Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Please Turn Off All Electronic Devices  
User currently offlineRevo1059 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 132 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15636 times:

Ok, I have an issue here. Why do I have turn off everything for takeoff and landing??? I can understand anything that has headphones (though I'm not sure I completely agree, emergencies happen at any altitude so if I can have them on at FL340 why can't I have them on at FL60, but that's another topic). The real issue is that I had an Amazon Kindle that I was reading. It's a book, yes it has a switch, but it's function is no different than the paper book the person next to me is reading. It doesn't transmit, there is no RF interference, no headphones, no video, it doesn't make noise, so why do I have to turn off my e-book, but someone with a paper book can keep reading? Is this a case of the rules haven't caught up with technology?

117 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15724 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15653 times:



Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
Is this a case of the rules haven't caught up with technology?

It's a case of erring on the side of safety, which aviation is prone to do. (and rightfully so)

Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
It's a book, yes it has a switch, but it's function is no different than the paper book the person next to me is reading. It doesn't transmit, there is no RF interference, no headphones, no video, it doesn't make noise, so why do I have to turn off my e-book, but someone with a paper book can keep reading?

It is easier and more efficient to just turn everything off rather than have FA's scurrying down the aisle to see who has what and whether it has an airplane mode.

Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
Why do I have turn off everything for takeoff and landing???

There is a worry that it may interfere with aircraft systems. As far as I know there are no studies confirming this, but I have read anecdotal evidence here to the contrary.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13985 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15647 times:



Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
The real issue is that I had an Amazon Kindle that I was reading. It's a book, yes it has a switch, but it's function is no different than the paper book the person next to me is reading. It doesn't transmit, there is no RF interference, no headphones, no video, it doesn't make noise, so why do I have to turn off my e-book, but someone with a paper book can keep reading? Is this a case of the rules haven't caught up with technology?

It is not a book but a specialised PC. All PCs contain oscillators. Depending on the quality of the shielding and the operating frequency they can cause interference. A paper book does contain none of the above.

Jan


User currently offlineA1ring23 From Australia, joined Jun 2009, 196 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15647 times:



Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
There is a worry that it may interfere with aircraft systems. As far as I know there are no studies confirming this, but I have read anecdotal evidence here to the contrary.

Can someone explain to me how an electronic device actually interferes with an a/c's systems? Like the physics behind it....



Where's the accelerometer on this thing?
User currently offlineIluvflywn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 15643 times:

Probably easier to have all of those electronic devices stowed away -- to keep passengers on alert during the take off and landing, in case of emergency. I'm just guessing.

User currently offlineNYC2theworld From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 664 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15644 times:



Quoting A1ring23 (Reply 3):
Can someone explain to me how an electronic device actually interferes with an a/c's systems? Like the physics behind it....

Every current gives off a electromagnetic pulse. Shielding prevents this from escaping the surroundings of the device (i.e. an airplane) and/or prevents it from transmitting at extremely high levels. If the shielding on the device is not designed properly AND it is located in an area of sensitive equipment AND the frequency of the EMP is near the frequency of the current in that sensitive equipment, you may have interference.

Easy test of EMP...put a GSM cell phone near some speakers. Call it from another phone. You will hear cracking and such out of your speakers before your cell phone even rings.



Always wonderers if this "last and final boarding call" is in fact THE last and final boarding call.
User currently offlineTG990 From New Zealand, joined Sep 2005, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15642 times:

Thats why most airlines have no tv or music playing during take off and landing... so everyone is alert.

As already said it is a safety caution. Im not sure there is any full proof behind it, but Im not complaining about having something off for a brief part of the flight in case it might cause issues to the flight.

And yeah if the FAs were to allow certain devices over others, imagine PAX arguing over "well if they're allowed that then why aren't I allowed...

Didn't Mythbusters do a programme recently on mobile phones and interference with aircraft and revealed nothing major.

