In flight internet a step closer

[drewbles]

There are quite a few applications where the latency that comes from using satellites would be quite tolerable.

True, but it's still annoying. Adding in the way Sat handles packets, it'll not be particularly wonderful but as I say, any is better than none when you're on a plane for 14 hours with a power point

And of course the airlines are quick to say 'no video conferencing or skype' which are the main two that are very critical to latency when I think of it. Online gaming being the other, but that's not going to be in high demand amongst the target demographic they're aiming at i'm guessing. Some VPN's will have issues too depending on configuration.

 

[medhead]

As with everything else you read about aviation in the press - take this piece with sufficient salt to give you hypertension.

cheers

CrazyDave98

Thanks for the sumamry and link. I should say that I wasn't advocating for either system, just putting forward a news story. I provided a summary of the article, but only because I didn't do the right thing to start and provide some direct quotes to give people an idea about what it was all about.

Re the coverage in in land australia, in addition to what people have mentioned about it being a "Gogo*" syaytem, I have had some excellent coverage on Telstra 3G in remote parts of South Australia. I used to have big black spots from Gawler north east to broken hill, but on my last trip out there I had 3G phone service the entire distance. Even at a mine site about an 1 hour north of the highway.

As others have mentioned I think that a first implementation of a system using GRPS is totally pointless. I also think that as using a satellite means paying international roaming rates for data then your definitely cut out a large number of potential customers. IF a ground based system is a lot cheaper and uses domestic data charges, I think there are much greater numerb of potential cutomers.

* my knowledge of this stuff is limited, just repeat names here.

 

[drewbles]

Thanks for the sumamry and link. I should say that I wasn't advocating for either system, just putting forward a news story. I provided a summary of the article, but only because I didn't do the right thing to start and provide some direct quotes to give people an idea about what it was all about.

Re the coverage in in land australia, in addition to what people have mentioned about it being a "Gogo*" syaytem, I have had some excellent coverage on Telstra 3G in remote parts of South Australia. I used to have big black spots from Gawler north east to broken hill, but on my last trip out there I had 3G phone service the entire distance. Even at a mine site about an 1 hour north of the highway.

As others have mentioned I think that a first implementation of a system using GRPS is totally pointless. I also think that as using a satellite means paying international roaming rates for data then your definitely cut out a large number of potential customers. IF a ground based system is a lot cheaper and uses domestic data charges, I think there are much greater numerb of potential cutomers.

* my knowledge of this stuff is limited, just repeat names here.

Bit off

There's several solutions here.

a) Picocell 3G/2G. this would be a virtual base-station in the sky that phones/3G devices connect to. The data/voice backhaul is via satellite
b) GoGo-esque. There is a ground-to-aircraft system for data communications. Data is accessed on-board via bog-standard wifi devices (.a/b/g).
c) Satellite Internet. There is 2-way transceiver on-board that talks to satellites, which in turn beam down to earth stations to retrieve data, send it back to the satellite, and back to the aircraft. Access to this data service could be via wired or wireless connections.

Option A is going to incur roaming data rates and speeds of 3G data access. Not nice.
Option B needs a series of ground stations to transmit data to and from the aircraft. They also need large pipes back to aggregation points to feed data around; not really viable in AU due to the isolation of towns and cost of backhaul (even wireless infrastructure back haul on the ground would be prohibitively expensive in AU).
Option C isn't as easy as you may think due to the fact each satellite only has a small "footprint" of coverage, and you're going to need to use several 'birds' to pass data to and from during longer flights. Think Foxtel; they use various different satellites in Australia for broadcasting due to them not all covering the same area (PAS8 (Pan Am Sat 8) used to but i'm pretty sure they stopped using that due to the bird ageing and the cost).

 

[JohnK]

Do people really need to have continuous access to the internet? Perhaps chip implants would be a much better solution.

I hope this does not mean that people could use applications like skype or webcams inflight. Very distracting, rude, annoying and should be banned in public areas especially Qantas Lounges where people are trying to relax not listening to someone else's stupid conversations.

 

[samh004]

Do people really need to have continuous access to the internet? Perhaps chip implants would be a much better solution.

I was going to ask the same question, I mean, when I sleep I don’t have access so there are times that I’m not browsing. But I guess it’s a feature that you can use to sell seats or make yourself look better than another competing airline, so whether you need to be on or not isn’t the question

I hope this does not mean that people could use applications like skype or webcams inflight. Very distracting, rude, annoying and should be banned in public areas especially Qantas Lounges where people are trying to relax not listening to someone else's stupid conversations.

