March 2011 Archives

The answer, according to Innotech Aviation, is the SkyPad. See the firm's vague statement below. Some folks simply can't wait to break their news until #AIX11, humph :-)

Montreal, QC - March 29, 2011 - Innotech Aviation has awarded California-based tech startup, Esoteric, an order for 35 ship sets of its SkyPad wireless In-Flight Entertainment (IFE) system for the Bombardier and Cessna business jet platforms.

SkyPad is the industry's first certified wireless IFE system integrated with Apple iPads and Ku Band Internet. Not only was it designed from scratch using the latest digital technology, but it is a complete re-interpretation of the IFE concept. "We wanted to create a whole new experience in the air, one based on the same level of luxury and convenience our customers are used to on the ground," says Esoteric founder Alexander Dean, "Our goal from the onset was to make life simple - for the end user and the OEM."

SkyPad combines state-of-the-art audio/video compression and distribution technology with cloud computing, and provides a complete solution for content loading, management and playback. Esoteric employs a sophisticated, yet simple approach to wireless technology. Hence, the entire system can be implemented for a fraction of the cost of traditional wired systems. "The SkyPad system provides an easy to use and light weight platform to manage our customers' aircraft cabin entertainment," says Innotech Aviation CEO Kirk Rowe. "We have currently installed SkyPad using the Apple iPad tablets as system controllers seamlessly integrated with our Innotech I-Ku Broadband system." The SkyPad system can be installed as a standalone media system on any aircraft or integrated with any current high speed satellite system and wireless router.

With CDs and DVDs heading toward inevitable obsolescence, the Innotech-Esoteric offering is a timely, elegant solution that not only eliminates the need to carry physical media, but it is completely future-proof. The entire system is ready for cloud-based content delivery via Ku and eventually Ka band Internet.

 

By now you've no doubt heard that LiveTV is likely to be breaking out the bubbly after snagging a pretty significant deal with Continental to fit some 200 Boeing aircraft with Ka-band satellite-based connectivity (birds that happen to have LiveTV's Ku-band supported in-flight live television service, the 95-channel LTV3).

The deal falls on the heels of JetBlue's announcement last year that it will offer Ka-band connectivity across its entire fleet, working with its subsidiary LiveTV (and, like Continental, partnering with ViaSat (whose ViaSat-1 satellite launch is delayed, ahem, due to an unfortunate mishap at the factory.)

But beyond the big headlines, I'm sure some of you are wondering when these letters of intent (LOI) (yes, the JetBlue and Continental deals are both LOIs right now) will be signed.

JetBlue CEO Dave Barger gave some clarity on that issue today at the JP Morgan Aviation, Transportation and Defense conference, where he said the LOI with ViaSat would be firmed up in a matter of days.

Meanwhile, Aircell is pursuing its own technology path, which offers a Ku-band solution in the interim but ultimately leads to Ka, and presumably Inmarsat's Global Xpress service, due around 2015. I asked Aircell a number of questions after it's latest announcement, including:

1)     How quickly can Aircell bring a Ku-based solution to an airline at this juncture (i.e. what's the earliest if a carrier wants it ASAP)?

2)     Has Aircell applied to the FCC - and other regulators around the world - for regulatory authority to offer Ku?

3)     Has Aircell reached agreements as yet for Ku capacity with satellite operators?

4)     With regard Ka, what Ka satellites will you use for coverage over North America by 2013 (ViaSat's current and forthcoming Ka sat)?

5)     When you speak of global Ka for 2015, are you referring to the Inmarsat Global Xpress service?

6)     Will you offer hybrid solutions - i.e. ATG/Ku and ATG/Ka or, perhaps, Ku/Ka ultimately?

7)     Will the upgrade to ATG-4 satiate the bandwidth hungry users, in your opinion (i.e. Virgin America, for instance, has said it will need a lot more bandwidth than what is currently provided by Gogo when it seeks to make good on its plans for 2013.or do you think domestic carriers like VA, which have eyes on big bandwidth, will make the jump to Ka)?

Here is the company's response:

We haven't announced vendor selection.  We believe, as the world's largest IFC provider by a factor of more than 10, most vendors will be thrilled to work with us.  We also believe hybrid solutions will exist; they will be unique and highly beneficial for our customers and partners.  ATG-4 is a quantum leap, further improving our bandwidth leadership. Bandwidth demands will grow, and it will be our aim to always bring the best solutions.

Knowing that their work colleague long ago caught the in-flight connectivity bug, my co-workers have been graciously giving me plenty of notice when they see something that might be of interest to me and RWG readers.

