Cellphone Use in the Air

[TheTraveler]

An interesting article from the Economist about cellphones in flight with commercial carriers:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2012/12/radio-interference

(Doesn't he look comfy in Lufthansa 1st class?)

I tend to agree with the author. I don't think I would be too thrilled sitting on a flight listening to someone chatting next to me for hours about god knows what. I personally have no need to be chatting while I'm in the air, so the cell phone rule doesn't bother me. It's actually a few hours of peace where I don't have to take calls, texts, or look at my email.

As this applies with GA, I've been with some pilots who turn off their phones in the air, some who don't.

Just curious...how does everyone else feel about this, both on commercial and GA terms?

 

[LDJones]

It would be fine if they put a decibel limit and short time limit on the caller.

Edit: a very LOW limit on both!

 

[dell30rb]

I never get service above 5000 feet anyway

 

[Piloto]

In many instances telephone is important to coordinate your arrival with your party on the ground, specially on long trips. You arrival could be delayed by weather and winds aloft. When flying HF equipped airplanes I use WLO Radio http://www.shipcom.com/services.html to get a phone patch with the party on the ground. It works very well over the Gulf, North Atlantic and the Caribbean. And unlike LDOC stations anyone can make a call with just a credit card.

José

 

[X3 Skier]

Something I have not seen mentioned is using Skype or other VOIP to make calls with airborne WiFi on Commercial aircraft. Wonder if it is legal since you can send and receive emails using WiFi so why not Skype?

That said, I hope it NEVER gets approved since hearing either an insipid conversation, a Titan of Wall Street or any other phone communication while airborne would be sheer torture. OTOH, my Bose ANR headsets should block it if necessary.

Cheers

 

[TheTraveler]

I never get service above 5000 feet anyway

I've turned my phone on in-flight to listen to music or take a photo, but always above 10,000' and in those cases I turned off the mobile network immediately so I never even checked to see if I had service.

 

[TheTraveler]

Something I have not seen mentioned is using Skype or other VOIP to make calls with airborne WiFi on Commercial aircraft. Wonder if it is legal since you can send and receive emails using WiFi so why not Skype?

That's actually interesting. With in-flight WiFi on AirTran, Delta, and Southwest I've typed with Skype, MSN, and Facebook, but I never actually tried to make a call. I get limited chances to do this anyway. The largest majority of my flights are international and WiFi is offered only on domestic.

 

[dell30rb]

In many instances telephone is important to coordinate your arrival with your party on the ground, specially on long trips. You arrival could be delayed by weather and winds aloft. When flying HF equipped airplanes I use WLO Radio http://www.shipcom.com/services.html to get a phone patch with the party on the ground. It works very well over the Gulf, North Atlantic and the Caribbean. And unlike LDOC stations anyone can make a call with just a credit card.

José

Not sure about international flights but if you are flying IFR get an account with flight aware.

You can set up e-mail alerts (and text alerts too I think) to be sent to your friends picking you up. It will give them an estimated time of arrival that is fairly accurate and will also let them know if you divert and land at another field.

Not to mention they can also just log on, put in your tail # and track you that way.

 

[Rose2012]

That said, I hope it NEVER gets approved since hearing either an insipid conversation, a Titan of Wall Street or any other phone communication while airborne would be sheer torture. OTOH, my Bose ANR headsets should block it if necessary.

I want whatever Bose ANR headset you have that blocks voices. Mine blocks everything else out so well that voices are MORE annoying.

That's actually interesting. With in-flight WiFi on AirTran, Delta, and Southwest I've typed with Skype, MSN, and Facebook, but I never actually tried to make a call. I get limited chances to do this anyway. The largest majority of my flights are international and WiFi is offered only on domestic.

Gogo's TOS and American Airlines policy prohibits VoIP calls. Not that there aren't ways around it, but I really don't want to listen to people yapping for hours on end.

 

[TheTraveler]

Gogo's TOS and American Airlines policy prohibits VoIP calls. Not that there aren't ways around it, but I really don't want to listen to people yapping for hours on end.

That makes sense, but I didn't realize that. I'm now surprised that Skype even opened while I was on Gogo.

I never tried calling because I didn't have the interest. Aside from not wanting to listen to other peoples' conversations, I really wouldn't care to share my conversations with others.

 

[douglas393]

I never get service above 5000 feet anyway

5000 feet, from my experience when a passenger in my plane has tried to use their cell phone they were lucky to get service if I was over 2000 agl. Some of this I guess would depend on where you are, for example I am in Fl and it flat, whereas in the west or other mountainous regions the cell towers may be set up differently to allow coverage at a different range of heights.

