Planes are usually quite not as most city trains or buses, so no need to yell (which won't prevent everyone, but the most, I guess)
I regularly ride the (Seattle area) Sounder commuter train. When it's moving, it's still generally not so loud that you have to raise your voice above a normal conversational level to be heard... but even when the thing's stopped and completely quiet, you get morons shouting into their phones - and I don't mean in anger, they're shouting a normal conversation!
I still remember one time (definitely a non-normal conversation) when I was riding the train several years ago, and this lady was making this really loud phone call. I was doing my best not to listen, but right in the middle she starts shouting - very loudly, and completely without emotion - "I'm telling you she's DEAD. I SAID SHE'S DEAD!!". It was completely bizarre.
I've always wondered if Americans shout a lot when they're at home, because they certainly tend to talk very loudly overseas. I was walking down a busy street in Kabul, Afghanistan, ten years ago with an American friend. She was talking at the usual American overseas, ear-splitting volume, which made me feel a bit self-conscious. When i suggested she might like to speak a little less loudly, she was surprised - she had no idea she was shouting. Security in Kabul wasn't too bad in those days, but foreigners did get kidnapped now and then, and it seemed smart not to draw too much attention to ourselves - particularly with an American accent.
In the US at least, in coach, there are always people in the cabin that never shut-up during the entire flight, and have to make sure everyone in the vicinity can hear their conversations as well. You have to get the flight crew to tell them to quiet down and stop making the flight even less awful than it already is.
Actually, it is the volume of the loudspeaker output. There are times that I can almost here what the person at the other end is saying through the tiny speaker in the phone. Which means the call volume is fricking loud. As a result people start shouting in their phone, it's an automatic reaction. If I ask them to lower the volume of the call, people look at me dumbfounded or even angry because they don't realize it.
This gets fed into by the sound quality--phone calls tend to have absolutely shoddy sound quality, and sometimes about the only way to get understood on the other end or understand them is to increase the volume. I don't pretend to understand how and why, audio & auditory perception is not my field, but I'm very much on board with the people who think that it's well past time we ought to take advantage of tech improvements to raise the quality of audio over phone lines.
I've been on the el in Chicago, and the Metro, and buses in DC, and I do NOT WANT to be locked into a cabin with some moron yelling into his phone.
So, you'd like the government to legislate good manners? Why single out phone conversations, then — why not ban all talk? If you wish for the law to protect you from people talking, why not also cover screaming babies?
Would you also — based on your experiences — back measures mandating the use of deodorant and other aspects of personal hygiene? How about other people's choice of clothing — should women above certain age be legally allowed to wear miniskirts, for example? And, oh, almost forgot, food! Would you not like to ban certain foods — be it tuna [theonion.com] or curry or whatever else?
Various train operators in the US now have this wonderful idea of "quiet car" [xojane.com] — perhaps, airlines would offer a quiet section too, when the legal obstacles (based on bogus [livescience.com] claims of "interference" with plane's systems) are finally removed... Long overdue.
I believe that there was interference back in the day. My iDen handset would make my PC's speakers 'tic tic tic' right before a call. I wouldn't want that thing on an airplane...
Additionally to that there is an issue with tower spread. A phone on a plane will hit way more towers than a land based phone will. IIRC that puts a weird kind of strain on the cell system that it wasn't designed for, naturally a pico tower on the plane that also requests low power mode from phones connected to it resolves that
I believe that there was interference back in the day
Not since — at least — 1992:
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) asked the RTCA, an independent industry standards organization, to study the issue of electronic devices on airplanes in 1992. The RTCA found no interference and eventually recommended allowing the use of laptops, gaming devices and music players.
In other words, this stopped being a problem even before cell-phones became a must-have and before the very term "smartphone" e
That is pretty much it. Flying small planes I could always tell when I had a call or a message because of a small tic in the head sets. It still is an issue but you have to be much closer to the cockpit (or in the cockpit) to cause interference. It was an issue with older phones since they had a much higher watt rating than modern cell phones.
Cell towers back in the day could only handle a very limited number of calls. When you are in the air instead of hitting one or two towers you would hit all the t
Exactly. It's not that a phone call could make a plane crash - it's the fact that the phone would be *rapidly* switching between cellular network towers that's the problem (mainly during takeoff, when at cruise altitude the plane should be out-of-range for cellular towers anyway). The term for this "switch" is handover [wikipedia.org].
Full disclaimer: I'm not an expert in the field so what I've written above may be in fact utter bullshit, even if according to my best knowledge it's not.