Flightglobal's own journalist/editor extraordinaire David Kaminski-Morrow (DKM) is no exception. He has just forwarded me a fascinating presentation from Joseph Cramer, regional director, regulatory policy and international spectrum management at Boeing.

It's all about Wireless Avionics Intra Communications (WAIC). Now before you get super-excited, and think I'm talking about in-flight connectivity as we normally define it (i.e. mobile connectivity or Wi-Fi for passengers), I'm not.

WAIC is based on short-range radio technology, and its applications are defined as limited to safety applications.

Low-data rate interior applications include sensors for cabin pressure, smoke detection, fuel tank/line proximity temperature, EMI incident detection (oh, good one), structural health monitoring and humidity/corrosion detection; and controls for emergency lighting and cabin functions.

"The issue appears to be where the necessary radio spectrum band will need to lie and it's cropping up in preparatory documents for the next big World Radiocommunication Conference in Geneva, 2012," notes DKM.

Read the whole presentation here. PPT4_-_ACP-WGF24-RPW-IP09_-_WAIC_Presentation_(2)[1].pptx

Steven Udvar-Hazy, the most high-profile and influential man in aircraft leasing, gave journalists a lengthy interview immediately following the International Society of Transport Aircraft Trading (ISTAT) conference today in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Because Hazy gave us so much fodder for stories, Flightblogger Jon Ostrower and I have decided to break the lion's share of the interview on our blogs. Jon's blog covers Hazy's comments about widebody aircraft, while I'm covering narrowbodies and regional jets.

For the sake of historical context, here is Udvar-Hazy's last interview with Flightblogger from February 2008's Singapore Air Show, prior to the launch of the CSeries, 787-3 cancellation and global economic crisis.

Speaking to us today about Boeing's studies into a clean-sheet successor to the 737, Hazy says:

Boeing is working very closely with the engine manufacturers to see what is the level of efficiency and fuel consumption improvement from the initial neo to the time that they would introduce their engine and so that's going to obviously be important because the airframe, they could probably get several percent better efficiency from an all-new airframe, but then you have to combine that with engine efficiency. And that could come in several ways. That could come, for example, and I'm not telling you what Boeing will do or won't do, but for example a slightly larger fan diameter on the new-generation Boeing airplane versus the neo could give it several percent fuel advantage just the way the airplane is designed, whereas the A320 is already an A320. It can't be redesigned for this engine. So Boeing has the advantage of a clean sheet of paper and therefore they can optimize whatever engine or engines they'll put on the next generation airplanes, whereas on an A320, it's mounting an engine to a current-generation airplane.

On whether Boeing should forgo a one-to-one replacement of the 737 and develop a whole new family:

All I can tell you is our recommendation to Boeing, and we've bought over 800 new Boeing airplanes, is to build an aircraft family rather than a single sized model and that family hopefully will encompass at the upper end an airplane that could replace the 757.

Size-wise, where would that family start?

That question has to go back to the cost of building airplanes. What you have to ask Boeing and Airbus is that with their current labour costs and facilities costs can they build a 120-, 130-seat airplane in Renton or in Toulouse and Hamburg versus these new emerging market airplanes that are coming out and that's really the challenge here. In other words, they have a high cost structure which when you go to the 777-300ER, where you have virtually no competition, is less relevant. But when you have five or six manufacturers that now will be crowding this...

So can Boeing and Airbus be the low-cost producers at the lower end of this new generation of aircraft and I don't know the answer to that, but my instincts tell me is that some of these new competitors could ultimately have the lower cost, just like when the Japanese car companies invaded the us in the 70s and 80s, you know Toyota, Datsun and Honda, they had a lower cost base and were able to price their product below GM, Ford and Chrysler, and the German cars and look at the market share they were able to gain because they had that cost advantage. [They started] with small, cheap boxes and they bought their way into the market. How did they get market share? Because they were pricing their simple products and they were very competitive in that respect. So the question you guys have to ask of Boeing and Airbus is can they build a 120-, 130- or 140-seat aircraft of the future the way they build aircraft today. Now maybe Boeing and Airbus can do that but maybe in a different plant or a different location or maybe even a non-union location. I mean the Charleston link.

But you understand the issue here. It's not just designing a great airplane it's can it be cost effective to build and that I can't give you the answer because a lot of that is facilities, labour costs that they have to tackle going forward and the IAM issues and all those things.

On whether Hazy is still keen on a twin-aisle "narrowbody":

In all of the studies that we have done and in talking to airlines, you can turn a twin-aisle aircraft faster if you have good passenger access. So the whole idea of a short- to medium-haul aircraft is maximizing utilization and if you can get ten minutes a turn and you do six segments a day you can get an hour more flight utilization.

