Air Traffic Controller Lands Stricken Plane By SMS 177
There's a new reason to hope that the no-cell-chatter bill now under consideration in the US doesn't bring with it a Faraday-cage mandate, and that reason is landing safely. Reader ma11achy writes with an excerpt from a scary story (with an SMS-based happy ending) from the Irish Times: "Five people on a flight from Kerry to Jersey received mobile phone text instructions from a quick-thinking air traffic controller when he guided them in to a safe landing at Cork, after the plane lost all onboard electrical power, communications and weather radar soon after take-off from Kerry airport."
Oh dear (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh dear (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh dear (Score:5, Funny)
haha what u crshing on she not into u lolz
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen their weather reports? They probably invented communicating that way and it took IM and SMS for the rest of the world to catch up.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen their weather reports? They probably invented communicating that way and it took IM and SMS for the rest of the world to catch up.
I take it you mean the Shipping Forecast [bbc.co.uk]. I don't know if Ireland has one, but the UK does. To be read out in a very British accent:
And now the Shipping Forecast issued by the Met Office, on behalf of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, at 1130 on Sunday 10 August 2008.
There are warnings of gales in Viking North Utsire South Utsire Forties Thames Dover Fastnet Shannon Bailey Faeroes and Southeast Iceland.
The general synopsis at 0700: Low north Forties 989 moving north expected Viking 982 by 0700 tomorrow. L
Re: (Score:2)
You missed a bit off the end of that shipping forecast:
"And an extra special good night to Stoker Cheeky Hoyle. {smooch} night night petal pants!"
A cookie to my US brothers if they can source that quote without google.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't this lyrics from an old Tears for Fears song?
I believe I have the EP somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Me too, probably. But to my shame, here I am out somewhere "West of Shetland" (actually, the last land we saw was the Orkenys, but "whatever") and I don't actually know which sea area we're in. Checking the Met Office, we're near the border of Fair Isle and F
Re: (Score:2)
example: KLAX 131650Z 28005KT 6SM HZ FEW015 BKN180 21/16 A2984 RMK AO2 SLP104 T02110156
At KLAX on the 13th day of the month at 1650 zulu time the winds were 5 knots from slightly north of due west (280 degrees). 6 Statue miles of visibility with haze. Clouds are few (ie 1/8 of the sky) at 1500 feet and broken (ie 6/8 of the sky) at 18000 feet. Temp is 21 deg C with a dewpoint of 16 deg C. Altimeter is 29.84 inches of Mercury. There is a remark that the station is automated and some
Why didn't he just call them? (Score:2, Funny)
Would've been cheaper.
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:5, Informative)
Why didn't he just call them?
He did. FTA:
Eventually he [the pilot] managed to contact Cork [the air traffic controller] on his phone, telling them about his problem and his intention to approach the airport from the sea.
He then lost audio telephone contact but the air traffic controller switched to texting and told the pilot that he had a primary radar signal on the aircraft and that Cork would allow them to land there. He then used texts to guide the 30-year-old plane in.
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:5, Funny)
They can also start recruiting air traffic controllers right out of junior high school.
"U r clr 4 laning lol"
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:4, Funny)
I don't type much. Just under 50 texts a day on average.
I also don't read /. much. I probably hit F5 no more than 50 times a day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, and it's often easier to read than SMS-speak.
-
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:4, Insightful)
from TFA:
He then lost audio telephone contact but the air traffic controller switched to texting and told the pilot that he had a primary radar signal on the aircraft and that Cork would allow them to land there. He then used texts to guide the 30-year-old plane in.
What would make a phone lose audio but not SMS ability?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:5, Informative)
Because cellphone voice communications requires a constant link between the cellphone and the tower, where SMS is transmitted in bursts when the cellphone and the tower can hear each other.
You'll find in situtations where the cell towers are jammed with calls of people calling each other to see if everything is OK after a major storm, a SMS will get through even if you can't make a call.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
GSM uses time division multiplexing, which means that the "constant link between the cellphone and the tower" is infact a set of short and frequent bursts. A burst sent from a p
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a good thing they didn't have KPN as their cell provider (dutch company, so obviously not a chance), because I regularly get messages hours after they've been sent even with both phones in range of a cell tower and no other connectivity issues that I'm aware of.
