My understanding of the issue (and I don't claim to be an expert) is
that in the past airborne cellular comms was hit and miss. It might
work, it might not. It was not designed to be used that way. Given the
right circumstances you could use it.

What is being proposed in that article is a reliable, always accessible
system, designed for that purpose.

Phil
--
Pfft...english! Who needs that? I'm never going to England.
Homer J. Simpson

No. They used the airphones installed in the aircraft seats.

Yes..... However it has been against the law to use a cell phone over 100' for
many years. What the demonstration was reall all about was a low powered
micro-cell aboard the plane controlling the phones and passing the signal via
existing air to ground channels back into the phone system.

This and other pending announcements will allo us all to talk on our cell
phones airborne as well as on the ground - legally!

--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net

What has changed is the ability to make calls *reliably* in aircraft
as well as not "annoy" ground cell sites or mess with the plane's
avionics.  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
          remove NONO from .NONOcom to reply

Good point!

http://www.newbid.net/index.asp

from reading the article the term "cell phone" in the reference
application appears to be a bit of misnomer.  most likely as the term
"sat-phone" has its own connotations, of large products (compared to
the latest cell phones) and being expensive - i have used inmarsat
based systems, at the cost of 7 bucks a minute, though you have to
commit to a monthly minute plan, or worry about roll-over minutes!

ADA and AAS has had this discussion before, and while i am not a
communications engineer, there are points that have been raised and
discussed.  the land based cell phone system is based on a network of
"cells" with towers located either periodically or sporadically,
depending on where you live.  each cell has a capacity, and switches
over to alternative cells, within range depending on that cell
capacity and the movement of the phone its self between cells.

now in an aircraft, although its is not only possible, but likely,
that a cell will be in range, upto a given point, the phone will
likely have access to a number of cell simultaneously, and bearing in
mind the higher speed of movement, between cells in an aircraft as
opposed to ground based phones, the potential to absorb a a large
amount of cell capacity by a single or a few phones, that are
accessing several cells simultaneously, and switching between cells at
rate incredibly faster than implemented technology, will invariably to
to a lot of lost capacity and i am sure pissed off service customers.

now the article does quote satellite based technology, which is
different from cell technology, and there are and have been several
products both available and in development intended to allow more
consumer access to sat communication.

another and for me, more important, issue regarding cell phone use in
flight is the RF field and interference generated by cell phones.  i
have broadband wireless here. in addition, i also have a cordless
phone on the other side of the room, albeit not cell phone, however,
when the cordless phone is in use, the wireless connection drops out,
as they are both in the same freq. range.  also, i am sure others have
experienced this, often a cell phone, in the vicinity of a radio or
other electrical item causes interference, you may notice this when in
the car with the music on.  when the phone transmits or recieves a
signal, eg incomin/outgoing call or cell transfer a buzzing occurs
through the radio, not all the time but sometimes.  in an aircraft,
this is hardly an ideal situation, with not only the aircraft systems
sending and recieving data for safe flight, but through the internal
sytems on the aircraft.  you think how far your cell phone transmits
to the nearest cell, and compare that to the distance between an
aircraft cabin and e&e bay. personally speaking, i do not want some
idiot jibbering on his phone during an IFR approach, particularly,
with high ground in the area.  so turn it off in the air.

also another point to consider, is, passenger interactivity.  do you
really want to be on a 5 or 10 flight on the red-eye with some f.cking
berk nattering on about garbage, now you put a plane full of people
doing that!  recently i was behind one of these a-holes, who, upon
landing switched on his phone and carried on the same conversation
during egress, baggage collection, customs and immigration and, and ,
and the frigging transfer to the car rental area.  the call was a
joke, "yeah, yeah i am standing in the passport line now." , put "some
bubbly on ice", "uh huh, i should be there soon.", "is fred/Tim/Bob
(who the f.ck ever) in town yet?", "i am waiting for the bus to the
rental company", "put some bubbly on ice will you."  FOR 45 f.cking
MINUTES! nothing zero, zip, nada, of any reason to be on the phone.
yes big f.cking deal, he has cell phone, so do teenage venezualens,
who cares.

you want to deal with that on a transatlantic over night or the new
york red eye?  i bloody dont.