But I think the major thing to remember there is airlines are more concerned that allowing one or two devices on, will lead to many others being on and then the large amount of electronic activity might interferre....... (in very simple non scientific terms :P)


User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15643 times:

Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
It doesn't transmit, there is no RF interference

A Kindle doesn't transmit, but it does receive, just as an old-style numeric pager does, so there can theoretically be RF interference. (Emphasis on "theoretically"...)

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
There is a worry that it may interfere with aircraft systems. As far as I know there are no studies confirming this, but I have read anecdotal evidence here to the contrary.

From everything I've read, most of the worry about interference is a load of hooey, except possibly for cell phones, which transmit a (relatively) strong signal. A lot of it is, as you pointed out, just for operational convenience - it's easier to have a blanket rule than have FAs having to determine whether or not a device is capable of transmitting, or having a list they have to run down.

There's also the ancillary questions of using some devices - a notebook PC is well shielded and I've never seen any scrap of evidence that the wireless connectivity can interfere with an airplane. But if people have their laptops out, unless they have one of the new really little "netbooks", they're likely going to want their tray table down, which is an entirely separate issue. So again, it's just easier to have a blanket rule.

Another good example is digital cameras - there's a few that are capable of transmitting to a docking station, so you can download pictures wirelessly. (Who on earth uses their camera so much that not having to plug in a wire once in a while makes a material difference in their life?) Now whether or not these cameras have the ability to turn the transmitter off, I have no idea. Most digital cameras cannot transmit, though...but do we want FAs to have to look at each camera and determine this?

(Cameras are a huge source of confusion and rule-breaking...I've seen FAs tell someone to stop taking pictures when they're using an old-style film camera, that has no "on-off switch".)

[Edited 2009-08-11 08:34:54]

User currently offlineRevo1059 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15643 times:



Quote:
Can someone explain to me how an electronic device actually interferes with an a/c's systems? Like the physics behind it....

I wonder as well, considering that airlines are now installing wi-fi on planes and aren't some mulling over phone use (which I really hope does not happen)? it doesn't make sense, right now I can't have my wi-fi on at all, but when they offer wi-fi then I can have it on (I know that without the system in the plane, there is no real need unless you want an ad-hoc connection to someone else on the plane). Are they installing a bunch of shielding in the plane when they add wi-fi capabilities?

Hmmm and on that thought, with planes that are wi-fi, couldn't they have the FDR and CVR dump real-time off-plane? Might help avoid a missing box issue like AF447 and wouldn't really require that much more effort to setup .........


User currently offlineVgnAtl747 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 1513 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15638 times:

While accidents can happen at any altitude, statistically they're more likley to happen during takeoff or landing, and thus your attention shouldn't be directed elseware.

And while other's have pointed out, your kindle isn't a suppliment for a paper book, it's a specialized ultra-mobile PC which depending on the shielding, etc. has the potential to cause interference.



Work Hard. Fly Right. Continental Airlines
User currently offlineGCT64 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 1382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15642 times:

This is a perennial problem.

The excerpt below was written in 1992 when, apparently (although I don't recall it), AA were going through a period of banning mouse use onboard their aircraft:

"Just 2 weeks ago I attended the RFI emission testing of our one of our terminals and where did the major emission come from? If you guessed the
mouse then you're right.

A major source of emissions from equipment in the VHF band is the
cables. They act as antennas, radiating whatever noise is on the circuits
that connect to them. Mouse cables are often the worst offender since they
are rarely shielded."

To answer the simple question: "Does a device need to have a "transmitter" in order to transmit?" The answer is: No. Many, apparently non-transmitting, devices do actually transmit.



Flown in: A30B,A306,A310,A319,A320,A321,A332,A333,A343,A346,BA11,BU31,B190, B461,B462,B463,(..50 types..),VC10,WESX
User currently offlineFxramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7247 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15642 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
Why do I have turn off everything for takeoff and landing?

