Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cmon! Do 'Electronic Items' Disrupt Flight!?  
User currently offlineSoundtrack From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 284 posts, RR: 0
Posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5678 times:

Okay folks...

I've been told by FA's my camera (slr) and video cameras, laptops disrupt a plane's operation during takeoff and landing.

Can someone point to me if this is REALLY true!

I'm sure others have had the same experience.

Please enlighten me - thanks!

46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAir2gxs From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5670 times:

No, they do not disrupt the takeoff and landing, they disrupt the flight and cabin's crew ability to have your full attention during the most critical phases of flight.

User currently offlineMhodgson From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2002, 5047 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5639 times:

I think the fact that if an accident was to occur, the force of the SLR hurling through the cabin could do some serious damage. Doesn't stop most poeple though!


No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced
User currently offlinePilotpip From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3151 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5627 times:

Lower altitudes are usually more turbulent and the aircraft will be maneuvering more. These two items mean it's harder to hold onto something, and it could come out of somebody's hand and hurt another passenger.

You also need to know what to do when you have to get out of the aircraft fast.



DMI
User currently offlineXkorpyoh From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 821 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5601 times:

Some info here from an old article:
http://xar.us/stuff/papers/new_threat_of_the_airways.html

I personally still use my Ipod/mp3 player during takeoff/landing (to give it some cinematic soundtrack to the event  Smile ).... but i will really hate the day when cell phones are allowed to be used on board. It will be horrible. I think the noise cancelling heaphones sales will go up after that.

http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,41177,00.html

..i think that the ban is a "just in case" measure because they have not done extensive study on the matter to determine if "all" electronic devices cause interference or not.

I do think the cell phones are more of a risk than a laptop/mp3 player. Do you think that everybody remembers to shut their cellphones after boarding? i know of some people that just forget.
During a recent flight on Malev to Budapest, the flight attendant had a device that beeps when a cell phone signal is received. She was walking up and down the aisle and was politely asking paxs to shut the cell phones when her thing was beeping. I thought that was neat and should be use by other airlines if the cell phone signals are a real threat. Then again, why do the insist in adding features in the plane to allow the use of cell phones inflight? i think that will a cause of a bigger controversy.


User currently offlineJBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2373 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5516 times:

I think this is one for the Mythbusters to tackle  Wink

Then we'd know once and for all if electronic devices can mess with a plane, and in the end, something would most likely get blown up. lol.



I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 34
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5503 times:

The signals for mobile phones can be heard through the aircrafts communication systems which can be an annoyance. I don't know too much about what other electronic items do though, i'd imagine there might be some inteference but nothing life threatening.

User currently offlineLegacy135 From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1052 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5503 times:

Look, the thing is that we do not really know if it does interfere and if yes, what does interfere in which aircraft. I personally think that most of the times nothing will happen. On the other hand I was onboard a brand new King Air 350, 10 years ago, when we lost all EFIS displays for three times. They always came back and maintenance never found out why those failures occurred. Just the last time, we lost the displays, we could realize, how the owner completed a call at his cellphone. We told him then about and it never occurred again, but he never again used this phone on board.
On the other hand, I had hundreds of passengers on board the last years, calling from cells during the aircraft was on ground and this in different and much more sophisticated types then the 350 and there was never the slightest problem. So I think, best is to go the safe way and this is how it is done actually be the majority of operators. This may limit you in your personal freedom but there is no bad intention behind and just a safety measure.


User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5501 times:

Quoting Xkorpyoh (Reply 4):
I personally still use my Ipod/mp3 player during takeoff/landing (to give it some cinematic soundtrack to the event ).... but i will really hate the day when cell phones are allowed to be used on board. It will be horrible. I think the noise cancelling heaphones sales will go up after that.

I left my cell phone on once when to see if it would even get service. They don't at cruising altitudes. I doubt you can get reliable service above 10,000 feet. I did a cross country the other day (7.7 hours!!!) and needless to say I got a little bored sitting there after I had the plane all trimmed out. So I tried to make a phone call on my first leg (flew at 10,500). (My headphones have noise canceling and a jack you can plug a cell phone into to make a call) I wasn't able to pick up any kind of signal at all. My second leg (9,500) I tried calling, but the signal came in and out. I would have three bars, then no bars. Very unreliable.

