back to article Smartphones to be inescapable, even at 40,000 feet

Folk soon need not look up from their screens when boarding aircraft and wandering the aisles thanks to an alliance formed by OneWeb and Airbus to bring 5G roaming to the skies. OneWeb, which hopes to launch the first of some 900 satellites into low Earth orbit this year aboard a Russian Soyuz-ST from the Korou Cosmodrome in …

  1. VooDooMonkey

    900 satelllites? Nine hundred? WTF?!?!

    1. James 51

      There's going to be a lot of shooting stars at some point.

    2. Dr Who

      900 is barely a gaggle. If you want a proper swarm you have to go the way of Elon who plans to put 12,000 satellites into low earth orbit. How can there be room? Thinks of the space debris? How can you launch rockets through that kind of gauntlet? So may questions.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        How can you launch rockets through that kind of gauntlet?

        Makes me think of the asteroid field scene in The Empire Strikes Back

        1. Charles 9

          "Makes me think of the asteroid field scene in The Empire Strikes Back"

          Nah, the space-full-of-junk scenes in WALL-E.

      2. JDX Gold badge

        LEO is anything really from 150-2000km. Let's low-ball at 100km, 10^5m. Area of a sphere ~ 10r^2 so the amount of space at LEO is very conservatively 10^5.10^5.10 = 10^11 square metres or 100 thousand square kilometres.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        obligatory

        "How can there be room?"

        Space is big. Really really big.

        As to the main topic: I'm ok with this as long as we get cellular data (at reasonable rates) and as long as anyone using the speakerphone is forced to take the rest of the call outside. Stop copying the cretins on 'reality' TV you human waste of oxygen!

    3. TheVogon

      "However, the data slinger promises a campaign from August that will see a satellite launch every three weeks until it reaches the 900 target."

      So that would be, uhm, in about 52 years time!

      1. richardcox13

        > "However, the data slinger promises a campaign from August that will see a satellite launch every three weeks until it reaches the 900 target."

        > So that would be, uhm, in about 52 years time!

        Looking at Wikipedia (yes i know), the first launch is 10 satalites, and subsequent ones are 32 each.

        So not that long.

  2. monty75

    Sounds like the same service Emirates have been offering for at least the last two years

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    At what cost then?

    I guess the roaming will be in band Z and cost us £5/min even if we are flying from LHR to GLA.

    I'll carry on flying with my phone set to 'Airplane Mode'. At the moment being up in the air is the one place left to escape from other people's whining/warbling/moaning on the phone to their dear loved one.

    Then there is the inevitable air rage following a few dozen 'Hello darling, I'm on the plane' calls.

    Can't we just have on place where 'the bane of our lives' is silent?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: At what cost then?

      My initial though was does anyone actually *need* this.

      I already have to endure enough discomfort when I fly in Economy. The slightly sadistic side of my hopes that aircraft will be shielded in some way so that this feature only works in business class - the important business types can have the facility to allow them to conduct their business whilst in flight, whilst no extra disturbance in cattle class.

      1. Pascal Monett Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: "no extra disturbance in cattle class"

        But it's the cattle who like to moo !

  4. Hans Neeson-Bumpsadese Silver badge

    a campaign from August that will see a satellite launch every three weeks until it reaches the 900 target

    Having done some maths on the back of my fag-packet, I've arrived at a timescale of nearly 52 years. I'm wondering if that should say 90 satellites?

    1. Pen-y-gors

      Did the same sums. It is 900, so I think they'll have to start doing them a dozen at a time, otherwise they'll be obsolete before they're all ready.

  5. armyknife

    Why Isn't There Better Internet In Morgues.

    See title.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why Isn't There Better Internet In Morgues.

      I wonder if anyone has yet requested a tombstone engraved with an epitaph of "404" or "301".

      1. tony2heads

        Re: Why Isn't There Better Internet In Morgues.

        surely 410 (Gone)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why Isn't There Better Internet In Morgues.

      It interferes with the clairvoyants.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So are we going to rename airplane mode otherwise there's going to be lots of confused people out there wondering why their phones aren't working?

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "So are we going to rename airplane mode [...]"

    Cinema mode?

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I remember back when...

    ...nobody owned a cellphone and we got along just fine.

    (Maybe even better than we are now)

  9. doublelayer Silver badge

    Let's see if I understand this correctly

    So, right now the airlines tell us that we have to disable our cellular connections. We all know that we don't have to for air safety, as they claim, but they tell us to do it. Planes fly at 10 km or so up. Cell signals can go for 10 km. 5G networks are being OKed in planes. Why can't we use the ground-based cell towers? True, we'd have to see if there's a good way to deal with the constant connecting and disconnecting because we're flying really fast and will have to switch towers a lot, but it has to be cheaper than putting up the giant satellite junkyard. Right?

    1. Charles 9

      Re: Let's see if I understand this correctly

      No towers in the OCEAN.

  10. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge
    Mushroom

    CAN YOU SPEAK UP I'M ON A PLANE. <b>A PLANE!</b>

    Ugh.

  11. Andre Carneiro

    Quiet zone

    Ah, but think of the extra an airline can charge to sit you in a "Quiet Zone" where mobile phones are (supposedly) not allowed...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Quiet zone

      Think of the extra an airline can charge for an in-flight proctologist to safely remove that phone from where the passenger in the next seat rammed it during one too many loud phone calls.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like