qantasnet
What you won't see on a Qantas A380 inflight screen.

Qantas abandons in-flight internet

Angus Kidman
18 September 2008, 11:43 AM


What's the logic behind Qantas abandoning plans to offer Internet access on its A380 services: concerns over porn, technical incompetence, or fear of more bad press?


Qantas' first A380 flight from Melbourne to Los Angeles is due to take off in just over a month, but plans to offer Internet access on the much hyped Airbus plane have been grounded at the last minute.

Having already delayed announcing pricing for the service earlier this year, Qantas has now delayed offering full Internet access on its planes until early 2009. The Sydney Morning Herald reports that instead of full access, customers will be offered a "cached Internet service" with limited content.  A Qantas spokesperson told the SMH that "logistical and regulatory" were behind the delay.

There's been a whiff of suspicion around Qantas' plans for some time. When APC asked Qantas back in June how much the service would cost, we initially got not reply at all, and were eventually told "Pricing for Internet access on the A380 has not been finalised at this stage."

But why the last minute change of plans? There are at least three possible explanations:

Fear of a porn planet. The SMH report links Qantas' decision to recent controversy in the US over whether airline staff on American Airlines, which has started offering onboard Net access, should stop customers from viewing porn whilst flying. While we're all for mentioning porn in a tech context, this seems like a bit of a stretch. Though admittedly Qantas wasn't too impressed when stewardess Lisa Robertson got it in with Ralph Fiennes in first class in 2007, and perhaps doesn't want people getting any hornier while on board.

Technical incompetence. In-flight entertainment systems are quite hard enough to keep operational without adding a potentially infinite world of online content into the mix. While I was on a recent Qantas flight, the entertainment system had to be rebooted, which produced the surprising revelation that the base operating system being used was Windows CE (which you'll know as Windows Mobile these days). Now, I've never met a Windows Mobile system that didn't view a moderately large web page as an excuse to demand a complete reboot, so if the new platform is being built in the same way, it's no wonder there are problems.

No need to fan the flames further. Qantas has been taking a hammering in the press recently, with news editors apparently deciding that any minor delay on a flight is worth a story. While much of that coverage seems unjustified, the flow of criticism has been relentless, and the last thing the airline needs is another excuse to get beaten up. In-flight Internet offers so many potential opportunities in that regard -- failure to work, porn access, annoying people making Skype calls, blocking competitor websites -- that perhaps the airline decided to cut its losses and take a brief hammering now rather than open the floodgates.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Jarrod Spiga (User):

I bet that it's a combination of all three.

From my experience of Singapore Airlines' A380s though is that privacy on the screens is pretty good (they have a very narrow viewing angle). Put it like this - if you're watching porn and sitting in a Window seat, the person next to you is probably not going to notice unless you don't have that bulge in your pants covered by their complementary pillow and/or blanket. A steward from the aisle will have no chance of seeing what's on your screen. I reckon that you could easily get away with watching the porn, but they're probably just "thinking of the children".

Having said all of that, there's nothing to stop you from firing up your laptop and doing whatever the hell you like - after take-off and before landing, of course.

Regarding technical incompetence, the A380 uses a custom distro of Linux derived from Debian. And I have had the uneasy pleasure of seeing a kernel panic occur during take-off (I think I have a dodgy camera-photo of the screen somewhere). I would dare say that Qantas are going to use the same system (supplied by Airbus). Considering that the occasional system glitch still occurs on the Singapore Airlines A380s and that they've been in service for close to a year now, I would dare say that there will still be the occasional glitch on the Qantas-delivered ones too.

18 September 2008, 12:24 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

agami (New user):

Yes, but a passenger with their own "entertainment" is not likely to be taken to court. Major corporates live in constant fear of litigation.

Airframe companies would have more than one choice for in-flight entertainment systems and they're almost always provided by a sub-contractor anyway. Just because Singapore Airlines went with Linux doesn't mean Qantas will too.

18 September 2008, 1:34 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

gankul (New user):

i doubt its the person next to you that is the worry (since i have flown on one too) but you can see the persons screen in front of you very easily...

18 September 2008, 4:25 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Windows CE does not equal Windows Mobile. Using experiences with one to evaluate another is like concluding a Jaguar is crap because you once drive a Ford.

Edit: AS much as I hate MS, WinCE is actually quite good at what it's meant for. Windows Mobile on the other hand...

18 September 2008, 12:57 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

agami (New user):

Agreed. Many years ago the PocketPC operating system was derived from Windows CE. PocketPC became Windows Mobile and brought the crashing and rebooting experience to smartphones everywhere.

Windows CE gradually improved to become a fairly decent embedded OS, and because it's generally kiosk-ed you wouldn't know how many times you encounter it throughout the day.

18 September 2008, 2:20 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jake (New user):

so is the old windows mobile 2002 or 2003 based off wince?

22 September 2008, 10:30 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

LostBenji (New user):

Besides the obvious coments about fears of wrong use (easy enough to filter and poor excuse) there are the other issues of the extra weight all the terminals add as well as the power consumption and heat generated. Then add the extras from the sattelite backhaul systems and it soon becomes very expensive.

20 September 2008, 4:37 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user