Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Cell Phones Inflight By 2006?  
User currently offlineASAFA From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 168 posts, RR: 3
Posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3235 times:

I know this has been discussed in the past, but the FAA has just posted a release about cell phones and other portable electronics on their website.

http://faa.gov/news/news_story.cfm?type=fact_sheet&year=2005&date=0805

It contains a few interesting points about cell phone use on board aircraft, mentioning that the FCC might be close to lifting the ban. Even so the article says the FAA has the final word and each model phone would need to be approved for use on board each aircraft type. Hopefully this issue will die once and for all. I for one enjoy the escape from ringing phones and obnoxious conversations.

Since 2003, the RTCA – an organization that the FAA sometimes asks to help study technical matters that affect policy, program, and regulatory decisions – has been looking at the issue of electromagnetic interference from intentionally transmitting PEDs, such as cell phones and WiFi transmitters in laptops.

So far, the data suggest that emissions are well below FCC limits, and are also within limits for interference with aircraft systems. The FAA expects to get the final RTCA report and recommendations in 2006, and will review them to determine how they might be applied.

Even if the FCC rescinds its ban, FAA regulations would still apply. Any installed equipment would be subject to FAA certification, just like any other piece of hardware. The air carrier would have to show that the use of a particular model phone won't interfere with the navigation and communications systems of the particular type of aircraft on which it will be used.



Prepare for Takeoff
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

why the ehll would they want to do that? i'm glad that people are forced to turn them off when on the plane... they're an annoying necessity. besides, there wouldn't be any signal up at the criuse altitudes unless carriers started to carry extra equip just for that. wonder what carriers would be willing to do that.


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineASMD80 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3203 times:

WiFi is fine... but please! No cell phones in planes! It's already bad enough during boarding and taxying to the gate!

In fact, I am even considering buying a cell phone jammer!
 Wink
If the phone companies can charge for using the service in the air, then it will be kept to a minnimum.

Does this mean that there will soon be a "No Cell Phone" sign between the "No Smoking" and the "Fasten Seat Belt" sign? There should!!!

Sorry about that- airlines can train their crews to deal with obnoxious cell phone users, if they wanted to.

Better yet- make the in flight cell phone users sit right next to the engines on an MD80! Big grin



Some things are actually better at 30,000+ feet...
User currently offlineFpofllflyboi From Bahamas, joined Jun 2005, 234 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3203 times:

That would be unleashing hell in such a small space. Its bad enough when out in public and you have to hear peoples conversations. Most people dont know how LOUD they are in public while on the phone. We get so carried away with our conversations that we forget where we are. Imagine almost 200 people on a 757 headed back from Vegas with at least 100 on their phones. ANNOYING

User currently offlineFlanker From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1633 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3182 times:

Oh god not this. I already have a hard enough time with people not being on their phones. Imagine 250 people talking on a phone in a tube for 8 hours


Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmacist
User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8227 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3178 times:

Cell phones don't work in flight on jetliners anyway so idk what the huff is about. Unless people just want to play their crappy cell phone games?


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineHorizonGirl From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 807 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3173 times:

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!
Cell phones are annoying enough as is, but being stuck in a
metal tube with all that "yak yakity yak yak?"
I think I would go insane!




Devon



Flying high on the Wings of the Great Northwest!
User currently offlineHZ747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1660 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3157 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ASMD80 (Reply 2):
In fact, I am even considering buying a cell phone jammer!

Let me know where you can get one, please. There is a reason I prefer the quiet car on the train--not that most people every beother to follow the rules.



Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineASMD80 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3125 times:

Quoting HZ747300 (Reply 7):

Let me know where you can get one, please. There is a reason I prefer the quiet car on the train--not that most people every beother to follow the rules.

They're illegal in the US and the UK, unless it used for government or military purposes. But, I do think that all crew should start carrying them, if cell phones are allowed inflight.



Some things are actually better at 30,000+ feet...
User currently offlineAdriaticus From Mexico, joined May 2004, 1137 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3112 times:

Leave alone one of the very last peaceful public places on Earth; the sky!

