Ryanair - Mobile phones (MERGED)

[lgw_warrior]

Xeque-"Neanderthal man's brother and sister (ex Majorca tour reps) as cabin crew" thats a little out of order dont you think,fair enough Ryanair doesnt suit you as a passenger,but to many who are looking for cheap travel it does.but to start insulting people who are just trying to do there job is a little harsh.All the Ryanair crew that i have met have been extremely nice AND profesional,in fact a lot of the crew who have come from eastern europe are extremely well qualified!so please Xeque,before you start insulting someones daughter/son/girlfriend/boyfriend/brother/sister or wife,have a think about what your saying.

lgw_warrior

[PAXboy]

ContIgnt

I suppose the 'No Smoking' sign will be replaced with a 'No Phone' sign !?!?!?

Yes, is the answer. In (yet) another thread on mobiles a few weeks back, I posted the statement that manufacturers are doing exactly that now. FR are not the only ones to try inflight comms and some have already stopped doing Wi-Fi. The other week Boeing announced the closure of it's Connexion (spelling?) division as not enough carriers had taken it up.

[Tigger4Me]

More on the overhead 'No Mobile' sign here.

[jabird]

"Maybe MOL will start selling earplugs too."

I doubt it, not enough margins in that. I'm sure they could do a good line in noise cancelling headphones though, especially if they can be attached to mobile/mp3 players.

Presumably they will start providing in-flight charging facilities too - with guaranteed very expensive surcharges?

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by daz211

I wonder if this thread we be so negative if
it was British Airways that was doing this

If you were around when one of the predecessors of this thread was up, you would have seen that - yes! - it was just as negative, for all the same reasons, when discussed in the context of the possibility of BA doing it.

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by manintheback

A number of people have been fined/jailed for using mobiles on a plane on the grounds it was dangerous. This suggests it is not.

Is it really so difficult for people to understand the safety difference between using a phone on an aircraft that's equipped with a picocell, and using a phone on an unmodified aircraft? Do people really have so little understanding of what a mobile phone does, and how it works?

[Tigger4Me]

There is one thing that I'm not sure of Globaliser. Do I take it that a mobile phone is able to adjust the output power of a signal in accordance to the proximity of the receiving station? So a closely located picocell would draw a weaker signal than a more distant cellular mast. If that is so then I didn't realise that a cell phone had that capability. That would make sense as then when on the ground it would only locate the nearest mast rather than bang out a signal at max strength only to possibly be picked up at several masts.

[Globaliser]

Originally Posted by Tigger4Me

There is one thing that I'm not sure of Globaliser. Do I take it that a mobile phone is able to adjust the output power of a signal in accordance to the proximity of the receiving station? So a closely located picocell would draw a weaker signal than a more distant cellular mast. If that is so then I didn't realise that a cell phone had that capability. That would make sense as then when on the ground it would only locate the nearest mast rather than bang out a signal at max strength only to possibly be picked up at several masts.

That's exactly it. With a picocell on board, the handset will only transmit at its minimum power, thus minimising the possibility of RF interference. It's therefore restricted to a tiny fraction of full power.

If the picocell is not there, then the handsets tend to pump out at full whack, which can be about 2W IIRC.

[ChristiaanJ]

Originally Posted by Globaliser

... Do people really have so little understanding of what a mobile phone does, and how it works?

Even less than that.....
About all the average person knows is that cell phones do not work everywhere. The hows and whys and wherefores are totally beyond her/him.

[slim_slag]

Go on then Globaliser, tell us how it works. What is the peak output of a mobile phone when

1) being turned on and handshaking with the network
2) being "called" by a network
3) in a call
4) being turned off and logging off the network

If on a plane either with or without a picocell. Does a mobile phone start off at max power and work down to an optimum level, or min power and work up to an optimum level?

[derekl]

Finding a cellphone.

Not only does the cellular base station control the power output of the phone's radio transmitter, it is also possible to trace the position of a phone.

The system knows which cell the phone is in: but it also knows which sector of the cell it is in. You'll have noticed the cells have multiple antennae pointing in specific directions -- these are sectors.

As the power setting used by the phone transmitter is set by the base (as the signal from the phone weakens, it cranks up the power), it follows that the distance from the base can be approximated. So the vector (sector) and distance (power) are known.