I think better receiver towers would need to be developed before you can talk on your phone at 35,000 ft. I wouldn't put it beyond the phone companies to develop this and charge you a ridiculous amount of minutes/money for it though. I agree with you, I hope it never happens.


User currently offlineXkorpyoh From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 821 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5427 times:

Quoting NorCal (Reply 8):
I think better receiver towers would need to be developed before you can talk on your phone at 35,000 ft. I wouldn't put it beyond the phone companies to develop this and charge you a ridiculous amount of minutes/money for it though. I agree with you, I hope it never happens.

I was referring to this:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/2004-07-16-jet-phones_x.htm


User currently offlineMhodgson From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2002, 5047 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5314 times:

I was on a STN-BLK flight a while ago, and we were problably at round cruising altitude (I suspect about 18000'). I heard a phone recieve a text message, so it is possible.

But if I EVER hear Crazy Frog on a plane, I will search every single bin and smash the offending phone :-x



No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced
User currently offlineAeroWeanie From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1610 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5274 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Soundtrack (Thread starter):
Can someone point to me if this is REALLY true!

There have been several articles in Aviation Week & Space Technology relating how airliner crews had problems with their onboard systems (nav, etc.). They had a FA walk through the cabin and ask people to turn off their electronic devices. Sure enough, the problems went away. In at least one case, by the process of elimination, they identified the offending device (a CD player, if I remember right).

Electro-Magnetic Interference (EMI) testing is required in the certification testing of all new airliners, but its mainly for High Energy Radiated Fields (HERF). For example, during the HERF EMI test on the MD11, the APU inlet door opened uncommanded. Commercial electronic devices emit much weaker fields, but if they are in the wrong place, they can still mess with critical onboard systems.

Don't risk my life by having the arrogance to think that your device won't interfere with the onboard systems.


User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17110 posts, RR: 66
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5212 times:

Quoting AeroWeanie (Reply 11):

Don't risk my life by having the arrogance to think that your device won't interfere with the onboard systems.

I agree. While there is probably minimal risk, they ask you not to do it and it's against regulations. Isn't that enough reason to leave your device off? Take the train if you don't like it.


There is evidence that electronic devices affect aircraft systems, but nothing has been recorded that would be really dangerous. Another problem is that if the device is malfunctioning, it could produce (for example) a radio signal much more powerful than it was designed to do. That could also affect systems.

Quoting Mhodgson (Reply 10):
But if I EVER hear Crazy Frog on a plane, I will search every single bin and smash the offending phone :-x

No kidding. LOL



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineExusair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 684 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5182 times:

Electricity has the potential to jump through cords. Photographers who work with strobes will tell you that when working with two strobes and they want one to go on but not the other, that if the wires are crossed, the wrong strobe will missfire.

There is anecdotal evidence of efis screens going blank on approach with electronics onboard being suspected as the cause. Some research has been done and a handheld nintendo game was found to cause electricity to "jump" when used in certain spots aboard the aircraft.

There is not enough research, but it is safer to err on the side of caution and be sure that everything is turned off.


User currently offlineNewkai From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 330 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5179 times:

There's also the theory that airlines don't want you using your phone on board so that you'll use their's and pay twenty times as much!

But you're not going to get any reception at any decent altitude anyway.


User currently onlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6096 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5131 times:

EGGD is correct. Although the phone may not be heard on the ground, once you become airborne, you can hear it as it hunts for, or talks to, multiple towers. It sounds like morse code. If you want to experiment, you can hear your phone if you put itl next to a powered speaker, like a PC speaker, or phone with a speaker phone. My phone does this, but I can't gaurantee that every phone will.


Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5115 times:

Quoting Exusair (Reply 13):
There is anecdotal evidence of efis screens going blank on approach with electronics onboard being suspected as the cause. Some research has been done and a handheld nintendo game was found to cause electricity to "jump" when used in certain spots aboard the aircraft.

