Is WiFi D.O.A. aircraft technology?

[dk4]

With some customer surveys indicating that passenger preference for on-board GSM connection is 97% higher than WiFi. Are airlines, that are deploying WiFi, installing a technology that is going to be Dead On Arrival?

Flightglobal Flight Daily News - 09/04/2013 digital edition has presented an opinion piece that states most passengers would prefer to connect to GSM onboard (most notably for billing ease and convenience) and that the desire for inflight SMS at 47% is higher than that of email connectivity at 42%.

So, given a choice, how would you prefer to connect onboard? With GSM and billed directly to your mobile account, or through WiFi and via a third party provider (e.g. GoGo)? Which system do you think will have higher user uptake?

 

[mannej]

Stuff having access to a mobile network onboard plain and simple

 

[lovestotravel]

WiFi for me on-board flights (longer than 2 hours) would be great

While I don't need it for work, would be nice to be able to read/plan/book a restaurant etc for the day or week of your arrival

Shame that Qantas have pulled the pin on WiFi for the A380s

 

[Pvcmenace]

Would be nice to have but I don't want to pay for it, so I'll wait till I land thanks.

 

[drewbles]

Having flown extensively in the USA, I have to say 'stuff Cellular'. wifi is the way forward at the moment (with skype/VoIP applications blocked). It's a reasonable cost, allows for IM/email/web etc etc without any issues and allows me to work in the sky.

The big plus is cost. For $30-40/month, you can get unlimited in-air wifi. Compare that to the rates that any roaming carrier that has mico/pico-cells in the sky is charging (upwards of $5/minute). And in addition, they're only doing GPRS, not 3G or LTE speeds.

The main thing that makes the wifi in the US a real cost benefit is the fact it is not satellite based. GoGo is all ground-to-air, but it works in the USA due to population density on the ground and the ability to cheaply deploy skywards facing towers in populated areas, allowing aggregated backhaul to be provided cheaply.

When you're over the ocean or trans-con Australia, it's a different kettle of fish (but still, give me internet over a voice line any day).

 

[Deleted member 26544]

As I travel mainly for leisure I don't see the need to be connected inflight. I look forward to being somewhat cut-off as I catch up on reading books/magazines and watching movies or TV shows either on my iPad or the IFE.

Plus I also enjoy the food/wine, even on American carriers

 

[markis10]

WiFi is more likely the future compared to cellular, especially when 3G offload is supported by the carriers!

 

[lovestotravel]

The main thing that makes the wifi in the US a real cost benefit is the fact it is not satellite based. GoGo is all ground-to-air, but it works in the USA due to population density on the ground and the ability to cheaply deploy skywards facing towers in populated areas, allowing aggregated backhaul to be provided cheaply.

When you're over the ocean or trans-con Australia, it's a different kettle of fish (but still, give me internet over a voice line any day).

Yep that's right and I agree

Easy for USA coverage with airlines due to the ground-to-air systems and the number of people flying around, that sort of coverage will never happen in Australia

 

[drewbles]

Yep that's right and I agree

Easy for USA coverage with airlines due to the ground-to-air systems and the number of people flying around, that sort of coverage will never happen in Australia

Well, never say 'never' but almost. The possibility exists that it *could* be done. It just would not be commercially viable.

Nexgen have a massive fibre network and it's also in a lot of 'middle-of-nowhere' type towns where they're required to terminate into due to providing broadband 'in the bush'. You'd have to try and marry those locations up, and have something that's going to have a stupidly wide angle arc pointing at the sky. And of course, with a wide angle would come a stupidly high power requirement for whatever frequency they were going to use.

Not really viable, but hey, we can dream =)

 

[cirqueboy]

When I travel internationally i rarely use gsm outside of the country I am in. In flight and on transfer between countries, i exclusively rely on wifi - much cheaper for me and my company.

Most hotels in most countries of the world include wifi either for free or for a fee. In the not too distant future, wifi will be free in most capital cities, most hotels and dare i say it most airlines.

I think this is a great poll to see what people want however, the discussion is kind of moot because we will all see connectivity as a part of our way of life very soon, and we will pay for it either as part of our airline ticket or hotel ticket without even needing the question being asked. We will not notice the charge being included because what we pay will change very little. What will change is in the back office, how the charge is compiled. The more we ask for wifi, the more it will be included. The less we ask for other inclusions, the less they will be included....

 

[Awesom Andy]

Mobile networks are improving on data transfer, while wifi can easily be used for voice and messages as well. Perhaps one day, we'll see some sort of a convergence of both technologies, and that would be what's going to be available on aircrafts.

 

[JohnK]

Do people really need to be connected at all times?

Give it a break....

 

[here2go]

Free WiFi works a treat on Norwegian. Flew RVN to HEL in January. Used it to tweet the contents of the "Kids Box" which had no description. We expected muesli bar, popper, and a treat. Just got 1kg of lollies, including smoking pipes. Got a response from Norwegian's HQ while still in the air re they would investigate!

 

[Ansett]

My time onboard any flight is my time and about the only time I get where no one from the office can ring me or email me. Peace and lots of it is what I like.

Flying for me, specially long haul is my sanctuary and I do NOT want have WIFI or any other means by which I can be contatced during the flights. I travel regularly to London and love the time to myself to relax and just veg out watching movies or docos.

Do we really need to be in constant contact with those on the ground?

Is everything in life so important that we have to know about it now and deal with it NOW surely some things can just wait whilst we sit back and relax and unwind,

I like my sanctuary in the Sky please dont take it away

 

[harvyk]

I've voted for "none / I don't want any", but I'll put a conditional on that vote.

Right now IMHO, in flight internet is taking you back to the early nineties in terms of speed and price. I have little interest in spending what is effectively my entire monthly mobile internet budget on very slow internet where the total of what I can achieve is a FB status update or a post or two to AFF (I can't think what else I'd be likely to do with internet that slow)

Once the speeds are up to something useful, and the price comes down to something reasonable then I might have a stronger opinion on the right technology to do the job.

 

[codash1099]

Do people really need to be connected at all times?

Give it a break....

Only the DYKWIA tossers.

 

[here2go]

It's free on Norwegian. Note that the speed is slow, so is only good for basic email, twitter, on a short commute. If it is just a commute, I think Internet is important as we are so connected, and there is realistically little difference between a plane and a bus or commuter rail for some flights (SYD-MEL, SYD-BNE). Long distance totally different.

 

[shifty]

It's one of the last sanctuaries. Leave it alone!

The only part of domestic travel for business I look forward to is being cutoff from communications.

 

[drewbles]

Do people really need to be connected at all times?

Give it a break....

Some of us do, yes. In my line of work, an hour of downtime when a server/router goes down can be the cause of a loss of thousands, tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

When you work for small companies and it's you and only you, downtime is bad. Some of us just have to be like that (such is my line of work). I'm on call 24x7, even when on holidays (although people avoid bringing me in to issues unless it is critical).

 

[drewbles]

Only the DYKWIA tossers.

See my previous comment. It can be a matter of losing your job, or worse (putting other people out of a job).