Over the last 10 years or so, I've had things on my phones that track me. Most of them also tracked what towers I connected to. I left the phones turned on accidentally a few times. Generally, in the air there weren't enough towers to attempt a conversation from. If it even connected to a tower, it would disconnect in less than a minute.
I hate hearing people, talking or anything. I moved to LA for work and loathe every second of it. So that is my mind-set to start off.
But.
Your argument appealed to me. Tremendously. I am against the government regulating essentially anything, with the limit falling at 'where the actions of one gravely affect another without choice/alternative".
Here though, is my thought, and maybe I'm just defending my own peace-of-mind desires. And this might sound like I am being facetious, I am not:
Some people can'
That's pretty much what the TSA is doing. Give them a few more years, to get rid of the rest of the folks who didn't get the hint, when they insisted on either irradiating them, or groping their genitals, while throwing out their toothpaste.
>> So, you'd like the government to legislate good manners?
Philosophically I am against the government legislating such things, but realistically, there really are many people out there who either don't even know basic manners, or are selfish enough to not give a shit about anyone else.
Given we all have to get along in this world, it makes sense to me that sadly yes there needs to be legislation that covers the worst offenders. It is exactly those few that don't have the fucking basic intelligence to
Don't legislate good manners, remove barriers from letting those with extremely bad manners suffer sufficient negative consequences that, if they don't figure it out, we ought to be concerned for their mental capability.
... so basically if someone pissses you off sufficiently, you can legally shoot them? I like your thinking. For years I've been saying we need to do something to bring back natural selection in humans
The question for the poll isn't "Should the government allow cell phone usage on airplanes?" it's "Should cell phone calls be allowed on commercial airplane flights?" Even if the government allows it, airlines can (and should) prohibit it, just the same as movie theaters do. When crammed into a confined space for hours on end with no recourse to get away from a person, I should not be forced to listen to their 4 hour conversation with their boss, secretary, mistress, wife, kids, whatever.
OK, but the airlines can also allow brief calls (e.g. to discuss flight details, make arrangements for pickup or in case of delay) while still prohibiting 4 hour conversations.
I mean, this is the informal rule on most other shared transport -- talking briefly with the wife to coordinate is fine, but long drawn out conversations are discouraged.
So, you'd like the government to legislate good manners?
No, I don't want the government to do anything of the sort. I want the airlines to require good manners, just as movie theaters (those to enforce it, anyway) require you to stay off your phone during the movie. Babies are a different matter -- travel with babe-in-tow is arguably a life requirement from time to time. Bringing your precious little bundle to the movies, however, is not.
...And, on the subject of babies, I should add this: I hate the sound of crying babies as much as any guy without crying babies of my own -- it's like sand paper on my nerves. But, anyone who refuses to show kindness, patience and humane respect to those who have crying babies on a plane is an asshole.
Err. It's very, VERY easy to tell the difference between parents with a screaming baby on a flight who want it to shut up and stop annoying everyone and are making all the efforts they can towards that end (picking it up, rocking it, feeding it, hell just paying attention to it in any way at all), and the ones who don't fucking care that it's annoying the hell out of everybody else on the plane and are just ignoring it. Hey, its banshee wailing sounds like the most beautiful music in the world to THEM, so o
Babies have trouble equalising the pressure in their ears with cabin pressure, so are often in pain while flying. Aircraft can't be pressurised to ground level because the stress on the aircraft would be too great.
Interesting. I wasn't aware of this, but it totally makes sense. Too bad yawns aren't psychologically contagious to babies, as they are typically with adults. If you could trigger a baby's yawn, that would probably help.
[If you read this and yawned as a result, fist-bump to you]
*yawn*
I once had a cold that blocked my Eustachian Tubes on a flight between Los Angeles and Denver. It felt like ice picks in my ears as the plane descended and for more than an hour afterwards, far beyond the range that aspirin can handle.
Why single out phone conversations, then — why not ban all talk?
Cell phone calls are infinitely more annoying than people talking because you can only hear one side of the conversation. Your brain naturally wants to fill in the other side, so it's much, much harder to tune out.
To me, that's not really the reason why it's so annoying. People talking on the phone tend to TALK MORE LOUDLY. That's what makes it hard to tune out...
Why single out phone conversations, then — why not ban all talk? If you wish for the law to protect you from people talking, why not also cover screaming babies?
The quiet car idea is not limited to the US. You may find similar cars on high speed trains in Germany. Unfortunately, some people do not comply with it. In Italy people are encouraged to be quiet and respectful to the other passengers. Interestingly it works.
