BA could be phasing out seat-back screens. They might be on to something

British Airways is trialling a new system that allows travellers to stream the airline’s entertainment to their own devices - getty
Kicking back, guilt-free, in front of a silly film or television programme is one of the last remaining joys of long-haul flights – eclipsed only, perhaps, by the free bar. But the days of seat-back screens and all-you-can-binge films could be numbered, as airlines tighten their purse strings and pursue other options to keep their passengers entertained.
This month, British Airways is trialling a new system on selected long-haul aircraft that allows travellers to stream the airline’s entertainment selection to their own devices. Dubbed a “BYOD” – or “bring your own device” – model, it is being offered in addition to the airline’s existing seat-back screens, and BA says it has no plans to ditch these entirely. Yet other airlines are taking a harder line. In June, Qantas revealed new screenless seats on its short-range routes, joining the likes of American Airlines, BA Euroflyer and selected Etihad services. Some think BA’s trial could be the first step to joining them.
Travellers’ tastes are changing. More than 80 per cent of us consider inflight entertainment (IFE) important or very important when choosing long-haul flights, according to research by management consultancy Kearney. And yet, the same study showed that most 18- to 35-year-old long-haulers prefer to watch their own content and devices than the airline’s. According to a report by Sita and Air Transport World, 97 per cent of us were flying with a smartphone, tablet or laptop as far back as 2014, so it’s hardly a behaviour change to use them.
Are you team IFE, or prefer to BYOD? Here, we examine the perks and pitfalls of each approach, and quiz industry experts and frequent fliers: should seat-back screens stay or go?
Why the screen should go
By the time you plonk yourself down in front of the seat-back screen, your patience is probably already wearing thin. Frazzled from the airport, all you want to do is be lulled by a nice Jane Austen adaptation, a Jennifer Lopez romcom or a gently violent Mission: Impossible film – but no, the bloody screen isn’t working. You have to beg one of the cabin crew to reset it, at which point it blinks reluctantly to life, greeting you either in Spanish or Mandarin.
Cue the litany of annoyances that a clunky, outdated IFE system inevitably entails: the labyrinth of menus, the dodgy headphone jacks, the “touch-sensitive” screen that’s anything but. Before you know it, you’re prodding impotently at the non-responsive panel, twizzling your headphone cable in the socket (why no Bluetooth connection?!) and raising the hackles of your fellow passengers – especially the bloke in front whose headrest you’re now punching. It would be simpler, would it not, just to whip out your iPad and watch that instead.

Tablets are often technologically superior to in-flight entertainment systems - Moment RF
Georgia Fowkes, a travel adviser for tour operator Altezza Travel – who flies around 350 hours per year – agrees.
“My phone and iPad have better screens than most in-seat systems. Sure, they might be smaller, but the image quality is better, the colours are sharper, and I can tilt the screen or change the brightness. It also lowers the ambient glare from dozens of screens in a dark cabin, which constantly distracts our peripheral vision.”
We’re all travelling with our own screens anyway, so surely using them is more environmentally friendly than installing seat-back IFE, especially given the weight these systems must add to aircraft? And advancements in Wi-Fi mean that it can now be strong enough to withstand inflight streaming on the likes of Netflix or Disney+, says Christophe Firth, a partner at Kearney.
“Gone are the days of Wi-Fi being a patchy add-on available on a handful of flights: bandwidth has improved, costs have dropped, and airlines can now offer over 100 Mbps for less than $20,000 [£14,900] per aircraft per month, which is enough to support 120 streaming passengers.”
That may sound pricey, but it’s nothing compared with the cost of installing seat-back screens, says Kevin Crowder, the new product development manager at Mirus Aircraft Seating, which manufactures seats for the likes of Royal Jordanian, TUI and AirAsia.
“When retrofitting new seats with screens on to a fleet, the development certification alone can run into the millions, before you even get to the cost of the system itself, the installation, the fuel burn, etc.” Any little change to the seats entails expensive retesting (“even changing from USB to USB-C charging sockets,” says Crowder), and naturally these costs are eventually passed down to the customer. And don’t forget the cost of maintenance and ongoing content licencing fees, too.
Do the maths, and it’s little wonder that airlines are choosing to opt out – though whether it’ll keep fares modest for longer, we can only hope.
Why the screen should stay
“Let’s call this what it is: another service cut disguised as innovation,” says Clive Wratten, the CEO of the Business Travel Association. “[Removing seat-back screens] might save airlines money, but it does little to improve the passenger experience, especially on long-haul flights.”
Because really, who wants to watch films on a phone that’s balanced on a tray table? And can you trust your seat’s device-charging sockets to work without a hitch? “If airlines want us to stream, every seat must have reliable power and Wi-Fi – and that’s still hit and miss,” says Wratten. “Younger passengers might embrace streaming, but older ones prefer the guarantee of seat-back entertainment. A built-in screen means I always have something to watch. No hassle, no prep.”
If you don’t want to rely on streaming, you’ll need to remember to download enough films and shows beforehand – no mean feat for a 17-hour flight to Australia. And heaven help the parents who hand over their phones to their kids to keep them entertained, rendering themselves screenless for the entire flight.

Some say the scrapping of seat-back screens is just another service cut masquerading as innovation - getty
British Airways’ “BYOD” trial will enable passengers to access the airline’s own content, but when carriers don’t offer this service, the onus is on travellers to pay for subscriptions. On Netflix, that costs at least £5.99 per month (with adverts), while Disney+’s download-capable plans start at £8.99 – which soon adds up. Airlines often have the ability to show new releases long before streaming services too, so you’ll no longer get the joy of plugging into the latest blockbuster ahead of the masses.
And if you BYOD, you’ll probably want to bring your own screen-mount too: another thing to squeeze into your carry-on. “Many airlines still don’t have integrated mounts for personal devices, making it even less comfortable and convenient,” says Rhys Jones, the aviation editor at frequent flier website Head for Points, who racked up 411 flying hours last year. “Airlines also forget that many – if not the majority – of passengers don’t carry larger devices such as tablets with them. For these travellers, having to rely on a tiny phone is clearly a downgrade.”
Even having a phone that’s capable of streaming or downloading content isn’t a given: yours might be too old or lo-fi to manage it, or have insufficient memory. “Any airline that chooses to rip out inflight entertainment screens is doing a disservice to its passengers,” continues Jones.
For many, the “connectivity” that enables content streaming will feel more like a threat than a perk. If everybody has access to free and abundant Wi-Fi, then cue an endless chorus of phone alerts, ringtones and loud conversations. And though you may loathe the silly headphone jacks that IFE screens currently feature, at least there’s no option to eschew ear buds altogether and broadcast the audio to the entire cabin – surely the most infuriating trope of our times. It would make even the shortest trip feel interminable: a living hell that not even the cheesiest romcom or blood-spurting action flick could soothe.
Recommended
The world's best (and worst) airlines, according to you
Sign up to the Front Page newsletter for free: Your essential guide to the day's agenda from The Telegraph - direct to your inbox seven days a week.