Nary a week after JetBlue expanded its in-flight internet services on BetaBlue comes news that the airline's LiveTV unit will be picking up Verizon's Airfone network. As you can glean, the purchase is being made in order to further "develop in-flight email and internet services," and while no purchase price was disclosed by either outfit, we are told that LiveTV will receive "100 air-to-ground US communications towers and Airfone's corporate and government aviation clients on January 1st." That's nice and all, but can't we get something out of this sooner?

In a Harris Interactive survey of 2,030 US adults of whom, 1,778 have actually flown in an airplane, a full three quarters say that cellphone usage on airplanes should be restricted to "non-talking features." In other words, email, texting, and surfing the Web. That's a pretty significant majority seeing as how the EC has cleared the way for calls within European airspace. 69% of consumers agreed that if voice calls are permitted, a special "talking zone" should be established so that other passengers are not interrupted. While the survey reflects our own opinions, take note that the results benefit sites like Yahoo! Mobile, the very company which commissioned the survey. It's also worth highlighting a comment made by a certain Miss Teen, South Carolina who said, "That some US Americans should be unable to do so, because, uh, some-a people out there in our nation don't have cellphones, and such as, maps." Good point.

Despite the on-again, off-again worries about in-flight calling interfering with an airliner's many navigational gizmos, we have to admit, there's a part of us that really loves to hear a story about what happens when someone actually has the stones to ignore federal law and breaks out the phone. That's exactly what Texan Joe David Jones did on a flight from Austin to Dallas last week, receiving a message on his cell -- which he'd forgotten to turn off -- about his father's health and felt compelled to return the call immediately. He ignored flight attendants' requests to hang up, spending some 20-odd minutes chatting away, apparently with no ill effect on the plane's ability to fly without exploding, barrel rolling uncontrollably, or falling out of the sky. We'd expected that such a blatant disregard for ignoring crew instructions would result in some jail time, but apparently the gentleman simply got slapped with a disorderly conduct ticket that carries up to $500 in fines. If we'd been in the seat next to him, we'd have probably hogtied him with his seatbelt and thrown his phone down the scary vacuum-powered lavatory toilet, but at least we know exactly what happens now when someone says "screw you" to the in-flight phone ban.

Handset addicts traveling domestically through Houston's Intercontinental Airport have likely utilized the paperless boarding option if hopping on a Continental flight, and apparently the initiative is going over so well that the aforesaid airline and the TSA are expanding it to three more venues. As of now, passengers traveling within the US can enjoy the same luxury at Boston's Logan International Airport and Reagan Washington National Airport in Washington, D.C; later this month, the program should slide into Newark International Airport in New Jersey. As expected, only folks traveling alone can take advantage, as the airline feels that pulling up passes for an entire group would actually slow the flow of boarding. There's been no word given on future expansion plans, but at this rate, we wouldn't be shocked to see it hit even more airports in the not-too-distant future.

[Via WBZTV]

Not even a week after hearing that Air France was forging ahead with an in-flight calling trial, the European Commission has now voiced its approval of using mobiles on planes in European airspace. After six months of deliberating, the decision was finally made to give airlines the choice of offering up services in order for guests to dial loved ones at 3,000-meters or more. The EU telecoms commissioner, Viviane Reding, went on to warn operators to "keep the cost of calls made on planes at a reasonable level," and of course, not all is clear just yet. For starters, the European Aviation Safety Agency still needs to green-light the whole ordeal by approving any hardware that would be used, and we won't be seeing any 3G action up high just yet. Still, at least one less hurdle stands in the way of you phoning home from over Europe (and simultaneously making enemies out of all your neighbors trying to get a few decent minutes of shuteye).

Not even half a year after Air France enabled passengers on its single OnAir-equipped Airbus A318 to send / receive messages and e-mail, the airline has went live with the second phase of the in-flight experiment. As of this week, guests who find themselves aboard the aforesaid aircraft can make / receive calls on their mobile at 30,000 feet. Reportedly, a dozen simultaneous calls are possible "per picocell network, as well as unlimited text messages and e-mails," and while pricing details weren't disclosed, you can rest assured it won't be a bargain. Nevertheless, the voice aspect of the trial is scheduled to carry on for three months, and we're assuming the results (read: whether annoyed passengers start assaulting chronic yappers) will determine if it gets rolled out to more of the fleet or quietly buried.

[Via WiFi Net News]

This seems sort of obvious, but in case it wasn't crystal clear, a report from some company called Freesky Research points out that travelers on US airlines -- where cellphone use is categorically banned -- suffer an in-flight productivity hit versus their counterparts in Europe and Asia who are flying airlines that now allow yapping and / or data services from the comfort and convenience of their seats. The firm really makes it seem like a desperate situation, too, saying that the FAA, FCC, and other powers that be are "allowing other countries to leap ahead with in-flight productivity, while facing mounting evidence that there is no safety benefit to passengers." Perhaps what they failed to consider, though, is the safety benefit of not getting slapped by your neighbor when you're mouthing off on the celly for a good 40 minutes straight.

