michelhuebeli

How do you feel about this morning's news item that we may soon (no date set) be allowed to make phone calls while up in the air, and that the setting of policies may be up to individual airlines?

WoinParis

More earplugs to avoid hearing the long discussions of your neighbors.
I hope cost stays high so that we keep some quietness.

NewbE

I don't know how I feel about this. It's not really different than seating near people who chat to each other, but I hate when that happens!

There's nothing we can do about it, though, que sera, sera. I suppose one could provide feedback to the airlines--they care so very much about our satisfaction.

michelhuebeli

I dislike being cut off from the rest of the world while in the air, since the time differences make it impossible sometimes to communicate before the flight takes off, but I sure hope that the permission to go "live" will be kept to texting, not yakking.

travelchat

Ugh - yet more inane one sided conversation to put up with? Double ugh.

annw

I would hate voice calls but would love to be able to text.

NewbE

There might be something romantic about a voice call from 30,000 feet...

Kathie

Have you ever had someone call you from an "air phone"? It's awful. You can't hear, they can't hear and they end up shouting to try to be heard. They have had these phones at every seat in First class for years - maybe a couple of decades. Fortunately, few people use them. Letting people talk on their cell phones would be similar, I fear, so not just a matter of listening to a one-sided conversation, but also the person would be talking loudly in order to be heard above the ambient noise.

I would have no objection to allowing texting.

michelhuebeli

NewbE, I'm trying to wrap my head around what could possibly be romantic about a phone call just because it comes from 30,000 feet up in the air. If it's from my sweetie, it's romantic no matter where sweetie happens to be, but...

I didn't know about the 1st-class "air phone" calls (shows what world I live in...), but if 1st class can't provide a better product than what Kathie mentions, then what hope do mere mortals have in coach?

Let's hope for voice NO, texting YES, to keep everybody happy when the time comes.

NewbE

Everyone said the same things about cell voice service on trains--too hard to hear, poor connections, etc. But here we are, listening to people bellowing away on Amtrak, even though the Wifi is spotty and it's hard to hear.

I'm not even sure you can deny voice service whilst providing text service, technically...

As for romance, I have an active imagination. The reality would be more pedestrian, perhaps, and annoying to others, to boot.

emalloy

I've thought that it might be time to start singing when a neighbor talks to loud or too long. I have a terrible singing voice.

WoinParis

Most trains in Europe forbid to talk over the phone.
ICE TgV now even Thalys.
So - short flights voice calls long flights no voice calls ?

I guess I'll pass for an old grumpy but what is wrong to be cut off the rest of the world for ... Some hours ?

michelhuebeli

<what is wrong to be cut off the rest of the world for ... Some hours ?>

In principle I like the "radio silence" - but when you're cooped up on a plane that can't get going because of repeated de-icing and leaves a few hours late, and it's the middle of the night in Europe when you finally get away, you'd like to wait until it's breakfast time at your hosts' place before you alert them to the new ETA, to save them a trip to the airport and a long wait there.

The same with other kinds of reservations where the massive delay may screw things up unless you can communicate.

Texting would do the job (for the romantics like NewbE there are always emoticons to insert...).

NewbE

Romance aside, lol, I'm all for a texting only situation, but again, I'm not sure there's a way to prohibit voice while allowing text. Amtrak has their so-called Quiet Cars, I think these exist in Europe as well, but there would be no way to implement that sort of thing on a plane...

marvelousmouse

Hm. Interesting conversation. On the one hand, it would be nice to be distracted from the kid kicking the back of my seat. Or the couple arguing/flirting across the aisle. As someone else said it'd be nice to let folks know you've been delayed.

On the other hand, my ideal flight has everyone with headphones on and mouths shut. I don't want to talk to my neighbor. Flying brings out the worst in people. Cell phones and passive aggressive calls to friends or partners or family would just make the trip SO much worse.

I don't think there's anything to worry about though. I'm not sure it's possible to hold a steady signal and even if it was lots of people wouldn't call because of roaming charges. And come on, airlines charge prohibtively for wifi but then conveniently prohibit you from using any useful site like Netflix.

Christina

This is deja vu, they proposed that a couple years ago already. I don't know what the current news is, but they proposed that several years ago and many people told airlines in no uncertain terms that they didn't want that and wouldn't fly their planes if they allowed it. I think the FCC backed down then.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/1...-flight-100220

NewbE

<and wouldn't fly their planes if they allowed it.>
But the airlines know people don't mean it when they say that. People said the same thing about no smoking and charges for checked luggage, now they're saying it about charges for overhead bin space...but they still buy tickets based on price and schedule, and find a way to cope with the things they dislike.

Everyone says flying sucks, but there are more passengers every year.

michelhuebeli

It may be déjà vu, but what prompted me to post this is a sentence in last week's article in the NYT

[Begin quote] The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that this might be a first step by aviation regulators toward allowing in-flight calls. A spokeswoman for the Transportation Department said in an email that it had become concerned that the F.C.C. would lift its in-flight cellular ban, or that changes in Wi-Fi technology might prompt the airlines to change their policies.

She said the public would have 60 days to comment on the proposal. [end quote]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/09/bu...alls.html?_r=0

marvelousmouse

Darn, out of free times articles for the month!

There's no real reason for airlines to change the rule that I can think of. Unless they can present it as a "perk", especially in first class, that someone has to pay extra for. It's not like the luggage or food or narrower seats- all that is cutting for larger profits. People do respond to those things though, they might drop an airline unless they're dependent on a certain route. But you're right, Newbe, more people are flying every year and there are certainly plenty of people who are willing to do without food or luggage if it means a cheaper ticket...as shown by the folks that pop up once in a while to complain that the airline didn't seat their family together because they were too cheap to play for reserved seats

Iwan2go

What a terrible idea!!! Texting is one thing, but sitting next to someone chatting on the phone is in another realm. People on the phone are concentrating in a different way than in a conversation face-to-face. They aren’t aware of the people around them; they’re picturing the other person and don’t notice. They swear, they speak louder than usual, they share really personal information that they’d never share in the same volume if in person. And with planes flying near capacity now, there’s no where else to go.

Here’s the link for public commenting to the DOT, open until February 13th. A previous comment online was from a cabin attendant, pointing out that in an emergency they want people to listen, not film or call out.

https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=DOT-OST-2014-0002