btfarrwm
Topic Author
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:50 am

IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:23 am

I know airlines are looking at tablets for holding flight manuals, etc. How will these be compliant with FAA regulations about electronic devices during takeoff and landing, etc.?
 
Mir
Posts: 19093
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:31 am

Quoting btfarrwm (Thread starter):
How will these be compliant with FAA regulations about electronic devices during takeoff and landing, etc.?

The iPad 1 has been certified for this already. So, no issues.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 5:15 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
The iPad 1 has been certified for this already.

Example: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/02/13/ipad-...ation-as-an-electronic-flight-bag/

Tom.
 
qqflyboy
Posts: 1617
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:47 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 5:26 am

Interesting enough, AA just received FAA approval to use them in all phases of flight. AA, among other airlines, has been testing iPads, but AA is now the first to receive final approval. The test for them is over, 777 a/c will begin using them this Friday, with all fleet types to follow.

http://www.slashgear.com/american-ai...-cockpit-approval-by-faa-13202062/
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
 
spudsmac
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:36 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 6:17 am

So the pilots can keep their iPads on on takeoff, yet the passengers have to put their Kindle away? Lol, the irony.
 
wilco737
Posts: 7279
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:21 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 6:39 am

Quoting spudsmac (Reply 4):
So the pilots can keep their iPads on on takeoff, yet the passengers have to put their Kindle away? Lol, the irony.

Yes, and our laptops are ON as well as we use them as EFB...

Our airline doesn't seem to be too interested in the ipad.

wilco737
  
 
fxra
Posts: 600
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 1999 1:03 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 8:34 am

Comes down to AA, or whon ever, has gone through the process to prove that the iPad will not interfere with anything electronically and that the crew can safely use the iPad instead of the paper charts. If some one goes out and pays to get a Kindle an STC, then you could use that too. Of course, pax won't be able to use theirs for a littany of reasons, valid or otherwise.
Visualize Whirled Peas
 
bueb0g
Posts: 656
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 5:57 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 11:05 am

Quoting spudsmac (Reply 4):
So the pilots can keep their iPads on on takeoff, yet the passengers have to put their Kindle away? Lol, the irony.

No irony at all. The iPads being used have been certified for use in a cockpit and on an aircraft during critical phases of flight, including EM interferance, wheras Kindles have not. That's like saying its ironic that passengers can't use laptops during takeoff but pilots are allowed to have FMC's running... it's not a comparison one can draw.
Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
 
mmedford
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 12:47 pm

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 7):
No irony at all. The iPads being used have been certified for use in a cockpit and on an aircraft during critical phases of flight, including EM interferance, wheras Kindles have not. That's like saying its ironic that passengers can't use laptops during takeoff but pilots are allowed to have FMC's running... it's not a comparison one can draw.

What about the pax that have an ipad? They would be forced to put theirs away as well...

EMI is never a valid reason for that; it's just the one, that can't be validated...
ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:21 pm

Quoting spudsmac (Reply 4):
So the pilots can keep their iPads on on takeoff, yet the passengers have to put their Kindle away? Lol, the irony.

One's certified, one's not. One's being used by the flight crew, one's not.

"So pilots can keep their guns on the aircraft yet the passengers have to check theirs. Lol, the irony."

Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
What about the pax that have an ipad? They would be forced to put theirs away as well...

Yes. Certified devices are configuration controlled, non-certified ones are not. Only certain iPads got certified (so far) and, even then, they're still covered by the blanket personal electronic device rules for passengers.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
EMI is never a valid reason for that; it's just the one, that can't be validated...

EMI is a valid reason, it's well documented. I'm not sure where this old myth that it doesn't happen keeps coming from. Here's the last 50 reports to the NASA database the relate to personal electronic devices. In 60 seconds I already found two reports of EMI:
http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/rpsts/ped.pdf

I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

Tom.
 
mmedford
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:13 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

I see it affecting the onboard equipment due to improper or unsufficient shielding of equipments. But not the radiated signal from the ground.
ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 4948
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:07 pm

Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
What about the pax that have an ipad? They would be forced to put theirs away as well...

Here's some irony for you ...

A pilot issued iPad, (we have them as well), can be used in the cockpit per SOP, but can NOT be used in the cabin when traveling as a passenger. Why? Because electronic devices can not be used in the cabin. Period. As much as some people like to think these rules don't apply to them, they apply to everyone, even to someone that actually does have a device safe for use in an aircraft.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

So have I. It is irritating as hell. Sometimes I want to go back into the cabin, grab the offending device, and insert it into the users left ear. (after setting it into airplane mode, of course).
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
bueb0g
Posts: 656
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 5:57 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Thu Dec 15, 2011 10:24 pm

Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
What about the pax that have an ipad? They would be forced to put theirs away as well...

