Boeing Drops Wireless System For 787

K7DAN writes "It appears that state-of-the-art connectivity in Boeing's newest aircraft means a wired, not a wireless network. The Seattle Times reports that Boeing has abandoned plans to bring entertainment and information to passengers through a wireless system in its 787 Dreamliner due to possible production delays and potential conflicts with other radio services around the world. A side benefit is an actual reduction in weight using the wired system. Amazingly, the LAN cables needed to connect every seat in the aircraft weigh 150 lbs less than all the wireless antennae, access points, and thickened ceiling panels required to accommodate a wireless network (the design called for an access point above each row)." The article concludes: "The net impact, [a Boeing spokesman] said, is less technical risk, some weight saved, the system's flexibility and quality preserved plus 'a bit of schedule relief.'"

plane-LAN to WAN?

[Reverse Gear]

Wired seem to be a better solution for a plane anyhow, I wouldn't expect the need for moving around the plane with your laptop to be that massive, I mean people are usually pretty tied to their seats when going with a Boeing.
The problem probably is that different airline companies want different seating positions, but the article says that they should have solved this issue.

The article says nothing about how the LAN on the plane connects to the internet though. I think that is where the state of the art comes in, the only possible solution I see is through satellite connection, but with a moving plane I imagine that is going to give some problems.
Another problem in this is the bandwidth given by a satellite connection, if there are 20 passengers surfing the net that isn't going to give a lot of bandwidth pr. user.

Re:Not surprising.

[eln]

Besides, all this means is that the business traveler will have to carry around a 2 ft CAT 5 cable

My first thought was that they would just have cables permanently attached and resting in, say, the little pocket in the seat back in front of you. Then I thought, the most likely scenario would be for them to charge you $5 for a cable just like they do with headphones. Then, they could make the connector that goes into their network unique in some way so that your standard cable wouldn't fit, and you would be forced to rent theirs.

I don't think they would require you to bring a cable with you, since it's probably only a matter of time before they ban all cables of any kind from airplanes because they could be used to make bombs or something.

Re:I can see...

[FireFlie]

I guess WiFi PDA's will be SOL, but I'm sure most execs that need to connect to the internet via their cell phones will probably use their cell phone network's internet connection.

Re:plane-LAN to WAN?

[icebrain]

The "big idea" with the wireless system was to allow the IFE (in-flight entertainment)--TV screens on the backs of seats and such--to run over the wireless. That way, you wouldn't have to rerun wires if you changed the seating configuration. I think the need for an access point above each row was driven by a need to handle streaming video and games to eight or nine people in each row at the same time. Regular laptop access and all would have been secondary, I think.

Re:plane-LAN to WAN?

[frdmfghtr]

I think that is where the state of the art comes in, the only possible solution I see is through satellite connection, but with a moving plane I imagine that is going to give some problems.

Satellite connectivity for an aircraft wouldn't be that hard, really. I would expect the issues to be the same as with marine SATCOM, mainly tracking the satellite and having a clear view of the satellite. On an airplane the LOS issue would be pretty easy, since there isn't much that is above the airplane except empty space. As far as tracking the satellite, a flat-panel phased array antenna would do the job marvelously. In fact, that's one way that the former Connexion by Boeing [wikipedia.org] did it.

As far as bandwidth per user goes, how much does one passenger really need at any given moment? Sending and receiving email doesn't take a lot of bandwidth, and you can go on to do other things while your email client handles that. If you are web surfing, once the page is loaded, your bandwidth requirements are zero until you load a new page. It's not like anybody is going to try hosting a web server at 32,000 feet :)

Would you like Network or Non-Network seating?

[LaughingCoder]

With wired they can sell premium seats with LAN, or cheaper seats without LAN. That would be harder to control with wireless.

150 lbs

[Psychic Burrito]

Two weeks ago:

Ask Slashdot: How Can We Convert the US to the Metric System? [slashdot.org]

Today:

"Amazingly, the LAN cables needed to connect every seat in the aircraft weigh 150 lbs less (...)"

How to convert the US to metric? Well...how about starting with yourself? ...

Re:What about the connectors?

[Jaqenn]

I imagine that they'll expose a small (about 1/2 inch) extension to the general public, and put the permanent connection deeper in the console. When you've worn out your tiny extension box, you can replace the thing cheaply by digging in the console...probably about as difficult as replacing a burnt out bulb. I worked at a lab where we saw something similar for serial connections. With so many serial connections that get hooked / unhooked in the lifetime of the console, it's good to use a disposable front-end to absorb most of the beating.