Given that some airlines are handing out ipad for travellers, and given the large cost difference between doing so and supplying seat back IFE, but the experience for those device type IFE are inferior to seat back IFE, would it make sense to improve the seatback ife system that, replace the current ife screen with a stand that specifically design and fit for a single type of device that the airlines would buy en masse, and then plug that device into each of those seats and just leave them there? This way from customer experience perspective the device would be always there and be little different from regular seatback IFE, while to airlines doing so have all the advantage of device type IFE like they are easy to replace and no need to install an entertainment hub every row. Is this realistic?

c933103 wrote:

the experience for those device type IFE are inferior to seat back IFE

What makes device based IFE inferior to seatback IFE?

United actually has something like what you describe on their domestic 777s, except it's adjustable so it will work with any device. I think that's preferable to one that's only designed for a single device. That way passengers could place their own devices in the stand if they choose, and if the airline chooses to provide its own devices it would work with them too.

I definitely prefer built-in IFE just for the sake of less hassle. Everyone having their own devices set up, chargers dangling all over the place, the passenger at the window who wants to go to the bathroom tripping over the wire and pulling it down to the floor, the inevitable useless stories of people watching questionable things on their own devices... Of course I dramaticize a bit, but it just seems more efficient. And I mean hey, not everyone has a device still.

aamd11 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

the experience for those device type IFE are inferior to seat back IFE

What makes device based IFE inferior to seatback IFE?

See:

Blankbarcode wrote:

I definitely prefer built-in IFE just for the sake of less hassle. Everyone having their own devices set up, chargers dangling all over the place, the passenger at the window who wants to go to the bathroom tripping over the wire and pulling it down to the floor, the inevitable useless stories of people watching questionable things on their own devices... Of course I dramaticize a bit, but it just seems more efficient. And I mean hey, not everyone has a device still.

It is more cost efficient to separate device from seats but doing so also mean things are less comfortable or a bit more messy in some use case. So I am thinking along the line of make a device that is just like IFE but have its own connectivity instead of relies on wiring that is the expensive part and is detachable while keeping most other aspects of seatback IFE experience as it is.

c933103 wrote:

It is more cost efficient to separate device from seats but doing so also mean things are less comfortable or a bit more messy in some use case. So I am thinking along the line of make a device that is just like IFE but have its own connectivity instead of relies on wiring that is the expensive part and is detachable while keeping most other aspects of seatback IFE experience as it is.

802.11AC wifi can stream high-def content with ease. Power (to own devices) is the problem. That's the dangling cord issue noted above.

I've actually wondered something similar (I think) to what the OP is asking.

A couple of the major downsides to built-in IFE are the cost/complexity/weight of wiring, and the fact that in many cases, it requires a giant box under the seat that serves as the IFE brain for that row, which significantly diminishes underseat storage/legroom for someone sitting there.

Meanwhile, a run-of-the-mill iPad typically has better screen resolution and can store more movies/shows/music/games/etc. than most built-in IFE I've used (and can run much faster...nothing more frustrating than trying to watch a movie on IFE and having it take 5 minutes between button presses and the response, or when you're trying to get back where you left off (previous flight ended, or IFE crashed/reset and you have to resume) and to get to the scene 45 minutes in it actually takes 35 minutes of fighting with the controls, Fast Forward/Rewind buttons, etc. to get there.

What's to stop an airline from just installing a bunch of tablets permanently fixed to the seatbacks, and having them permanently connected to power (most modern planes have in-seat power available anyway)? Instead of a giant IFE box, you have the tablet which probably weighs less than the old IFE screens. Is it merely a matter of certifying such a setup, or are there other technical challenges to doing so?

c933103 wrote:

aamd11 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

the experience for those device type IFE are inferior to seat back IFE

What makes device based IFE inferior to seatback IFE?

See:

Blankbarcode wrote:

I definitely prefer built-in IFE just for the sake of less hassle. Everyone having their own devices set up, chargers dangling all over the place, the passenger at the window who wants to go to the bathroom tripping over the wire and pulling it down to the floor, the inevitable useless stories of people watching questionable things on their own devices... Of course I dramaticize a bit, but it just seems more efficient. And I mean hey, not everyone has a device still.

It is more cost efficient to separate device from seats but doing so also mean things are less comfortable or a bit more messy in some use case. So I am thinking along the line of make a device that is just like IFE but have its own connectivity instead of relies on wiring that is the expensive part and is detachable while keeping most other aspects of seatback IFE experience as it is.

Ah, now I see what you were driving at. Couldn't tell if it was a content based issue, or equipment.

