the path of in-flight cell phone use Thursday, when it voted to ban the use permanently. By a voice vote, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed the Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace(or Hang Up) Act, which was introduced earlier this year by Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.).

The legislation, which now moves to the full House for consideration, would prohibit "voice communications using communications devices on scheduled flights," with exceptions for flight crew members and a federal law enforcement officer acting in an official capacity. In-flight texting, Wi-Fi, and e-mail on airplanes would not be affected.

In a statement, DeFazio said that not only is cell phone use aloft an annoyance, but also that airlines should be stopped from using in-flight talking as a potential revenue source. "With airline customer satisfaction at an all time low, this is not the time to consider making airplane travel even more torturous," he said. "Polls show the public overwhelmingly doesn't want to be subjected to people talking on their cell phones on increasingly over-packed airplanes." During the hearing, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.) lodged a dissenting voice, saying, "You are trying to legislate courtesy, folks, and that just doesn't work."

In the past few years, the federal government has not looked kindly at in-flight calling. The Federal Communications Commissions, with support from the Federal Aviation Administration, already bans in-flight cell phone use, but the agency has the power to revisit the issue at any time. The Hang Up Act, however, would write the prohibition into federal law.

CNET News poll

Banning cell phone chatter at cruising altitude:

Good idea?
Bad idea?
Undecided



View results

Industry reaction is mixed for now. Though the Airline Transport Association, the industry's main lobbying arm, is not backing the bill, the Association of Flight Attendants, and some consumer groups are supporting a ban on sky-high cell chatting.

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, the European Union's equivalent of the FAA is moving toward allowing cell phone use on intra-European flights. Air France has already conducted a study of in-flight cell use on one of its aircrafts, albeit to mixed results; Ryanair, Emirates, and Qantas are considering allowing cell phone use as well. Yet, those airlines could also be subject to the Hang Up Act on flights to the United States.

Kent German is a senior editor for cell phone reviews at CNET. When he's not testing the newest handsets on the market, he's blogging about cell phone news for Crave. In his On Call column, he answers reader questions and gives his take on the rapidly changing mobile industry. E-mail Kent.
Recent posts from Crave
Thanksgiving poll: What are you most grateful for?
Note to hospitals: The pen is mightier than the data entry worker
Crave giveaway of the day: LG 32-inch LCD TV
Gadgettes Podcast 86: The Body Episode (a FLASHBACK episode!)
Windows Starter Kit refreshed for 2010
Sit your 'tude in the Mood Chair
Big changes in Security Starter Kit 2010
Passive-aggressive gifts for chronically late geeks
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (21 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by JCPayne July 31, 2008 7:03 PM PDT
Great so now people will rush to the Lavatory just to make an illegal phone call????
Reply to this comment
by kingrah1 July 31, 2008 8:37 PM PDT
LMAO
by Travis Ernst July 31, 2008 7:19 PM PDT
Yet we have no problem with the 400Mhz (if I recall, I need to double check that bandwidth) AirFone's that the planes have?? First Gen was 400; Newer ones were slightly different. You don't have "protection" (open broadcast) on that bandwidth as you do on cellphones from scanners FYI under law.

Yet we still will have people talking loudly, or kids with their MP3 players (fully legal on airplanes) blasting away. This law is worthless legislation at it's finest! Are we going to put gag's on the passengers to make the flight quiet as well?

Am I the only one that sees this bill as a complete and utter waste? The FAA *could* have passed a FAR barring use in flight, but they were smart and didn't. They knew cell's posed no danger. The Industry for YEARS has told us to turn the phones off (FCC policy) in flight. The individual airlines can have their own rules and enforce them, this didn't happen. Big Brother is tossing his weight around AGAIN.
Reply to this comment
by tripwilliams July 31, 2008 7:49 PM PDT
The only reason we have any direct testimony of the victims of 9-11, are the heart-breaking calls from the passengers of flight United 93 to their loved ones. If for that reason only, this is a bad idea. I also wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this was just a way to get people to use the planes own phones that cost a fortune. It's all about money.
Reply to this comment
by kingrah1 July 31, 2008 8:40 PM PDT
They are not banning cell phones, they are just limiting their use on the plane. If the plane is hi-jacked then that is a good excuse to use a cellular phone on the plane
by Dalkorian August 1, 2008 3:37 PM PDT
They specifically allow texting and email, which the terrorists hijacking the plane won't be able to overhear. Feeling silly yet? Don't terrorize everyone just so you can chat with your buddies on airplanes about last night's TV shows, annoying all around you. OK?
by kingrah1 July 31, 2008 8:38 PM PDT
what about the new thing where the airplane has a service that routes the phone calls through them??
Reply to this comment
by Travis Ernst July 31, 2008 10:00 PM PDT
I think Jet Blue was testing that. You still have the existing FCC regulation banning Cell use in airplanes unless the system has a DOE-E (exemption) tag on it. They don't want people tripping hundreds of towers at once. With the airplane relay you wouldn't be. It would use their phone system to connect you to the communications grid. It would have limitations I would imagine of the number of phones it could handle and they would most likely surcharge you for using it (it's not your "home" system). Most likely it would also work as a ONE WAY (directional) and you would not be able to receive calls. I'm trying to think of a 747-400 trying to handle the phone demands. It would be taxing.
by emoslayer6224 July 31, 2008 9:40 PM PDT
This reeks of low level corruption, but I kind of agree with their complaint. But technically, they migh as well ban al talking on airplaines. That would be rather extreme, so I dissagree.
Reply to this comment
by aka_tripleB August 1, 2008 2:14 AM PDT
Making a law would not stop the airlines from monetizing airbound calls; in fact, it will make the airlines' system the only way to legally call someone. And how would you enforce such a law? Have police roam the aisles? That would be not only be a watse of tax payer money, but actually creates other problems. Sure, it'll probably only be the air marshall enforcing the law, but there are real safety reasons why you're not suppose to walk around during a flight.