EMI is never a valid reason for that; it's just the one, that can't be validated...

Of course the pax would be forced to put it away. No electronic items are allowed in the cabin during critical phases of flight; it's really that simple, and it's not a stupid rule. There's a carpet ban for a reason and EMI IS a valid reason. Let's not forget, shall we, that the pax's iPad hasn't been certified for use onboard an aircraft, while the iPad used by the flightcrew has, as Tom has stated.
Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
 
mmedford
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 12:23 am

Hasn't anyone seen my 2nd reply...?

Reply 10 rather
ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:22 am

Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
What about the pax that have an ipad? They would be forced to put theirs away as well...

Yes, there has been no testing of iPads in the cabin areas.... yet. Of course, if you want to pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars it would take to get them cleared for use, you will find thousands of users who will thank you (perhaps).   

Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
EMI is never a valid reason for that; it's just the one, that can't be validated...

In aviation safety, the bias is toward safe rather than the unknown. One must prove the device will NOT cause a problem before it is approved for use. AA has spent 6+ months proving iPads do not cause a problem in AA 777 aircraft cockpits. The same can not be said for the 777 cabin areas (or any other airline's 777s).

Quoting Longhauler (Reply 11):
A pilot issued iPad, (we have them as well), can be used in the cockpit per SOP, but can NOT be used in the cabin when traveling as a passenger. Why? Because electronic devices can not be used in the cabin.

Same for AA pilots. Okay for use in 777 cockpits ONLY --by the working crew ONLY. Nowhere and nobody else. 737 fleet is next with testing beginning in January. It will be a few months for that fleet to get approval.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
GST
Posts: 808
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:27 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:13 am

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 14):
Quoting mmedford (Reply 8):
What about the pax that have an ipad? They would be forced to put theirs away as well...

Yes, there has been no testing of iPads in the cabin areas.... yet. Of course, if you want to pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars it would take to get them cleared for use, you will find thousands of users who will thank you (perhaps).

Besides, it removes ambiguity. If you tell passengers to turn off all electronic devices, most will do it without fuss.

If you tell them to turn of all electronic devices except laptop models A, B, C (as long as it is a mk4 or later), tablet models D (but only a batch 2 production model), & E, music players F, H, I, & J, and phones K & L as long as they are in flight safe mode... How many people do you think will do it? Or will more people than before get confused / think it must be okay with whatever electronic gizmo they have and leave it?
 
User avatar
notaxonrotax
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:29 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 1:58 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

Okay, like what? Can you give me a few simple examples of things you witnessed?
Was it due to a phone....or something without an antenna as well, like an electronic game?

Would be funny......I switch on my phone--> plane suddenly squawks 7700!

No Tax On Rotax
For anybody that happens to be wondering:"yes, owning your own aircraft is a 100% worth it!"
 
wagz
Posts: 461
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 12:48 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:40 pm

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 16):
Okay, like what? Can you give me a few simple examples of things you witnessed?
Was it due to a phone....or something without an antenna as well, like an electronic game?

Would be funny......I switch on my phone--> plane suddenly squawks 7700!

See the link in Reply 9 by tdscanuck. Most of the instances have nothing to do with EMI but a few definitely do. One that caught my attention was a DL DC9-50 that occurred in a sector of airspace I work here at PHL. The crew received a TCAS RA on no traffic shown, then the RA "evaporated" as they described it with no "Clear of Conflict" message. As it turns out a FA found a pax trying to make a phone call at the time of the RA maneuver.

You have to read the brief descriptions at the beginning to find the relevant ones. Full and detailed descriptions for each of the 50 are after the brief synopses. I've read of other incidents by crew members on this forum in the past. Correct if I'm wrong, but wasn't the crash of an aircraft ZRH maybe 10 years ago attributed to EMI? From what I remember they were conducting an ILS approach in IMC conditions and impacted terrain short of the runway because pax making phone calls skewed the glideslope indication.
I think Big Foot is blurry, Its not the photographers fault. Theres a large out of focus monster roaming the countryside
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:08 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
Yes. Certified devices are configuration controlled, non-certified ones are not. Only certain iPads got certified (so far) and, even then, they're still covered by the blanket personal electronic device rules for passengers.

