Boeing Connexion, No More Wi-Fi at 30,000 ft?

symonty writes "After 6 years and one billion dollars, Boeing is evaluating whether or not their wifi for planes connectivity business can be a viable business. " I've never had the actual pleasure of evaluating it or not; some folks, however, have said it's a great service.

Money versus power

[andrewman327]

Who is going to pay for an Internet connection on a really long flight when their laptop battery can't carry a charge long enough to use it all the way? I could use my LifeDrive, but that's not the best browsing experience. I wish AMTRAK would get wifi, as they have power outlets next to every seat and their trains take longer than aircraft.

A shame or not a shame?

[Billosaur]

If a suitable deal could not be reached, Boeing would be prepared to shut Connexion down, even though the service works as advertised and is used by a handful of international airlines on long-haul flights, one of the sources said.

Boeing has not said how much it has invested in Connexion, but people familiar with the situation say it is about $1 billion, according to the Journal.

Some industry officials say the business, because of lack of interest among U.S. airlines in outfitting their fleets with the system, may be worth no more than $150 million, the report said.

It's amazing that after 6 years with a working system, Boeing won't stick with this. It's been inevitable that Internet access would extend to airplanes and Boeing has it and now plans to give it up. I suspect someone will buy it on the cheap and turn around and make a profit on it in short order. Boeing may rue the day it turned its back on a potentially lucrative market all for lack of patience.

Great Service, but as for power

[hipsterdufus]

I was fortunate enough to have enough miles and therefore went with a first class seat. They had cigarette-style power plugs, and I had a car adapter for my laptop. They gave a free 1 hour coupon for Connexion, and I paid the full price for the 5 hour flight. What a godsend having the ability to surf while in the air, it makes the flight go much faster. Without a power plug, as is still standard for coach class, I wouldn't buy the service. That's the gist of the problem.

Re:Money versus power

[Agent00Wang]

That's what secondary batteries are for. I'd imagine that most frequent business travelers would be prepared for such a situation.

Re:Money versus power

[jeriqo]

If you have no more battery, just plug the laptop ?

$27 access fee?

[jmichaelg]

Charging $27 to use the service on a coast to coast flight might have something to do with the poor uptake on the service. If that's close to what it's really costing them to provide the service then they were bound to lose and if it's several multiples over cost, they deserve to lose.

So they lose either for being stupid or being greedy.

IP Soft Phones?

[pcguru19]

Can you see the average flight attendant understanding that your bluetooth skype phone isn't a cell phone? Also, it only takes one wizzard that decides the flight from DC to Dallas is the perfect time to download Superman Returns instead of watching it like decent folks to screw everyone on the plane that paid for the service.

I've used something like it

[JanneM]

I've used it or some service like it (no idea if there's more than one; these flights are on an Airbus not Boeing) on flights between Japan and Europe, and believe me, it's worth every penny.

Twelve hours of slow agony is transformed into an almost pleasant experience. When you can email and IM friends and family; check all your regular sites; search and read up on research you didn't have time for earlier; check out an endless variety of flash-games and other trivia. The mediocre in-flight movies just can't compete.

Re:Whoah

[Shivetya]

Probably 100 million to develop it and 900 million to test it to the point of insuring it won't cause an inflight issue.

1000000000 dollars and no results?

[Britz]

Boeing was at its best when there was competition. I think the Boeing 747 was/is the greatest airplane ever designed. Now only 2 state sponsored (Boeing with military contracts, Airbus with direct subsidy) remain. Monopolies seem to be such a huge drag and waste so much money it is not even funny. I am European and even though the new shiny Airbus 380 is pretty interesting technology wise I cringe every time I have to think of the billions of subsidies that went into it.

really great

[PureCreditor]

at $19.95 flat, Japan Airlines offered me unlimited access using Connexion at true broadband speeds. Sure the latency is low, but it's a huge boost for productivity. And seriously, how many internet cafes you know offer 13 hours of service for only $20 ?

it'll be really sad if Boeing cancels the service, cuz Connexion is one of my primary reasons I'll fly JAL or Lufthansa.

Do they even advertise the service?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I was an airline trying to attract those business travellers I would be using this service for sure. Just think about all the added value you could add outside of inflight wifi.

I can't believe there isn't a market for inflight wifi.

How about just wired Ethernet?

[DoofusOfDeath]

If the concerns about internal systems being disrupted by WiFI are such as big deal, why not just build Ethernet ports into new / revamped airplanes?

I realize that some people's Palm Pilots, etc. don't have Ethernet jacks. But pretty much every laptop does. Wouldn't this at least make the concerns about WiFi-related interference of flight systems just.. go away?

Re:Whoah

[immovable_object]

>1) A WiFi access point. This is reasonably easy, even if you have to make it play nice on the plane. Flight safety certification/qualification is difficult. The FAA is (understandably) paranoid about such things and I'm glad they are.

I've got a real problem with this. WTF is up with this 'understandably paranoid' statement? The FAA doesn't know what will happen, and refuses to test and qualify *anything* to do with wireless or computers. They refuse to come up with acceptable RF leakage standards, they refuse to come up with a test method so that equipment can be qualified, and they continue to say on each flight "please turn everything off".

It's laziness. They don't know and they don't want to find out. What do we pay them for, again?

Come on FAA, it's time to step up and figure out what equipment can be certified for use on planes, and (more importantly) come up with standards around RF leakage so that planes don't incur needless risk due to a poorly designed piece of hardware.

Ignorance is not bliss.

Just in case anyone at Boeing is reading this...

[JpMaxMan]

I would personally use this service on every single flight I take. I am Gold elite on Continental and with the exception of code shares w/ Korean air this service is simply not offered. I would even use this service on 1-2 hour flights. Please do not evaluate the viability of the business model when you don't have any adoption rates! Like the telcos / cable systems you will have to absorb an up front capital roll out cost to get the subscriber base. There are also a lot of other side industries here - WiFi enabled devices besides laptops could benefit as well. Think hand held multi-player gaming consoles. I sincerely hope to be able ot surf the web at 30k feet one day soon!

Re:A shame or not a shame?

[sinequonon]

You're talking about a company that cuts entire aircraft production lines because they are no longer making money. Production lines that once made billions and billions of dollars. Why keep throwing good money away? Smart companies decide whether a business line can become profitable with good margins. Overly patient companies can end up going bankrupt. Even if Boeing spent more money on this and turned it around, odds may good that by that time that happened they'd have a lot of competition and tighter margins. So from their perspective this decision is probably sensible.