___ad.



A300/18/19/20/21 B721/2 B732/3/G/8 B741/2/4 B752 B762/3/4 B772/3 DC8/9/10 MD11 TU134/154 IL62/86 An24 SA340/2000 E45/90
User currently offlineKanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3107 times:

Quoting N766UA (Reply 5):
Cell phones don't work in flight on jetliners anyway so idk what the huff is about. Unless people just want to play their crappy cell phone games?

Picocell technology works. Your cellphone 'talks' to a mini-cellsite installed on the plane which then handles the ground or satellite connection behind the scenes. You pay whatever the per minute 'roaming' fee is for using the service in the air. No different than in-air internet via WiFi, really.

As for the impact, not as big as everyone thinks. It's going to cost a lot more than standard usage. People aren't just going to chat away. For those times I need it (delays, missed connections) I would love being able to use a phone.

On jammers... not wise. They work by drowning out wireless frequencies with noise. If avionics really are EMI/RFI sensitive, that thing would proably put out more junk than 50 cellphones combined. Better, I think, to hand whomever one of these.

[Edited 2005-08-25 03:47:35]

User currently offlineGRRTVC From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 275 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3099 times:

I think a petition needs to start circulating on this. There are way too many people out there that have no manners or know how to be polite.

You think there was air rage before. Now you'll probably see some guy sitting next to some obnoxious cell phone user beating the crap out them with a seat cushion.

This is insane. What purpose does it serve? It's bad enough you already get that person who thinks they need to talk to you.

BAD BAD BAD idea.  banghead 

GRRTVC  hissyfit 


User currently offlineKanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting GRRTVC (Reply 11):
I think a petition needs to start circulating on this. There are way too many people out there that have no manners or know how to be polite.

You think there was air rage before. Now you'll probably see some guy sitting next to some obnoxious cell phone user beating the crap out them with a seat cushion.

This is insane. What purpose does it serve? It's bad enough you already get that person who thinks they need to talk to you.

BAD BAD BAD idea

Ok imagine this. When you make a call you get a message before it connects you to whomever that says "This call will cost $3.99 per minute. Billing will begin at the beep. Hang up now if you do not wish to be charged." That's going to stop 99% of all calls right then and there.


User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3084 times:

Quoting Cancidas (Reply 1):
they're an annoying necessity.

They're annoying, but they're certainly not a necessity.

Quoting N766UA (Reply 5):
Cell phones don't work in flight on jetliners anyway so idk what the huff is about. Unless people just want to play their crappy cell phone games?

The Internet can't reach FL350 on its own either and yet some planes allow folks to use their laptops to surf. There are local area mobile-friendly networks planned for eventual use with current and future airliners. Please try to keep up.

Quoting ASMD80 (Reply 8):
They're illegal in the US and the UK, unless it used for government or military purposes.

Sources?!

We now have reason to believe that trains, subways, and trams can trap mobile phone radiation and expose passengers to much higher levels than is even currently believed to be safe. Is it not possible that this could also happen on airplanes? Perhaps the needless chatter ringing in your ears will just be the tip of the iceberg as more is eventually learned about how mobile device radiation.

Quote:


Train passengers who hate it when other commuters use mobile phones on board may have every right to get angry.

Research carried out by scientists in Japan suggests that using a mobile phone inside a train carriage could have serious health risks for other passengers.

They found that electromagnetic radiation levels inside trains can exceed international safety limits if even a small number of passengers are using their phones.

Tsuyoshi Hondou, Tohuku University
This is because the microwave radiation emitted from handsets has effectively no where to go and simply bounces back off the carriage's metal structure.

Tsuyoshi Hondou, from Tohuku University, used the plans of a typical train carriage to calculate the impact of mobile phone mivrowave radiation.

He found that very little radiation managed to escape through windows and was instead reflected inside.

He discovered that if just 30 people in a standard carriage with 151 passengers used their phone radiation levels exceeded the limits recommended by the International Committee for Non-Ionising Radiation.

But he added that because the radiation can build up, levels can be high in carriages with fewer passengers.

"It's possible even if the train is not crowded," he told New Scientist magazine.

Mr Hondou said the findings, originally published in the Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, were worrying in light of the growth in the number of people with WAP phones and other wireless electronic devices.

He suggested train operators should consider introducing rules on the use of mobile phones in carriages.

But he added that the effects seen in train carriages may also apply to buses and elevators.