I would think audio conversations would be banned, just like when they had the phone trial on board. And I’ve sat across from a loud American that decided the QP would be a good place for a video chat to back home, crazy how some people don’t consider others around them. Then again, I think everyone heard the conversation, so not exactly private.

Either way, doubt they’d let pax make audio calls, as for webcams with no audio, I wouldn’t see a problem with that, other than the bandwidth limitation that’d probably stop that idea very quickly, if they didn’t just block video altogether. I think most of the solutions are really only good for picking up and sending emails.

 

[serfty]

I've used the wi-fibased GoGo on AA MD80's and internet is not available though the entire flight. There's about 40 minutes after takeoff and before landing where it can't be used.

Once got a strong signal from GoGo while waiting at an ONT gate lounge.

 

[pblackm]

The problem here is latency. Satellite will not be nearly as good as GoGo's system. It's much more simple to implement from an infrastructure view, but then don't forget that satellites generally only have a limited 'footprint' and handoffs still have to happen between the birds themselves.

plane-bird-ground-bird-plane = a lot of latency. You're typically looking at around 150msec for one hop up and down, so this will effectively make it 300msec on top of usual transmissions.

Of course i'd be glad of any (useable) internet in the Air

On the matter of latency, it is generally accepted that when you press a button (let's say a mouse click) and nothing happens for 250msec, most people assume that the click has benn lost and will click again.

One quarter of a second may not appear much, but it is. think of those satellite TV interviews where the studio asks the reporter in the field a question. That verrrrrry long pause before the response is mainly the latency caused by the satellite. Each pair of hops adds to the latency.

 

[JohnK]

I would think audio conversations would be banned, just like when they had the phone trial on board.

Can they ban audio but let you browse the internet?

And I’ve sat across from a loud American that decided the QP would be a good place for a video chat to back home, crazy how some people don’t consider others around them. Then again, I think everyone heard the conversation, so not exactly private.

This lady annoyed the hell out of me in the BNE Qantas Lounge a couple of weeks ago. Loud phone conversation for about 20 minutes and then used her laptop, while sitting at the lounge terminals, for skype conversation. The connection was atrocious and the voice at the other end sounded like it was coming through in slow motion. Just as well I am a tolerant person and bottle everything inside.

 

[drewbles]

Can they ban audio but let you browse the internet?

Not really, the RTP stream uses high-numbered ports, typically in the un-reserved range which a lot of programs use. Filtering the ports is not a good thing (affects too many other things).

They can however filter port 5060 which is the standard SIP port, which Skype uses as well. This will kill the initiation of the voice, and no RTP will be used.

This lady annoyed the hell out of me in the BNE Qantas Lounge a couple of weeks ago. Loud phone conversation for about 20 minutes and then used her laptop, while sitting at the lounge terminals, for skype conversation. The connection was atrocious and the voice at the other end sounded like it was coming through in slow motion. Just as well I am a tolerant person and bottle everything inside.

People have no common courtesy. Whenever i'm on my phone in a public place, I try to keep as quiet as possible (providing i'm sober of course ).

 

[samh004]

Can they ban audio but let you browse the internet?

Well drewbles answered the technical side of that for you, and from the airlines stand point I’d think if it’s their service, they can choose what to ban and what to allow.

This lady annoyed the hell out of me in the BNE Qantas Lounge a couple of weeks ago. Loud phone conversation for about 20 minutes and then used her laptop, while sitting at the lounge terminals, for skype conversation. The connection was atrocious and the voice at the other end sounded like it was coming through in slow motion. Just as well I am a tolerant person and bottle everything inside.

Karma should take care of things

 

[markis10]

Do people really need to have continuous access to the internet? Perhaps chip implants would be a much better solution.

I hope this does not mean that people could use applications like skype or webcams inflight. Very distracting, rude, annoying and should be banned in public areas especially Qantas Lounges where people are trying to relax not listening to someone else's stupid conversations.

Probably explains why Boeing and LH wound up Connexion.

 

[JohnK]

They can however filter port 5060 which is the standard SIP port, which Skype uses as well. This will kill the initiation of the voice, and no RTP will be used.

Well hopefully they go down this path otherwise there will be a lot of arguments on flights.

People have no common courtesy. Whenever i'm on my phone in a public place, I try to keep as quiet as possible (providing i'm sober of course ).

The saddest part is how society tolerates people's rude manners. I really have no idea how these people turn out the way they are.