Comments on: Southwest Airlines, Surprise Mobility….

By: Colin G

Colin G — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 12:14:52 +0000

Steve,

The inflight restriction of cellular phones originates from the FCC. As you point out the cell phone contacts too many towers and transitions between them too fast. Cell service wasn’t designed for this, and it can tie up too much cell network resources. Additionally the cell phone has to transmit at a higher power, and the cacophony of transmissions inside the plane has the outside possibility of disrupting navigation instruments.

Wifi signals have been extensively tested onboard aircraft and haven’t caused identifiable problems. Cell service has been tested with “pico base stations,” where the cell phone can operate at its lowest transmit power to the base station onboard the aircraft. The pico station then retransmits the signal outside the aircraft to a network designed for high speed traveling signals. This has also tested safe for aircraft instruments. Lack of interest in the service has prevented a wide roll-out by any US airlines.

By: Steve Mueller

Steve Mueller — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:34:22 +0000

@Walter:

Actually, I wasn’t talking about using cell phones for talking (hence my reference to “cellular devices”). I was thinking about tethering my cell phone to my laptop for Internet access access without having to pay for in-flight WiFi.

If they allow WiFi radios during the flight, why not cellular radios? (I’ve heard about issues like hitting too many cell towers or moving between them too fast, but that’s an issue for the carriers, not the airline.)

Steve

By: Walter

Walter — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:19:48 +0000

I personally wouldn’t want them to allow cell calls on the plane, can you imagine 100 people all on their phones at the same time in a confined space. I’d go nuts! Wifi on the otherhand, for web browsing is relatively quiet.

By: Pony99CA

Pony99CA — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 20:43:21 +0000

If it’s $2 per hour or less, I’d consider it. If they want some outrageous fee like $25 per trip, I wouldn’t (unless I had to do business).

However, this begs the question. If we can have relatively high-powered WiFi radios on in the plane, can we have low-powered cellular devices on now? (And would they work?)

Steve

By: Ike

Ike — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:51:38 +0000

If there are now three, it is a sign of expansion. As of mid-March, the crew was proud of being on the only one.

Thanks for the update.

By: Chris Leckness

Chris Leckness — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 03:50:04 +0000

It was free, but I fear it will cost if it goes live. The flight attendant was asking me a bunch a questions and one of them is if I would be willing to pay if they had it and charged. I answered, depends on the length of the flight and if basketball was on. :) Then I said, really though, it would depend on the length.

By: onus

onus — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 03:31:57 +0000

Ike,
There are 3 planes in the pilot program. If it is rolled fleet wide, there almost certainly will be a fee for 2 reasons. The Wifi satellite antenna increases fuel burn considerably. Southwest is under considerable pressure to raise revenue, which on a percentage basis is well down the last several years. They loath to raise prices and damage their low fare reputation. Wifi would likely be used to close this revenue gap.

By: KCMatt

KCMatt — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 03:31:25 +0000

Chris- was it free?

This is awesome… I hope it becomes standard.

By: Larry Wallace

Larry Wallace — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 00:11:10 +0000

Southwest Airlines, Surprise Mobility…. http://viigo.im/f6h

By: Ike

Ike — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:53:05 +0000

Chris, I was lucky enough to be on that same route in mid-March. I tweeted from the WiFi on my Tilt, while my wife checked her gmail from the Asus!

For all the salivating, though, this is a pilot program, and there is only one plane in the Southwest fleet that is so equipped. Once they know more about the bandwidth demand and such, they can proceed with outfitting the rest.

It wouldn’t surprise me that once in-flight WiFi becomes more available, that there will be a charge. And with it being Southwest, it also wouldn’t surprise me if it ends up being free.

By: David Gray

David Gray — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 21:58:28 +0000

THIS idea, as well as the willingness to hold fast on Not charging customers for baggage, is/are the kinds of things that makes me want to be loyal to a company. It’s the kind of thing I don’t know why more companies don’t get. Yes, you CAN nickle and dime me at every opportunity if you so desire, but at what cost? Is it going to cost you a little to give me something like free Wi-Fi (which I seriously doubt) or is it going to cost you A LOT in loyalty or complaint to not do so? Other companies and industries should take a lesson. Greed has become rampant in more areas than just banking or insurance or pharmaceuticals. It’s time for more companies to stand up and be leaders by example. Think we, the consumer, doesn’t notice or care how we are treated? Think again. Maybe you’re paying a very high price for carrying your own baggage, Corporate America.

By: Walter

Walter — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 20:12:16 +0000

That’s great news Chris. I use Southwest a couple of times a year, wifi would keep me occupied while flying.

I didn’t see anything about it on the Southwest website.

By: Gadget Feed

Gadget Feed — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 19:49:56 +0000

[MobilitySite] Southwest Airlines, Surprise Mobility…. http://tinyurl.com/d5lqqm