"At the moment we have no regulation on the use of mobile phones in areas where many people are together.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1961484.stm



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineKanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Quoting SATX (Reply 13):
Quoting ASMD80 (Reply 8):
They're illegal in the US and the UK, unless it used for government or military purposes.

Sources?!

http://www.globalgadgetuk.com/Personal.htm
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=18642
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WolfFiles/story?id=561589&page=1
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/12365312.htm
They're illegal in Canada too.

As for our Japanese scientist, I call BS. That's oversimplification at it's finest and complete junk science. How are the cars constructed? Of what materials? How large is the window area? How many windows? What are they made of? Are the windows metallized (tinted)? How close is the cellsite? What level of power was he predicting when he did the modelling? What propagation model did he use? Each and every one of these factors will affect how much RF energy is retained.

There's no need to 'estimate' this at all, either. Note that the article says he "calculated" the RF reflectivity using plans of a "typical train carriage". Typical for where? Japan? The US? The UK? Trains vary wildly in design and construction. It's trivially easy to study this. Walk into a train on any given day, set up an RF field strength meter and measure. To guarantee a certain level of emissions, arrange for volunteers to make phonecalls. Repeat for each type of train one wishes to study.

[Edited 2005-08-25 04:15:07]

User currently offlineFutureFO From Ireland, joined Oct 2001, 3132 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3066 times:

This has all ready been rejected by every union that reps the F/A's. I don't know why anyone would want to allow them to be used.


Sean from MCO and MKE



I Don't know where I am anymore
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3064 times:

Quoting Kanebear (Reply 14):
They're illegal in Canada too.

I've heard about American businesses that were preventing cell phones from being used inside their offices, but it appears this is through the choosing of specific construction materials instead of active electronic jamming as I originally thought.

In any case, I'm glad you inadvertently brought me to the Society for HandHeld Hushing!

http://www.coudal.com/shhh.php

Priceless!  Big grin



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineHKGKaiTak From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1050 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3048 times:

It used to be that people got asked "smoking or non-smoking" when checking in to a flight.

Perhaps if airlines are stupid enough to allow this to happen, we should be asked "phone or no phone" when checking in. It is bad enough with phones in buses and trains.

Can be done - the French TGV trains have "No Mobile Phone" carriages ...



4 Engines 4 LongHaul
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3043 times:

Quoting Kanebear (Reply 14):
As for our Japanese scientist, I call BS.

So, are you saying that we need better studies, or that we should just assume that 'anything which does not kill us can only make us stronger'?



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineS12PPL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3022 times:

I sure hope so!!!

Of course, that would be my opinion just to irriatate those of you that think that would mark the end of the world Smile


User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3004 times:

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 19):
I sure hope so!!!

Of course, that would be my opinion just to irriatate those of you that think that would mark the end of the world

I think you and me are going to start a new fad I'd like to call Phone Rage. Since it's my idea, I get the first punch. Are you still game?  bomb 



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineKanebear From United States of America, joined May 2002, 953 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2998 times:

Quoting SATX (Reply 18):
So, are you saying that we need better studies, or that we should just assume that 'anything which does not kill us can only make us stronger'?

We need empirical studies and measurements, not fearmongering and conjecture. Handheld wireless phones have been on the market and in heavy daily usage for over 20 years now. We've not seen a spike in cancer rates. While further studies are necessary, we have much more important and immediate health risks to contend with.


User currently offlineHa763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3653 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2974 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There was a thread in July where the FAA testified to Congress that the cell phone ban will remain even if the FCC lifts the ban.

FAA: Ban Of In-Flight Cell Phone Use Will Remain (by PHLBOS Jul 15 2005 in Civil Aviation)


User currently offlineIowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4383 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2972 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting N766UA (Reply 5):
Cell phones don't work in flight on jetliners anyway so idk what the huff is about.

Yes they do, I've called my voice mail before.



Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD. Return: US SJD-PHX, WN PHX-MDW-DSM
User currently offlineASAFA From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 168 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (8 years 12 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2943 times:

Quoting Ha763 (Reply 22):
There was a thread in July where the FAA testified to Congress that the cell phone ban will remain even if the FCC lifts the ban.

