El Reg reports:
If you fancy spending your next European airline flight sitting next to someone who's carrying on a protracted conversation via mobile phone, you're in luck.
The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has issued new guidance to European airlines allowing them to permit passengers to keep phones and other portable electronic devices (PEDs) switched on throughout flights, regardless of whether the devices are in "airplane mode."
"This is the latest regulatory step towards enabling the ability to offer 'gate-to-gate' telecommunication or WiFi services," the agency said on Friday.
The regulators define PEDs as "any kind of electronic device brought on board the aircraft by a passenger such as a tablet, a laptop, a smartphone, an e-reader or a MP3 player."
EASA loosened its restrictions on devices in 2013 such that passengers don't have to switch them off, provided their Wi-Fi, cellular, Bluetooth, and other radios are disabled.
With the new guidance issued on Friday, airplane mode becomes something of a misnomer, as passengers are free to leave their devices' radios active throughout takeoff, landing, and the flight itself.
That's not to say airlines have been given a rubber stamp to let passengers do whatever they want. Each carrier must go through an assessment process to ensure that aircraft are not affected by transmissions coming from passengers' devices -- and submitting to the assessment is entirely voluntary.
(Score: 2) by Zyx Abacab on Sunday September 28 2014, @01:34AM
This will pave the way to a wonderful thing: having Internet connectivity while in flight. Of course, cellular communication will probably come too.
On the other hand, I'm not happy with the wording here:
ensure that aircraft are not affected by transmissions coming from passengers' devices
I'm much more worried about how I will be affected by the passengers' transmissions: we'll now have to deal with the inevitable "What? Speak up, I can't hear you! WHAT?!" guy.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday September 28 2014, @07:37AM
Many airlines have had cell phone coverage in flight for years, it simply isn't an issue.
(Score: 1) by FuzzyTheBear on Sunday September 28 2014, @12:47PM
Trying to get a bit of rest in decent surroundings would take a hit. As much as " they " have rights " we " do too , and one of them is not to be disturbed .
(Score: 2) by monster on Monday September 29 2014, @04:22PM
There's no such thing as a right to not be disturbed in a public place. Hell, there's not even such a thing at your own home!. If you don't believe it, try suing the next asshole to knock your door at 3AM and see yourself laughed at at the court, if not something worse.
What there is is an expectation on civility, but don't fool yourself with a false sense of entitlement.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday September 30 2014, @01:43PM
Well...that depends on who they are, why they're there, if they do it more than once, and if you have any kind of 'keep out' sign or operating hours posted. Could get them for trespassing, disturbing the peace, or harassment...
Try telling the cops there's no right to not be disturbed in your own home the next time they show up for a noise complaint and watch them laugh while they write you a citation!
(Score: 2) by monster on Tuesday September 30 2014, @03:08PM
I think you are misrepresenting my post. To clarify:
- A one time occurrence is by definition not harassment. At least not in sane legal systems.
- As much as money and power may get someone special treatment, that doesn't make it a right.
- Signs are not law. Trespassing needs to physically enter the property, not just knocking the door. As for disturbing the peace, I'll concede that it's a convenient catchall for LEOs, but good luck arguing it as a commoner.
- There's quite a difference between cops showing up for a noise complaint and getting a citation: If when they arrive there's no noise and no witnesses, it's not an stablished fact and therefore you wound't get the fine. When it's an event maintained for some time then it's against the ordinances, but that's not the same, again a one-off event against a continued occurrence.
Anyway, the point to my post was not to hairsplit over legislation, but to specify that certain social conventions are just that, not stablished rights. Being polite to other people is one of them.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by rbanfield on Sunday September 28 2014, @02:02AM
A letter of support, signed by more than 70 members of congress, for banning the use of voice telecommunication on commercial aircraft. The letter is dated September 22, 2014.
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/flightletter.pdf [arstechnica.net]
I'm not certain I'd support such a ban, as proposed, at the federal level. But I am absolutely in favor of the ban being enacted.
(Score: 1) by canopic jug on Sunday September 28 2014, @07:36AM
I can see this leading to more fights on the longer flights, especially if they cut another 2 inches off the leg room and don't serve enough alcohol.
Also, if passing through areas under US influence, people with run down batteries will lose their devices.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday September 28 2014, @12:07PM
"don't serve enough alcohol."
In some ways that might be worse. You can put "Frozen" on the movie screen and people will chill or at least be predictable, sorta, but you have a bunch of drunks arguing with their friends and family and coworkers on the phone and who knows how nuts they'll get if their girlfriend and/or wife dumps then at 35kft in the middle of the ocean. Or their visa gets denied or they get downsized over the phone or whatever. If they're sober they still might do something stupid, but pouring them liquid courage isn't going to help matters much.
Much like there are quiet train cars, I'd like a quiet plane. I don't even mind if there's kids or the occasional 30 second emergency call, I just don't want to hear some jackass on a conference call for three hours, times 99 other passengers doing the same thing.
Maybe quiet plane section. So let the hyper extroverted idiots all sit in the front aisles and the quiet civilized people in the near silent back of the plane or whatever. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be better.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday September 28 2014, @12:15PM
Space on planes has been increasing, at least long haul. What used to be the domain of F (flat beds) came into J, then the increased space in F came into J (even American carriers have acceptable products now). Mean while F has suites, and even butlers on some planes.
Flying long haul has never been better.
Short haul, unless you have access to a private jet, has become worse in Europe, especially with Ba's recent enhancement of legroom to economy standards, and don't get me started on the on board food and the downgrade of champagne. I don't fly short haul in the states though, but in Asia and the middle easy it's still very good for a couple of hours.
(Score: 1) by plnykecky on Monday September 29 2014, @07:53PM
Actually, when you lift any mobile around here over 1000ft AGL, they usually get much worse signal. As a result, they max their radio power, which consumes the battery quite fast. The two side effects that I see could be:
1) numerous desperate attempts to re-establish connection with the ground stations and
2) the associated noise it produces on the headsets of the nearest hipsters.
(Score: 1) by plnykecky on Monday September 29 2014, @07:43PM
Recently flew from PRG to AYT via our national airliners (EU-based). I was being pushed unpleasantly by the stewardess to switch off my phone completely. While doing so I bitterly mentioned the status of this thing in U.S. The stewardess got hesitant for a split second, but then she took a deep breath and announced aloud and in a very self-assured manner that "..but as we are in the Czech republic, EVERYBODY will switch off their phones NOW". Then she added to me in a sweet voice, that "you are doing it for your own safety, my dear".
I did not know whether to laugh or weep desperately..
I give it next 20 years to take some effect.