Using a safety regulation to enforce good manners is a terrible idea and an awful precedent.
So you want to get rid of traffic lights that tell people to wait their damn turn? Or not have rules against queue-jumping? Or no-smoking areas? Or driving on the proper side of the road and within the lines? Or not driving the wrong way in traffic?
It's stupidity like yours that highlights how far down the drain slashdot has fallen. If you think there should be no laws against smokers, tough shit, loser.
Driving down the correct lane on the roads and obeying traffic lights aren't good manners. It's a safety issue. Where are the rules for queue jumpers? That may be in a country of which I'm familiar. There should be no laws for smoking areas. Don't like it? Don't go there.
Libtard detected? So says the all around idiot.
Your rights end when they infringe on mine (and vise versa). Second hand smoke has been proven to carry serious health consequences. You are free to smoke in your home and car. If i visit you, I'll abide by your rules. In public, smoking should be limited to designated areas. There should probably be an exception for vaping unless studies show significant side effects for second hand vaping.
I highly doubt there are laws against queue jumping, but many places have RULES. If you queue jump at Disneyland, you
Perhaps we should consider putting up a sound-dampening partition as a special section for those who wish to use their phones in-flight. Preferably the rear-most rows. The ones nearest the bathrooms.
The primary reason for banning the devices is interference with the airplane's systems. Another story today on/. say that malware was found on 25 new/cheap android devices. Isn't there a possibility that hacked phones could send out interference on their radios and cause electrical interference with an airplane's navigation and/or communication systems?
No. The reason for originally banning cell phones on aircraft was that when you get some altitude, you're tying up frequencies on towers for 20 miles instead of the usual couple of blocks. You're interfering with the ability of others to use the system. CB radios were banned in aircraft for the same reason.
While that was true at the time, that issue has been mitigated with wifi calling. I think that is the direction that this is going, not toward using cell tower signals.
but if I did, the last thing I want to hear is some ignorant fucktard yakking on the phone. I also despise people who use cellphones in the theater or in the middle of a conversation. Like the sign in a doctors office says... If answering your phone is more important than our meeting, we'll stop and you can reschedule for another time.
In some of the early 747s the upstairs was set up as a lounge area. If it were practical to have an area like this as something of a business lounge, I wouldn't mind people on their phones there. I don't believe this is practical now.
People making normal, polite, business calls in the seat next to me probably wouldn't bother me too much. Letting Aunt Martha know what time you'll be in...OK. Angry business calls and "relationship" calls...No way!!
I think people need to be satisfied with a text-based messaging system for communicating while on an aircraft.
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights. Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin. Wake up in the arrivals lounge of the new airport.
The airline saves money on food, air hosts, and can stack the passengers in like cordwood. I don't have to deal with crappy airline flights. Everybody wins, and the question of cell phone calls becomes moot.
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights. Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin. Wake up in the arrivals lounge of the new airport.
The airline saves money on food, air hosts, and can stack the passengers in like cordwood. I don't have to deal with crappy airline flights. Everybody wins, and the question of cell phone calls becomes moot.
Yeah, that sounds like a great idea until you consider how often airlines manage to misplace luggage, or lose it entirely.
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights. Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin. Wake up in the arrivals lounge of the new airport.
The airline saves money on food, air hosts, and can stack the passengers in like cordwood. I don't have to deal with crappy airline flights. Everybody wins, and the question of cell phone calls becomes moot.
Yeah, that sounds like a great idea until you consider how often airlines manage to misplace luggage, or lose it entirely.
Don't worry, you'll always be able to find yourself! Add to that the option to make phone calls... "Operator, please trace this call and tell me where I am!"
I've thought about this and I don't think you could sign a wavier to completely absolve the airline of anything bad that might happen while you are unconscious, and nor would you want to (if they drop you on your head you want to be able to sue). But even if you overcame that, it would be medically quite challenging. Drugs have different effects on different people, and some would need much higher doses than others to remain out for 8+ hours. In hospitals there is a doctor whose only responsibility to is to keep the patient unconscious while being operated on. Even if it could be automated, people would need health checks before hand.
A more practical idea would be bunk beds. Safety is an issue but perhaps some kind of Japanese capsule-hotel style arrangement could allow people to sleep naturally, or at least be more comfortable.
Crew have bunks already on some planes. It's not a stretch to imagine more of them and since people are stacked, aisles could be bigger or your luggage could be stored in a different manner.
http://www.core77.com/posts/27... [core77.com]
Safety is an issue but perhaps some kind of Japanese capsule-hotel style arrangement could allow people to sleep naturally, or at least be more comfortable.
