[HN Gopher] United Airlines to launch Starlink wi-fi in spring 2025
___________________________________________________________________
United Airlines to launch Starlink wi-fi in spring 2025
Author : f1shy
Score : 52 points
Date : 2025-01-05 17:38 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.techinasia.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.techinasia.com)
| freedomben wrote:
| > _Starlink offers download speeds between 40 and 220 Mbps and
| upload speeds of 8 to 25 Mbps, which allows streaming and video
| conferencing during flights._
|
| Oh man, I really hope I don't have to sit anywhere near somebody
| doing a video conference during a flight. We've avoided this
| minefield previously since phones don't work on planes so it's
| not been an issue before, but it seems we're about to cross that
| bridge.
|
| Incidentally, I hope this doesn't mean that as employees we'll be
| expected to attend meetings even when on a plane...
| elashri wrote:
| Shouldn't the law prohibiting the voice calls on flight be
| changed first?
| 15155 wrote:
| Which law is this specifically? Airfone was a thing for
| years.
| Jtsummers wrote:
| https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ254/PLAW-115publ254.
| p...
|
| Section 403, passed in 2018. Search for "41725" for an
| easier search through the PDF. Installed phones are not
| prohibited, it's more about restrictions on personal,
| portable electronic devices brought on by passengers. Crew
| are also exempted.
|
| > ''(2) MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE.--
|
| >> ''(A) IN GENERAL.--The term 'mobile communications
| device' means any portable wireless telecommunications
| equipment utilized for the transmission or reception of
| voice data.
| gostsamo wrote:
| Can you imagine being stuck for hours with loud and obnoxious
| human being who thinks that they are in their right to explain
| all of their work and family problems to the entire airplane? I
| hope airlines will forbid such behavior but it might be time to
| buy noise suppressing headphones for the gun silencers are not
| allowed on board.
| cryptoz wrote:
| Seems like a use case for AI right here; just have the user
| 'talk' silently, mouthing the words or in a very quiet
| whisper. I assume AI can read lips pretty well by now right?
| So turn on your video, have the AI already know how to
| synthesize your voice, and then just careful mouth the words
| into the camera. An AI model should be able to live-
| synthesize your voice that matches what you want to say and I
| think there would be minimal latency, not any worse than
| other video conferencing latency. And with headphones on,
| nobody on the plane can hear the other side, or you. And you
| could get a live transcript visible to you as well, so you
| could know if the AI made a mistake in reading your lips and
| you could correct it.
|
| Might look weird but _shrug_.
| throw5959 wrote:
| AI can read lips better than humans. Unfortunately, lip
| reading isn't really possible. Too much ambiguity and way
| too hard to do it in a recognizable way while not making
| any sounds.
| rurcliped wrote:
| To disambiguate, the person on the plane could learn to
| use hand signals (e.g., Cued Speech) and the AI model can
| be trained on that.
| NegativeK wrote:
| I can't tell if this is an oblique reference to keyboards
| or not.
| dmitrygr wrote:
| > Can you imagine being stuck for hours with loud and
| obnoxious human being
|
| You just accidentally made the case for WFH :)
| MuffinFlavored wrote:
| I'm not calling you sensitive because this also upsets me
| but... "get over it"?
|
| There's no law that says somebody can't take a phone call or
| a conference on a bus. A plane is just a bus in a sky
| ("public transportation")
|
| Are they being kind of rude/selfish? Sure. Are you being kind
| of rude to say "you can't do this thing you want to do
| because it's an inconvenience to me"?
| michaelt wrote:
| There's also no law against me belting out some opera
| classics on the plane while my 6 year old accompanies me on
| the violin I got them for christmas.
|
| But the pleasure it brings the two of us might be
| outweighed by the displeasure of the other 500 people on
| the plane.
| mattmcknight wrote:
| Acela does have the quiet car.
|
| Many more people do sleep on planes than busses.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| There aren't specific laws about this, but the law does
| allow for private businesses, and even public services to
| set rules around behavior.
|
| There likely is a rule about being disruptive on a bus (or
| airplane), and it is within the law to enforce those rules.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| _Can you imagine being stuck for hours with loud and
| obnoxious..._
|
| Yes, which is why I never get on an airplane without
| headphones/earbuds. Seems simple enough to solve this problem
| at the receiving end.
| greggyb wrote:
| I can guarantee that even top of the line noise cancelling
| headphones do not obscure a conversation happening next to
| me. The only way to drown out enough noise is to raise the
| volume to an uncomfortable-to-me level.
|
| If you are lucky enough that you can be in comfort and
| noise-isolated from earbuds or headphones, I envy you.
| f1shy wrote:
| > Can you imagine being stuck for hours with loud and
| obnoxious human being who thinks that they are in their right
| to explain all of their work and family problems
|
| That describes the current situation in lots of everyday
| setups, like waiting room in a clinic, bus, train...