"Anecdotal" and "research" don't belong in the same sentence together. Do you have a link and / or hardcopy for any of this, please? RF emissions combined with poorly shielded electrical conduits causing an arc? This goes against any DC/AC circuit analysis that I've studied while working on my EE. I'd love to see where you heard this from.

Cheers!



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17110 posts, RR: 66
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5089 times:

Quoting Wukka (Reply 16):
Quoting Exusair (Reply 13):
There is anecdotal evidence of efis screens going blank on approach with electronics onboard being suspected as the cause. Some research has been done and a handheld nintendo game was found to cause electricity to "jump" when used in certain spots aboard the aircraft.

"Anecdotal" and "research" don't belong in the same sentence together. Do you have a link and / or hardcopy for any of this, please? RF emissions combined with poorly shielded electrical conduits causing an arc? This goes against any DC/AC circuit analysis that I've studied while working on my EE. I'd love to see where you heard this from.

Will probably not answer your question but nevertheless raises the issue from the purely anecdotal realm somewhat.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_10/interfere.html



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAMSSpotter From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 271 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5081 times:

When I was in the army (this was in the early 90's) and we turned on one of our pc's (286's) in the office, there was a real bad interference with the radio signal (FM music) during the boot-up process. The radio literally sounded like a slot-machine for a few moments.

My first pc (486) always interefered with one of the TV-stations (lower frequencies).

Even nowadays, radio's sometimes give away incoming mobile phone calls, so I guess the aviation industry does have a valid point when it wants electronic devices to be shut off during take-off and landing.

Personally, I don't think a photo-camera or a camcorder will do much harm but like more people here pointed out: it's always better to be safe than sorry!

[Edited 2005-05-14 21:43:43]

User currently offlineBiggles From Canada, joined Dec 2004, 459 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5021 times:

With the large number of potentially dangerous electronic devices being brought on and used in an aircraft , you would have thought some authority would have carried out some specific tests by now..

User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17110 posts, RR: 66
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4981 times:

Quoting AMSSpotter (Reply 18):
Personally, I don't think a photo-camera or a camcorder will do much harm but like more people here pointed out: it's always better to be safe than sorry!

Heavier items like camcorders and laptops should be kept off and stowed for another reason. They can turn into rather nasty missiles during emergencies.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlineAMSSpotter From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 271 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4968 times:

You're absolutely right about camcorders and laptops being dangerous missiles during an emergency! What I meant was that photo equipment probably won't be the actual cause of the plane going down (when it comes to interfering with the aircraft's systems).

User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4946 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 17):
Will probably not answer your question but nevertheless raises the issue from the purely anecdotal realm somewhat.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer....html

Thanks for the link, Starlion... I believe that I've read either that particular article or a similar one in the past, however, I still have issue with this particular statement, "As a result of these and other investigations, Boeing has not been able to find a definite correlation between PEDs and the associated reported airplane anomalies."

No definitive correlation from the manufacturer almost reeks of media sensationalism, even though Boeing hosts this article on their site.

Quoting Biggles (Reply 19):
With the large number of potentially dangerous electronic devices being brought on and used in an aircraft , you would have thought some authority would have carried out some specific tests by now..

Thank you! I tip my hat to you, sir! As stated by a member above, this looks like a job for Mythbusters.



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineConcentriq From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 368 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4914 times:

While most devices which are designated for use in a residential environment (Class B) comply with Part 15 of FCC Regs (I think). that "device shall not create interference, and must accept interference, bla bla bla".

 goodvibes  <-- Interference.

So, for most devices manufactured in US, especially in recent times, are safe to use, as they probably wont cause any interference. however, what if device was manufactured in foreign country, or some homebuilt or antiquated device is brought on, it may cause such interference. So i think the restriction of use of "portable electronic devices" is a blanket rule that covers all. as far as 10K ft is a mark where you can start using them, i dont know.

 twocents  from me



Mobilis In Mobili
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4892 times:

Quoting Concentriq (Reply 23):
So, for most devices manufactured in US, especially in recent times, are safe to use, as they probably wont cause any interference.

Are you simply referring to the fact that most electronic devices are no longer manufactured in the US in 'recent times'?