Look, at the upper end of that market, once you get above 200 seats. How many of you have flown on a 757 when you're in row 39F and how long does it take to get off the airplane if they're loading only through the front. Sometimes it [feels like it] takes longer to get off the airplane then the flight itself. My feeling is that to be a really an effective airplane above 200 seats and a great competitor and have the cargo capacity, which is also an important element in the rev generation of airplanes, a small twin-aisle has a lot of advantages once you get north of 200 seats.

On whether Boeing will cede the small narrowbody market to other players:

How many 737-600s did they sell? How many A318s were sold? So what does that tell you? The Embraer 190 has outsold them. The Embraer 190 has just left them in the dust. Embraer has a huge advantage over Bombardier because they have a huge built in customer base. For example in Europe you got British Airways, KLM, Air France, Lufthansa, all operate Embraer 190s. We've talked about this idea of cooperating either Airbus or Boeing with Embraer. I currently don't see it. I think Embraer wants to stay pretty independent, but they're always looking at what they they're going to do to their products.

Thoughts on Mitsubishi's portfolio:

Mitsubishi is talking about stretching the airplane. They've come to talk to us about the MRJ100, which would be a two or three row stretch of the MRJ90 and Pratt can certainly deliver an engine. But now the situation in Japan is so awful. That could set things back as far as development money, other than what's in the pipeline. The 70-seater is mainly because of the US scope clause and the only reason they designed that aircraft is that they felt to penetrate the US market a lot of US majors will not allow their regional partners to fly [over 70 seats]. But if we take ourselves five years from today, it would not surprise me that they'll have the [MRJ]70, the 90 and the 100 or whatever they call it. It would not surprise me that that would become three airplane types in the family, just like the CRJ700, 900 and 1000 is a three-airplane family. [A 100-seater would help be more competitive] with certain airlines. As a [BAe] 146 replacement as a Fokker 100 replacement even as a 737-500 replacement, certain airlines may go for that. So if the Japanese want to be a real player, I think they'll have to build a 100-seat airplane. I just don't see that they'll have the market penetration with the current models they have now. They've already resized the fuselage based on our inputs. They changed the fuselage diameter by like 7cm or 8cm because they were building it based on the average Japanese sized adult and we had them completely redo the fuse diameter and now that's the new standard.

On whether Airbus is in a position to respond to a clean-sheet Boeing narrowbody design:

They have to get through the A400M programme and the A350 programme. If you're on the board of EADS, would you approve an all new programme today? I mean look at all the cash that's going out for the A350 so I think they've got to that under control.

Thoughts on the A320neo:

It took a while but the advantage is that they've been able to shed a lot of cost off to the engine guys. The engines guys are picking up the bulk of the headache. I mean there is still a lot of flight testing and the wing has to be strengthened. They've got the sharklet stuff, the gears, etc. [The sharklets] still involves strengthening the wing. So hopefully that strengthening will also work for the neos. They don't have to redesign the wing three or four times.

On the driver behind 737 production increases:

I think Boeing will build as many 737s as the supply chain allows. Why? They need the cash flow from the 777 programme and the 737s and they've got a very long backlog so they could increase production by say two airplanes a month. As many airlines as they go to and say, would you take a 2015 [delivery] in 2013 or 2014 and they'll have lots of guys raising they're hands saying 'yeah, we'll take a 737 early'. So there is financial motivation for Boeing to get more cash flow out of the 737 and 777 and that's one of the reasons they've increased production rates. It's not 100% due to demand, but there is demand so it's kind of a win/win. But I think the supply chain is the limiting factor whether they can go to 42 or 41.

They [Boeing] don't want to lose any big 737 operators to the neo. Neither would you if you're Boeing. I think Airbus will make a strong effort at Delta and United. United phased out their 737s but Delta has a lot of MD-80s and 737s and they have the Northwest A319/A320 fleets and lots of 757s at both so I think Airbus will make a very strong push at both Delta and United-Continental.

On supply chain constraints.

It's pretty close to the limit. For example, seats are becoming a huge constraint, especially after that Japanese disaster where [Koito] falsified certification. Galleys are constrained. Avionics are in pretty good shape because a lot of the military stuff has been cut back so people like Honeywell and Rockwell are able to move their avionics suites.

Some suppliers are telling us they are pretty stretched. It's the weakest supplier that really runs how many airplanes you can do. It's not your strongest supplier.  