Re:Why didn't he just call them? (Score:5, Informative)
What would make a phone lose audio but not SMS ability?
Shite signal. An SMS is sent in a single frame of GSM data. Audio needs 50 frames per second.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
An SMS is sent in a single frame of GSM data. Audio needs 50 frames per second.
And again I'm reminded of why I'm so sick that we pay so much for SMS services.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The reliability isn't generally there. They got lucky that the messages went through so quickly.
SMS services are inexpensive to provide and don't consume much bandwidth -- although they consume some storage.
The reason providers get away with charging so much for them is because they can, because enough customers perceive SMS as having value, being an extra feature, and tolerating the ridiculous, exhorbitant pricing.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe the plane was in a tunnel at that time.
Re: (Score:2)
What would make a phone lose audio but not SMS ability?
If you can't think of the reason, then I would suggest that you are probably at the wrong site. Fox news is that way -->
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
[The pilot] then lost audio telephone contact but the air traffic controller switched to texting and told the pilot that he had a primary radar signal on the aircraft and that Cork would allow them to land there. He then used texts to guide the 30-year-old plane in.
Once again.. (Score:5, Funny)
..what would be the point of this act? To reduce passenger annoyance? Great, might as well ban cellphones in cinema halls now.
I think a more sensible legislation would be legalizing poking obnoxious cellphone loudmouths in the eye with pencils..
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I think a more sensible legislation would be legalizing poking obnoxious cellphone loudmouths in the eye with pencils..
Personally, I have found that its more annoying when other passengers try to strike up a conversation with me.
Once I was flying during the summer by myself for business and I ended up sitting next to this really intoxicated lady in her late 50's. On retrospect it was kind of funny, but kept asking me personal questions and even offered me several thousand dollars if guessed her age right as
Re: (Score:2)
Amen to that. I wouldn't call myself reserved, a loner or even an introvert. But when I travel, I usually make it a point to carry along something to keep me occupied for the journey. Something constructive, like a book, or podcasts, or even a laptop, if I need to get work done.
Co-passenger conversations are tolerable, and even fine if the discussion is more on a /.-ish line, like on news, issues
Re: (Score:2)
Put your ear buds on, slide one of these bad boys [aircraftspruce.com] over your head and you're golden.
Re: (Score:2)
I was Google searching to see if a gas mask is even allowed on a plane (it wouldn't surprise me if they're classified as a weapon, since they could be used as one component in an attack), but lo and behold, this page [instructables.com] actually has a picture of a guy flying American Airlines with a gas mask on. So, go for it!
Re: (Score:2)
Sitting next to inquisitive passengers is the worst. I once was next to a 6 or 7 year old version- who proceeded to chatter whilst I was quite airsick and throwing up. Luckily, the flight attendant moved him, before I throttled him.
Re:Once again.. (Score:5, Funny)
You can be thrown out of a theatre for talking on your cell phone (or having it ring). Perhaps we should indeed have the same rule for airplanes.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up. Parachute optional.
Re: (Score:2)
A cell talking section is actually a good idea. Maybe those seats right behind the engines.
Re: (Score:2)
Please elaborate on your experience in China, Mexico, and the Philippines.
Re: (Score:2)
Some years ago I remember reading about how a theatre in Beijing had solved their problem with patrons talking on their cell phones and annoying everybody else. When a ban on cellphones didn't work, they made an arrangement with the People's Liberation Army, which simply jammed the relevant band in the vicinity of the theatre.
Whats the tech hubub about cell phones? (Score:2)
I find it hard to believe that something as critical as the electronics system in an airplane would be so prone to cell calls.
Re:Whats the tech hubub about cell phones? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Whats the tech hubub about cell phones? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Mythbusters, while highly entertaining, would not win any prizes for designing good experiments. They are entertainers, not scientists, and you could poke huge holes in quite a high percentage of their endeavours, so I wouldn't cite them as a meaningful reference.
Re:Whats the tech hubub about cell phones? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Whats the tech hubub about cell phones? (Score:4, Informative)
Carnegie Mellon University good enough for you? [sciam.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There is plenty of anecdotal evidence. Check NASA's airline database. [nasa.gov] A quick search for "PED" in text synopsis or narrative will bring up various stories where interference occurred and stopped occurring when the passenger turned off the device.