I agree that would be more comfortable, but having slept in a capsule-hotel, I think it would also take up more room on the airplane.
Being sedated would be an invitation for TSA to probe you deeply, just in case you are hiding something inside your body.
Call me old fashioned (and it wouldn't be the first time), but I prefer to be full awake and go through a Xray body scan.
Oh, _that_ could never lead to any malpractice lawsuits about incorrect dosage. No, thanks. We'd either have sedation administered by (shudder) flight crew, or we'd pay ER-visit rates for airline tix--plus the "normal" cost of the flight. Cordwood, indeed.
You do realize that you have just given the airlines the idea of charging for the right to make phone calls from the plane. Natural implementation would be through registering your phone number along with your credit card, and using that data to authorize your airborne call.
Or maybe they are already doing that? (I haven't flown in many years.)
(Actually, I wish they would designate specific cars on the trains where phone use is allowed. Most of the other passengers would crowd into those cars, making my trip
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights.
I want that too but...
Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin
Why would *I* want to be sedated? Flight time is great reading time.
Instead what I want is a seat that can offer on-demand sedation. If I need it, I can ask for sedation (great option because I cannot sleep on planes). But even better, if five passengers on the plane vote to sedate someone in a specific seat, it would also instantly sedate you.
At best, a cell phone will work until about 10,000 feet. Beyond that, you won't get a signal. So yeah, I'm fine with people talking on their phone at the start/end of a flight.
Or is the question meant about whether voice calls should be allowed via the in-flight WIFI?
Yes, people should be allowed to make calls, but only as a form of assisted suicide. They're just asking for the rest of the plane to murder them after the third loud outburst you didn't give a shit about anyway.
Oh wait, nevermind, the TSA grabbed everything we can use to murderate them. Guess we'll have to resort to "no calls" until I can bring my nail clippers on board again.
Given that WiFi isn't free on many airlines that might bacgood solution since most passengers won't want to pay to make a call. Howver, can a plane's wifi handle the bandwidth needed to make calls viable? If not, airlines are not likely to allow it to avoid javing pissed off customers who likely are amongst their best customers. Ive used in flight WiFi to check emails and send documents,as well as to textbut have not tried to make a call so I don't know if it would work.
We would also recommend that billing of phone calls from airplanes should be significantly lowered, pairing land calls. This will make your flight more comfortable, and significantly increase the effectiveness of our work.
Do you know how many more in-flight confrontations passengers will have? You won't need in-flight entertainment. Maybe popcorn, or a way to de-stress after your plan is diverted again to remove individuals.
Of course, this is a good excuse to install actual (soundproof) doors between first and economy classes, and charge more for the ability to sit in a quieter area.
[P]Cell phones do [b]NOT[/b] work in an airplane especially when you're at cruising altitude. It's impossible to make a call or even get data for all but a few minutes after take off and right before landing. [/p]
[P]Go ahead and try it the next time you fly. No signal![/p]
[P] Makes you wonder how everyone on those 9/11 flights were able to make cell phone calls...[/p]
Makes you wonder how everyone on those 9/11 flights were able to make cell phone calls...
Phones stop working at elevations of 10,000 ft or so I've been told. I don't remember the height of the twin towers, but they definitely were much lower than that. For quite some time those planes must have been flying well within range of terrestrial mobile phone networks. Then maybe that 10k ft level is a myth, too. On the ground the range of a single tower is for sure a lot more than that.
Wired phones return the talker's attenuated voice back to the earpiece. That allows us to have some reference for how loud to speak. Sidetone is entirely missing in mobile phones, so the talker thinks their voice is not loud enough.
Read more about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
There is no good reason for a federal ban on phone calls in flight, especially as there used to be "air phone" services that let you do that, albeit at absurd per-minutes rates.
But then I would really love to fly any airline that prohibited the calls on their own, akin to "non-smoking" establishments before laws started to ban smoking in public.
Airlines could even make segregated "quiet" cabins for those who don't want to hear random conversations. Given the current trend to micro-upgrades in airlines,
Boring crap should be banned.:) Standing in line at my corner store a lady in front of me was complaining about the lack of male stripers in our small town (on her phone)... they wanted him for a bachelorette party.... damb i should have spoke up. Now that type of convo shouldn't be banned... just saying.:)
The airlines should allow calls only on the plane's built-in phones. (Not on your personal phone.) And the plane's phones can have some restrictions:
1) No call longer than 5 minutes. At 4 1/2 minutes, you get a warning. At 5 minutes, the call is automatically ended.