Unsubstantiated rumors are circulating that the US FAA may be going above and beyond normal electro magnetic interference (EMI) testing protocol when in-flight connectivity service providers seek supplemental type certification (STC) for their systems on aircraft, and that that is the reason why Honeywell Phase 3 Display Units blanked out during STC testing of Aircell's Gogo in-flight Internet system on Boeing 737NG aircraft.

The reason for the alleged stepped-up protocol, according to scuttlebutt (i.e. not confirmed) is that regulators are concerned that terrorists would focus an intense amount of RF signals at the cockpit (think a heaping transmitter in the forward lavatory) and bring down an aircraft.

Today, at the ISTAT conference in Scottsdale, Arizona, I asked FAA administrator Randy Babbitt if the agency is quietly bolstering EMI testing standards. Babbitt says there is nothing quiet about FAA's interest in ensuring appropriate testing is done. But he, like the FAA's public relations office, does not volunteer specifics.

"We will decline to comment on the specifics involved in certifying the Aircell Gogo system," says a spokesman for the FAA.

The spokesman says that when the FAA  evaluates in-flight WiFi systems, "two of the areas we consider are interference with avionics systems necessary for continued safe flight and landing, and any vulnerability of airplane systems to intentional or accidental electronic emissions outside FCC standards."

Specifically, when  conducting EMI tests, applicants are required to:

1) Perform an airplane ground test using a portable wireless transmitter emulator.  RTCA/DO-294B defines a test procedure with an emulator consisting of a signal generator, amplifier and transmitting antenna.
 
2) The emulator antenna should be placed at each location, including the flight deck, in the airplane cabin where the access point antennas are installed, and at locations where WLAN-equipped PEDs may be operated.

3) Monitor all aircraft systems with catastrophic, hazardous, and major failure conditions, and systems required by certification or operating regulations.

4) The test is performed at three separate channels in each general WLAN operating band that will be used in the airplane WLAN installation.

Some industry observers believe avionics should be able to withstand even the most stringent EMI testing. In this instance (involving Gogo), interference with Honeywell Phase 3 DUs "should be known well before Gogo is placed on a 737", says a source, noting that such discovery should have been made in qual testing or, at least, later when the system was certified for the aircraft.

Boeing has launched a thorough review of part numbers to make sure no other avionics suffer the same issue as the Honeywell Phase 3 avionics.

However, notes an industry source, the very instance of interference between Wi-Fi and avionics is "bad news for the industry as a whole because there are a lot of people pushing for COTS [consumer off-the-shelf] technology to be brought into aircraft, and anything that carries a transmitter means that it's emitting signals."

Boeing's investigation into why in-flight connectivity interfered with Honeywell's Phase 3 Display Units (DU) during electro magnetic interference (EPI) testing is not merely limited to those particular Honeywell parts.

The US airframer, which has offered the Phase 3 DUs on aircraft since July 2009, is currently mired in the laborious process of determining whether any other airplane part numbers have the same issue, RWG can reveal.

There are three categories of systems being studied - critical, essential and nonessential required. Boeing is reviewing these systems to ensure they are not susceptible to Wi-Fi or cellular devices.

There are hundreds of systems that must be studied, and Boeing is using RTCA DO-307 - which covers Aircraft Design and Certification for Portable Electronic Device (PED) Tolerance - as guidance.

When a manufacturer goes through qual testing in the lab for RTCA DO-307 (as outlined in the FAA's advisory circular AC-20-164), it accounts for both the frequency and energy field value at levels well beyond what a cell phone or Wi-Fi would produce if its near that equipment.

The value covers a range between 100 MHz to 8 GHz. To put that into perspective, Wi-Fi operates at 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz and cell phones operates as low as 460 MHz and as high as 2.17 GHz. So yes, the levels tested far exceed all normal scenarios, but for good reason. Who wants people with malicious intent (oh, say, terrorists) to take RF aim at the cockpit? Uh, nobody, except the terrorists.

If the equipment passes muster, it is considered to be T-PED (tranmissing portable electronic device) tolerant, and that's what Boeing and others are working towards.

If through its review Boeing discovers additional anomalies, it will be forced to further delay linefitting its aircraft with in-flight connectivity systems, a move that would have the biggest impact on Panasonic Avionics and partner AeroMobile, which fought long and hard to achieve linefit status for the latter firm's eXPhone in-flight mobile connectivity solution. (Side note: I find it rather fascinating that some people downplay such deferrals as 'no big deal'. These are expensive systems, which are ordered well in advance of delivery. Let me assure you that it is in fact a 'very big deal' to the operators that have paid for these options.)

