Qantas Airbus A380 landing at LAX.
Getting on a plane with-in the US that offers in-flight internet is not that rare anymore. Many airlines have their entire fleet outfitted and others are still in process. For some, having access to the internet for a flight that might only last a few hours is not a huge perk — yet, there is surely more demand for flights that are longer. Since most US-based in-flight internet makes use of cell towers on the ground, the service is not available for international flights. Satellite based systems are heavier, cost more and take longer to install. Because of this, we have not yet seen a many airlines that offer Wi-Fi on longer, international flights.
Even though there have been quite a few airlines that have announced their intent to provide satellite internet service, many have not followed through for one reason or another. One airline that is moving forward with long-haul internet is Qantas.
Qantas Airlines decided to use OnAir as their service provider and they currently have six of their Airbus A380 aircraft flying between Australia and the US configured to offer Wi-Fi on an eight week trial.
’œThe eight-week trial will give customers the opportunity to access the Internet in exactly the same way as a terrestrial Wi-Fi hotspot in which customers can pay with their credit card and surf the Internet, including the use of email,’ Qantas Executive Manager Customer Experience, Alison Webster, said.
Since this is a trial run, only passengers in premium cabins (first and business) will have the opportunity to try out the OnAir Wi-Fi. After the two months is up, Qantas, “will assess opportunities for the long-term application of Internet capabilities across its A380 fleet.”
Australian Business Traveler (AusBT) was able to get a first hand account on how the new Wi-Fi service works. They tell the story of Andrew Hazelton, who flew on February 29th and was given 35MB of bandwidth to use during his flight. That is not much, especially for a long flight and Hazelton told AusBT that he used all of his bandwidth quickly and he was not super impressed by the slow speed of the service. Of course, this is just a trial period and it is hoped that speeds will improve with time.
During the trial, the internet is free for first class and business class passengers and Qantas and OnAir are in process of figuring out how much they might want to charge for the service, if the trials are successful.
Besides testing satellite internet, Qantas is also working with aircraft based entertainment, accessed through Wi-Fi. The new service, called Q Streaming, allows customer to wirelessly connect to computers on the aircraft to access an array of in-flight entertainment options.
See a video played on the Q Streaming aircraft to let passengers know they are on a special aircraft
Passengers have high expectations and I feel that in the next year or so we will see more airlines adding the ability to access Wi-Fi on international flights. It might not be the best quality of service, but with additional development, we will all see quicker and cheaper options.
Image: Jeremy Dwyer-Lindgren
EVA Air Boeing 777-300ER.
EVA Air is an airline based in Taiwain and was founded in 1989. They started flight operations on July 1, 1991 and today they fly to over 40 international destinations.
The airline has mostly an all wide-body fleet of aircraft including the Airbus A330, Boeing 777 and the Boeing 747. They also have a small fleet of MD-90 aircraft.
The airline has a unique livery using green and orange. The green represents durability and the orange represents technological innovation. According to Wikipedia, “The tail globe logo is intended to represent stability and reliability, and its positioning on the tail, with one corner off the edge, represents service innovation.”
I feel that the livery is beautiful and best appreciated in person. I have heard from some that they aren’t as much of a fan of the orange and green, but you do not find many airlines showing off green and especially with orange. The previous generation of livery still had the green and orange striping, but had a bit too much white.
Image: Jeremy Dwyer-Li ndgren
Not that long ago, we successfully concluded Aviation Geek Fest 2012. One of the participants was Rob Hahn, Team Leader, Customer Advocacy and Social Media with Southwest Airlines. He recently shared his avgeek experience on the airline’s Nuts About Southwest Blog and I wanted to share — so head on over and check out Rob’s story.
We are already in talks about what #AGF13 will look like, so it should be bigger and better than this year!
OMG!I took this photo below 10,000 over Iceland. I am in big trouble now?! Nope... I had permission.
Earlier in the week, I posted a time-lapse video of a Southwest flight from Denver (DEN) to Burbank (BUR) and back. Almost a year ago, I posted a similar video of an Air France video from San Francisco (SFO) to Paris (CDG). Along with the comments about how awesome the videos were, I also received quite a few angry comments, emails and tweets berating both artists for using their cameras below 10,000 feet.
First, let’s start with the facts. In both cases, the people making the videos received permission from the airline beforehand. According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), airlines are able to approve the use of electronic devices on their own aircraft. From an FAA advisory: “The related 14 CFR sections in paragraph 3 allow for the operation of PEDs [Personal Electronic Devices] that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not interfere with the navigation or communication system of that aircraft… It should be noted that the responsibility for permitting passenger use of a particular PED technology lies solely with the operator.”
Just to make sure I was not reading this wrong, I reached out to the FAA and Alison Duquette with the FAA Office of Communications confirmed to AirlineReporter.com that, “The guidance states that everything should be turned off below 10.000 feet and we expect operators to follow that.” She continued with, “An airline could let someone use a video camera if they determine that there would be no interference.”
So now that we have those pesky facts out of the way, let’s talk some common sense. The rule to not allow cameras is overzealous and well… I think stupid. Do you honestly think that someone using a digital camera is going to cause any sort of interference for an airplane? Things like phones, computers, radios, are made to send and receive signals. Even with those, many have argued that they cause no real harm for airlines.
Most digital cameras, or at least mine, do not transmit anything outside of the body of the camera, they simply have a battery. I have successfully used my Canon digital camera in my house (lights didn’t short out), near my microwave (it didn’t explode), in a highly sophisticated/computerized car (didn’t lose operational control and crash), on the floor of the Boeing factory (paint didn’t catch on fire nor did engines mysteriously start & begin to run out of control), and on yes, on airplanes of all types and I’m still here writing my blog, right?
There is being careful and then there is going a little too far. As I am sure you know, airlines are extremely safe and cameras are not going to change that. With all the real issues going on in the world, being concerned about someone taking photos or video below 10,000 feet should be at the bottom of your list.
All that being said, I am not telling you to take photos below 10,000 without permission from the flight crew. Even if I might not agree with it, these are still the rules and every time I have been told that I cannot take photos I politely comply. It doesn’t mean I have to be happy about it.
This picture of the actual SUD modification performed at Seattle at the FAL, is a scan from KLM's "Wolkenridder" Magazine. Click for Larger.
About a month ago, I posted a story about how Boeing converted some Boeing 747-100s and 747-200s to have a stretched upper deck (SUD). After posting the story, reader Peter Evers forwarded me this photo showing the process. It is pretty cool to think that Boeing used to offer this option for customers who wanted to convert their 747-100 or -200s to have the same upperdeck length as a -300/-400.
I figured it was something worth while to share with you folks.
READ: An Inside Look at the Boeing 747 Stretched Upper Deck (SUD)
