Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
FCC Says 'No' To Cell Phones On Planes  
User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Posted (7 years 5 months 6 hours ago) and read 3936 times:

I think I speak for all of us (most of us, anyway), when I say "amen".

FCC Says 'No' to Cell Phones on Planes

Apr 3 04:16 PM US/Eastern


WASHINGTON (AP) - The Federal Communications Commission has officially grounded the idea of allowing airline passengers to use cellular telephones while in flight.
Existing rules require cellular phones to be turned off once an aircraft leaves the ground in order to avoid interfering with cellular network systems on the ground. The agency began examining the issue in December 2004.

Federal Aviation Administration regulations also restrict the use of cellular phones and other portable electronic devices onboard aircraft to ensure against interference with the aircraft's navigation and communication systems.

In an order released Tuesday, the FCC noted that there was "insufficient technical information" available on whether airborne cell phone calls would jam networks on the ground services.

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNkops From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2662 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 6 hours ago) and read 3933 times:

Thank goodness.... last thing I need is someone yapping on their cell phone the whole flight next to me!!!

Good call FCC!!



I have no association with Spirit Airlines
User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 6 hours ago) and read 3882 times:

100% agree. For once the government got one right! I'd be interested to see the comments filed during the public comment period. I bet some are pretty amusing.

User currently offlineMPDPilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 991 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 6 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

Though I have to agree, with the final decision. I think that the FCC should have done some tests to find out what the problem was instead of just saying that there wasn't enough technical information. Seems a little weak to me. I can't stand the idea of having 150 people yapping away inflight but this decision sounds like someone just saying NO with no reasoning for their decision. I don't know everything about the situation but it has always seemed like a lame excuse that they interfere with the navigation equipment, I have flown in training airplanes with my phone like 2ft from the radios and forgot to turn it off and gotten a phone call and I have never had any problems, nothing went haywire. Why would it interfere from like 15ft, I just don't get it. I know that there is interference but it needs to be close to the radios not back in the cabin. Something needs to limit it though like I said before cell phones do not need to be used in a small confined space like an airplane.


One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
User currently offlineContrails From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1833 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 5 hours ago) and read 3825 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
I think I speak for all of us (most of us, anyway), when I say "amen".

You certainly speak for me. This is a good decision.



Flying Colors Forever!
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3940 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 5 hours ago) and read 3815 times:

I believe that the following emoticons sum up what words can not on this decision . The FCC may have their flaws but they hit a homerun on this.

 bigthumbsup   bouncy   highfive   veryhappy 

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineCharger From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 273 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 3 hours ago) and read 3661 times:

Quoting Positiverate (Thread starter):
I think I speak for all of us (most of us, anyway), when I say "amen".

You certainly speak for me. Thank God. They actually made a good decision.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21511 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 3 hours ago) and read 3650 times:

Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 3):
Though I have to agree, with the final decision. I think that the FCC should have done some tests to find out what the problem was instead of just saying that there wasn't enough technical information. Seems a little weak to me

On who's dime?

And if you want a good reason why we should all breathe a sigh of relief, read this short commentary by Neil Cavuto about what would likely happen on each and every flight, especially on heavy business routes...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,262903,00.html

Though on a plane, there's no "between cars" space to retreat to.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offline767Lover From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

I'm not an outwardly religious person but


AMEN


User currently offlineHa763 From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 3656 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3536 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 3):
I don't know everything about the situation but it has always seemed like a lame excuse that they interfere with the navigation equipment,

That would be the FAA's area of responsibility, not the FCC, and the FAA is adamant about not letting people use cell phones in flight, tests or not. What the FCC is concerned about is the effect in flight cell phone use would have on the ground networks. On the thread I started about the FCC's plans to drop this issue, it was the cell phone providers that brought up the issue of the interference with ground networks in their testimony against allowing cell phone use in flight.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12497 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3446 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I guess the thing to remember is that the cost of making a cell phone call from a plane will likely be sufficiently high to deter the 30-minute call to Aunt Jane to discuss her operation and how the kids are doing at college.


Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offline3DoorsDown From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3407 times:

God Bless the FCC.

 Silly  bouncy   Silly  bigthumbsup   bouncy   Silly


User currently offlineLuvfa From United States of America, joined May 2005, 446 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3310 times:

Thank god. We have enough to worry about other issues involving passengers. I have seen people fight over armrests and the person behind someone who reclines their seat 2" freak out. I definitely didn't want to play cellphone referee!