Already, the discovery during EMI testing for Aircell's Gogo STC on Boeing 737NG aircraft that Phase 3 DUs are susceptible to "blanking" has resulted in Boeing's decision to defer since last fall  eXPhone linefit installs on Boeing 777s. Carriers impacted by the deferral include 777 customers V Australia (which was supposed to take its fifth 777 with eXPhone), Air New Zealand, Emirates, and Turkish Airlines.

Lufthansa, incidentally, hopes to have both eXPhone and Panasonic's in-flight high-speed Internet system eXConnect already installed when it takes delivery of its new Boeing 747-8s. 

Boeing's deferral of linefit installs of in-flight connectivity systems is unfortunate, but necessary not simply because of the event involving Aircell's STC, but because interference with Phase 3 DUs has also been simulated in testing with a large number of cells phones going off at the same time (a scenario that is also against all operating instructions and procedures).

Some 90 Emirates aircraft are installed with eXPhone - allowing passengers to make and receive voice calls and text messages - and the carrier has not ever experienced issues with interference with avionics. But Emirates does not allow cell phones to be switched on in the cockpit and it's my understanding that EASA is content for Emirates to place a placard in the cockpit saying just that (just as 737NG operators with Gogo must do as a condition for installing Gogo).

If the interference problem detected with Honeywell Phase 3 DUs on Boeing aircraft is indeed limited to Phase 3 DUs, there is light at the end of the tunnel for eXPhone customers.

Depending upon who you talk to, a Service Bulletin from Boeing could drop as early as next month and the issue could be cleared up by June or as late as the fourth quarter. After all, Boeing is now building brand new equipment like the 777 with the more stringent requirements in place (based on lessons learned through STC). With a new aircraft, it's far easier to ensure all systems are up to snuff.

At this juncture it would appear that the problems are being discovered on older aircraft with their many mods and STCs.

Tonight is already sizing up to be a very late night so I'm going to simply copy and paste my Flightglobal story to this blog until tomorrow morning. Clearly BIG lessons are being learned about interference through the massive Gogo retrofits being accomplished. Bloody good to know, I'd say.

Honeywell Phase 3 Display Units (DUs) have shown themselves susceptible to "blanking" during airline electro magnetic interference (EMI) certification testing of wireless broadband systems (Wi-Fi) on various Boeing 737NG airplanes, prompting Boeing to cease linefit installs of in-flight connectivity systems across its portfolio, including widebody aircraft.

Multiple sources tell ATI and Flightgloal that the blanking occurred during EMI testing for Aircell's Gogo in-flight Internet supplemental type certificate on 737NG aircraft. Aircell has declined comment, saying "this topic is not Aircell specific and, as such, we do not have any comment on the matter".

Boeing says it has deferred the activation of wireless systems that interface with passenger devices that could potentially interfere with the DU 3 displays. "Boeing has not delivered any installations that would have this issue. Honeywell has assured us that they are working to address the problem and we are satisfied that they are taking the necessary steps to do so," says Bret Jensen with BCA Engineering Communications.

A source with knowledge of the situation tells ATI and Flightglobal that Boeing has "gone through and scrubbed the avionics numbers to make sure that there are no anomalies and that the avionics will not be affected by personal electronic devices (PEDs). It has been discovered that there is stuff out there that doesn't meet those requirements yet, and we may uncover more as we go down that path".

The source adds: "There are three specific part numbers associated with the [Honeywell] display that could be installed. Those are the ones [found to be] susceptible to transmissions."

Fallout from the event is already occurring. Multiple sources tell ATI and Flightglobal that one of the conditions for STC is that 737NG operators place placards in the flight deck saying that Wi-Fi devices are to be powered off.

Another condition, say sources, is that 737NG operators are not to have DU 3 displays installed with the presence of in-flight connectivity systems, be they Wi-Fi or cellular-based.

On a Boeing Business Jet fitted with in-flight connectivity, for instance, there is a note in the log book that says Phase 3 DUs are not to be installed, but that "version 4 is fine and version 2 is fine", says a source.

Panasonic partner AeroMobile's eXPhone in-flight mobile connectivity solution, which was made linefit offerable on certain Boeing types, is not being installed until the Honeywell issue has been addressed. As such, customers of eXPhone are not receiving aircraft with eXPhone as planned. Customers of eXPhone include Emirates, Turkish Airlines and V Australia.

"We're continuing to work closely with Boeing and our partners at Panasonic to bring eXPhone to full line-fit offerability across the entire Boeing fleet," says AeroMobile.