It was funny reading on these threads that some people thought the cockpit was armed with a monitoring system able to detect who left an Ipod or cellphone on.  rotfl 


User currently offlineA1ring23 From Australia, joined Jun 2009, 196 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15640 times:



Quoting NYC2theworld (Reply 5):

Every current gives off a electromagnetic pulse. Shielding prevents this from escaping the surroundings of the device (i.e. an airplane) and/or prevents it from transmitting at extremely high levels. If the shielding on the device is not designed properly AND it is located in an area of sensitive equipment AND the frequency of the EMP is near the frequency of the current in that sensitive equipment, you may have interference.

If this is true, then shouldn't ALL electronic equipment be banned from even going into the cabin? I mean loads of people take photos on takeoff/landing and the FAs either don't see or don't notice, or just look the other way.

We've all seen the plethora of videos of take-offs/landings on youtube etc
Are these technically illegal (in addition to taking photos)?



Where's the accelerometer on this thing?
User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15639 times:

The Kindle has a built in Cell Phone. It needs to be in airplane mode the whole flight and off for takeoff/landing.

User currently offlineTavong From Colombia, joined Jul 2001, 835 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15639 times:



Quoting Fxramper (Reply 11):
It was funny reading on these threads that some people thought the cockpit was armed with a monitoring system able to detect who left an Ipod or cellphone on.

I tought they where called FAs Big grin

Gus
SKBO



Colombian coffee, the best...take a cup and you will see how delicious it is.
User currently offlineExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 15642 times:



Quoting A1ring23 (Reply 12):
We've all seen the plethora of videos of take-offs/landings on youtube etc
Are these technically illegal (in addition to taking photos)?

Technically, all the videos are a violation, and any still photo taken with a digital camera (pretty much all of them these days!) are violations too.

As far as I know, at least in the US, it's not a violation to take pictures, but to comply with the "electronic device" rules you'd have to have a camera that uses film and doesn't have an electronic flash or, in the case of SLR cameras, electronic auto-focus (or the electronic features were turned off.)

Some countries, and I believe some airlines, have rules against all photography, electronic or not.

The fact that thousands and thousands of photos and videos are taken every single day is pretty strong evidence that there's no danger from cameras, and I suspect that's why the airlines don't make that much of an effort to enforce the rules...besides, as long as you have your flash turned off (which you need to to shoot out the window anyway), how would they know after the FAs are seated for takeoff and landing?


User currently offlineMoose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2311 posts, RR: 10
Reply 16, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 15642 times:



Quoting NYC2theworld (Reply 5):
Easy test of EMP...put a GSM cell phone near some speakers. Call it from another phone. You will hear cracking and such out of your speakers before your cell phone even rings.

I always knew when I was about to receive an e-mail on my Blackberry - I would get awful interference on my (cable) TV.



KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
User currently offlineEMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9364 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 15640 times:

Quoting A1ring23 (Reply 3):
Can someone explain to me how an electronic device actually interferes with an a/c's systems?



Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
Why do I have turn off everything for takeoff and landing???

1) Because it's a Federal Regulation and upon buying your ticket you are required to follow those regulations and instructions by the crew.

2) My strongest guess has always been they want you paying attention and not distracted during take off and landing as those are by far the most event prone parts of flight.

Quoting A1ring23 (Reply 12):
Are these technically illegal

Not technically, they are.. but I think illegal is a strong word. A violation might be better

[Edited 2009-08-11 10:21:53]


"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
User currently offlineSpacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3624 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 15641 times:



Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 7):
A Kindle doesn't transmit, but it does receive,

There's no such thing as a radio that "only receives". All radios transmit. They may not transmit at a very high strength or on a specific wavelength, but they transmit.

Quoting Revo1059 (Reply 8):
I wonder as well, considering that airlines are now installing wi-fi on planes and aren't some mulling over phone use (which I really hope does not happen)? it doesn't make sense, right now I can't have my wi-fi on at all, but when they offer wi-fi then I can have it on (I know that without the system in the plane, there is no real need unless you want an ad-hoc connection to someone else on the plane). Are they installing a bunch of shielding in the plane when they add wi-fi capabilities?