Add to that the fact that the phone, although only in communication with one cell, may be visible and known to others, you can triangulate the phone's position.

Such evidence has been used in court (the Soham murders, for example).

[Flybywyre]

and a point to remember its a service you dont have to use it
they wont make you call someone

Correct. But unfortunately you are going to be sitting near to some Chav / Cretin / Pykie / Wayne & Chardonay from Essex who will be using it and you will then have to put up with listening to their mindless crap.
I would pay EXTRA to be on a plane that DOES NOT allow mobile phone calls.
FBW

[Xeque]

Response to LGW_Warrier

So you would have me compare them to (say) Singapore Air or Thai Inter or even good old BA cabin crew. Or Emirates or Gulf Air or (even) Air Asia which is my local equivalent of Easyjet or Ryanair. Chalk and cheese mate - I stand by what I said.

[FLR-PSA]

Originally Posted by Globaliser

That's exactly it. With a picocell on board, the handset will only transmit at its minimum power, thus minimising the possibility of RF interference. It's therefore restricted to a tiny fraction of full power.
If the picocell is not there, then the handsets tend to pump out at full whack, which can be about 2W IIRC.

Not at all true. The handset MAY transmit at its minimum power BUT only once established on the onboard PICO Cell. But it may also transmit at its full power If:
- The onboard Pico cell fails
- The onboard Pico cell is unable to offer a connection to a handset because it's full bandwidth is occupied by other handsets
- The underlying network refuses access to the handset (say because the customer is pay-as-go and not allowed to roam)
- The customer has the "manual network" search option selected which forces the handset to do a full power search for all nearby cellsites.
- Data enabled devices such as the blackberry don't transmit on GSM, they use 2.5G or GPRS which by default uses a higher transmission power to increase reliability and decrease data corruption.
- Finally, the uplink from the pico will be provided by a sat network, countless factors can affect the performance of this link too and if it fails or degrades handsets will increase their power automatically to search for an alternative cellsite.

Any and all of the above occur in ground based situations every hour of the day, so they will happen in the air too, and when 200 handsets start transmitting noise at full power the first people to hear it will be the boys on the FD, then the CC will hear it using the interphone, the pax will hear it over the PA and that’s before we start discussing the unproven allegations that they will also interfere with other, more critical aircraft systems.
FLR

[daz211]

for all the people on this thread that said they
would never travel on an airline that let pax
use mobile phones

here is another one to add to your
" I will never travel that airline " list

QANTAS

they have also announced today they are going to do it !

shame realy for all the people who have said on here they
would not use an airline if they had mobile use
soon they will have to get the bus or start walking

I hate to say it but i told you so !

[10secondsurvey]

Quantas are going to install it in one domestic 767 during early 2007, for a 3 month trial.

And yes, I would do my best to avoid it.

On one level it sounds really good for business travellers, as many are addicted to their blackberries, but most people I know who fly a lot on business really crave the ability NOT to be E-mailed or Phoned on the plane.

A bad idea. Let's see how the trials go..(excluding Ryanair)

[daz211]

10second

yes lets see
before you do a total u-turn and say well your not that fussed
I mean its only been what 2 days and already we have heard
RYANAIR AIR, AIR FRANCE, BMI, TAP and QANTAS
saying the same thing and someone on here had said that
they would very much dout if major airlines would follow
ryanairs lead

[The late XV105]

Cellphones and Ryanair a step closer

Apologies if this is a duplicate of today's news that I've missed.

After all the talk and rumour in previous threads, please, Dear Lord may the price quite literally be sky high if this gets approval. Not looking forwards to "Pardon, I'm ON THE PLANE" one bit on my twice monthly flights between STN and NYO.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5298332.stm

[Gnirren]

Queue in-ear headphones and ipod.

This does not however protect you from the wonderful interruptions from passengers "Uh... are you a PILOT??". Flying home in uniform is just great And the all-time fav joke, "hehe, shouldn't you be sitting in the front, hehe".

Wow, funn-y man.

[reverserunlocked]

I'M ON RYANAIR!!!!
WHAT?
NAW, IT'S CRAP!!!