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
25 Post contains images Concentriq : haha. good one. this reminds me of some comedian who commented on a capture of a sophisticated US surveliance plane by the chinese few years back. It
26 UPS Pilot : For those naysayers, I have an experiment for you. Set your cell phone near a car speaker with the radio on but at low volume. Have somebody call your
27 EnviroTO : Most devices will not interfere with aircraft operation but a portable electronic device could be created which created interference on the frequencie
28 NorCal : " target=_blank>http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireles...x.htm definitely time to find those noise canceling head phones then
29 MrChips : You bet your bottom dollar that PEDs interfere with avionics. One fine day, I was doing a walk-around on a 172, and when I had the electrics powered u
30 Post contains images TedTAce : I will ask to be seated in the 'no calling' section. Like hotcakes!! I think the key here is certain types of devices.. I know up until a couple of y
31 Alberchico : Iv'e used cameras during takeoff,cruise . and landing, nothing ever happend.....
32 Starlionblue : This doesn't mean that: - Nothing will ever happen when you do it. - Nothing will ever happen when anyone does it.
33 TG992 : Alberchico - in the event of a sudden event such as aborted takeoff, runway overrun, etc, your 1kg camera will hurtle through the air with the equival
34 Post contains links FlyHoss : Speaking from personal experience, the answer is yes, some electronic devices do cause interference. I can recall three occasions of (otherwise) unexp
35 Post contains images N243NW : Definitely. My car has a mysterious hole to the right of the radio (came factory standard...it's a '98 Civic, anyone know what it is?) that I always
36 SkyexRamper : This will explain everything you need to know: FAR 91.21 Portable Electronic Devices (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no perso
37 Post contains links Jamtide : I have read these threads with great interest. I am going on my honeymoon next week to the Mayan Riviera and like most here, look forward to the journ
38 UA772IAD : I don't think it can, despite the purser's requests to turn them off. However, I have noticed on United flights (Haven't heard it elsewhere yet) that
39 Baw716 : To answer directly. One electronic device, nah, probably not. However, I would be willing to be a rather large sum of money that on a regular flight I
40 AlanUK : It is nice of you to admit you broke the law on two occasions on your flight. Just a "gentle" reminder that is is against the law to use mobile/cell
41 Post contains images Nucsh : Here's something you can do to test it... Go out to your car, turn on your cell phone and your car's radio. Stick the cell phone near the radio. You s
42 EK156 : I think you watch too much of Discovery Channel JBo... what the hec.. I watch is 24/7 too..... hehehehehe
43 PlaneSmart : Back up your Palm on your PC. Place your cell phone close to Palm. Call cellphone. Check Palm memory.
44 ThePinnacleKid : personal experience.. me and two other pilots went flying and wanted to test out the cell phone thing... made a few calls.. nothing happened... but on
45 Post contains links Backfire : If you want to judge the evidence for yourself, try the NASA aviation safety reporting system database, which has a section dedicated to collecting re
46 Finkenwerder : The problem stems from something called screening. This is a potentially complex subject if you know nothing about induced RF or EMF. In brief.... All
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UA: No Liability For Electronic Items In Baggage posted Sat Aug 19 2006 01:45:59 by BoomBoom
B787 Winglets ... Do They Move In Flight? posted Fri Sep 16 2005 00:28:51 by Slarty
CX 747-412 About To Do Its 1st Pax Flight. posted Mon Jun 27 2005 10:06:51 by N754PR
Southwest! When Do They Begin International Flight posted Sat Apr 2 2005 04:54:59 by Georgiabill
How Often Do You Go On A Flight? posted Fri Mar 26 2004 07:50:59 by ACB777
How do airlines decide which flight number they assign? posted Wed Jan 14 2004 22:57:41 by KLM exel
How Do Airlines Decide The Flight Numbers? posted Wed Aug 27 2003 00:36:23 by Pe@rson
What Airline Stuff Do You Save After A Flight? posted Mon Apr 21 2003 22:47:44 by Zrs70
Do Pilots Enjoy MS Flight Simulator? posted Mon Jul 1 2002 02:37:40 by Cmchardyfl
Do They Cancell This Flight In Case........ posted Fri Jun 14 2002 18:36:42 by Hamad