And even if this law gets passed, there is a very good reason that a judge could use to overturn this law. One could argue, while we do not have the "right" to talk on a cell phone, congress also doesn't have to autority to take away the ability without having a reason to do so. If people don't want people talking on planes, they will ask the airlines to ban cell phone. Airlines do have the right to do that, but it would be wise to either have passengers hold a vote whether phone can be used, or clearly designate which flights allow phone.

But when I first read the headline, it made me think that the government is planning something nefarious seems how they are banning something that is already banned. Why else can you explain redundant laws? It's either that, or they're just wasting our money making useless laws, kind of like how it's illegal to fish while sitting on the back of a giraffe in Illinois. I don't even think it's legal to own a giraffe, so it's pointless to make laws about fishing from them.
Reply to this comment
by bluesk1d August 1, 2008 7:01 AM PDT
You know, I dont have a problem with this at all. People are incapable of not screaming into their phones especially if there is even a little background noise.
Reply to this comment
by willdryden August 1, 2008 8:39 AM PDT
At 30,000 ft, a single cell phone will try to lock into 12,000 to 15,000 receiving stations. This creates quite a problem for the cell phone providers. If 100 people did this all across the country, it could tie up all the cell receivers and drop calls for the people on the ground. Since only radio people working on cell systems truly know the problems, they are the ones who should decide. The ban should stand except in emergencies. Even the cell phone providers agree.
Reply to this comment
by Joliet Eddie August 1, 2008 1:45 PM PDT
I hope that this ban is somehow put into a formal ruling. If the FAA is ever allowed to approve cell phone use in flight, flying will become dreadfully annoying. The last thing that I need in flight is to have to listen to some else chat away on their cell. And with ambient noise in the cabin always high, you can count on those users raising their voices to either be heard or because monitoring their own voice level will be difficult.
Reply to this comment
by sunwatcher August 1, 2008 5:26 PM PDT
Unfortunately we live in a world now where people aren't decent or courteous enough to keep their mobile phone calls discrete or short. There are plenty of inconsiderate people who will hold an hour long conversation around others who just want to get through a flight without being disturbed unnecessarily. This legislation needs to go through. What valid reason is there for making an inflight phone call anyway, outside of a real emergency?
Reply to this comment
by alegr August 2, 2008 7:34 AM PDT
This law will eventually be considered unenforceable. Will those who fake a call (just talk into non-working phone) be prosecuted? If not, what's the purpose of the law? How annoyance of a person faking a call is any different from an annoyance of a person actually making a call? If it's not different, then how it's possible to ban faking a call, or just talking to myself, which can look like talking on the phone?
Reply to this comment
by ev61 August 3, 2008 1:22 PM PDT
Just as I much prefer to be in a bar without smoking, I would be really annoyed if everyone on my flight was talking on the phone. That being said, it should not be a law that I cannot allow a legal product to be used in a location if I own it. It should be up to the airlines if they can make it work for them, and the government should only get involved after the fact.
Reply to this comment
by kylebuttermore August 3, 2008 3:27 PM PDT
i agree i hate when people dont shut up on there cell phones!
Reply to this comment
by August 4, 2008 9:14 AM PDT
This not only bans cell's, but the airlines also.
The airlines phones saved the Capital on 9/11.
Also it will make tickets go up.
Reply to this comment
by willdryden August 4, 2008 8:37 PM PDT
Actually, it was the passengers that saved the capitol. The fact is that they acted too late to save the aircrew and themselves. Five guys with boxcutters VS. 200 people with all their carry on luggage. I would have beat the hyjackers to death before they got onto the flight deck.
by renaistre August 4, 2008 9:20 AM PDT
If we're moving from an issue of safety to an issue of courtesy, how does our government have the right, not to mention the nerve, to pass this ban? If there really are technical problems that would go along with using the phones from 30,000', that is also an issue that needs to be looked at. But to ban them because they are annoying? Give me a break! Of course they can be annoying, but that's an issue for the airlines or even the passengers themselves to deal with.
Reply to this comment
by willdryden August 4, 2008 8:57 PM PDT
It is not as easy on an airplane as a city bus. After 45 minutes, I threw a cell phone out the door when the bus stopped. Can't do that with an airplane.
(21 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Crave topics

The browser battles go on and on

roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.

3G wireless still holds promise

The next generation of 4G wireless may get all the headlines, but advanced 3G technology will likely dominate services for the next few years.