2) The airline's phone should allow only a certain loudness (up to 60 dB?) of sound going into it. If sounds > 60 dB go into the phone, then the phone won't send the sound of your voice to the person you're talking to. Instead, both you and the other person will hear an annoying whining sound. As soon as you stop talking loudly, that sound will stop. If a screaming baby is behind you, raising the dB going into the phone, then a flight attendant can disable this rule for you.
You miss the point where after 5 minutes, you have to wait 5 minutes before calling again...
Here in Frnace, we always have a douchebag in the wagon I take to go home (~1h1/4) to speak loudly about his life non stop from the moment he come in until he go out (without stopping talking sh*t on his f*cking phone)... I can't imagine something like that in a 6 or 7 hour flight, I think I could kill the guy:D .
Governments should not ban it. Airlines should be permitted to ban it. This is not a significant safety issue; however, there is a market for quiet zones and talk zones. Trains already have quiet cars. I suspect that most airline passengers would prefer designated quiet areas once they've tried talk zones a few times.
I have to agree with AC. I would much prefer Airlines ban in-flight calls than for Government to pass the law. Make it an airline by airline decision. Let passengers vote with their buttocks.... like they frequently do in general elections.
I'm still waiting for the advent of the computer science groupie.
I don't want to hear your call (Score:1)
I've been on the el in Chicago, and the Metro, and buses in DC, and I do NOT WANT to be locked into a cabin with some moron yelling into his phone.
Re: I don't want to hear your call (Score:4, Insightful)
Planes are usually quite not as most city trains or buses, so no need to yell (which won't prevent everyone, but the most, I guess)
I regularly ride the (Seattle area) Sounder commuter train. When it's moving, it's still generally not so loud that you have to raise your voice above a normal conversational level to be heard... but even when the thing's stopped and completely quiet, you get morons shouting into their phones - and I don't mean in anger, they're shouting a normal conversation!
I still remember one time (definitely a non-normal conversation) when I was riding the train several years ago, and this lady was making this really loud phone call. I was doing my best not to listen, but right in the middle she starts shouting - very loudly, and completely without emotion - "I'm telling you she's DEAD. I SAID SHE'S DEAD!!". It was completely bizarre.
Re: I don't want to hear your call (Score:4, Interesting)
I've always wondered if Americans shout a lot when they're at home, because they certainly tend to talk very loudly overseas. I was walking down a busy street in Kabul, Afghanistan, ten years ago with an American friend. She was talking at the usual American overseas, ear-splitting volume, which made me feel a bit self-conscious. When i suggested she might like to speak a little less loudly, she was surprised - she had no idea she was shouting. Security in Kabul wasn't too bad in those days, but foreigners did get kidnapped now and then, and it seemed smart not to draw too much attention to ourselves - particularly with an American accent.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it's usually millennials. It has little to do with reception and more to do with the psychology of talking to someone you can't see.
Re: (Score:2)
We usually have enough money and foresight to have hearing aids, and culturally sensitive enough not to make annoying habits public.
Usually. The exception is when we want retribution on some annoying millennial. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Signal:Noise Improvement Needed (Score:2)
This gets fed into by the sound quality--phone calls tend to have absolutely shoddy sound quality, and sometimes about the only way to get understood on the other end or understand them is to increase the volume. I don't pretend to understand how and why, audio & auditory perception is not my field, but I'm very much on board with the people who think that it's well past time we ought to take advantage of tech improvements to raise the quality of audio over phone lines.
Mostly, admittedly, because I am
You don't want to hear my call (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you'd like the government to legislate good manners? Why single out phone conversations, then — why not ban all talk? If you wish for the law to protect you from people talking, why not also cover screaming babies?
Would you also — based on your experiences — back measures mandating the use of deodorant and other aspects of personal hygiene? How about other people's choice of clothing — should women above certain age be legally allowed to wear miniskirts, for example? And, oh, almost forgot, food! Would you not like to ban certain foods — be it tuna [theonion.com] or curry or whatever else?
Various train operators in the US now have this wonderful idea of "quiet car" [xojane.com] — perhaps, airlines would offer a quiet section too, when the legal obstacles (based on bogus [livescience.com] claims of "interference" with plane's systems) are finally removed... Long overdue.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that there was interference back in the day. My iDen handset would make my PC's speakers 'tic tic tic' right before a call. I wouldn't want that thing on an airplane...
