Gold9472
08-01-2005, 09:28 AM
Can you hear me on a 747?
FCC set to consider in-flight cell phones
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/12/15/MNGUMAC6LB1.DTL
David Lazarus
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Air travel, already a less-than-pleasant experience, soon may become a whole lot worse.
The Federal Communications Commission is expected today to begin a process to relax the agency's ban on the use of cell phones aboard aircraft.
If the FCC determines that technological issues can be adequately addressed, and if a separate study by the Federal Aviation Administration finds that cell phones don't affect aircraft safety, it's likely that passengers will be allowed to jabber away during flights within the next few years.
And you thought one or two crying kids were an annoyance.
"You can imagine airlines putting up dividers, making talking and non- talking sections," said Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer Federation of America. "We'll have to see what the demand is for both cell phones and quiet and then see how the airlines respond."
Today's vote by the FCC is intended to address whether technology has improved to the extent that cell phone calls now are possible above 10,000 feet -- they weren't in the past -- and whether they'd mess up ground- based communications.
"We adopted this rule 20 years ago," said Lauren Patrich, a commission spokeswoman. "Technology has advanced quite a bit in the last 20 years."
One promising technology developed by Qualcomm would allow cell phone calls to be blasted from aircraft into space and then beamed back to Earth by satellite.
For its part, the FAA is exploring whether modern technology still poses a danger of interfering with aircraft radio and navigation systems.
"If a device could be proven not to interfere with airline systems, we would allow it," said Paul Takemoto, an FAA spokesman.
If the FCC, as expected, votes today to proceed with its study, it should be in a position to make some decisions by the end of next year. The FAA study isn't expected to be completed until 2006.
All that's known at this point is that neither the FCC nor the FAA is interested in policing wireless use aloft.
Both agencies say it'd be up to individual airlines to decide what rules, if any, should apply to airline cabins crammed full of fidgety business travelers and bored passengers armed with cell phones.
"We haven't formulated a unified airline front on this issue," said Jack Evans, a spokesman for the Air Transport Association, an industry group. "But it's on our radar screens. It's an issue we'll have to address."
This much at least is clear: Cell phones represent a potentially lucrative revenue source for cash-strapped carriers, which face a projected $5 billion loss this year.
Evans acknowledged that airlines already get a piece of the action from seat-back phones in jets (even though, at about $2 a minute, the handsets are too pricey for most travelers).
"I assume that the carriers would also make money if cell phones are allowed aboard aircraft," he said. (In theory, fees could be levied as individual calls are transmitted via special gear from jets to satellites.)
This would create a strong incentive for airlines to allow the practice and a significant disincentive to do much, if anything, about subsequent inconvenience for passengers who'd prefer instead a little peace in which to read.
Faced with booming cell phone use, Amtrak has introduced "quiet cars" on some trains. But that's not as easily done with an aircraft.
One possibility is that passengers will agree to pay an extra fee for no- phones-allowed quiet flights. Another is that sales will boom for those noise- reducing headsets that some travelers already use to shut out engine noise.
Evans is sympathetic. "When I'm on the subway, I don't want to be near someone talking at that elevated volume that, for some reason, people have to talk at whenever they talk on cell phones," he said.
But progress is progress.
"This is a competitive business," Evans said. "If one airline offers this service, they probably all will."
Something to look forward to.
A false alarm: Speaking of cell phones, e-mail has been circulating in recent days warning that people's mobile numbers are about to be handed out to telemarketers.
"It's an urban legend," said Jen Schwartzman, a spokeswoman for the Federal Trade Commission in Washington. "There's no cause for concern."
The e-mail making the rounds says that "all cell phone numbers will be made public to telemarketing firms" as of Jan. 1.
"Unlike your home phone, most of you pay for your incoming calls," it says. "These telemarketers will eat up your free minutes and end up costing you money in the long run."
The e-mail adds that consumers have until today to register their cell phones with the national Do Not Call list.
Schwartzman said that while service providers are in fact creating a 411 directory for cell phone numbers, consumers will be asked up front whether they want to be listed. No one's number will automatically make it into the directory, she said.
We shall see.
In any case, Schwartzman said, there's no deadline if people want to register their cell phones with the Do Not Call list. "You can register at any time if you feel you need the added protection," she said.
It's probably a good idea. You can add your cell phone (or any phone) to the Do Not Call list by dialing (888) 382-1222 or by visiting www.donotcall.gov.
David Lazarus' column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He also can be seen regularly on KTVU's "Mornings on 2." Send tips or feedback to dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.