So there's plenty of evidence. The "problem" is that airline flight crews are interested in passenger safety, not in scientific research. If the navigation radios aren't working and they start working again when your cell phone is turned off, that's as far as it
Re: (Score:2)
The next sentence is the one that matters:
"The researchers also determined that some of the emissions from mobile phones occurred in frequencies employed by Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers, which are increasingly vital for safe landings."
If anything, since the calls regularly occur on flights despite the ban, I would take that to be evidence that there is no risk.
Only so if there weren't incidents or problems related to interference. NASA released a report of problems encountered by passengers electronic devices and many of them relate to interference. You can view that here [nasa.gov]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Cell phones, certainly GSM cell phones *DO* interfere with aircraft communication systems.
It was a dark and stormy night (OK, it wasn't stormy, just light rain, with a cloud base at 600 feet, and it was very dark). I was returning from the UK with a friend in his light aircraft. It was my friend's first IFR approach for real - in the clouds, at night. The air was smooth though, so the conditions weren't too bad for a first time.
Unfortuantely he had forgotten to turn off his phone.
ATC cleared us for the appr
Re: (Score:2)
I was annoyed and disappointed in an episode where they were testing a story about the effects of a bad paint job (or some other thin substance...can't remember) on the rotor blades of helicopters. Two of the assistants (mitigating factor: one was the smokin' hot babe) decided to test it by doctoring the blades of a radio controlled helicopter. They went to a hobby store and bought one, then spent quite a bit of the alloted time trying to fly the thing. That's like testing a rumor about surfing by going
Re: (Score:2)
The mythbusters experiment was highly flawed. They used a single cellphone for all their tests.
There's this effect called "heterodyning", where two signals mix to produce two more (sum and difference). When you have multiple cellphones going on, their signals will mix to produce all kinds of nasty products. If one of them happens to land on the VOR/glideslope frequency, things can very suddenly get interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
Heterodyning will happen in any nonlinear medium, such as a diode or just two pieces of nonsimilar metal being connected. In particular, it will happily happen in the receiver front end of pretty well any radio, such as a VOR receiver, or any of my UHF/VHF/HF tranceivers, because transistors themselves (e.g. GaAsFET front ends) do not have linear response.
Take any scanner and drive through a downtown city and you'll get pager blare. That's
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the one hand the aluminum tube body of the typical modern aircraft is potentially an antenna which can deliver your cellphone signal at full strength (which isn't much, I'll grant you) directly into the cockpit electronics. On the other hand, the signal strength is jack diddly shit and your laptop backlight probably has at least as much chance to interfere with something, and the only time they make you stow that is on takeoff. It has nothing to do with the electronics, though; they just don't want stuff
Re: (Score:2)
But how about 300 phones? And what happens if all of them go to max power because they can't reach a cell? Or when the plane's micro cell goes down.
Just putting an active GSM phone next to audio equipment makes it buzz. With such phones you can even tell that you are about to get a call just by the distinctive tatata-tatata-tatata-ta-ta sound from the interference.
So I won't be confident on it not causing problems to avionics.
Another thing - does using a
Re: (Score:2)
My GSM cell phone causes audible noises whenever it's near powered computer speakers or poorly-shielded microphones, produces a weird flickering on my CRT monitor, and I've seen it cause erratic mouse behavior (contextual menus pop up when I'm not touching the mouse). I have no idea what it does to airplanes, but I have to move my phone away from my computer when I take a call, so it's not a load of crap.
thats standard procedure (Score:4, Interesting)
My Brother flies an A320 for BA.
They have constant contact via cell phone to their dispatchers. Even tho they require flight passengers to shut down theirs.
Once the shit hits the fan, I guess it would be the first they use to contact Ground for any vectors, weather infromation or whatsoever.
-S
"this never happens" (Score:2)
While the situation described shouldn't effect new communication rules, there are many different ways cell phone communications can be useful. Furthermore, the ability to communicate using cell phones is a deterrent to hijackings. The person in charge of the plane is not certainly in charge of all communications, and thats a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
It didn't "deter" the 9/11 hijackings, did it? It probably was the reason the passengers rushed the cabin and crashed Flight 93 though.
