August 7, 2006 6:51 AM PDT
Airlines to replace 'no smoking' with 'no mobile'
- Related Stories
-
Mobile next battleground for Linux
June 28, 2006 -
Verizon to exit in-flight phone business
June 23, 2006
Air France will be the first airline to try out the satellite-based technology early next year, followed by the U.K.'s BMI and Portugal's TAP.
The technology, developed by Airbus and SITA joint venture OnAir, will allow passengers to make in-flight mobile calls and send text messages on short-haul flights across Europe at a cost of around $2.50 per minute.
The overhead "no mobile" signs will be retrofitted to old aircraft and fitted to new Airbus planes coming off the production line, which will be used by airlines to provide the in-flight mobile phone service.
The illuminated "no smoking" signs have now become outdated since almost universal bans on lighting up on scheduled passenger planes were introduced in the late 1990s.
The "no mobile" sign will show a mobile phone crossed out and will be illuminated during takeoff until the plane has reached a certain altitude in order to ensure there is no interference with mobile networks on the ground.
"After takeoff, an announcement will be made that passengers are allowed to use their mobile phones. At this point the 'no mobile' sign will be turned off," a spokesman for OnAir told Silicon.com.
The new signs are currently only applicable to Airbus aircraft. But OnAir said it hopes to have them on Boeing planes as well if the in-flight mobile service is extended to its aircraft in the future.
Boeing last month warned the financial markets it may take a $315 million hit on the sale or closure of its own troubled in-flight broadband technology operation, Connexion, which has struggled to take off.
Andy McCue of Silicon.com reported from London.
See more CNET content tagged:
airline, aircraft, mobile phone, sign, Europe
20 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
on (accidently) and got a text message during the flight and
recieved a call but obviously didnt talk because that would be
noticable, and as far as i am concerned there were no problems
with the cockpit radios. The only reason they say you cant is
because no one has decided to test the fact that they can use them
because it would be too much of a hassel for the airlines to cancel
flights in the area to test it. So its easier for the airlinees to just say
you cant use them.
The OnAir press releases talk about being able to browse the web and access corporate networks through their service, but realistically, who is going to do that at $2.50/minute, except in dire emergencies?
$2.50/minute is $150 per hour!
If they asked me for $5 or $10 for unlimited access to the Internet (and it worked at a reasonable speed), I might be inclined to use it to pass the boredom, but not at $150/hour.
without a monthly contract on the ground. Ditto for the rates WiFi
providers charge at hotels.
I'm all for companies making a fair profit, but this is ridiculous.
Nowadays it seems like most companies are out to pick your
pockets for every last cent they can...
Like you, I might consider $10 - $15 for the entire flight, but
that's about it.
Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com
If you can't stand the 4 hour flight because you can't have your cell phone (and yes, those people are out there because no one would be doing this unless there was a market for it), then take a bus, train, or drive the 30 hour trip.
Be thankful you got from Atlanta to LA in 4 hours. Believe me, no one is "not flying" because it is too boring, but because plane tickets usually cost 1% of the average person's income income to travel on one day single day.