falconieri asks: I would also imagine that airlines WANT you to buy your stuff. Your movies and entertainment. Last plane I was on headphones from 1949 were still $8.
» SFB says: To some degree this is true, but on the other hand, it’s not like they’re without options. (Plus, the FAA arguably doesn’t have jurisdiction over business motives like this.) Do you know how much they charge for wi-fi on some flights? That certainly makes up for the headphones. And on top of this, they could totally run a Starbucks-style closed network with free Netflix or something, and sell ads against it. They have options. — Ernie @ SFB
Surely if electronic gadgets could bring down an airplane, you can be sure that the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, which has a consuming fear of 3.5 ounces of hand lotion and gel shoe inserts, wouldn’t allow passengers to board a plane with an iPad or Kindle, for fear that they would be used by terrorists.New York Times reporter Nick Bilton • Going in for the kill with his story regarding the use of electronic devices on planes — specifically, why can’t they be used as a plane’s taking off or landing? According to FAA spokesperson Les Dorr, the agency chooses to err on the side of caution, despite evidence that the usage of electronic devices have no effect on a plane. “There have never been any reported accidents from these kinds of devices on planes,” Dorr said, reluctantly. So, why the policy? Good question. source (via • follow)
Iran’s had trouble with planes recently. Part of this is due to an ancient fleet and little way to get new supplies for the aircraft. So, as a result we have scenes like this one, where 72 people die (and 33 are hurt) in a plane crash. On a ground covered with snow. In the dark. This isn’t even the worst aviation disaster Iran has had in the last decade. Sigh. Can we offer a word of advice, Iran? Perhaps, instead of putting so much energy into building a nuclear facility, maybe you should build some new planes. It might help save some lives. (We retract this for the reasons explained here. See? We’re not made of stone.) source
It appears American Airlines is burning online travel bridges. In recent weeks, both Orbitz (who couldn’t reach a contract with the airline) and Expedia (who voluntary took them out) have ditched the airline. Is it possible that these sites have been so successful at their mission that they’ve actually forced airlines to make their flights cheaper? Well, to test this theory, we looked online at American Airlines’ site for travel deals to from DC to Dublin (where we’re taking our girlfriend in the next few months). The average cost at a site like Orbitz was roughly $650 per person for a flight and hotel. The lowest price at AAvacations.com? $1260 per person. It’d be way harder to figure out that was an awful deal if we had to go to every airline to compare prices. AA’s efforts to strongarm online travel sites are simply bad for consumers and should not be supported. Who else has good deals to Dublin? (photo by lrargerich) source
Let’s admit a basic fact here: If you’re a passenger carrying a printer ink or toner cartridge on a plane, you’re probably a terrorist. It’s such a weird thing to be carrying on a plane in the first place that we can feel safe in saying this. This will inconvenience nobody except printer and printer ink manufacturers. Even so, when the TSA bans this device, it’s going to be a huge waste of time, because now that al-Qaeda knows that the TSA knows about it, they’ll never use it again. This, friends, is called security theater and won’t actually keep anyone safe. source
Copyright 2009-2013 Ernie Smith • Ask us stuff! • E-mail us • Follow us on Twitter • Follow us on Facebook