Re: (Score:2)
And this magic charm I can sell you for a low, low price can "deter" tiger attacks, though not guaranteed to "prevent all" of them.
Re: (Score:2)
"landing safety" -- bullshit (Score:5, Insightful)
How about reading TFA: "the twin-engined Piper plane ... with four passengers". It wasn't a fucking jumbo jet. That kind of plane is never going to be affected by any "no cell chatter" rules, much less have any "Faraday cage" built into it. And I think an airliner would have multiple multiple communications backups.
Reminds me of the wackos who say cell phones should be allowed in cinemas "in case of terrorist attack".
The only reason Timothy linked this with the cell phone ban on passenger planes is that it is guaranteed to start up a multi-page thread arguing that subject again, reardless of its irrelevance. Too bad he couldn't think of a way to get gun rights or evolution into the story too.
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of the wackos who say cell phones should be allowed in cinemas
I've never been in one that doesn't allow them in. They just ask you to silence the damn thing, during the previews, often with some very creative short films. I still usually hear at least one.
Re: (Score:2)
I should have said "allowed to use".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
They've got a point though - cell phones are an excellent way of setting bombs off remotely, how else are you going to mount a terrorist attack if they're banned in cine.....oh.....hang on... Ah, I get your point now...
Keep them off for sanity's sake. (Score:2)
I hope this law never gets passed and I don't care what lie the gov't has to tell to keep cell phones turned off. Planes are already noisy. People who talk on cell phones talk LOUDLY. Add a lot of people in a noisy environment all talking at the same time, and that makes for a lot of noise.
Non-Story (Score:5, Informative)
If the pilot wouldn't have had the cell phone, he would have been given signals from a light gun as he approached the airport. Losing radios isn't exactly all that uncommon, especially in older aircraft, so pilots and controllers have come up with ways to handle the situation.
Re: (Score:2)
Even the title sounds pretty silly to a pilot. Air traffic controllers didn't land the plane-- the pilot did. It MIGHT have been a story if the guy was flying through dense clouds and fog and lost control just as another radar contact was intersecting his vector at high speed or something.
Re: Air Traffic Controller Lands Stricken Plane (Score:2, Informative)
Sheesh! Air controllers don't land planes, stricken or otherwise. Aircrews land airplanes. The airplane will land (and fly) just fine without an "air controller".
Air traffic controllers _clear_ airplanes to land. This involves traffic de-confliction and statistically improves safety but there are plenty of non-towered airports where the aircrew routinely lands without benefit of Air Traffic Control.
For instance: http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KPUW [flightaware.com]
At Pullman/Moscow Regional Airport, a non-towered fi
The pilot actually landed the plane (Score:3, Informative)
The controller doesn't land the plane. The controller works with pilots to keep the airspace and runway coordinated and air traffic moving smoothly. That's an essential job, but it doesn't include flying.
After all, there's no way (in a short time) to MacGyver a cell phone SMS to an autopilot. And this plane may not have an autopilot anyhow.
The pilot followed standard lost contact procedures and augmented them with the call to the controller. The controller wisely used SMS when voice was lost.
Anyhow, the article writer's hook for large commercial aircraft is nonsensical since this is a four-seat aircraft and wouldn't fall under those rules anyhow.
Reasons for airliner cell phone ban (Score:3, Insightful)
First off, when an aircraft is in an emergency, you can do a lot of things that would otherwise be banned. You save your fanny first, then worry about regulations later.
Second, the reasons given for the cell phone ban appear to be largely misinformed. I know of two: potential interferrence with aircraft equipment, and interferrence with ground cell phone towers.
To demonstrate that cell phones categorically do not interfere with aircraft equipment, in the US, the FAA would require that each cell phone design demonstrate that it does not cause interferrence. Change the design, or have a different design? New demonstration required. Cell phones passing the test would more than likely need some sort of identifying mark showing that they were approved for aircraft use.
Don't like this idea? Perhaps you'd like to fly with someone who can interfere with the aircraft instruments. I can imagine the headlines: "FAA fails to insure airline safety. Cell phone determined to be cause of crash claiming 150 lives!"