Additionally to that there is an issue with tower spread. A phone on a plane will hit way more towers than a land based phone will. IIRC that puts a weird kind of strain on the cell system that it wasn't designed for, naturally a pico tower on the plane that also requests low power mode from phones connected to it resolves that
Re: (Score:2)
Not since — at least — 1992:
In other words, this stopped being a problem even before cell-phones became a must-have and before the very term "smartphone" e
Re: (Score:2)
This may (or may not) be a problem for the Federal Communications Commission, not the Aviation.
The FCC is where the ban originated. The airlines/FAA are just enforcing the FCC ban.
Re: You don't want to hear my call (Score:2)
It was introduced to avoid broadcast storms on cell towers on the ground.
Re: (Score:1)
Cell towers back in the day could only handle a very limited number of calls. When you are in the air instead of hitting one or two towers you would hit all the t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, you're absolutely right. Well, mostly right.
Over the last 10 years or so, I've had things on my phones that track me. Most of them also tracked what towers I connected to. I left the phones turned on accidentally a few times. Generally, in the air there weren't enough towers to attempt a conversation from. If it even connected to a tower, it would disconnect in less than a minute.
Here's a composite map of several trips in 2010. [imgur.com] There were stops at Boston, New York, DC, Atlanta, and Tampa. I thin
Re: You don't want to hear my call (Score:1)
Re: You don't want to hear my call (Score:1)
Re: You don't want to hear my call (Score:2)
Even better, ban flying. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:1)
Even better, ban flying. Problem solved.
That's pretty much what the TSA is doing. Give them a few more years, to get rid of the rest of the folks who didn't get the hint, when they insisted on either irradiating them, or groping their genitals, while throwing out their toothpaste.
Re: (Score:3)
>> why not also cover screaming babies?
I'd vote for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Sssssh! Don't give him ideas.
Re: (Score:1)
You want quiet and thin walls? Move out in the middle of nowhere.
Re: (Score:3)
You would be outlawing yourself.
Re: (Score:3)
You never screamed in the middle of the night when you were a baby?
AC would hold a rational conversation with his mother and simply explain to her that he was hungry and wanted her to place her tit in his mouth.
Re: (Score:2)
>> So, you'd like the government to legislate good manners?
Philosophically I am against the government legislating such things, but realistically, there really are many people out there who either don't even know basic manners, or are selfish enough to not give a shit about anyone else.
Given we all have to get along in this world, it makes sense to me that sadly yes there needs to be legislation that covers the worst offenders. It is exactly those few that don't have the fucking basic intelligence to
Re: (Score:2)
Don't legislate good manners, remove barriers from letting those with extremely bad manners suffer sufficient negative consequences that, if they don't figure it out, we ought to be concerned for their mental capability.
Re: (Score:2)
... so basically if someone pissses you off sufficiently, you can legally shoot them? I like your thinking. For years I've been saying we need to do something to bring back natural selection in humans
Re:You don't want to hear my call (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, but the airlines can also allow brief calls (e.g. to discuss flight details, make arrangements for pickup or in case of delay) while still prohibiting 4 hour conversations.
I mean, this is the informal rule on most other shared transport -- talking briefly with the wife to coordinate is fine, but long drawn out conversations are discouraged.
Re:You don't want to hear my call (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I don't want the government to do anything of the sort. I want the airlines to require good manners, just as movie theaters (those to enforce it, anyway) require you to stay off your phone during the movie. Babies are a different matter -- travel with babe-in-tow is arguably a life requirement from time to time. Bringing your precious little bundle to the movies, however, is not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: You don't want to hear my call (Score:1)
Err. It's very, VERY easy to tell the difference between parents with a screaming baby on a flight who want it to shut up and stop annoying everyone and are making all the efforts they can towards that end (picking it up, rocking it, feeding it, hell just paying attention to it in any way at all), and the ones who don't fucking care that it's annoying the hell out of everybody else on the plane and are just ignoring it. Hey, its banshee wailing sounds like the most beautiful music in the world to THEM, so o
Re: (Score:3)
Babies have trouble equalising the pressure in their ears with cabin pressure, so are often in pain while flying. Aircraft can't be pressurised to ground level because the stress on the aircraft would be too great.
We need a technological solution to this.
Re: (Score:2)
[If you read this and yawned as a result, fist-bump to you]
*yawn*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Gamow Bags [wikipedia.org]. Make little ones that you can pressurize the little bugger back to sea level.
Add some nitrous oxide as a secondary measure.
Re: You don't want to hear my call (Score:2)
Don't fly if you have a baby.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a technological solution to it: pressure equalizing earplugs.