User currently offlineMrocktor From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1668 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3272 times:

The FCC, once more, encroaches on individual liberty. The safety issues are the FAA's responsibility. And if so many people don't want cell phones on planes, I'm sure the airlines would offer "no phoning" flights or cabin areas - just as there were once "no smoking" flights and cabin areas.

Airlines should be free to offer phone service on their planes if they can do it safely, customers are free to choose the airline that offers what they want (i.e. peace and quiet or access to communication).


User currently offlineB777-700 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3262 times:

Quoting Mrocktor (Reply 13):
The FCC, once more, encroaches on individual liberty.

If you want to talk on your cell phone on a plane, I will exercise my individual liberty to scream "shut up" in your ear over and over.


User currently offlinePolymerPlane From United States of America, joined May 2006, 991 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3233 times:

oh come on guys... airphone has been available for ages, yet there's no people fighting over the airphone conversation. What is the difference here?

For those of you who thinks that you can make cell phone call as convenient as in a train you're just plain wrong. Unless they find a way to put cellphone tower in the sky, the cost of having a transmitter in a plane will be just as expensive as airphone. For example, EK charges a hefty fee for its onboard cellphone use.

I am sure if somebody wants to shell out 10 bucks per minute of phone call, that call will be important enough, and they are not gonna yap for 2 hours about their aunt Barbara

Cheers,
PP



One day there will be 100% polymer plane
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12136 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3215 times:

Quoting Thomasphoto60 (Reply 5):
I believe that the following emoticons sum up what words can not on this decision . The FCC may have their flaws but they hit a homerun on this.


Amen, brother.


User currently offlineBond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5413 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3145 times:

Quoting Mrocktor (Reply 13):
The safety issues are the FAA's responsibility

No, the FCC are not allowing because they don't know "whether airborne cell phone calls would jam networks on the ground services." . This IS the FCC's responsibility.. has little or nothing to do with aircraft interference.

Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 3):
I have flown in training airplanes with my phone like 2ft from the radios and forgot to turn it off and gotten a phone call and I have never had any problems, nothing went haywire.

Oh, so that makes it OK, just because you landed a Cessna 172 OK. Try it next time in a glass cockpit, on an ILS approach, in zero zero conditions ... if you dare. Personally I wouldn't be taking the risk.

We know it CAN, under some circumstances, cause interference, and there have been some well documented cases.

Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlineMrocktor From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1668 posts, RR: 50
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3075 times:

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 17):
No, the FCC are not allowing because they don't know "whether airborne cell phone calls would jam networks on the ground services." . This IS the FCC's responsibility.. has little or nothing to do with aircraft interference.

That's just the bullshit excuse, as far as I can tell. Could be wrong though.


User currently offlineFtrguy From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3011 times:

What people really don't get is that above 3000 AGL or so, the phones DO NOT WORK ANYWAY. Without special equipment onboard the aircraft, a normal cell phone is worthless in the sky (in an airliner at airliner altitudes). I try it all the time and I get nothing. Sometimes you can get a signal, but I've never been able to get a call out.

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 On Planes, Why Not? posted Fri Dec 28 2001 10:46:04 by Ual747
EU Says No To Ryanair-Aer Lingus Take-Over posted Fri Mar 30 2007 17:50:28 by Beaucaire
Boeing Says No To Southwest! posted Tue Nov 28 2006 05:57:44 by Bringiton
FAA Says No To JAT For U.S And Canada Flights. posted Tue Apr 25 2006 16:59:16 by Wolsingerjet
FCC Sets Airwaves Sale For Internet On Planes posted Fri Jan 13 2006 17:16:28 by Leelaw
America West Says NO To Fargo posted Thu Oct 13 2005 04:33:01 by Azstar
Venezuelan Govt Says NO To AA Flights SJU-Porlamar posted Tue Jun 21 2005 15:47:14 by Luisde8cd
US To Ban Lighters On Planes posted Wed Apr 13 2005 20:42:31 by Keta
Cell Phones On US Domestic Airplanes posted Sun Feb 6 2005 20:33:10 by KC135TopBoom
Canada Says No To Universal posted Fri Dec 3 2004 14:40:33 by LatinAviation