Mobile-haters beware - in-flight calls are set to make air travel even more irritating, writes Brian O'Connell
Picture the scene: you're on board a Boeing 737, cruising at 30,000ft. You put up your tray, gently slip off your shoes, adjust the seat all the way back and drift off to sleep.Brace yourselves, though - the relative tranquillity of air travel is about to suffer a noisy crash-landing. From the middle of next year, Europe's largest carrier, Ryanair, will offer passengers e-mail, text and phone services while in the air, in line with similar services being offered by other airlines around the world. Qantas began the move last April, while Emirates is also expected to launch by the end of this year. With the number of passengers growing by 6 per cent annually and more than three billion mobile phone devices in operation in the world, it's inevitable that every airline will soon be forced to follow suit.
While aviation authorities in the US have dragged their heels over allowing the making and receiving of phone calls, e-mail and text servicing will also be available on internal US flights. Elsewhere, passengers will be able to make and receive calls from their mobiles, as well as e-mail from hand-held devices, much the same as you would when roaming abroad. It is estimated that prices will be in the region of $2.50 (€1.75) per minute for calls and $0.50 (€0.35) for text messages.
The technology comes courtesy of a picocell receiver - costing upwards of $150,000 (€106,000) per aircraft - that helps eliminate the threat of such communications interfering with the aircraft's navigating devices. Once the aircraft reaches cruising level, calls are diverted to ground networks via satellites.
"Logistically, the technology is relatively straightforward," says Charlie Pryor, a spokesman for in-flight communications company OnAir, which has won the contract to supply the Ryanair fleet, and has been developing its system for the last seven years. "Our system collects signals from the phones, and from there sends the data to satellites and then to the ground," he says. "The only issue we had was to make the equipment small and light enough to be economically viable and to be robust and rugged enough to survive the aircraft environment. We also had to make sure the technology didn't interfere with plane electronics, which we've achieved."
To those who resent their once-peaceful flights being interrupted by hearing the minutiae of their fellow passengers' personal lives, Pryor is nonplussed. "You're going to get opposition to this from people who don't like mobile phones anywhere," he says. "Within a year or two, or maybe a bit longer, I would think that the service will be available on all flights in Europe."
And what of the potential for terrorists to manipulate the technology for sinister means? Again, operators deflect responsibility and say the prime aim of airport security is to ensure no explosive devices make it onto aircraft.
It's worth noting that authorities have been reluctant to regulate personal electronic devices (PEDs) in the past, whether two-way devices such as mobile phones, pagers and radios, or "non-intentional" transmitters such as iPods, laptops and hand-held game consoles. The initial ban on electronic devices on aircraft was introduced in the 1960s, when studies found that PEDs were possibly interfering with the onboard electronic equipment of aircraft.
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, the risk of interference was deemed to be extremely low, but increased at critical phases during the flight, particularly take-off and landing. Mobile phone usage will still not be permitted during these times as a safety measure.
Pryor doesn't agree that in-flight communication services will make it easier for terrorists to co-ordinate attacks while on board. "Just because you can communicate in the air, I don't see that as crucial," he says. "I'm not a security expert, but the important thing in stopping terrorism is to prevent any explosives getting on in the first place. Our advice is that this service doesn't increase the security risk."
Some fliers are reluctant to embrace the new technology. Ali Robertson, a theatre producer who frequently flies between Ireland and the UK, has some reservations. "I think it's an excellent idea for text and e-mail, but a terrible idea for phone calls," he says. "The quiet sections on trains just don't work, and having someone going 'I'm on a plane' next to you would be yet another nail in the coffin of pleasant flying."
With seven major airlines already signed up for the system, and many airlines taking a cut of the call charges, don't expect them to show much sympathy towards irritated passengers. Operators claim that the charges will be in line with international roaming rates, albeit at the higher end of the scale. Text and e-mail usage will be unlimited, while a maximum of 14 passengers will be able to make and receive calls simultaneously.
"The rates will be competitive," says Peter Sherrard, Ryanair's head of communications. "The revolution is that you can use your own mobile phone. One of the problems with previous systems launched in the US was that you had to use hand-held devices and your credit card. In the past the rates were much higher."
Sherrard expects Ryanair to launch the system early next year, starting off with about 20 aircraft and then, provided there are no problems, rolling it out for the rest of the fleet. By the middle of next year they should have the service available on 92 routes and on more than 50 Boeing 737 aircraft. On the issue of noise interference to passengers hoping to grab a few hours' sleep, Sherrard is dismissive. "If you think about it, our aircraft were never quiet places," he says. "We spend most of the flight selling you food, drinks, gifts, snacks and scratch cards. The reality is that more people will prefer text and e-mail."