 

[X3 Skier]

I really wouldn't care to share my conversations with others.

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be a universal truth.

Cheers

 

[bflynn]

I never get service above 5000 feet anyway

I've got AT&T. I don't get service at 1000 ft, doing turns around a point at a cell tower....

 

[CJones]

Not sure about international flights but if you are flying IFR get an account with flight aware.

You can set up e-mail alerts (and text alerts too I think) to be sent to your friends picking you up. It will give them an estimated time of arrival that is fairly accurate and will also let them know if you divert and land at another field.

Not to mention they can also just log on, put in your tail # and track you that way.

As an added bonus, if you sign yourself up for email/text notices, you will get a confirmation shortly after arriving at your destination. It's a nice double-check to make sure you actually landed where you thought you were going.

 

[Piloto]

As an added bonus, if you sign yourself up for email/text notices, you will get a confirmation shortly after arriving at your destination. It's a nice double-check to make sure you actually landed where you thought you were going.

Unfortunately Don Miguel De La Torre does not know how to spell Internet and he is happy with his rotary dial phone in his ranch.

José

 

[Meanee]

Something I have not seen mentioned is using Skype or other VOIP to make calls with airborne WiFi on Commercial aircraft. Wonder if it is legal since you can send and receive emails using WiFi so why not Skype?

There are technical reasons for that. VOIP requires somewhat decent latency, and reasonable bandwidth. Same reason they do not allow streaming netflix, HBO To Go and so on. You will be hogging internet connection. Since latency is a problem with inflight WiFi, your conversation will constantly have 2-5 second pauses.

As for non-technical reasons, I can wait few hours to make a phone call, just so I won't annoy the entire aircraft cabin. I would hope that other passengers would too.

 

[N801BH]

....his rotary dial phone......

José

What is this rotary dial phone thing you speak of?

 

[MAKG1]

Since latency is a problem with inflight WiFi, your conversation will constantly have 2-5 second pauses.

Where did they put their satellites? On the moon?

Geosynchronous is only 22,000 miles (each way). Even with a generous margin in case the satellite is on the horizon, that's still 1/4 sec latency due to light travel time. Where's the extra order of magnitude come from? It ought to be possible to do quite a lot better than that.

Geosynchronous comm satellites have been used for long distance landline communication since the 60s.

 

[Meanee]

Where did they put their satellites? On the moon?

Geosynchronous is only 22,000 miles (each way). Even with a generous margin in case the satellite is on the horizon, that's still 1/4 sec latency due to light travel time. Where's the extra order of magnitude come from? It ought to be possible to do quite a lot better than that.

Geosynchronous comm satellites have been used for long distance landline communication since the 60s.

Keep in mind, there's still protocol overhead, and routing that may take it through quite more steps on the ground, once the signal gets back to earth. And there's encoding/decoding of the voice.

 

[numl0ck]

As for non-technical reasons, I can wait few hours to make a phone call, just so I won't annoy the entire aircraft cabin. I would hope that other passengers would too.

Today it's all about me me me me and I I I I I. People will talk for a 5 hour flight across country just because they can...with no respect for others.

 

[Inverted]

I never get service above 5000 feet anyway

I routinely get service above. I have used my cell phone in the air for certain company related issues which has made me glad to have it.

 

[JHW]

Today it's all about me me me me and I I I I I. People will talk for a 5 hour flight across country just because they can...with no respect for others.

if I have a job to do in the field and I can get a head start by working with people over the phone, then you can bet I don't give a rip whether or not you are annoyed. The sooner I get done the sooner I get home to my family.

 

[cessna182b]

Where did they put their satellites? On the moon?

Geosynchronous is only 22,000 miles (each way). Even with a generous margin in case the satellite is on the horizon, that's still 1/4 sec latency due to light travel time. Where's the extra order of magnitude come from? It ought to be possible to do quite a lot better than that.

Geosynchronous comm satellites have been used for long distance landline communication since the 60s.

I don't know if geosynchronous satellites are used or not - but can comment that the latency is enough to be annoying if so. One time I made a call that involved two geosynchronous satellite hops - and the latency was bad enough to make normal conversation virtually impossible.

Dave

 

[cessna182b]

Today it's all about me me me me and I I I I I. People will talk for a 5 hour flight across country just because they can...with no respect for others.

I'm sure that a poll would indicate that most people would prefer that airline flights be cell phone-free. However, I'm not sure that talking on the phone is any worse than talking to the person next to you. Awhile back I shared a row with two men who carried on long and loud about stuff of no interest to me - but at least it wasn't topics that I find annoying. Their privilege, I suppose - they gotta pass the time somehow. Fortunately, that seems to be rare - most passengers are reasonably quiet.