To expound on what Tom means by certification for those not Aviation savy:

Certification goes all the way down to the individual unit being used. So even if all IPADs starts out the same. The ones that are certified have passed all required testing AND gets periodical RE-CERTIFICATION to make sure they still operate as intended.

This is not true for the run-of-the-mill IPAD which may or may not have defects straight from the factory, have been modified by the user, or hacked . . . etc ..

bikerthai
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
mmedford
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:30 pm

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 18):
Certification goes all the way down to the individual unit being used. So even if all IPADs starts out the same. The ones that are certified have passed all required testing AND gets periodical RE-CERTIFICATION to make sure they still operate as intended.

Off the shelf hardware can attain certification, it happens everyday. Certification is all for traceability...

The question is; certification based on what standard?

And nothing stops me from maintaining certification on a piece of equipment, I do it all the time.

Shouldn't the OEM work on better methods for protecting equipment from RFI?

EDIT: Thinking about something here, why doesn't apple capitalize on this? Why wouldn't they offer their customers the ability to have the only Airplane Approved Device, for all phases of flight?

[Edited 2011-12-16 11:56:49]
ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
 
mmedford
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:33 pm

Quoting wagz (Reply 17):
From what I remember they were conducting an ILS approach in IMC conditions and impacted terrain short of the runway because pax making phone calls skewed the glideslope indication.

I'd question this one; I've used a cellphone with flightcheck in the air...during runs.
ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2161
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:05 pm

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):

Off the shelf hardware can attain certification, it happens everyday. Certification is all for traceability...

The question is; certification based on what standard?

Others would answer this better. But the basic certification is per FAR.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):
And nothing stops me from maintaining certification on a piece of equipment, I do it all the time.

If it relates to anything on the aircraft, then YOU would also have to be certified by the FAA or similar regulatory agency in order to maintain certification of any certified equipment. Nothing stops anyone from getting that certification . . . except cost, paperwork, and the necessary bookwork and training to get certified.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):
Shouldn't the OEM work on better methods for protecting equipment from RFI?

They do have minimum standards to which they design to. But as you would know, there is a minimum, and there is the should be, and there is the military grade  

Besides, equipment design and certified 20 years ago may not have taken into account the proliferation of all the personal equipment that can emit high power wireless signals now-a-days.

bikerthai

[Edited 2011-12-16 12:06:17]
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:25 pm

Quoting Longhauler (Reply 11):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

So have I. It is irritating as hell. Sometimes I want to go back into the cabin, grab the offending device, and insert it into the users left ear. (after setting it into airplane mode, of course).

Really, their ear? You are too kind, sir.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 20):
Quoting wagz (Reply 17):
From what I remember they were conducting an ILS approach in IMC conditions and impacted terrain short of the runway because pax making phone calls skewed the glideslope indication.

I'd question this one; I've used a cellphone with flightcheck in the air...during runs.

Don't question it. I have personally seen a cellphone cause issues with avionics. Just because your interactions seem to show no apparent issues, DON'T mean those issues don't exist.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 16):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

Okay, like what? Can you give me a few simple examples of things you witnessed?
Was it due to a phone....or something without an antenna as well, like an electronic game?

Command bars on FD's disappearing, comparator warnings, etc. The FD bars were certainly due to a cellphone; the autopilot and comparator issues were unknown as they required a missed approach, after which I asked the FA's to check for PED's. They found several on including phones, so I don't know. I made an announcement explaining the situation and all was better. No idea what the offender was.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):
Shouldn't the OEM work on better methods for protecting equipment from RFI?

Shouldn't the passenger just comply with regulations so airplanes (and tickets) don't have to get more complex and expensive?
 
User avatar
notaxonrotax
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:29 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Fri Dec 16, 2011 10:59 pm

Interesting PGNCS. And a little scary.

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 22):
They found several on including phones, so I don't know. I made an announcement explaining the situation and all was better. No idea what the offender was.

Yep, I understand. You will only find out by throwing every offender off the plane, 1 by 1.
Very time consuming.....

But seriously, do manufacturers test this? The amount of interference caused by "gadgets"??
If so, I hereby apply for a test-job in Toulouse for the A-350.
An I-phone in one hand, a Nintendo DS in the other and I could play an electric organ with my feet during all phases of flight.

No Tax On Rotax.
For anybody that happens to be wondering:"yes, owning your own aircraft is a 100% worth it!"
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:12 am

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 16):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 9):
I've personally witnessed EMI from portable electronic devices on multiple aircraft, as have several other members of this forum.