|
| Sometimes I wish the world was more like Japan in that
| regard...
| throw_pm23 wrote:
| I almost always wish that in almost every regard :)
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| The TOS of airplane wifi I used last week prohibited voice
| usage.
| perihelions wrote:
| Is that consistent with net neutrality principles? Should
| commercial resellers of network connections be permitted, as
| a question of law, to set rules dictating the contents and
| endpoints of those bits?
|
| (I'm not happy with the direction of tech culture, that this
| could be an open question. The first half of the computer
| revolution was about making cool things for people to use.
| The second half seems to be about taking those cool things
| away. I imagine an airline user from 1950's jet age, who
| would be beyond _astounded_ to learn a human could talk to
| anyone on the planet from the *middle of the freakin '
| ocean*, through a series of space-based microwave relays--
| they would give their right hand to live in that reality. Now
| that we've created literal magic, we're... simply throwing it
| away? Bah, humbug).
| itake wrote:
| presumably... airlines have been allowing certain messaging
| providers (whatsapp, imessage, etc) to send text messages
| during a flight.
|
| But you can't send a Signal message or send a photo.
| greggyb wrote:
| They could trivially _allow_ the network to be used for
| anything, but also have a rule about behavior in the cabin
| to not disturb any other passengers. They'd be imposing
| restrictions only on physical actions you take during the
| term of the contract between the two of you, and while you
| are in the location that contract specifies. The ticket is
| the contract. And they can say, "Don't talk with your voice
| to anyone not on the plane." Or however they'd like to word
| it.
|
| Personally, I'd hate to be next to someone on a call on a
| plane, and I'd hate to be on a call while next to someone
| on a plane. This is personal preference. It is no better or
| worse than your personal preference to sit next to someone
| while they take a call or to take a call while sitting next
| to someone.
|
| Perhaps we'll see an evolution of plane seating to allow
| for quiet zones, similar to how some trains have quiet
| cars.
| NegativeK wrote:
| Analogously, terrestrial places that offer internet have
| behavioural restrictions on how they're used.
|
| I can imagine a number of things that can kicked you out of
| coffee shops that have guest wifi. Since it's a private
| business, that doesn't bother me on principle.
|
| Libraries are often pretty open about what they allow, but
| the one at my university had a policy of "porn is fine
| unless other patrons see it and object." I find that policy
| to be incredibly reasonable.
| inemesitaffia wrote:
| It's an FAA, FCC, Department of Transportation, Airline and
| Flight attendant ban.
|
| And that's before you get to the ban in law because the FCC
| mused about letting airlines decide. In 2018
| perihelions wrote:
| Those regulations targeting EMI with aviation
| communications would no longer make sense, I think, when
| we're talking about the airliner's own wi-fi; that should
| be flight-qualified for that purpose.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > imagine an airline user from 1950's jet age, who would be
| beyond astounded to learn a human could talk to anyone on
| the planet from the _middle of the freakin ' ocean_,
| through a series of space-based microwave relays--they
| would give their right hand to live in that reality.
|
| Well, perhaps, since air travel was much more heavily
| slanted towards high-ranking executives. For them
| communication matters.
|
| For the vast majority of everyone, it is true now, and it
| was then, that sending and receiving communications up to a
| day earlier than otherwise doesn't approach the value of
| your right hand.
| freedomben wrote:
| It's disappointing to see your comment downvoted because
| although I strongly don't want people making calls on the
| plane, your perspective is interesting and you make a good
| argument :-)
|
| I would definitely agree I don't want arbitrary
| restrictions, but when jamming a ton of humans from all
| walks of life into a narrow metal tube, sealing it, and
| sailing it through the air, we have to have some common
| rules of conduct to prevent it turning into an unbearable
| hell for some of the people. Definitely don't want to see
| governments pass laws or even ISPs, but the plane owners I
| see no issue with and in fact think it is an important
| thing to do.
| burnte wrote:
| There's a difference between "you can't use Zoom but you
| can use Webex" and "you aren't permitted to do video or
| voice calls on our plane."
| laweijfmvo wrote:
| Not when all 300 passengers decide they want to stream in "high
| quality"...
| notatoad wrote:
| yeah, i'm assuming this is up to 220Mb/s _for the whole
| plane_ , not for each passenger.
|
| airplane wifi is still going to suck.
| notyourwork wrote:
| Delta courtesy of T-Mobile has been solid in my experience.
| A few times not but in general it works really well.
| freedomben wrote:
| I can't remember where or how I pieced this together, but
| I'm guessing that each plane will have two dishes (which
| will be bonded together), and Starlink is expecting
| bandwidth to improve to Gbit speed, so it will probably be
| 2 Gb/s down for the whole plane. Still not great if every
| passenger is streaming HD video, but I imagine with some
| "traffic shaping" (aka throttling) it will be pretty snappy
| for web browsing and small file downloads.
| harrall wrote:
| The bridge has been crossed for a few years.