Not necessarily, but they are testing the hell out of it, which is not something they do normally. Different airplanes might behave differently, some might need extra shielding in certain areas, others might not, some might need to have the wi-fi equipment placed further from the cockpit than others, etc. You don't know until you test, and on most airplanes this stuff has not been tested so it's safer to just say "turn it off".

Also, some radios *do* affect cockpit instruments... the TV show Mythbusters did a show on this, and while I think their conclusion was "busted" about whether electronic devices interfere with cockpit instruments, the tests they actually did showed otherwise and the assumptions that they made at the end were faulty. What they showed was that an airplane with either improperly shielded wiring or frayed wiring insulation can have its instruments easily affected by commonly-available cell phones. In one test they did, a real navigation instrument (I forget which one) from a single-engine Cessna went completely haywire in the presence of an 800mhz cell phone. If I remember right, they traced this unexpected result to a piece of wiring with frayed insulation. They then concluded that this would never happen on a well-maintained airliner, hence "busted".

But it does happen on airliners and I guarantee there are many airliners flying around today with frayed wiring insulation somewhere. It has been the direct or indirect cause of many accidents, and that suggests that there are many more airplanes flying around in this condition that *haven't* had accidents (since it's safe to assume that the accident rate of airplanes with frayed insulation is not 100%, probably more like .0001%). And those airplanes could theoretically be affected by radio interference.



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineNCB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 15643 times:

Avionics on modern airliners are well-shielded and are not prone to interference except in case of malfunction/improper installation, so yes interference is possible.
Anyone who has flown on small, older general aviation piston aircraft have at least once experienced the interference caused on their VHF comms by their cell phone that they forgot to switch off.

Microwave band radiations have the ability to cause interference, but radars are as likely to cause interference as a few dozen passengers calling using their cell phones that are desperately looking for a network in the open sky.
So, to say that electronic devices used during flight increase the risk of interference is true, to say that they would be the only possible cause of interference is false.

There are many other reasons: you don't want to hit your head with earphones in your ears during a RTO or other sudden maneuver and the airline doesn't want to be sued for that.
You don't want to be holding that expensive camera because if the pilot has to make a sudden maneuver and your camera is trashed, they don't want to be sued.
It' a critical phase of flight, you don't want to have the increased risk of fire.
You don't want F/A's explaining to dozens of passengers why they can't use their laptop during take-off/landing.


User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 15645 times:



Quoting ExFATboy (Reply 7):
A Kindle doesn't transmit, but it does receive, just as an old-style numeric pager does, so there can theoretically be RF interference. (Emphasis on "theoretically"...)

That is not correct. You can select books to buy. You can surf the web. To do those it needs to transmit to Amazon's servers which book to buy, which web site to see. Also internet transmissions send back acknowledgment packets and such - otherwise if you miss one packet you would have to send the whole book again.

In addition radio receivers (like your FM headset) of just about any kind use internal RF generators to receive the signal efficiently.


User currently offlineAirNz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 15644 times:



Quoting Revo1059 (Thread starter):
Ok, I have an issue here. Why do I have turn off everything for takeoff and landing???

If I may ask, what exactly is the "issue"? The regulations involved are required by law so why not simply just comply with them. IMO, the "issue" is that more and more people simply want to do whatever they want, when they want and to hell with everyone/everything else.
It's pathetic really that we've got to the stage where some people can't bear to be separated from their music etc., for the short time it takes to land and/or take-off. If it's really THAT important, that's pretty sad.......why not simply drive?


User currently offlineYYZYYT From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 947 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 15643 times:



Quoting TG990 (Reply 6):
Didn't Mythbusters do a programme recently on mobile phones and interference with aircraft and revealed nothing major.

They did. They used a cell phone next to instruments from a disassembled small plane instrument panel, and found interference. They then repeated the test in a biz-jet that had shielded avionics, and found no interference.