Okay, like what? Can you give me a few simple examples of things you witnessed?

The one I've seen the most often, by far, is having my VHF communications stomped on by the "dit dit dah" sound of a nearby cell phone making a data transmission.

I also know of one series of flight deck displays that will blank in the presence of just the wrong kind of WiFi signal.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 16):
Was it due to a phone....or something without an antenna as well, like an electronic game?

So far, I've never experienced anything I could pin on something that didn't have an antenna. However, a lot of things have antennas that people don't think of...bluetooth chips and WiFi are in almost everything now.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):
The question is; certification based on what standard?

Compliance to the FAR's.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):
Shouldn't the OEM work on better methods for protecting equipment from RFI?

Things that can be shielded are shielded. But if your equipment is *designed* to pick up RFI (communications, navigation, GPS, etc.) you can't shield it from RFI.

Quoting mmedford (Reply 19):
EDIT: Thinking about something here, why doesn't apple capitalize on this? Why wouldn't they offer their customers the ability to have the only Airplane Approved Device, for all phases of flight?

Because Apple doesn't have that authority. Only the airline has legal authority to allow operating personal electronic devices onboard.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 23):
But seriously, do manufacturers test this?

Yes.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 23):
The amount of interference caused by "gadgets"??

Yes. The problem is the number of gadets and potential uses of gadgets is way larger than the amount of possible testing and, even if you did all the testing, personal gadgets have no configuration control.

Tom.
 
User avatar
notaxonrotax
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:29 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:12 am

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):

The one I've seen the most often, by far, is having my VHF communications stomped on by the "dit dit dah" sound of a nearby cell phone making a data transmission.

Okay, and was that "somebody" making this transmission on purpose while flight testing? Purposely?

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):

So far, I've never experienced anything I could pin on something that didn't have an antenna.

Fair enough. And I´m not all being devil´s advocate here; but in your personal experience you have not seen any non-antenna device causing things to go belly-up at front then?
Interesting!
The obvious problem is that airlines don´t want to play the game where every flight attendant has to be an IT-expert to be able to clear the cabin for take off.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):

Yes. The problem is the number of gadets and potential uses of gadgets is way larger than the amount of possible testing and, even if you did all the testing, personal gadgets have no configuration control.

That makes sense. But WHY exactly are aircraft manufacturers testing this then? Just to test the aircraft whilst enduring a "worst case scenario" with 100 phones and 50 laptops switched on, for argument´s sake?
Just wondering!

Interesting subject.

No Tax On Rotax
For anybody that happens to be wondering:"yes, owning your own aircraft is a 100% worth it!"
 
YokoTsuno
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 1:21 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:41 am

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 25):
That makes sense. But WHY exactly are aircraft manufacturers testing this then? Just to test the aircraft whilst enduring a "worst case scenario" with 100 phones and 50 laptops switched on, for argument´s sake?

You have a point notaxonrotax. The problem here is that this debate about EMI interference in airplanes is no longer solely about exact science. It is a mixture about exact science, beliefs, and politics, in other words “Greek mythology”. 
Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 23):
But seriously, do manufacturers test this? The amount of interference caused by "gadgets"??

Manufacturers indeed test this but only for the prototypes.
This test is two ways EMI (Interference generated by a device) and EMC (The sensitivity of a device to external interference). So you are referring to EMC in this case.
Smaller equipment, like cars, motorbikes, TVs, and electronic devices, including VHF aviation receivers, are placed inside in what is called an anechoic chamber. This is to eliminate all external EMI. An antenna inside the chamber connected to an EMI transmitter, which is basically the same thing as a large cell phone or small TV transmitter subjects the device under test to EMI levels it will “never” experience in real life. This is done for the “entire” frequency spectrum. An EMI test engineer observes the device under test at what level it goes haywire.
For large equipment like airplanes a so called Open Area Test Site (OATS) is used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anechoic_chamber
Here you see a tank under test.
http://www.oobject.com/anechoic-cham...afj-international-rf-chamber/2059/

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 22):
Shouldn't the passenger just comply with regulations so airplanes (and tickets) don't have to get more complex and expensive?

Yes they should. If you question this you can question everything including speed limits on the road.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):
The one I've seen the most often, by far, is having my VHF communications stomped on by the "dit dit dah" sound of a nearby cell phone making a data transmission.