I did wonder years ago if there was likely to be a movement to design a seat with a built in slot for iPads. Basically have a docking station in the seat, slot the iPad into the back of the seat where it would get power and just have the device connected via WiFi to a server. Advantage would be quick and easy replacement of a defective unit, even in flight if necessary, and without the extensive wiring needed for usual seatback IFE setups.

Suspect that ship has sailed. Now that iPads and such devices are so widespread on a consumer level, it makes less sense to build them into the aircraft when hundreds of them are being brought on board anyway. A big advantage of BYOD IFE is that the weight is being carried by the passenger already - if you add an iPad at each seat as installed equipment your weight goes up without adding any benefit (as the service can be used by passengers anyway). And with fuel prices heading up rather than down, it's easy to see an acceleration of the move towards BYOD setups.

Some of the newest seat being rolled out by a number of full service carriers in Y now feature a dedicated tablet folder. A horizontal strip of plastic hinge that will support tablet/smartphone and hold small items such as glasses. A USB charging port is also included. This achieve what you have described except that in this case the passenger supplies the device. Personally, i believe people rather prefer to spend time looking at their own device and their own library of movies and music.

I think definitely what you are proposing can be looked at for short haul Y and long haul LCC Y. For long haul full service airlines Y seats, given that nearly all the major airlines now have seatback IFE/AVOD installed, I believe it says something about the cost and benefit of such system and it is pretty much towards the benefit side.

hOMSaR wrote:

What's to stop an airline from just installing a bunch of tablets permanently fixed to the seatbacks, and having them permanently connected to power (most modern planes have in-seat power available anyway)? Instead of a giant IFE box, you have the tablet which probably weighs less than the old IFE screens. Is it merely a matter of certifying such a setup, or are there other technical challenges to doing so?

Assuming nothing has changed, this exact solution will be introduced with Delta's CS100 fleet. Here's a link with some more details: https://blog.wandr.me/2017/09/gogo-vision-touch-delta-cseries-entertainment-ife/

I cannot find the map with full details on AA flights where they switched to app only. You either get a progress bar going across the top of the gogo webpage, or a satellite map of the exact plane's location. but no altitude, airspeed, animations. nothing.... annoying

During design of the B-787, wireless IFE was considered and rejected as having no real advantage over a wired system. An in seat back wired system that is integrated with the aircraft IFE server, public address system and electrical system is by far the best option.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/global/a ... ertainment

A few points from me:

1.) Why do so many IFE systems still require a large box per row under the seats? If my tablet can hold far more content than exsting IFE systems... there is something very wrong with those existing IFE systems.

2.) Having worked with IT outsourcing companies for nearly 2 decades, don't overestimate the skills of your average tablet user. Any system that requires 100+ people to need to connect to WIFI at the same time will change the role of FAs to onboard technical support. I'm not referring to WIFI's ability to support hundreds of devices (although I do have questions about that in a long thin tube), but the human factor. You'll be moving from 1 or 2 seats per flight where the IFE wasn't working to potentially many more.

3.) None of the above really matters to the airlines as they will underestimate point 2 and can save a pretty penny from weight reduction, content licensing etc.

aamd11 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

aamd11 wrote:

What makes device based IFE inferior to seatback IFE?

See:

Blankbarcode wrote:

I definitely prefer built-in IFE just for the sake of less hassle. Everyone having their own devices set up, chargers dangling all over the place, the passenger at the window who wants to go to the bathroom tripping over the wire and pulling it down to the floor, the inevitable useless stories of people watching questionable things on their own devices... Of course I dramaticize a bit, but it just seems more efficient. And I mean hey, not everyone has a device still.

It is more cost efficient to separate device from seats but doing so also mean things are less comfortable or a bit more messy in some use case. So I am thinking along the line of make a device that is just like IFE but have its own connectivity instead of relies on wiring that is the expensive part and is detachable while keeping most other aspects of seatback IFE experience as it is.

Ah, now I see what you were driving at. Couldn't tell if it was a content based issue, or equipment.

I did wonder years ago if there was likely to be a movement to design a seat with a built in slot for iPads. Basically have a docking station in the seat, slot the iPad into the back of the seat where it would get power and just have the device connected via WiFi to a server. Advantage would be quick and easy replacement of a defective unit, even in flight if necessary, and without the extensive wiring needed for usual seatback IFE setups.

Suspect that ship has sailed. Now that iPads and such devices are so widespread on a consumer level, it makes less sense to build them into the aircraft when hundreds of them are being brought on board anyway. A big advantage of BYOD IFE is that the weight is being carried by the passenger already - if you add an iPad at each seat as installed equipment your weight goes up without adding any benefit (as the service can be used by passengers anyway). And with fuel prices heading up rather than down, it's easy to see an acceleration of the move towards BYOD setups.

