I'm one of the happy users who has been on a series of intercontinental flights on both Lufthansa and SAS who has used the Boeing In Flight Internet Service and it has worked as advertised. Hopefully Boeing won't mothball it.
The fact that the financially troubled US airlines can't see the value in this for passengers is downright old school thinking. That's the same kind of thinking that the record industry took about downloads as a way to sell music in my view, and we all know what happened there.
My view on this is simple. As each new plane rolls off the assembly line this service should be standard equipment and an available option to the airlines to activate.
Once the service got rolling last year I found that the connectivity is as good as EvDO on the ground with even better upload speeds. VoIP actually works if you have a good headset, but best of all is the feeling of relief when you step off the plane and know you're all caught up on email and blogging.
Having taken my last three trips to Europe this way, like WiFi or broadband in hotels, it's something that the real road warrior today will find makes it easier to be working anywhere.
Actually the reason it isn't 'about $1000' is because of the compliance and regulatory issues related to the aviation issue and the FAA.
Guess how much it is to add a CD player to a twin engine private plane? $200? $500? More like $7500.
Posted by: Raj Dutt | June 26, 2006 at 09:29 PM
US aircarriers aren't all thinking this is a bad idea. SkyBlue is still planning on putting wifi in their jets
Posted by: michael | June 26, 2006 at 08:13 AM
US aircarriers aren't all thinking this is a bad idea. SkyBlue is still planning on putting wifi in their jets
Posted by: michael | June 26, 2006 at 08:13 AM
Yeah, it's so cool your tongue sticks to it. And it does indeed work well. But this is dying/dead because the financially-crapped-out US carriers don't see this as a must-have feature, and as such it is stuck in the 'Frills' bin. They've cut meals, magazines, leg space, etc... I think it's great, your readers probably agree, but that's about it. Just another Airfone (also dying).
Posted by: Walter Mellon | June 26, 2006 at 07:23 AM
I love this service but I think that the future is clouded because of the flimsy revenues that the service has generated. I've had trouble using it on some coach flights across the pond because the seat pitch in coach is so tight now that I have trouble using my Sony Vaio if the person in front of me decides to recline. This isn't a problem in business or first class but there probably aren't enough of potential users up front to support the system without a greater percentage of back seat users.
Posted by: Paul Dubinsky | June 26, 2006 at 07:23 AM
Well as to why it costs so much money. You have to remember that it is not just the accesspoint. You need to have a backend connectivity which may be expensive and also you need shielding from *harmful* radiowaves which will cause the plane to drop from the sky or so the airplane people think.
Posted by: Yuva Mani | June 25, 2006 at 02:33 PM
Two issues. It looks like Connexion isn't making any money and the losses don't add up. It isn't that they don't "get it" it's that they're loosing WAY too much money.
Second.
New jets don't just roll off the assembly line all the time and go into service. Most of the jets in service today have been around for a LONG time. If you want in-flight service they will need to be retrofitted.
That costs money. I think we need to figure out WHY it costs so much money though because adding a wifi Access Point seems like it should cost < $1000 per jet.
Posted by: Kevin Burton | June 25, 2006 at 11:14 AM