I found that thread when I searched the topic, however this latest release was also issued by the FAA, and seems to indicate that it will be up to each carrier to seek approval for onboard use. The article mentions a successful test of pico cell equipment:

In July 2004, American Airlines and Qualcomm did a successful one-time cell phone test using pico cell equipment aboard an MD-80 aircraft. In June 2005, the FAA approved United Airlines' request to install equipment for WiFi wireless internet connections aboard Boeing 757 aircraft.

Also as I quoted initially:

Even if the FCC rescinds its ban, FAA regulations would still apply.

HOWEVER it continues...

Any installed equipment would be subject to FAA certification, just like any other piece of hardware. The air carrier would have to show that the use of a particular model phone won't interfere with the navigation and communications systems of the particular type of aircraft on which it will be used.

That seems to suggest that an outright ban may not be set in stone.

If it were to happen I would imagine you would first need to buy an 'Aircraft ready' phone, (one that has been approved by the FAA). I can see this only being available on certain flights, perhaps on business-heavy routes, and of course only on select carriers. A surcharge is also a certainty, but airlines would probably offer an exclusive carrier onboard, meaning aircraft use could probably be added as part of a monthly billing plan. (1000 anytime aircraft minutes anyone?? AHH)

Either way it seems this latest release hints that it will be up to the airlines to put down the cash to get this approved, the question is will any do it?



Prepare for Takeoff
25 Post contains images HAWK21M : I can just imagine the noise. regds MEL
26 Cornish : Especially on a long haul flight when everyone is trying to sleep except some teenager having a text conversation with a friend at home and refusing
27 1aMLA : I can imagine some little twat trying out all the ring tones. pls pls no its the only place your free of them.
28 Post contains links and images HAWK21M : Cellphones on Aircraft Maybe there could be restricted to a Zone regds MEL
29 SATX : They once tried to restrict smoke to a 'zone' and it still got everywhere. My guess is that noise from mobile devices will still reach nearly everyon
30 Nonrevman : I was thinking more along the lines of sticking that phone where the sun doesn't shine. Imagine finally falling asleep on the transoceanic flight onl
31 Evan767 : Somebody above me beat me to it. What wealthy airlines should do is, and this is if this plan goes into effect, make a little section for people to us
32 Kanebear : I am failing to understand why everyone seems to think that just because your mobile COULD work in air that we'll see a huge amount of usage? How much
33 Post contains images HAWK21M : If this is to be Implemented.Start distributing Ear Plugs to Pax.The ones with the cellphones can use their hands free kit regds MEL
34 Iakobos : Nothing wrong with your post Kanebear, except that sentence... (re Verizon) ...and this one; it is necessarily routed to a satellite or satellite net
35 Doona : Dosen't ANA already allow cellphones on certain aircraft? Thought I read something in their inflight magazine a few weeks ago about people not being a
36 Kanebear : This sentence taken alone is, of course, incorrect. Verizon has a land-based ground-air network which is the former GTE Airfone network. In context,
37 Milan320 : You're very correct. The company I work for is currently working on the GSM-on-Aircraft feature. We're only in the feasability stage of it, and lucki
38 Starlionblue : It works on trains in Europe.
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...
Cell Phones Shut Off At Altitude By Cell Operator? posted Sun Feb 6 2005 21:30:41 by A380900
Pilot Reprimands Passengers For Cell Phones posted Fri Sep 8 2006 03:59:06 by SkyHigh777
Air France Says "oui" To In-flight Cell Phones Use posted Sat Jun 3 2006 21:48:43 by LH492
Cell Phones On Planes Worry US Law Enforcement posted Fri May 27 2005 21:20:29 by Beauing
Just Announced: UA To Get Wifi By 2006 posted Mon May 9 2005 20:15:06 by FA4UA
Cell Phones In The Airline Workplace posted Sat Apr 30 2005 05:09:18 by Zippyjet
Cell Phones On US Domestic Airplanes posted Sun Feb 6 2005 20:33:10 by KC135TopBoom
AA Tests In-Cabin Use Of Cell Phones posted Fri Jul 16 2004 17:05:51 by SNATH
Using Cell Phones In Flight posted Thu Jul 1 2004 20:08:50 by Dan2002
Cell Phones In The Air posted Fri Jun 18 2004 21:57:50 by Captjetblast