Interesting episode, even though nothing blew up.


User currently offlineTugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5491 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 15640 times:

The truth is that aircraft fly through sever electronic interference all the time with little or no effect and they fly in an environment where there are radars constantly sweeping them, radio transmission towers transmitting 50,000+ watts, satellite systems broadcasting constantly, numerous cell phone are left on inadvertently every flight, in addition to the ones that are being secretly used intentionally (and if you believe the tin-hat crowd, weather manipulation systems are spreading millions of watts or energy everywhere), etc.

Not saying the regulations don't exist or that crews shouldn't enforce them but the regulations are behind the times a bit and either need to be revised or technology refined to defeat or ignore the modern day electronic world. The crew does not need the added burden of the hide-and-seek game.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMaddog888 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 15638 times:



Quoting EMBQA (Reply 17):

1) Because it's a Federal Regulation and upon buying your ticket you are required to follow those regulations and instructions by the crew.

2) My strongest guess has always been they want you paying attention and not distracted during take off and landing as those are by far the most event prone parts of flight.

Whilst personally I agree with both your comments and with those from others about interference, I will have to play Devil's Advocate with no. 2 and ask how reading an electronic book or working on a laptop or taking a photo is anymore "distracting" than reading a newspaper/magazine which the airlines hand out or paper book? Most airlines even encourage you to read the list of approved appliances in the back of their magazine.

As I say just playing Devil's Advocate!