Re:You don't want to hear my call (Score:4, Informative)
Why single out phone conversations, then — why not ban all talk?
Cell phone calls are infinitely more annoying than people talking because you can only hear one side of the conversation. Your brain naturally wants to fill in the other side, so it's much, much harder to tune out.
Re: (Score:3)
To me, that's not really the reason why it's so annoying. People talking on the phone tend to TALK MORE LOUDLY. That's what makes it hard to tune out...
Re: (Score:2)
That, and people almost always talk louder on a telephone.
Re: (Score:2)
Why single out phone conversations, then — why not ban all talk? If you wish for the law to protect you from people talking, why not also cover screaming babies?
Yes, please.
Re: (Score:2)
The quiet car idea is not limited to the US. You may find similar cars on high speed trains in Germany. Unfortunately, some people do not comply with it. In Italy people are encouraged to be quiet and respectful to the other passengers. Interestingly it works.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I wand the government to make it legal to slap the shit out of rude people.
They do that, and everything will solve it's self.
Re: (Score:2)
Using a safety regulation to enforce good manners is a terrible idea and an awful precedent.
So you want to get rid of traffic lights that tell people to wait their damn turn? Or not have rules against queue-jumping? Or no-smoking areas? Or driving on the proper side of the road and within the lines? Or not driving the wrong way in traffic?
Libtard detected!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Driving down the correct lane on the roads and obeying traffic lights aren't good manners. It's a safety issue. Where are the rules for queue jumpers? That may be in a country of which I'm familiar. There should be no laws for smoking areas. Don't like it? Don't go there.
Libtard detected? So says the all around idiot.
Your rights end when they infringe on mine (and vise versa). Second hand smoke has been proven to carry serious health consequences. You are free to smoke in your home and car. If i visit you, I'll abide by your rules. In public, smoking should be limited to designated areas. There should probably be an exception for vaping unless studies show significant side effects for second hand vaping.
I highly doubt there are laws against queue jumping, but many places have RULES. If you queue jump at Disneyland, you
Re: (Score:1)
Re: I don't want to hear your call (Score:2)
I have no problem with calls being allowed on planes, so long as punching people who are making them is allowed.
Safety first? (Score:1)
Re:Safety first? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Missing Option (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but you are not allowed to talk- you insensitive clods
I don't fly... (Score:1)
Lounge area? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sedation (Score:5, Interesting)
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights. Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin. Wake up in the arrivals lounge of the new airport.
The airline saves money on food, air hosts, and can stack the passengers in like cordwood. I don't have to deal with crappy airline flights. Everybody wins, and the question of cell phone calls becomes moot.
Re:Sedation (Score:5, Funny)
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights. Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin. Wake up in the arrivals lounge of the new airport.
The airline saves money on food, air hosts, and can stack the passengers in like cordwood. I don't have to deal with crappy airline flights. Everybody wins, and the question of cell phone calls becomes moot.
Yeah, that sounds like a great idea until you consider how often airlines manage to misplace luggage, or lose it entirely.
Re: (Score:2)
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights. Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin. Wake up in the arrivals lounge of the new airport.
The airline saves money on food, air hosts, and can stack the passengers in like cordwood. I don't have to deal with crappy airline flights. Everybody wins, and the question of cell phone calls becomes moot.
Yeah, that sounds like a great idea until you consider how often airlines manage to misplace luggage, or lose it entirely.
Don't worry, you'll always be able to find yourself! Add to that the option to make phone calls... "Operator, please trace this call and tell me where I am!"
Re:Sedation (Score:5, Interesting)
I've thought about this and I don't think you could sign a wavier to completely absolve the airline of anything bad that might happen while you are unconscious, and nor would you want to (if they drop you on your head you want to be able to sue). But even if you overcame that, it would be medically quite challenging. Drugs have different effects on different people, and some would need much higher doses than others to remain out for 8+ hours. In hospitals there is a doctor whose only responsibility to is to keep the patient unconscious while being operated on. Even if it could be automated, people would need health checks before hand.
A more practical idea would be bunk beds. Safety is an issue but perhaps some kind of Japanese capsule-hotel style arrangement could allow people to sleep naturally, or at least be more comfortable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Safety is an issue but perhaps some kind of Japanese capsule-hotel style arrangement could allow people to sleep naturally, or at least be more comfortable.
I agree that would be more comfortable, but having slept in a capsule-hotel, I think it would also take up more room on the airplane.
Re: (Score:2)
Call me old fashioned (and it wouldn't be the first time), but I prefer to be full awake and go through a Xray body scan.