FCC set to consider in-flight cell phones
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/12/15/MNGUMAC6LB1.DTL
David Lazarus
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Air travel, already a less-than-pleasant experience, soon may become a whole lot worse.
The Federal Communications Commission is expected today to begin a process to relax the agency's ban on the use of cell phones aboard aircraft.
If the FCC determines that technological issues can be adequately addressed, and if a separate study by the Federal Aviation Administration finds that cell phones don't affect aircraft safety, it's likely that passengers will be allowed to jabber away during flights within the next few years.
And you thought one or two crying kids were an annoyance.
"You can imagine airlines putting up dividers, making talking and non- talking sections," said Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer Federation of America. "We'll have to see what the demand is for both cell phones and quiet and then see how the airlines respond."
Today's vote by the FCC is intended to address whether technology has improved to the extent that cell phone calls now are possible above 10,000 feet -- they weren't in the past -- and whether they'd mess up ground- based communications.
"We adopted this rule 20 years ago," said Lauren Patrich, a commission spokeswoman. "Technology has advanced quite a bit in the last 20 years."
One promising technology developed by Qualcomm would allow cell phone calls to be blasted from aircraft into space and then beamed back to Earth by satellite.
For its part, the FAA is exploring whether modern technology still poses a danger of interfering with aircraft radio and navigation systems.
"If a device could be proven not to interfere with airline systems, we would allow it," said Paul Takemoto, an FAA spokesman.
If the FCC, as expected, votes today to proceed with its study, it should be in a position to make some decisions by the end of next year. The FAA study isn't expected to be completed until 2006.
All that's known at this point is that neither the FCC nor the FAA is interested in policing wireless use aloft.
Both agencies say it'd be up to individual airlines to decide what rules, if any, should apply to airline cabins crammed full of fidgety business travelers and bored passengers armed with cell phones.
"We haven't formulated a unified airline front on this issue," said Jack Evans, a spokesman for the Air Transport Association, an industry group. "But it's on our radar screens. It's an issue we'll have to address."
This much at least is clear: Cell phones represent a potentially lucrative revenue source for cash-strapped carriers, which face a projected $5 billion loss this year.
Evans acknowledged that airlines already get a piece of the action from seat-back phones in jets (even though, at about $2 a minute, the handsets are too pricey for most travelers).
"I assume that the carriers would also make money if cell phones are allowed aboard aircraft," he said. (In theory, fees could be levied as individual calls are transmitted via special gear from jets to satellites.)
This would create a strong incentive for airlines to allow the practice and a significant disincentive to do much, if anything, about subsequent inconvenience for passengers who'd prefer instead a little peace in which to read.
Faced with booming cell phone use, Amtrak has introduced "quiet cars" on some trains. But that's not as easily done with an aircraft.
One possibility is that passengers will agree to pay an extra fee for no- phones-allowed quiet flights. Another is that sales will boom for those noise- reducing headsets that some travelers already use to shut out engine noise.
Evans is sympathetic. "When I'm on the subway, I don't want to be near someone talking at that elevated volume that, for some reason, people have to talk at whenever they talk on cell phones," he said.
But progress is progress.
"This is a competitive business," Evans said. "If one airline offers this service, they probably all will."
Something to look forward to.
A false alarm: Speaking of cell phones, e-mail has been circulating in recent days warning that people's mobile numbers are about to be handed out to telemarketers.
"It's an urban legend," said Jen Schwartzman, a spokeswoman for the Federal Trade Commission in Washington. "There's no cause for concern."
The e-mail making the rounds says that "all cell phone numbers will be made public to telemarketing firms" as of Jan. 1.
"Unlike your home phone, most of you pay for your incoming calls," it says. "These telemarketers will eat up your free minutes and end up costing you money in the long run."
The e-mail adds that consumers have until today to register their cell phones with the national Do Not Call list.
Schwartzman said that while service providers are in fact creating a 411 directory for cell phone numbers, consumers will be asked up front whether they want to be listed. No one's number will automatically make it into the directory, she said.
We shall see.
In any case, Schwartzman said, there's no deadline if people want to register their cell phones with the Do Not Call list. "You can register at any time if you feel you need the added protection," she said.
It's probably a good idea. You can add your cell phone (or any phone) to the Do Not Call list by dialing (888) 382-1222 or by visiting www.donotcall.gov.
David Lazarus' column appears Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays. He also can be seen regularly on KTVU's "Mornings on 2." Send tips or feedback to dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.