Some airlines had (haven't seen 'em lately) flight phones installed (for which there were hefty fees). I never saw anyone use one (except some kids who didn't know any better). Their father put a stop to that right away!

Dave

 

[Clark1961]

5000 feet, from my experience when a passenger in my plane has tried to use their cell phone they were lucky to get service if I was over 2000 agl. Some of this I guess would depend on where you are, for example I am in Fl and it flat, whereas in the west or other mountainous regions the cell towers may be set up differently to allow coverage at a different range of heights.

I know a guy who talked to someone once who was related to a gal that heard that someone made a cell phone call from 5,000 feet above Winslow, AZ. Dunno if had anything to do with anything but it was on a T-Mobile triple band phone. At least that's what I heard. :wink2:

 

[N801BH]

I know a guy who talked to someone once who was related to a gal that heard that someone made a cell phone call from 5,000 feet above Winslow, AZ. Dunno if had anything to do with anything but it was on a T-Mobile triple band phone. At least that's what I heard. :wink2:

I use my cell phone that is connected to my Lightspeed headsets all the time around here... Signal is good up to 16,000 feet or so. All around Western Wyoming /Eastern idaho......

 

[Piloto]

What is this rotary dial phone thing you speak of?

It is an improvement over the crank phone. No need anymore to get a line operator, you just dial the number (in most cases) to get an specific phone. No waiting anymore for an open line.

I do not understand the preference for texting someone rather than just talk on the phone. In the old days if you wanted to send a text message to someone you just go to a Western Union office and send a telegram. No much difference than texting today. Oh well, maybe I am getting old

José

 

[N801BH]

It is an improvement over the crank phone. No need anymore to get a line operator, you just dial the number (in most cases) to get an specific phone. No waiting anymore for an open line.

I do not understand the preference for texting someone rather than just talk on the phone. In the old days if you wanted to send a text message to someone you just go to a Western Union office and send a telegram. No much difference than texting today. Oh well, maybe I am getting old

José

I am right with ya ol buddy..... I have NEVER texted any one... A phone call is so much easier..

 

[spiderweb]

I routinely get service above. I have used my cell phone in the air for certain company related issues which has made me glad to have it.

How far above?

 

[JHW]

phones work better in rural areas, in cities the towers are too close together and an airborne phone sees too many of them at once

I can pretty reliably make calls at 4K agl and get a text at 9K agl, higher and the iphone will sometimes show service but mine seldom works

 

[TheTraveler]

...I'm not sure that talking on the phone is any worse than talking to the person next to you.

I'm not so sure of that. Granted, it does happen. But in all the times I've flown, only a few times have the people next to me have chatted away as if they were old friends. Only once was there someone trying to talk to me who didn't catch my hints, and became annoying.

I think with phones it would be much worse because I just don't believe that the majority of people care enough to shut up and turn the phone off for the sake of those surrounding them.

At least when the conversation is in person and directed at you, you've got a little power to stop it. Your neighbor on their phone leaves you powerless.

Unless you're going to snatch their phone away and whip it like Nolan Ryan towards the cockpit door, accidentally hitting someone in the head on the way, then being escorted by multiple armed men when the plane lands.

 

[flyguy_17]

I have made a few calls and routinely send text updates to my wife while on X-Country flights. Also, I often take a friend of mine, who owns a ranch, looking for his cows when he is gathering and he often calls his cowboys on the ground and guides em in on cows they are looking for. We often do this low level, even on the mountains, and I have been suprised where he can get service. Pretty high-tech cowboys

 

[Meanee]

It is an improvement over the crank phone. No need anymore to get a line operator, you just dial the number (in most cases) to get an specific phone. No waiting anymore for an open line.

I do not understand the preference for texting someone rather than just talk on the phone. In the old days if you wanted to send a text message to someone you just go to a Western Union office and send a telegram. No much difference than texting today. Oh well, maybe I am getting old

José

Tons. Sometimes you don't want to talk to the person, but just let them know. A quick "Hey, will be home 1 hour late" quickly takes care of it. And sometimes you just don't want to talk with bunch of people around you.

 

[dell30rb]

I use my cell phone that is connected to my Lightspeed headsets all the time around here... Signal is good up to 16,000 feet or so. All around Western Wyoming /Eastern idaho......

Thats wild. I think that it might have something to do with towers on mountains. From what I understand, cell signals are very directional and the antennas on towers actually point down a bit.

Here I can be at 4,000 feet, looking down at a cell tower and can't send a message. Lots of times, i'll be turning base/final and my phone starts buzzing with all of the messages it did not receive while I was flying.

I've definitely dropped as low as 1500 feet to pick up a radar picture on the iphone.