J


25 ExFATboy : Ah, did not know that, thanks for the info...knew a "Kindle" received books, etc., but thought you ordered them from your PC. Even if they didn't hav
26 RunwayGirl : Some pax don't adhere to these rules. How many of us leave our phones, etc in the "on" and "roaming" mode simply by accident? A passenger seated besid
27 GT4EZY : At FL340 you won't have time critical commands shouted at you such as "brace brace", "unfasten your seatbelt and get out". Therefore anything that may
28 Jreuschl : If an unlimited amount of passengers on a plane during flight can have their notebooks open using WiFi, sending and receiving data constantly, I don't
29 GeorgiaAME : Okay, so how come I have to turn off my cell phone the instant the boarding door is shut at the gait, but as soon as the wheels touch down on the runw
30 Spacecadet : I do agree with this, however this is a rule designed to protect not just you but everybody else, it's designed not to protect you from yourself but
31 InnocuousFox : Amen to that. People don't realize that we are being constantly bombarded with electronic noise all the time - both man-made and environmental. To th
32 Kalvado : That's an easy one. Just because there may be no additional opportunity between pushback and takeoff to remind you about pushing "off" button..
33 APYu : Your electronic book will quickly become a missile should the aircraft come to a quick halt and it could take an chunk out of someones head as it flie
34 ExFATboy : But so could a regular book. Or a magazine. Or a lap baby. Yet you can have any of those in your hands during takeoff. The "projectile" danger has no
35 Jfidler : I always follow the rules, but when they say that these devices may interfere with an aircraft's navigation systems, that seems to me potentially misl
36 IAirAllie : Yes. Agree with the person who said illegal is a bit harsh though. The main reason because flight attendants aren't able to do another compliance che
37 Jetmatt777 : Pro photographers. They are used at sporting events, news conferences, press releases etc. The idea is to get the image off the camera ASAP and get t
38 RFields5421 : Like many of the Mythbusters test - the test itself was bogus. I have personal knowledge of a Blackberry which would trip off the ADF on a 1999 Chall
39 Panova98 : Digital cameras. Maybe I haven't been paying attention, but I've never heard a pre-flight announcement about when I could and could not use my digital
40 Caliatenza : Emirates now has the "Aeromobile" facility on several of its flights...so i guess there must be some kind of special shielding in the plane so as to
41 LVZXV : I often get told to turn-off my digital camera when filming take-offs or landings. I promptly ignore the command for two reasons: 1) There is absolute
42 JaseWGTN : Perhaps if it really bugs you, take the bus! (just being cheeky!)
43 GT4EZY : Whether the crew are right or wrong (and they are sometimes wrong i am sure) you are leaving yourself wide open. It is an electronic device and these
44 ATTart : I would tell you to turn it off once. I do not hover to make sure a person has turned it off. But if I do happen to notice that the person has not tu
45 ExFATboy : Those aren't an issue, since as you point out they have to be used with a working laptop. I seem to remember, though, a couple of non-pro cameras (I
46 KAUST : Somehow all of this reminds me of a Dilbert strip in which the Pointy Haired Boss refuses to turn off his laptop after being advised by his secretary
47 Jbernie : To keep things simple and easy it is better to say ALL electronic devices (excluding medical etc) as opposed to saying device X is ok, but device Y is
48 Boeingluvr : From what I know here are a few reasons... I do know that as far as some electronic devices go, yes they can interfer, now to get into exacts, I don'
49 Kaiarahi : And if I were sitting beside you, I'd take it off you and grind it into the floor, for three reasons: 1) You're being obnoxious - FAs have a hard eno
50 Boeingluvr : Well said! F/A's don't do it cause they're on a powertrip... They do it because it's regulation and it's for safety... I can't stand being on a plane
51 Qualitydr : They may have, but there's a small-sample problem here (statistically speaking), and even that doesn't cover the bases. Leaving aside the need for ev
52 RFields5421 : One other thing. Aviation safety standards are based on the concept that nothing is allowed on the plane, to operate on the plane until it has been pr
53 Christopherwoo : I once heard that one of the main reasons is that most electronic items are hard, and would make a very nasty projectile if something goes wrong and t
54 FLY2HMO : As a pilot I ran into electronic interference for the first time when I was flying G1000 equipped planes. I always left my phone on when flying on a C
55 Cschleic : Yes, and no planes have crashed because of them!!!! And all those cockpit videos for sale. All those pilots taking approach pictures with digital cam
56 Rwessel : I don't really disagree, but clearly that requires that we ground every single airliner immediately. If the manufacturers, airlines, and regulators c
57 AWACSooner : So, by that logic, you'd be supporting the crew of that X-jet flight that kept the pax onboard at Rochester, MN overnight cause they were INSTRUCTING