It just depends on the length of the trip. For a 3 hour midcon, a tablet is sufficient. For a transcon or transoceanic flight, I'd want seat back IFE plus power ports.

Virtual737 wrote:

If my tablet can hold far more content than exsting IFE systems... there is something very wrong with those existing IFE systems.

Is it that existing IFE systems can't hold more content, or that the carriers don't want to pay the licensing fees for additional content?

The only worthwhile channel on the IFE is the moving map anyway.

Blankbarcode wrote:

I definitely prefer built-in IFE just for the sake of less hassle. Everyone having their own devices set up, chargers dangling all over the place, the passenger at the window who wants to go to the bathroom tripping over the wire and pulling it down to the floor, the inevitable useless stories of people watching questionable things on their own devices... Of course I dramaticize a bit, but it just seems more efficient. And I mean hey, not everyone has a device still.

Amen. I could not agree more on all points.

If only AA management would reverse its decision to move away from seatback IFE to streaming.

Menzenski wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

What's to stop an airline from just installing a bunch of tablets permanently fixed to the seatbacks, and having them permanently connected to power (most modern planes have in-seat power available anyway)? Instead of a giant IFE box, you have the tablet which probably weighs less than the old IFE screens. Is it merely a matter of certifying such a setup, or are there other technical challenges to doing so?

Assuming nothing has changed, this exact solution will be introduced with Delta's CS100 fleet. Here's a link with some more details: https://blog.wandr.me/2017/09/gogo-vision-touch-delta-cseries-entertainment-ife/

I was actually thinking about a detachable design that could be removed from the seat and put into seatback pocket in takeoff/landing/emergency so that they don't need to be certified. But I guess the potential lost due to devices being stolen/missing might be larger than the possible saving from certification cost?

MIflyer12 wrote:

802.11AC wifi can stream high-def content with ease. Power (to own devices) is the problem. That's the dangling cord issue noted above.

Nowadays seats already have USB charging ports included and I don't think making another charging port in the tablet stand would be of huge difficulties?
As for wifi, actually 802.11ac can serve high definition content with ease in standard hone environment or so but I think it will be a bit stressed when you have hundreds of people sharing the same router. There are usually multiple routers for wireless connection in cabin for aircrafts that offer the service but it will still have multiple rows of passenger sharing the same system. I have read report saying that Cisco have demonstrated the ability to stream 4mbps video to 100 users via a router in 2016 which would be roughly the bitrate for typical 720p video so it is doable, but probably not with ease considering that they're still demoing it in 2016. The upcoming wifi standard 802.11ax is probably going to make it easier.

stratclub wrote:

During design of the B-787, wireless IFE was considered and rejected as having no real advantage over a wired system. An in seat back wired system that is integrated with the aircraft IFE server, public address system and electrical system is by far the best option.

https://www.thalesgroup.com/en/global/a ... ertainment

A wireless IFE system can also link up to the aircraft IFE and public address system, but I guess when 787 was designed the latest available wifi version available at the time was 802.11g which probably would be not capable enough to handle all the passengers of a plane.

mdavies06 wrote:

Some of the newest seat being rolled out by a number of full service carriers in Y now feature a dedicated tablet folder. A horizontal strip of plastic hinge that will support tablet/smartphone and hold small items such as glasses. A USB charging port is also included. This achieve what you have described except that in this case the passenger supplies the device. Personally, i believe people rather prefer to spend time looking at their own device and their own library of movies and music.

I think definitely what you are proposing can be looked at for short haul Y and long haul LCC Y. For long haul full service airlines Y seats, given that nearly all the major airlines now have seatback IFE/AVOD installed, I believe it says something about the cost and benefit of such system and it is pretty much towards the benefit side.

Actually, when such system is to be implemented at all cost, it can be setup in a way that is to be 1 to 1 replica to seatback IFE system. But with the license fee of contents and system being comparatively high, probably most carriers aren't do so.

Virtual737 wrote:

A few points from me:

1.) Why do so many IFE systems still require a large box per row under the seats? If my tablet can hold far more content than exsting IFE systems... there is something very wrong with those existing IFE systems.

2.) Having worked with IT outsourcing companies for nearly 2 decades, don't overestimate the skills of your average tablet user. Any system that requires 100+ people to need to connect to WIFI at the same time will change the role of FAs to onboard technical support. I'm not referring to WIFI's ability to support hundreds of devices (although I do have questions about that in a long thin tube), but the human factor. You'll be moving from 1 or 2 seats per flight where the IFE wasn't working to potentially many more.

3.) None of the above really matters to the airlines as they will underestimate point 2 and can save a pretty penny from weight reduction, content licensing etc.

I would like to ask point 1 too especially when airlines doing byod are already having a centralized media server