As much as I dislike the airlines getting a free ride on their phones being the only ones usable on the aircraft, those phones have been verified not to interfere with other equipment on the aircraft.
The other problem is that ground based cell phones were designed for ground usage. They punch into whatever cell phone towers happen to be in range. As long as the cell phone itself isn't at a higher elevation, it only reaches a limited number of towers. Put it in an airplane, and it reaches a much larger number of towers. Which tower should be handling the call? Who knows?
This might not be too bad for one or two cell phones, but open it up to all cell phones, and significant interference could result.
It is possible to design a cell phone for airborne use. All it takes is money.
One can, of course, legislate this problem, and declare whatever the legislators think will please the electorate the most. But that, of course, does not change the laws of physics.
I can't decide (Score:2)
SMS does get through better (Score:2)
SMS does get through when voice can't. Especially since analog AMPS service was discontinued.
Last month I was using SMS to communicate with a friend who was spending a week horse camping in San Mateo County. This isn't exactly Outer Nowhere, but there's a big area of hilly parks west of Silicon Valley with no cell towers. She was camped in a valley, and I couldn't reach her with voice calls, but if I sent her a text message, it would be delivered the next time she rode up to a ridge line and briefly go
Misleading, a bit (Score:3, Informative)
There have been pretty good rules around for over 60 years regarding what the pilot should do when they can't contact the tower. Similarly the tower has an old red/green light gun for communicating with planes that can't hear.
It's unlikely there was any safety added by the cell phone sms messages. In fact, bypassing the usual no-radio procedures may have compromised safety. There may be some flags dropped on this play.
That IS a Scary Scenario! (Score:2)
People's lives in the hands of text messages. As if mobile telephones weren't annoying enough without butchering written languages as well.
Re: (Score:2)
No one's life was in the hands of a text message. Airplanes fly on the principles set out by Bernoulli and Newton, *not* Marconi. A radio failure is something that's trained for, and the aircraft's captain was merely using an additional tool at his disposal; a radio failure should never be something that's life threatening.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would flight principals be based on macaroni? I like a good helping of cheese and noodles as much as the next guy, but I think you're taking it a bit too far.
I expect a new Irish drinking song (Score:2, Funny)
'tween Cork and Kerry airports
I saw the dash go dim,
and me passengers did scream out,
"You better land this plane, man
or the Devil, he may take ye"
Whack fol my daddy-o,
Whack fol my daddy-o,
there's whisky in the jar
I switch to my cell phone,
for my cell phone never fail'd me.
But, the Devil take that cell phone,
for when I called the tower,
that damn'd thing went and dropped me!
If anyone can aid me,
it's controller in the Tower.
Send forth me text message
and direct me
Making a bigger deal than it should be... (Score:2)
There are established procedures for landing with no radio. A light gun with red and green is used so that the tower can signal an aircraft when it is okay to enter final and land.
This is news? (Score:2)
A private piston-powered aircraft has an electrical failure, and it's Slashdot-worthy news that the pilot managed to get a landing clearance on his cell phone?
Must be a slow news day. This sort of thing happens fairly regularly in the US. Two friends of mine had the same thing happen to them a couple of years ago and managed to re-establish communications via cell phone. No big deal, and certainly not worthy of the front page on Slashdot, which is clearly trying to spin this as some sort of "OMG DONT BANZ T
Sellotape (Score:3, Funny)
You have used two inches of Sellotape. Bless you, my child!
happy ending (Score:2)
with an SMS-based happy ending
And here I thought phone sex was a waste of time.
Congrats to the Guy... (Score:2)
..and everything, but, what's that sms'd exchange going to cost the hero? I have a rough over/under of 5,000..
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
1 - People have an annoying habit of yelling into their cellphones for no good reason.
2 - Maybe you don't hear complaints about people on cell phones in restaurants because you're too busy yelling into your cellphone.
3 - Passengers are packed pretty tightly into those airplanes.
Re: (Score:2)
But there already are phones on airplanes. The complaints from passengers is that they cost too much compared to their cellulars. I think it's appropriate that a proven safe telephone system be used and the users pay extra for it, in part for safety and in part to reduce the chatter. Ear plugs should not be necessary to sleep on a flight, as prudent as they might be.
