Cell service from balloons legal in the cockpit?

[Rob]

I want Nexrad and satellite imagery and METARs and TAFs live on my PDA
while I'm flying, like I now have them on the ground when I'm near a
wi-fi connection. How long will it be until I can get wireless voice
and internet connectivity that's legal for use in the air?

Maybe when it comes it'll look something like this:

N.D. to Test Balloons for Cellular Service
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/30/D8FF53180.html

If the cell sites are above aircraft, the presumed problems with the
current setup that are the reason for the current FCC ban on digital
cell-phone use during Part 91 flying would no longer be a factor,
right?

My favorite part:

------
The balloons swell from six feet in diameter to 30 feet after they gain
altitude. Once a balloon leaves the state, its toaster-size
communications pod would jettison, deploy a parachute and fall to
earth, where it would signal its position.

"We'd pay some guy a bounty, put in a new battery pack and send it off
again," Knoblach said. Schafer said the repeater could be used
indefinitely "unless it lands in a lake or gets run over by a truck."
------

Watch out for electronics falling from 100k ft.! Will there be
"falling communication equipment TFRs"? Or rising for that matter?
And the article never mentions what happens to the envelope of the
balloon!

My wireless phone has bluetooth capability. It would make a great
modem to connect my PDA to the internet and it would solve my problem
today if I could operate it in flight legally (and if Verizon hadn't
disabled portions of the bluetooth implementation in a misguided
attempt to encourage me to send 25 cent text messages). These
obstacles will be overcome though. My question is... when?

-R

[peter]

Rob wrote:
> If the cell sites are above aircraft, the presumed problems with the
> current setup that are the reason for the current FCC ban on digital
> cell-phone use during Part 91 flying would no longer be a factor,
> right?

AFAIK, the FCC ban is specifically on the cellular 900 MHz band.
There's a separate FCC document on rules for the PCS band at 1.8 - 1.9
GHz and AIRC, there was no corresponding prohibition in the latter
document.

[soon to be student]

"peter" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Rob wrote:
> > If the cell sites are above aircraft, the presumed problems with the
> > current setup that are the reason for the current FCC ban on digital
> > cell-phone use during Part 91 flying would no longer be a factor,
> > right?
>
> AFAIK, the FCC ban is specifically on the cellular 900 MHz band.
> There's a separate FCC document on rules for the PCS band at 1.8 - 1.9
> GHz and AIRC, there was no corresponding prohibition in the latter
> document.
>


Why is the use of cell phones illegal while flying in a aircraft anyway??

[Roy Smith]

soon to be student > wrote:
> Why is the use of cell phones illegal while flying in a aircraft anyway??

Two basic reasons.

One is that at altitude, you have line of sight to many more cells
compared to standing on the surface. This means many cells pick up
your transmission and try to handle your call.

The second is that as you move at speeds anywhere from 2 to 8 times
what a car in the highway might be doing, your call gets handed off
from cell to cell very quickly.

Both of these things violate the design assumptions used when the cell
system was built out, and thus degrade performance of the cell network
as a whole. It is for this reason that the FCC (not the FAA) makes it
illegal to use a cell phone in an aircraft in flight.

[Rob]

Roy Smith wrote:
> soon to be student > wrote:
> > Why is the use of cell phones illegal while flying in a aircraft anyway??
>
> Two basic reasons.
>
> One is that at altitude, you have line of sight to many more cells
> compared to standing on the surface. This means many cells pick up
> your transmission and try to handle your call.
>
> The second is that as you move at speeds anywhere from 2 to 8 times
> what a car in the highway might be doing, your call gets handed off
> from cell to cell very quickly.
>
> Both of these things violate the design assumptions used when the cell
> system was built out, and thus degrade performance of the cell network
> as a whole. It is for this reason that the FCC (not the FAA) makes it
> illegal to use a cell phone in an aircraft in flight.

Are these limitations of analog cell phones only, or are they shared by
PCS, CDMA, etc.? Certainly the speed limitation is surmountable for
me. I'd be happy to slow my Grumman Tiger momentarily down to freeway
speed if it meant I could have a live look at the RADAR picture.

-R

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Rob" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Roy Smith wrote:
>> soon to be student > wrote:
>> > Why is the use of cell phones illegal while flying in a aircraft
>> > anyway??
>>
>> Two basic reasons.
>>
>> One is that at altitude, you have line of sight to many more cells
>> compared to standing on the surface. This means many cells pick up
>> your transmission and try to handle your call.
>>
>> The second is that as you move at speeds anywhere from 2 to 8 times
>> what a car in the highway might be doing, your call gets handed off
>> from cell to cell very quickly.
>>
>> Both of these things violate the design assumptions used when the cell
>> system was built out, and thus degrade performance of the cell network
>> as a whole. It is for this reason that the FCC (not the FAA) makes it
>> illegal to use a cell phone in an aircraft in flight.
>
> Are these limitations of analog cell phones only, or are they shared by
> PCS, CDMA, etc.? Certainly the speed limitation is surmountable for
> me. I'd be happy to slow my Grumman Tiger momentarily down to freeway
> speed if it meant I could have a live look at the RADAR picture.
>
> -R
>

I believe it is phone in the 900Mhz band.

[John T]

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message

>
> Two basic reasons.

Neither of which apply to modern digital PCS devices according to FCC regs
(unless you have new information which I'd be interested in seeing).

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting/tree/browse_frm/thread/1993fdb33094eb17/2f6cfc03590fbac0?rnum=1&q=john+t+fcc+part+24&_done=%2Fgroup%2Frec.aviation.piloting%2Fbrowse_fr m%2Fthread%2F1993fdb33094eb17%2F43e8783843b6545f%3 Fq%3Djohn+t+fcc+part+24%26rnum%3D1%26#doc_83016350 2f18ae68>

- or -
http://tinyurl.com/bgn45

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[Morgans]

"Rob" > wrote

> I'd be happy to slow my Grumman Tiger momentarily down to freeway
> speed if it meant I could have a live look at the RADAR picture.

The altitude is the primary problem. Sitting on the ground, you may be only
hitting a couple, or a few cell towers. One is going to be a lot stronger,
so it is a easy choice, which one is receiving your call. Once you are a
few thousand feet in the air, you could be hitting dozens of towers, and
they all have to vote and decide who is going to take your call. All of the
other towers you are hitting must also block out the exact frequency that
you are on, so nobody else can use it. That cuts down on the capabilities
of the system, in a hurry.

It has been said from others here, that the PCS phones that some are saying
are legal to use, seem to have very poor connection abilities, once you get
above a couple thousand feet. It seems like the antennae has a radiating
pattern that keeps the signal much closer to the ground.
--
Jim in NC