Boeing, meanwhile, says: "Current testing by Boeing and Honeywell has determined that blanking may occur when a DU is subjected to testing procedures specified by the FAA requirements (AC-20-164) during installations of Wi-Fi systems on the airplane. Based on testing that has been conducted, Boeing and Honeywell have concluded that actual EMI levels experienced during normal operation of typical passenger Wi-Fi systems would not cause any blanking of the Phase 3 DU. This issue does not exist with the Phase 1 or 2 DU's."

Honeywell says that, during recent ground testing "at elevated power levels", the company observed a momentary blanking on the 'flat panel' liquid crystal displays that it developed and pioneered for Boeing.

"The screens reappeared well within Boeing's specified recovery time frame. The screens have not blanked in flight and are not a safety of flight issue. Honeywell is working to ensure the problem is addressed and fixed and that our technology will continue to exceed specifications," says Honeywell.

The firm stresses that there have been "no blanking incidents of in-service aircraft with the Wi-Fi system installed".

A spokesman for the FAA says: "The FAA is aware of some issues involving interference between Honeywell flight displays and in-flight WiFi that surfaced during STC testing. The FAA is currently working with both manufacturers to examine the technical data and test results. After a thorough review, the FAA will consider if further safety action is necessary."

Sources say a Service Bulletin from Boeing is expected.

Updated with new info...

An announcement today from Lufthansa Systems that the firm is bringing a new wireless in-flight entertainment (IFE) solution to German holiday carrier Condor's Boeing 767s begs all sorts of questions.

You'll recall, no doubt, that Boeing originally intended to offer wireless IFE on the 787, and Panasonic and Thales created solutions for the US airframer, but well-documented challenges persisted.

I'm told  today by Lufthansa Systems that a broadband connection is not necessary. Indeed the firm is right now demonstrating its solution on 80 netbooks (and only two access points) at the ITB show in Berlin. Lufthansa Systems is using 802.11n as its standard for aircraft.

I'll have more later concerning the burning questions about content licensing. If you have any private thoughts about this announcement, please feel free to email me at mary_b_kirby@yahoo.com. All emails are confidential.

Here's the original statement. More later.
  

Condor and Lufthansa Systems take off with the next generation of in-flight entertainment
World premiere at ITB: In-flight entertainment via WiFi

On-board entertainment is an important part of an airline's service for tourists and business travelers alike. At the ITB, Lufthansa Systems presents BoardConnect, its cost-efficient new in-flight entertainment (IFE) system which opens up a new world of opportunities for on-board communication. Condor will be the first airline to install BoardConnect on its Boeing 767 aircraft.

The innovative infotainment system is based on a WiFi network which passengers can log on to through seat-back screens or their own laptops, tablet PCs, smart phones or other WiFi-enabled devices to access a wide range of video and audio on demand, games and other content. BoardConnect also makes it possible for airlines to offer new forms of customer communication, information and services. New services can generate additional revenues for airlines, and airlines can also customize their contact with each passenger.

"In-flight entertainment is an important part of the travel experience and a way to stand out from the competition, particularly in the tourism industry," said Rainer Kröpke, Head of Project Management and Marketing at Condor Flugdienst GmbH. "BoardConnect opens up entirely new possibilities for us. In addition, the system costs much less to install and operate than other solutions."

Unlike conventional IFE systems, BoardConnect does not need to be wired into every seat. The cabin of a Boeing 767, for example, will only need five access points which are connected to a central server.

 
"The system is much easier to install because there is no wiring required. It can be integrated during a regular maintenance check, so there's no need for extra downtime," said Dr. Jörg Liebe, CIO of Lufthansa Systems AG. "BoardConnect is also very reliable and gives airlines maximum flexibility as regards cabin rearrangement, the integration of new technologies and the development of new services."

The elimination of wiring and data distribution hardware can lead to weight savings of nearly half a ton for a Boeing 767-300. This reduces annual fuel consumption by around
20 tonnes per aircraft.

To create this pioneering IFE solution, Lufthansa Systems drew on its experience with the Mobile Infotainment System which it developed for cruise ships. The technology behind BoardConnect is not restricted to the aviation industry; it can also be used on other forms of public transportation, such as trains, buses and ferries.

On aircraft equipped with broadband Internet access, passengers can also surf the Web, send and receive e-mail and interact with friends on social networks. Airlines can also provide individual passengers with information about their connecting flights or offers tailored personally to them.

South African Airways has become the latest customer of Sicma's seat-centre SiT in-flight entertainment system, RWG can exclusively reveal.

"We are retrofitting two [Airbus] A330s starting with the first plane in June 2011," says Thomas Lee, director of business development at Zodiac Aerospace, the parent to Sicma. The aircraft are owned by a leasing company.

The carrier will offer 10in screens, and take advantage of the lightweight fiber optic-based wiring available to SiT customers (traditional copper wiring is also on offer).