Re: (Score:1)
Seed of terrible idea... (Score:2)
You do realize that you have just given the airlines the idea of charging for the right to make phone calls from the plane. Natural implementation would be through registering your phone number along with your credit card, and using that data to authorize your airborne call.
Or maybe they are already doing that? (I haven't flown in many years.)
(Actually, I wish they would designate specific cars on the trains where phone use is allowed. Most of the other passengers would crowd into those cars, making my trip
Even better take (Score:2)
I would pay a premium if an airline were to offer sedation flights.
I want that too but...
Receive an injection at the boarding gate. Get loaded into a tiny coffin
Why would *I* want to be sedated? Flight time is great reading time.
Instead what I want is a seat that can offer on-demand sedation. If I need it, I can ask for sedation (great option because I cannot sleep on planes). But even better, if five passengers on the plane vote to sedate someone in a specific seat, it would also instantly sedate you.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone's been watching The Fifth Element.
"allowed"? (Score:2)
At best, a cell phone will work until about 10,000 feet. Beyond that, you won't get a signal. So yeah, I'm fine with people talking on their phone at the start/end of a flight.
Or is the question meant about whether voice calls should be allowed via the in-flight WIFI?
YES! (Score:2)
Yes, people should be allowed to make calls, but only as a form of assisted suicide. They're just asking for the rest of the plane to murder them after the third loud outburst you didn't give a shit about anyway.
Oh wait, nevermind, the TSA grabbed everything we can use to murderate them. Guess we'll have to resort to "no calls" until I can bring my nail clippers on board again.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: YES! (Score:2)
Please, make all the calls you want! (Score:2)
your truly
NSA chief officer
In-flight altercations (Score:2)
Do you know how many more in-flight confrontations passengers will have? You won't need in-flight entertainment. Maybe popcorn, or a way to de-stress after your plan is diverted again to remove individuals.
Of course, this is a good excuse to install actual (soundproof) doors between first and economy classes, and charge more for the ability to sit in a quieter area.
Re: (Score:2)
Doors would also help in slowing snakes and zombies down as they spread between cabins.
Emergency Safety (Score:1)
Only if you want your cell crumpled and folded (Score:1)
And then crushed by the tray table.
In that case, go for it.
Why do people keep asking this idiotic question? (Score:1)
Re: Why do people keep asking this idiotic questio (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Makes you wonder how everyone on those 9/11 flights were able to make cell phone calls...
Phones stop working at elevations of 10,000 ft or so I've been told. I don't remember the height of the twin towers, but they definitely were much lower than that. For quite some time those planes must have been flying well within range of terrestrial mobile phone networks. Then maybe that 10k ft level is a myth, too. On the ground the range of a single tower is for sure a lot more than that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Makes you wonder how everyone on those 9/11 flights were able to make cell phone calls...
Satellite phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the 9/11 calls were fake .. just like the elections didn't matter. Trump/Hillary are puppets. The US doesn't have a real press.
Missing Sidetone == LOUD CALLS (Score:2)
Legally, yes, but airlines should prohibit. (Score:2)
Depends what they talk about (Score:1)
Technology to enforce courtesy rules (Score:4, Interesting)
The airlines should allow calls only on the plane's built-in phones. (Not on your personal phone.) And the plane's phones can have some restrictions:
1) No call longer than 5 minutes. At 4 1/2 minutes, you get a warning. At 5 minutes, the call is automatically ended.
2) The airline's phone should allow only a certain loudness (up to 60 dB?) of sound going into it. If sounds > 60 dB go into the phone, then the phone won't send the sound of your voice to the person you're talking to. Instead, both you and the other person will hear an annoying whining sound. As soon as you stop talking loudly, that sound will stop. If a screaming baby is behind you, raising the dB going into the phone, then a flight attendant can disable this rule for you.
Re: (Score:3)
2) The airline's phone should allow only a certain loudness (up to 60 dB?) of sound going into it. If sounds > 60 dB go into the phone,
That's not going to work because the ambient noise from the engine at times can be greater than even 85dB
Re: (Score:1)
Watch A Husband for Christmas (2016) Online Free (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Governments should not ban it. Airlines should be permitted to ban it.
This is not a significant safety issue; however, there is a market for quiet zones and talk zones. Trains already have quiet cars. I suspect that most airline passengers would prefer designated quiet areas once they've tried talk zones a few times.
I have to agree with AC. I would much prefer Airlines ban in-flight calls than for Government to pass the law. Make it an airline by airline decision. Let passengers vote with their buttocks.... like they frequently do in general elections.