58 Post contains images BEG2IAH : I use my camera pretty much all the time. What bothers me is that we went from "the list of approved electronic devices can be found in our flight mag
59 ATTart : I can tell you this. If I do tell you to turn it off, I then walk away. I then go back to do my final cabin check and you still haven't turned it off
60 BEG2IAH : I'm not a native speaker, but this is a very interesting usage of tenses and sentence constructions. By the way, didn't you write the same thing in p
61 N104UA : I had a F/A on a mesa flight recently that said "Airplane mode does not work on this flight" something I have never heard from an F/A has anyone else
62 ATTart : We, are required by our company and the FAA to make these announcements on the plane. These are not rules we make up, they are put out by the FAA.[Ed
63 Post contains links KAUSpilot : I can hear a signal through my headset at moderate volume whenever a cellphone goes off (sends or recieves) in close proximity to the cockpit. It soun
64 InnocuousFox : I think that we need to remember that there are two arguments going on here. One is things that transmit and/or receive any sort of signal. The other
65 BEG2IAH : InnocuousFox, thanks for nicely summarizing the whole thread. Common sense is hard to find these days. BEG2IAH
66 GT4EZY : Is it not just the case that........ a) Some of you don't like being asked to do something? b) Because you're a plane buff, you believe you know bette
67 ATTart : It is one's own decision whether or not to follow the rules. However, if that person does not they are the one that will have to deal with the consequ
68 YULWinterSkies : If that was true and strictly enforced, no humans would be allowed on board, as they are by far the most unsafe 'items' on board... I totally agree w
69 LVZXV : So what you really have is not a problem with me but a problem with the hundreds (or thousands by this stage?) of passengers who film their take-offs
70 KAUSpilot : Yes, I think you're on to something here. I think many rules in life are stupid, but I still follow them because that's the way things work. If a per
71 Kaiarahi : Please don't fly anywhere near me. Check out recent NZ accident investigations - piloting and cell phone calls / texting don't mix - in fact, they te
72 Brilondon : God!!! What is the problem? So you havre to turn off your electonic devices. Just bloody do it. WTF is on your mind. I am too importent to follow the
73 LTC8K6 : Because the Captain asked you to.
74 MD11Engineer : It seems that there is a lack of understanding how especially digital electronic devices work. All of them need a high frequency "pulse", a timed sig
75 ETFokker50 : OP, you do realise your Kindle is actually a phone? You can't make calls on it but it has a wireless modem to access the internet to download new cont
76 Revo1059 : I used the Kindle as an example,let's talk about the Sony e-book which I believe does not have a transceiver in it, but here is what my point boils d
77 Cschleic : That's because they really don't know the facts, and they'll say all sorts of things to get you to comply. I've heard them say it's due to TSA rules
78 Kalvado : Let's try to be a little bit numeric. I'm not advocating either side, just cranking the numbers. I'm talking about low power -camera/PDA devices - no
79 JFKMAN : Well...I have a wild mind, and I have pondered exactly this in the past!
80 MD11Engineer : Sure, but with a somewhat resonant antenna (I´m talking about an SWR of 1.7 or better) and 25W HF power (in the shortwave band) I can have a nice PS
81 Kaiarahi : The alternative is to have the FAs going through the cabin checking every piece of electronic equipment that PAX want to use, and testing every devic
82 UnitedFA07 : That's what the problem is, nothing is standard on all airlines. So when pax go from one to another and the policy is different they don't care eithe
83 A1ring23 : That's quite a generalization, if this was indeed the case, wouldn't more a/c's have their systems interfered with? And specifications? Would the FA
84 Kaiarahi : That's my point - it's not feasible. So you make people do without them during the most critical phases of flight, such as intercepting/tracking the
85 Panova98 : OK then, boys and girls, I think we get it, subject of further review! Flights governed by the US FAA have this regulation, codified at 14 CFR 121, se
86 Post contains links ExFATboy : Well, keep in mind that besides the FAA ban due to potential interference, the cellphone-in-flight ban is also a FCC regulation - while cellphones wo
87 Kalvado : One question I was going to ask is where antenna cabling is located. I had an impression (and please correct me if I'm wrong) it's in a top portion o
88 YYZYYT : Interesting - I have wondered (but never asked before) if pilots ever notice interference or possible interference... thanks for the first-hand view.
89 Brilondon : All electronic devices emit radiation or some form of electronic signal which could interfere with the navigation radios. When below 10,000 feet it i
90 Kaiarahi : It does happen. On an NZ SFO-AKL flight two women in Business Premier had to be asked 3 times while taxiing to stop talking and turn off their phones