[Via textually.org]

Just in case last month's airport scare wasn't enough, today we're finding that an Alaska Airlines flight from San Jose was evacuated upon landing "after a passenger found an unclaimed cell phone tucked in his seat." Both the FBI and Port of Seattle police eventually concluded that the mobile "posed no safety threat," but apparently, it was worth looking into. When found, the handset "appeared to have been taken apart, put back together and shoved into the seat," but after all was said and done, no humans were injured, other flights at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport were only delayed for about ten minutes and some poor soul is wishing he / she had opted for that cellphone insurance back in the day.

[Via SlashPhone]

With rude passengers and terrorist thoughts in the mind of airline officials and passengers, British parliament members (MPs) are holding steady against any airline policy that would allow in-flight mobile phone use. The real reason they are scared, from what we can glean, is related to the remote detonation of bombs on planes by terrorists. Outside of the Executive Decision movie scenario being painted here, the MPs referenced the 2004 Madrid bombings being set off by cellphones in explaining their support for the ban. As such, we don't see any mobile use coming on Britain-originated flights soon. Better catch a Qantas flight instead, heh.

[via textually.org, image via arinc.com]

The FAA's still hemming and hawing over how to handle the rather controversial issue of in-flight mobile phone use, but that hasn't stopped Europe's Airbus from pushing the issue on its home turf. Having already signed agreements with Ryanair and Qantas to provide service through its OnAir subsidiary, the company's been testing equipment to enable the use of GSM handsets for some time; the European Aviation Safety Agency's apparently pretty satisfied with how those tests have been coming along, too, having just blessed the system for commercial use. European travelers worried that this development is going to lead to a rash of incessant yappers on domestic flights can take some solace in the knowledge that flight attendants will be able to "manage" the service, even shutting off voice entirely while leaving SMS and data active. Look for OnAir service to drop initially on short flights in Western Europe, though Airbus intends to take it global -- if the FAA's cool with it, anyway.

[Via WirelessInfo.com]

The seemingly never-ending "will they or won't they" saga involving the FCC, the FAA, airlines, mobile carriers, and the extraordinarily annoying plane passenger sitting next to you has taken another unexpected turn this week. On the heels of a CTIA study suggesting that so-called "picocells" placed on planes to communicate with phones won't completely eliminate paralyzing interference with ground towers, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin suggesting that the feds should hold off on lifting the in-flight calling ban. Apparently, the big issue revolves around phones operating on bands that aren't supported by the installed picocell; in the absence of that local communication, the handset goes right back to mussin' and fussin' with the traditional towers several miles below -- potentially with disastrous effects to the network and other users, never mind the fact that no one's managed to conclusively prove that aircraft systems won't be affected. For what it's worth, the chairman's suggestion is just that -- a suggestion -- and doesn't prevent the agency's commissioners from approving the move anyway. While we're the first to agree that the thought of a couple hundred passengers yakking away in tight quarters is a starkly frightening one, we're not sure it's the FCC's place to be legislating away annoyances -- let the feds do their technical due diligence, we say. Word has it the picocells can be tweaked to fix the CTIA's concerns, and if that holds up, airlines will decide individually whether to let customers dial (or, at the very least, access data services) mid-flight. From there, we'll all be voting with our dollars.

[Via Techdirt]

If you're a jet-setting highfalutin business executive, you probably can't afford to live even a few precious hours on your private jet without being connected to the outside world. Executives, fear no longer, because 3Way Networks and Triagnosys have partnered together to build the first 3G communications network that can be installed on any private plane. Contained within a four kilogram (under nine pounds) low power box connects to a satellite signal that communicates with a terrestrial base station. 3Way Networks says that the box will allow 10 simultaneous voice calls and offer HSDPA rates of up to 3.6 MB/sec. No word on if it's actually been field tested by 10 suits who've been strung out on caffeine for days and are on the final leg of a trans-Pacific flight back to New York -- we figure that by that point, they might be actually coming to blows over bandwidth.

[Via The Register]

If ASiQ has its way, worries about cellphones bringing down airplanes could soon be a thing of the past, thanks to its still well-guarded system that would let passengers make in-flight calls using their own phone. They're being stingy with deets on account of their patent status, but what we do know is that the system will consist of a device that's connected to your cellphone by either a cable or Bluetooth connection, and that it'll supposedly work with GSM, CDMA, UMTS and EDGE. It also won't be free, of course, but ASiQ says it'll be inexpensive. What's more, they claim they've managed to address the privacy concerns of other people on the plane. We still think the Cone of Silence is the answer, but we're guessing they've cooked up something decidedly less cool (and probably less effective).

[Via textually.org]