Sicma's SiT has been enjoying some solid success of late. Customers include launch customer Royal Jordanian and Corsairfly. SiT has also been made linefit offerable on Airbus A330s and A340s (no easy task!!)

Linefit status means that Sicma is now playing in the same backyard as Panasonic and Thales.

"With respect to the capabilities of our system, we have video and audio on demand (obviously) but there is also gaming. We have 3D capability in our system on the games so you can have multiple players laying the same game at the same time competing with each other through the network."

Check out the installs on Royal Jordanian!

My Flightglobal colleague Olivier Bonnassies is in Toulouse to witness the delivery to Brazilian operator Azul of an ATR 72-200, a pink turboprop that will promote the fight against breast cancer on this International Women's Day.

Femama, the name you see on the headrest covers, is a Brazilian organisation for breast cancer.

Olivier says the ATR 72 is a second hand aircraft. Azul last year placed an order for 20 firm plus  20 options on the new -600 series. First delivery is planned in October of this year. Meanwhile, Azul is taking these -200s as interim aircraft for 1-1.5 year period.

So says this full-page advert in the #AIX11 show preview report....

Qantas low-cost operator Jetstar is nearly ready to offer Apple iPads as in-flight entertainment (IFE) units on some 48 Airbus A320 family narrowbodies, and begin A330 widebody roll-out around mid-year.

Oh, I know what you're thinking. We've been hearing that Jetstar "is poised" to offer iPads-as-IFE for quite some time and it still hasn't happened.

But key partners to Jetstar - portable IFE provider BlueBox and content specialist Stellar Inflight - appear to have finally made some headway in the matter, apparently entering an enterprise license agreement with Apple and pulling together a proposal that they hope will convince the studios to allow early window movie content to be shown on the iPads (the latter would be a nice-to-have, they say, but is unnecessary for launch due to content alternatives).

Both firms acknowledged the challenges of turning iPads into IFE during a recent APEX technology committee hearing. You can read their entire presentation here. D.Brown_M.Reilly_Introduction_of_iPads.pdf

But do check out the key Q&A slides below (note that nobody is saying a single word about cost, which often means a programme is costing far more than originally imagined.)

It's no secret that this RWG loves an ultra-high-speed Internet connection, be it on the ground or in the air. But for smaller aircraft especially, many would argue that it makes little sense for operators to bolt on the far larger, heavier equipment required to bring that sort of service to the cabin or cockpit.

Enter Thrane & Thrane, whose Aviator 200 system with Wi-Fi capability works quite nicely on the light cabin airplanes of the world (Including UAVs!). The Aviator 200 system uses Inmarsat's SwiftBroadband SB200 service (global coverage except for the poles), which offers up to 200Kbps 'always-on' IP connection and a simultaneous low-cost, high quality voice channel.

"Designed specifically for small satcom terminals to allow for an easier and more cost effective installation, the SwiftBroadband SB200 service enables aircraft owners and operators to take advantage of a host of affordable in-flight services including voice calls, text messaging, emailing, Internet surfing and much more," says Andy Beers, director of aeronautical sales for the Americas region, Thrane & Thrane.

He notes, however, that the application for Wi-Fi enabled products "reaches far beyond passenger use in the cabin and has begun to filter into the cockpit providing pilots and crew with access to extensive data at their fingertips. This is already proving useful for flight crews, offering access to real-time weather updates for example, and has sparked much debate about the replacement of traditional processes with this modern and innovative technology in the future."

Thrane and Thrane partner Banyan Air Service shows us how the Aviator 200 brings a real-time satellite weather image upload into the cabin of a Citation in the following video (courtesy of Banyan):
 

Banyan developed the STC for the Aviator 200's installation aboard Cessna 500, 550, S550, 552, 560, and 560XL aircraft. The system has also successfully gained a STC developed by Hawker Beechcraft, "and we are pleased to report its well on the way to receiving a third STC", says Beers.

As for future developments, he adds: "Who knows what could be next and it's inspiring for us at Thrane & Thrane to imagine where potential technology advancements could take us. Five years ago the capability to use the Internet and email from the cabin was an exciting prospect and now full 'office in the sky' functionality has become a reality, even for small aircraft. Technology is continuously evolving and just as we think we've reached the limit, a new wave of developments surface which change everything, again."