91 Rikkus67 : A theory on intereference actually is as easy as googling the problems with bee polination. Apparently, there seems to be a correaltion between heavie
92 Max777geek : I think that's more related to the safety issue that in case of emergency evacuation, a book would block you as well than nintendo ds. It's like the
93 Revo1059 : No, obviously you can't understand that this is simply a DISCUSSION on a topic letting people voice points of view on it. If you can't handle it with
94 Revo1059 : Again, this topic was just regarding e-books (specifically e-ink books). Something like the Kindle in Airplane mode or the Sony e-book consume such a
95 ExFATboy : This is an absolutely inappropriate statement for what is supposed to be a forum for the civil exchange of ideas and questions...if you can't be civi
96 MD11Engineer : Exactly. It is about two holes in the cheese slices lining up (anybody who did an aviation human factors course should understand what I mean) with t
97 Revo1059 : Bingo! We have a winner!!!!!
98 UnitedFA07 : Not sure who you fly on, but I know most UA pilots do turn the seat belt light off when they can. The people I'm talking about aren't American. Major
99 Luv2cattlecall : Ironically, WN and other airlines allow you to use powered active noise canceling headphones even on takeoff/landing! However, aside from the moment
100 Brilondon : I applaud your airlines actions. Well done. So you knew why yet you want an explanation? They will always air on the side of caution. You said it you
101 ExFATboy : Yeah, we determined somewhere mid-thread my understanding of the Kindle was incorrect, I thought it received only and you ordered off your PC. My err
102 Gsoflyer : It's not a matter of erring on the side of safety persay. It is because electronics in Europe, Canada, USA, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and S Korea
103 Post contains links Viscount724 : AC also received approval earlier this year to leave their IFE system on throughout the flight, from the time you board until the aircraft parks at t
104 Kaiarahi : Which makes sense, because PAs override the IFE, but not personal devices.
105 ExFATboy : That's odd, I wonder why only "earbud" earphones? Does the AC IFE system not play PA announcements through the IFE system? If so, it shouldn't matter
106 Post contains links Viscount724 : Explanation for this requirement from an AC captain's blog site (scroll down to Monday, June 8, 2009): http://www.fromtheflightdeckbook.com...15%3A37
107 Revo1059 : This isn't really what my original post was about, if your above statement was a concern, then everything would have to be off the entire flight. My
108 JCS : When thinking about the reason to force all electronic devices to be turned-off at t/o & landing, I thought about something else. What about the chanc
109 Post contains links ManuCH : Several airline pilots told me that they don't really care about the fact that the device is electronic, but that it hurts if it hits other passengers
110 ExFATboy : Hmmmm - the cord on the earbuds that came with my iPod is quite a bit longer than the cord on my Bose noise-cancelers. Noise-canceling headphones are
111 Prebennorholm : If an electronic device is damaged to such a degree that it may produce sparks, then it doesn't matter whether it is switched off or not. The only th
112 Gsoflyer : But you aren't understanding here. In USA and Western Countries, devices have to follow radiated emissions standards, especially ones that have oscil
113 Xero9 : Just want to add three things to this.. 1) I do use my camcorder to record take-offs and landing. I don't get to fly often, and so when I do, I like t
114 Kaiarahi : Try reading the rest of this thread .... Was Bluetooth mode switched off on your phone - on some phones, it's the phone that initiates the connection
115 InnocuousFox : And don't forget that big yellow glowy thing in the sky. It tends to kick out a little electronic noise.
116 SkyGirl : I have a theory. Once the door to the airplane closes, one of the first things that your f/a's do is to perform a safety demo, either live or video.
117 ExFATboy : I do, it's taught Americans to ignore the light. Maybe helps on the legal front, but just creates another problem in the process. I see your point, b
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...
United Airlines Channel 9 - Reasons To Turn Off? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 01:57:49 by KSMOGeNe
QF Could Be Forced Off All NZ Domestic And Tasman posted Tue Mar 13 2007 06:33:59 by 777ER
Last One Out Gets To Turn Off The Lights posted Wed Jun 7 2006 08:32:08 by Uadc8contrail
Portable Electronic Devices, A Danger? posted Fri Mar 3 2006 13:06:56 by ESGG
Portable Electronic Devices Safe At 10,000ft? posted Wed Feb 9 2005 02:55:46 by TinPusher007
Electronic Devices On Board (i.e. Digital Cameras) posted Fri Jan 7 2005 18:44:26 by Cyrillim
Incidents Caused By Electronic Devices posted Fri Apr 2 2004 20:10:35 by Hugojimenez
Using Electronic Devices On Aircrafts... posted Wed Mar 31 2004 18:50:34 by Jmets18
Aerlingus.com's Low Cost Image Is Such A Turn-off posted Sun Feb 22 2004 15:36:26 by KEno
More Scrutiny For Electronic Devices posted Tue Aug 5 2003 20:34:59 by Jhooper