What's the Point of Wifi without Power?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: SFO
Programs: OZ Diamond/*G, IHG Diamond Amb, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,239
What's the Point of Wifi without Power?
After flying EWR-SFO (6.5 hrs) on an A320 (new one), I really wonder what was going through the heads of United when they designed that plane. What is the point of installing Wi-Fi if I can only use it for about 2-3 hours until I run out of battery because there is no power at any seat? I ended up just doing a bit of planning on united.com and then reading, because they were charging a price appropriate only for all 6.5 hours although one could effectively only get 2-3 from paying the cost.
#2
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: The shape-shifting urban sprawl that is El Lay. FT member #71.
Programs: UA Gold & MM; DL & AA credit card dirt status; Hilton Diamond; Marriott Fool's Gold
Posts: 4,683
When you say a "new" 320, does that mean it was recently updated? IIRC UA hasn't bought any 320's in a dozen years.
As to a device lasting only 2-3 hours on battery power, I'm not understanding why that should be much concern to the airline. Many people have mobile devices that can last a full flight, whether an iPad or a laptop (my Lenovo can go about 8 hours if I'm careful).
In fact why would the airline want every Wi-Fi user to be hooked up for a full 6 hour flight? There is only so many concurrent sessions that can exist. If people were connected non-stop take-off to landing I would think it would minimize revenue potential.
As to a device lasting only 2-3 hours on battery power, I'm not understanding why that should be much concern to the airline. Many people have mobile devices that can last a full flight, whether an iPad or a laptop (my Lenovo can go about 8 hours if I'm careful).
In fact why would the airline want every Wi-Fi user to be hooked up for a full 6 hour flight? There is only so many concurrent sessions that can exist. If people were connected non-stop take-off to landing I would think it would minimize revenue potential.
#3
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1
After flying EWR-SFO (6.5 hrs) on an A320 (new one), I really wonder what was going through the heads of United when they designed that plane. What is the point of installing Wi-Fi if I can only use it for about 2-3 hours until I run out of battery because there is no power at any seat? I ended up just doing a bit of planning on united.com and then reading, because they were charging a price appropriate only for all 6.5 hours although one could effectively only get 2-3 from paying the cost.
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: A menace to everything in the sky. Yes. Even birds.
Programs: Eh+ Rapid Rolleyes
Posts: 14,519
The reality is UA has opted not to put power on their Airbus fleet, when they had a perfect opportunity during the seat retrofits, because they're cheap.
#5
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 16
I've wondered the exact same thing. Why wouldn't they attempt to make it the most easy to use for the customer which would include power at the seat. I've found the United wifi completely useless while the gogo internet on other airlines great. I actually subscribe to their monthly plans even though I only fly them monthly.
#6
Join Date: May 2012
Location: LAX
Programs: UA GS/1MM, Ritz Carlton Plat
Posts: 200
I think the OP's point is if they are taking the plane out of service to update it anyway, why in world wouldn't they put in power, even if only in F. I agree. I wonder about that every time I am in one of the renovated ones.
#7
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Redwood City, CA USA (SFO/SJC)
Programs: 1K 2010, 1P in 2011, Plat for 2012,13,14,15 & 2016. Gold in 17 & 18, Plat since
Posts: 8,824
After flying EWR-SFO (6.5 hrs) on an A320 (new one), I really wonder what was going through the heads of United when they designed that plane. What is the point of installing Wi-Fi if I can only use it for about 2-3 hours until I run out of battery because there is no power at any seat? I ended up just doing a bit of planning on united.com and then reading, because they were charging a price appropriate only for all 6.5 hours although one could effectively only get 2-3 from paying the cost.
Also, keep in mind there are few domestic flights longer than EWR-SFO, and that 6.5 hour time probably represents about 5.5 hours, if that, of "quality time with your laptop".
#8
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: BOS
Programs: Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott/SPG/Hilton Gold, PreCheck + Clear
Posts: 2,306
It's especially puzzling given that most planes had power in F via the old EmPower style plugs back in the freaking 90s. Many UA F seats even still have the old jack, but they've plugged it up, presumably to avoid paying a licensing fee after their deal with EmPower ended. Amazing.
#9
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,413
Pretty much every Apple device has sufficient battery to surf the internet for a full transcon. The new ones can probably run movies the whole time.
This is UA we're talking about.
This is UA we're talking about.
#10
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1k, SPG Plat 100
Posts: 619
The question "Why does UA have WiFi but no power on 6 hour flights when my battery only lasts 3" assumes that everyone else is in the same situation as you. They aren't; many people use devices that last longer than 3 hours, or carry enough power to last them their whole flight. Further, many people value 3 hours of WiFi connectivity over 6 hours of power.
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: A menace to everything in the sky. Yes. Even birds.
Programs: Eh+ Rapid Rolleyes
Posts: 14,519
The only time I step on a plane with all of those devices fully charged is a 6am flight.
I don't see wifi and in-seat power as a binary equation. Yes, I care more about working wifi (something that's elusive to United) than in-seat power, but if you're going to gut a plane and install new seats and fit the plane for wifi the reason you're not providing power at the seats is C H E A P.
The real question is does not having in-seat power influence purchase behavior? For me, no. Lack of wifi, if all else is close to equal, yes. But it doesn't matter because I value on-time performance far greater than anything else and UA doesn't win that metric.
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Jersey Shore/YYZ
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Plat, Hilton Diamond, Hertz PC
Posts: 12,521
But agree - no power for 14+ hours is awful if one doesn't sleep. I can't defend UA here, but personally, I'd have slept for a lot of that flight.
#14
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,413
#15
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Redwood City, CA USA (SFO/SJC)
Programs: 1K 2010, 1P in 2011, Plat for 2012,13,14,15 & 2016. Gold in 17 & 18, Plat since
Posts: 8,824
That's not the OP's situation. You likely consider me an apologist in this thread, but I'd agree with you that power should be available on a TPAC or TATL. I just don't see it as the end of the world on a TCON.