Well one thing's for certain, Boeing's got gumption. The US airframer entered the 787 - in its entirety - into the competition for a Crystal Cabin Award and, interestingly, has been shortlisted by the folks who hand out these coveted statutes (the Aviation Cluster Hamburg Metropolitan Region Association....tis a mouthful :-)

Every year at the Aircraft Interiors Expo in Hamburg, Crystal Cabin Awards are given to the best and brightest concepts for aircraft cabins. Thales' Android-based touch passenger media unit; Air New Zealand's Skycouch and Airbus' display-based passenger sign (which will be first used in the A350...see right) are among the finalists in various categories for this year's awards.

But rather than submit an individual design (the 787 lighting system perhaps?), Boeing - together with design partner Teague - have entered the whole kittencaboodle, saying the 787 deserves a Crystal Cabin Award in industrial design because it "combines groundbreaking technology with award-winning design". Hey, why not? "Think big" is my new motto (not Charlie Sheen big, though).

Here's the rest of Boeing and Teague's submission:

"Pursuant to the manufacturer from concept through delivery The Boeing Company and Teague worked collaboratively to define and deliver an unprecedented passenger experience. The composite aeroplane features an expansive inner architecture as well as dynamic LED lighting that replicates day-to-night light patterns, wide seats and aisles, dimmable windows (65 percent larger than the competition's) and larger stow bins. The interplay between light and structural lines underscores the spacious feel of the cabin, further enhanced by the intelligent use of material layering. The revolutionary 787 Dreamliner expends 20 percent less fuel, produces 20 percent fewer emissions than similarly sized aircraft and also has 30 percent lower maintenance costs and 10 percent better operating costs."

To see a list of all the Crystal Cabin Award finalists, go here.

Any bug with an exoskeleton makes my skin crawl. So when I learned a few years ago that New York hotels - and progressively hotels around the country - were being overrun with bed bugs this road warrior implemented a few new practices. As soon as I know the name of the hotel in which I'll be staying I Google it and the words "bed bugs" to see if any reports or reviews have been filed. When I arrive at the hotel, I head to the top of the bed, pull back the sheets, lift up the mattress and check around the bed board for any signs of bed bugs such as red stains, bed bug feces and those exoskeletons, which bed bugs leave behind when they grow and go through the process of molting (i.e. when they get fat and happy after feeding on people for a while).

We all know that bed bugs like to travel - they'll hitch a ride on your suitcase, in your purse or on your person - so it probably shouldn't come as a big surprise that bed bugs have jumped from the hotel bed to the in-flight bed, as LA computer executive Zane Selkirk discovered on a British Airways flight (Zane must be particularly tasty - she claims she was bitten about 90 times....and oh those photos are NOT pretty). British Airways has since fumigated two Boeing 747s for bed bugs, and confirmed to the Daily Mail what we've all suspected for a while: "The presence of bed bugs is an issue faced occasionally by hotels and airlines all over the world." Except pull out the word "occasionally".

So what can we do? Drawing from her own experience (and riding a wave of anti-bed bug sentiment) Zane has published Three Tips for Flying Bedbug-Free. Among the best advice is this:

If you find bugs in your luggage or on your person, do NOT get in your car or set foot in your house! This is critical. If you step into your car or your house, you will be risking $2000-$5000 or more to fumigate.

Unfortunately, fumigation doesn't always work, which begs the question - .how much money are airlines now spending to keep bed bugs from taking a bite?

Give credit where credit is due. Lufthansa is being all kinds of fun funky monkey with its social media experiments, taking the opportunity on its inaugural A380 flight from Frankfurt to New York to drive interest outside of traditional media (yeah, real people excited about a real nice product...hmmm clever in its simplicity). "Tweet about it," urges the Lufthansa staffers. "Post something on FaceBook.You can actually use the hashtag #LHA380 if you want to tweet something." I wonder if this is part of Lufthansa's not-so-sneaky plan to recreate viral magic.

Lufthansa's Airbus A380 (like all A380s, frankly) is a stunning sight to behold. But while the carrier is offering its usual high-end Panasonic in-flight entertainment (IFE) in all three classes (naturally), it has not yet retrofitted the birds with its FlyNet in-flight high-speed Internet system.

The FlyNet system, driven by Panasonic's eXConnect, is not linefit offerable on the A380. While Lufthansa is hopeful - nay expectant - that this will change, the carrier is soldiering on with retrofit plans.

Yesterday in New York, the carrier's VP Americas Jens Bischof graciously answered a few  questions about connectivity and the A380, and the joys of connecting in-flight entertainment to the cloud (hmmmmm, I wonder if Cloudstream is just the beginning of the type of IFE content to be held in the cloud!!)

Check out my brief chat with Jens and then scroll down for a funky little video about Lufthansa's inaugural A380 flight between Frankfurt and JFK. Damn, I love those urinals - what a great idea!