And let's not overlook the fact that the plane in the OP had already lost all its sensitive guidance devices, so at that point of course it'
Re: (Score:2)
Right, which solves the problem. Some of us don't want anybody talking on a phone on the plane under any circumstance. I really and truly don't care whether they're dealing with business, I don't want to hear it, especially since it's usually a multi hour flight and I have nowhere to go.
If we really want to compromise on this, a special cellphone cabin for the business class would be a reasonable compromise. But a lot of people don't want the added annoyance of cellphone idiots while they're flying.
If the U
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If you don't want to hear it, then get ear plugs, plug in your iPod, or just not listen
You're louder than my music, moron. Get off the f***ing plane.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see what the big deal is. People talking on a cell phone is hardly any different than two people talking to each other on the plane. Except you only get (have) to hear one side of the conversation.
If you don't want to hear it, then get ear plugs, plug in your iPod, or just not listen. I mean, seriously, you don't hear people complaining about cell phones at restaurants, yet it is the same concept.
When did flying become a "quiet zone"?
I think it would be a non-issue if people talking on cell phones would use a normal level of volume to speak. It becomes a problem when people are practically yelling on the phone and can be heard three rows down the airplane. Most normal face to face conversations on an airplane are barely audible b/c of the background noise on the plane.
Re: (Score:2)
WHAT WAS THAT?!?
No, I said X
Y
Z
No can you hear me?
No I said XYZ
Re: (Score:2)
That's not true, not even a little bit. Reception is a function of what the antenna is or is not doing, it has absolutely nothing to do with what the microphone is picking up.
It would be a very broken phone which was sending clear signals to the tower and garbling at the microphone end of things. If that's what's going on the appropriate fix is to get a decent phone. Even my several years old razr has no issues with that at all.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not true. Yes you can't lip read over the phone, but it's a common misconception that you have to speak loudly in order to be heard on a cell phone.
Unlike landlines, the cellphone doesn't pipe you're own voice back to you. This results in you having to guess rather than know how loud the other party thinks you're talking and for cellphone users to generally yell.
On the rare occasion where I use my phone on the bus, _I_ can't hear what I'm saying and the other party rarely if ever has any trouble hear
Re:What? (Score:4, Insightful)
As others have already pointed out: it is, my friend, oh well, it is.
Which is even worse. I find it much more easy to ignore a completely understandable talk between two people. With just half of the communication present, some nerve tickles all the time and tries to make sense of all this gibberish.
Thank you, but I get seriously irritated when not hearing what goes on around me. I dislike ear plugs and I dislike the wet atmosphere they generate inside my ears; earphones, on the other hand, induce very discomforting pain (the anatomically more suitable earphones are so sound-proof that I can't use them in public; see above).
In my country, this is mainly because nobody uses the cell phone while in a restaurant. If they have to, they go outside. Very polite.
Why should it become a terroristic attack on my ears and--maybe more importantly--on my intellect? Flying is uncomfortable enough as it is, no need for additional yelling.
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Give it up, friend. People who are determined to do whatever they please whenever they please and have a "screw the rest of the world" attitude will always attack anyone who dares question their right to do so.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Give it up, friend. People who are determined to do whatever they please whenever they please and have a "screw the rest of the world" attitude will always attack anyone who dares question their right to do so.
Works for Bush.
Re: (Score:2)
Learn to fly first class noob. It's only uncomfortable when you don't have a stewardess sucking your balls through the flight.
Damn, all this time I've been flying coach and landing with cramps and dry balls.
Perhaps you can clear something for me, is there or is there not sex allowed in the champagne room?
Re: (Score:2)
Must be nice. I pay $80/m for my Sidekick, and I get all that stuff "free". I have yet to hit one of those "unlimited" caps, nor to see anything inexplicable with my bill.
Enjoy that Verizon-branded rape! Ask for some lube next time!
(I will never touch Verizon. Any cell company that removes a functional button to stick their logo in, are a bunch of assholes. See the Motorola RAZR on Verizon - right soft-key is nonfunctional and contains the Verizon logo on the screen.)