 

[Shepherd]

I haven't been on a commercial flight in so long, I can't even tell you when. If I can't fly myself there, or drive there, I don't bother going, so cell service on an airliner doesn't affect me at all.

Shep

 

[Ghery]

Here I can be at 4,000 feet, looking down at a cell tower and can't send a message. Lots of times, i'll be turning base/final and my phone starts buzzing with all of the messages it did not receive while I was flying.

Think "antenna pattern". They are designed to keep the signal near the horizon to maximize coverage on the ground. If you are above the antenna you won't have as much, if any, useable signal.

 

[drgwentzel]

Texting has it's benefits and utility. There are many I know that if I call them to ask a simple question, I will be on the phone talking about nothing for 30 minutes. These people you TEXT!!

Gene

It is an improvement over the crank phone. No need anymore to get a line operator, you just dial the number (in most cases) to get an specific phone. No waiting anymore for an open line.

I do not understand the preference for texting someone rather than just talk on the phone. In the old days if you wanted to send a text message to someone you just go to a Western Union office and send a telegram. No much difference than texting today. Oh well, maybe I am getting old

José

 

[N801BH]

Thats wild. I think that it might have something to do with towers on mountains. From what I understand, cell signals are very directional and the antennas on towers actually point down a bit.

Here I can be at 4,000 feet, looking down at a cell tower and can't send a message. Lots of times, i'll be turning base/final and my phone starts buzzing with all of the messages it did not receive while I was flying.

I've definitely dropped as low as 1500 feet to pick up a radar picture on the iphone.

Actually. On the way to OSH this year I flew with a new pilot buddy of mine in his new 182T... We went straight up to 17,500 and flew direct.. Draw a line between JAC and OSH... We kept our cell phones on the entire trip, I bet I had a decent signal 70 % of the time.. In fact at least 5 times I called him on his cell from up there... Worked every time..

No , I can't explain how it worked so good either..

 

[Piloto]

Think "antenna pattern". They are designed to keep the signal near the horizon to maximize coverage on the ground. If you are above the antenna you won't have as much, if any, useable signal.

The problem is not that much related to antenna pattern since all the vertical monopole antennas such as those used by ATC are horizontal pattern to maximize coverage. The cell phone access problem at altitude is more related to mutual interference from multiple cells on the same frequency that are in view the higher you go. When you are on the ground your cell phone will normally see no more than three cells on different frequencies but as you go up it will see multiple cells on the same frequency that interfere with each other. The cell phone is unable to synchronize with a cell thus no access. When in remote areas of fewer cells the mutual interference problem is reduced thus access is possible. The same problem happens when trying to receive TV or FM radio in the air.

José

 

[denverpilot]

The problem is not that much related to antenna pattern since all the vertical monopole antennas such as those used by ATC are horizontal pattern to maximize coverage.

Just to provide more info... Most ATC antennas are 1/4 wave verticals. It's rare to see stacked co-linear or stacked dipole arrays in ATC.

A single 1/4 wave will have a fairly high takeoff angle and a donut pattern, like you took a giant donut and laid it on its side, with the donut squished (and also reflected, but that's getting too technical) off of the Earth below it.

For land-mobile use and maximum gain to the horizon, something with much higher gain is used. On one system I maintain, there's a shared PAIR of eight-bay folded dipole arrays on masts, at VHF. One for transmit, one for receive.

Each antenna is 23' long. Mounted, with associated hardware and masts, they take up just under 60' of an 80' tower leg. Reported ranges of the transmitters that share the TX antenna which only have 7W of RF going to the TX antenna after losses in the TX combiner, is roughly 100 miles in FM.

(Remember RF gain isn't really adding any RF, it is just focusing the flashlight. Like aiming a Maglight at a white wall and twisting the focus knob... No more light it coming out of the light source, but you can focus and make a bright spot on the wall...)

There are even special order antennas for mountain-top sites that depress the angle of takeoff (without resorting to turning the antennas upside down which some people do and forget the water weep holes are on the traditional bottom and forget to drill new holes... Water fills them with bad results, usually at first freeze of the year.

So basically the executive summary is, aviation applications often use short high angle of takeoff antennas to cover the sky. And FAA RF engineers do choose antennas to cover the desired places needed in 3 dimensions.

Cellular antenna folks typically use slotted panel arrays, designed to put the RF out horizontally and down from their towers to keep cells from overlapping in urban environments. When the tower is in the boonies and they're spread out, they start using stacked vertical co-linear antennas to increase the range between towers and those towers "leak" more energy skyward. This, creates (by accident) better coverage aloft vs. the low angle urban setups, out in the boonies.