The FCC this week announced that they're targeting 500 MHz of additional airwaves that could be opened up to help improve in-flight broadband services. Currently, most in-flight broadband either rely on congested satellite broadband bandwidth, or skyward-pointed ground to air EVDO antenna arrays. The latter frequently provides only 3 Mbps or so per plane, though companies like GoGo have been working on pushing that to around 9.8 Mbps per plane.
The new FCC proposal is based on an older Qualcomm plan to free up spectrum in the 14.0-14.5 GHz band, which is predominately used for uplink satellite communications. Some 150 towers would be used across the country, each capable of delivering 300 Mbps to any passing planes, a significant improvement over current technologies.
That added capacity might improve in-flight broadband prices, but might not. In-flight broadband pricing from the dominant in-flight provider (GoGo) has turned off most customers, many of whom have grown accustomed to free Wi-Fi in airports and elsewhere. That hasn't been helped by the fact that GoGo keeps jacking up prices.
Last December, the FCC announced that they had sped up the approval process necessary to operate Earth Stations Aboard Aircraft (ESAA), something the FCC at the time claimed would speed up in-flight broadband deployment by 50%.
"The reality is that we expect and often need to be able to get online 24/7, at home, in an office or on a plane," insisted outgoing FCC boss Julius Genachowski at a meeting this week. "This will enable business and leisure travelers aboard aircraft in the United States to be more productive and have more choices in entertainment, communications and social media, and it could lower prices."
Meanwhile, a study was released this week by the Airline Passenger Experience Association and the Consumer Electronics Association that found that a significant portion of flyers never turn off their devices when flying. Those organizations have been pressuring regulators to ease off in-flight restrictions regulators claim are in place to limit interference, but also to prevent devices from becoming projectiles during takeoff and landing turbulence.
..because in-flight broadband is so important, unlike the millions of customers that AT&T and Verizon are trying to screw out of existing service and push them to more expensive and capped wireless.
Cell phones don't work on planes anyways. This is stupid. It's nice not to have internet on a plane, and with a captive market and limited bandwidth, internet on a plane is always going to be ridiculously overpriced.
· 2013-May-10 7:04 pm: ·
Duramax08 To The Moon Premium Member join:2008-08-03 San Antonio, TX
I paid like $8 for GoGo when I used it in January on southwest. That link to an article from Sep 2012 says they are charging $17.95 per flight. I never seen it that high before on any carrier. I have seen it as low as $5 and as high as $8 in the past couple of years.
Southwest doesn't use GoGo internet.. I can't remember the company they use, but it's different.. Southwest also uses Sat based technology which is way slower than GoGo (Cell based)..
Southwest is 8 bucks from when I've flown and GoGo charges based on distance/time from what I've seen.
I used onboard wi-fi on both Virgin America and Southwest. VA uses upward onground and Southwest satellite based. The wi-fi on Southwest seemed little faster, but on either it was too slow to play streaming media.
As for flying, I prefer to fly on any carries except SW or any that uses cattle boarding with no preassigned seat. Doesn't matter if you're in group A, B or C. If you're on A but arrive late, everyone from B will take all seats available by window. Once you enter gate, they take your boarding pass.
· 2013-May-10 5:24 pm: ·
Oh_No Trogglus normalus join:2011-05-21 Chicago, IL
I hate flying southwest due to not having assigned seats. It is a huge pain and stupid people who are too large to fit into seats or have little kids like to wait to board last when all that is left is middle seats. It really slows down boarding. They usually are not the cheapest, but sometimes they are or within a $20 so I will fly them so I can go into midway.
I live closer to ohare than midway, even though the latter is renewed and nice, I prefer ohare despite it being busier. Its cheaper and quicker for me to cab or drive to and park at ohare than midway. And I find Terminal 3 to be nice enough, its not far from entrance to your gates once you pass security and there is a central food court at concourse G.
If you ever fly to LAX or SFO I recommend you give VA one shot. Even their economy coach class is nice, I find their seats to be larger than on other airlines, plenty of things on IFE, you can even order a specific drink or snack from your screen. Unfortunately their routes are very limited compared to other budget airlines like JetBlue. They are not always cheaper in airfares than legacy carries though. It all depends on time, date and route you book.
· 2013-May-10 6:45 pm: ·
SanAntonioTx Premium Member join:2008-07-18 Dayton
thats the speed test doing it while in flight i thought it was pretty fast i was broadcasting my webcam wirelessly to chat program around the world with little lag which i thought wasn't bad theres actually a turn on and turn off button for the internet they say at 10,000 feet they can turn it on but they turned it on for take off.......
· 2013-May-11 4:45 pm: ·
aaronwt Premium Member join:2004-11-07 Woodbridge, VA
$18 per flight doesn't sound very bad for a flight that is several hours long. I've spent more than that for daily internet access at some hotels and have only spent one or two hours each day online.
· 2013-May-12 12:38 am: ·
ieolus Support The Clecs join:2001-06-19 Danbury, CT
They also charge that much on purpose so as not to overload the currently limited bandwidth they have access to per-plane. I can see the prices going down if/when more bandwidth is allocated to each plane, allowing for more customers with a satisfactory internet experience.