|
| I watch streaming video over plane Wi-Fi. Sometimes over the
| Atlantic or Pacific Ocean.
| svachalek wrote:
| That's typically a CDN node on the plane though, not a live
| 2-way connection.
| harrall wrote:
| I'm watching videos from my Plex server sitting in my
| living room, on the other side of Earth...
|
| ...or random skate videos on YouTube which won't be
| replicated.
|
| So it's not the on-plane CDN.
|
| It's true that the upstream probably isn't too great for
| streaming but I also upload media over plane Wi-Fi just
| fine.
| notyourwork wrote:
| Really? I doubt that. How large is a node on the plane?
| koolba wrote:
| Buffered streaming is quite different than a two way call.
| The latency on traditional airplane WiFi would make video
| calls more like a two way radio with "Over!" pauses in
| between.
| harrall wrote:
| Sure, but my point isn't that over technical specs. Plane
| Wi-Fi is already good enough to let people do some
| seriously rude stuff but yet I have not heard of it being a
| problem.
|
| United, who are the ones quoted to be adding Starlink, has
| already invested some of the most I have seen in on-plane
| Internet so this is just a gradual upgrade for those who
| fly United.
| bobmcnamara wrote:
| I did this once.
|
| I explained the situation ahead of time to a coworker in
| the same meeting and that I'd answer any questions via
| chat.
|
| A little surprised it worked as well as it did.
| kcb wrote:
| Yea, I watch YouTube all the time on planes. Usually 480p
| maybe 720p. Sometimes I find I need to use a VPN to prevent
| streaming sites from being throttled badly.
| mlacks wrote:
| Just did Starlink on Hawaiian Airlines. TOS requests you avoid
| video and the cabin staff enforces it
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| United, and all major carriers I've flown on recently, already
| offer wifi (good enough to stream YT, in my experience, so
| presumably already good enough to attend meetings), this isn't
| a new service announcement.
|
| This announcement is just that they are going to be trialing
| using Starlink as an ISP in addition to the other providers
| they already work with.
| bigbones wrote:
| > good enough to stream YT, in my experience, so presumably
| already good enough to attend meetings
|
| YT needs bulk throughput while meetings need latency and
| quality. YT can seem smooth for much longer despite massive
| amounts of retransmission and packet loss, meetings fall
| apart rapidly with even a tiny bit of those
| mark212 wrote:
| you really have to try it. On a flight to Hawaii in October,
| I was getting speeds of 300+ mbps and latency that felt like
| my home wifi. It's just seamless and feels like an entirely
| different product than any other connectivity I've had in the
| air.
| Beijinger wrote:
| Finally, youporn on a plane.
| Klonoar wrote:
| Might depend on what state you're flying over. ;)
| jasondclinton wrote:
| Starlink has been deployed on JSX for almost a year now and
| I've taken quite a few flights on their Bay Area to LA and
| Vegas routes. Despite 20 people on the planes, no one has ever
| been on a video conference, though I could see it becoming an
| issue with a broader consumer base.
| arcticbull wrote:
| Tons of the Hawaiian flights have it now too. It's such a
| game changer. Most people are on YouTube, it looks like -- no
| video calls I've seen.
| Klonoar wrote:
| I just did an Antarctic cruise that had StarLink. While it
| sucked to have internet access - like, I wish I could've
| been fully disconnected - it did allow me to run my stuff
| remotely and ultimately have more time out there.
|
| Pretty wild how well it works.
| ericrosedev wrote:
| Flew on Hawaiian last month which had starlink. During the
| announcements they asked everyone not to do voice or video
| calls, and said they would disable the internet if they saw
| people doing it. Will be interesting to see different airlines
| policies as broadband becomes available on flights
| metalman wrote:
| they will have to block the signal in the bathrooms, or those
| will be used as an "office" by the true optimise and take
| advantage of everything crowd
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| Half the call: "yeah I'm on a plane"
| aliasxneo wrote:
| Elon Musk streamed Path of Exile 2 from an airplane using
| Starlink a few days ago. It was surprisingly decent.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| > It was surprisingly decent
|
| Much better than Diablo 4, that's for sure.
| Salgat wrote:
| If anything I'd expect performance to improve on a plane. Aside
| from the cabin itself, it's line of sight. What I'm really
| curious about is how well LTE over Starlink will work.
| UtopiaPunk wrote:
| That's cool, but what I'd really like to see is something like
| Starlink on Amtrak trains. I would be happy with slower but much
| more comfortable train rides if I could do my work on the train.
| noja wrote:
| Can't you use a mobile data connection?
| umeshunni wrote:
| Not if it's going through remote, unpopulated areas (like the
| California Zephyr).
| aednichols wrote:
| Mobile data sucks even in the densely populated northeast
| parts of the Amtrak system. Cell network congestion and dead
| spots where the railroad takes a path away from population
| centers and highways.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-01-05 23:01 UTC)