Not all interference is created equally. The origin of the "dit dit dah" is a world apart from for instance the interference a walkie-talkie could possibly generate on an ILS. So there’s a technical reason why this is the most frequent source of interference. The "dit dit dah" is picked up by sensitive low frequency equipment like audio preamps, headsets, car stereos, pickup heads in tape recorders, etc. The “only” devices that can generate that type of interference are GSM phones. Because of the low frequencies one need to be very close to the audio equipment and that is also the reason why the culprit is most likely the pilot.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):
Things that can be shielded are shielded. But if your equipment is *designed* to pick up RFI (communications, navigation, GPS, etc.) you can't shield it from RFI.

If that would be the case you would not be able to watch TV, listen to radio, or get onto a WiFi network. and making a cellphone call next to your TV would immediately result in interference on your TV. The signal picked up by you TV is the sum of everything in the air since an antenna is a wire and on a wire there can only flow one current at one moment in time.

It would also imply that you could resolve the problem entirely by just shielding the passenger cabin, since all antennas needed for airplane communication are outside. It also raises the question that airlines or the FAA should just be as paranoid about a broadcast transmitter being picked up by the aircraft’s VHF antenna or radar LNA as a cell phone inside the cabin, which is not the case.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):
So far, I've never experienced anything I could pin on something that didn't have an antenna.

An antenna can be literally anything. If you pull the Cinch plug from your CD player when your amplifier is at full volume your home amplifier you’ll hear a load 50/60Hz rumble sound. This is simply the EMI from the power grid which is picked up by an antenna. If a signal gets picked up by another device depends on how sensitive it is to the wavelength and level of the respective interferer. So in theory even a 50/60Hz power grid can interfere.


Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 25):
has to be an IT-expert

I assume an electrical engineer. Bits and bytes can’t interfere.  
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:51 am

Quoting spudsmac (Reply 4):
So the pilots can keep their iPads on on takeoff, yet the passengers have to put their Kindle away? Lol, the irony.

If it interferes, they switch it off... if a pax iPad cause interference, they can't just go to the PA and say, "could someone with his/her iPad on please switch it off!" and expect it to be all OK.
Plus, the iPad in the cockpit will have it's GSM/GPRS/3G mode switched off when in use in the cockpit when not at the gate. WiFi use, depends on the type of aircraft (Some cockpit flight displays did not like wifi interference or EMI caused by devices interacting through wi-fi and blank themselves out)...

Quoting wagz (Reply 17):
Correct if I'm wrong, but wasn't the crash of an aircraft ZRH maybe 10 years ago attributed to EMI? From what I remember they were conducting an ILS approach in IMC conditions and impacted terrain short of the runway because pax making phone calls skewed the glideslope indication.

No, that one was a non-precision approach, and someone screwed up on the DME/Altitude cross check. It was not an ILS approach.

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 22):
Command bars on FD's disappearing, comparator warnings, etc. The FD bars were certainly due to a cellphone; the autopilot and comparator issues were unknown as they required a missed approach, after which I asked the FA's to check for PED's. They found several on including phones, so I don't know. I made an announcement explaining the situation and all was better. No idea what the offender was.

People seems to refuse to believe just because the plane didn't crash, it didn't put the flight at risk...
It may not cause a plane to crash, but it definitely would erode the safety cushion the flight has... so instead of needing a lot of bad luck, a little bad luck could make everyone's day a very very bad one!

*Btw, did you experience these things in the "Kitchen stove" days as well?   

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):
I also know of one series of flight deck displays that will blank in the presence of just the wrong kind of WiFi signal.

Honeywell Phase 3 Display Units?

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:22 pm

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 25):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):

The one I've seen the most often, by far, is having my VHF communications stomped on by the "dit dit dah" sound of a nearby cell phone making a data transmission.

Okay, and was that "somebody" making this transmission on purpose while flight testing? Purposely?

No. We brief to turn off personal electronic devices just like everyone else...but not everyone complies, just like everyone else.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 25):
in your personal experience you have not seen any non-antenna device causing things to go belly-up at front then?

Correct.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 25):
The obvious problem is that airlines don´t want to play the game where every flight attendant has to be an IT-expert to be able to clear the cabin for take off.

Exactly. Purely from a praticality point of view, there's no reasonable way to distinguish devices.

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 25):
But WHY exactly are aircraft manufacturers testing this then? Just to test the aircraft whilst enduring a "worst case scenario" with 100 phones and 50 laptops switched on, for argument´s sake?
Just wondering!

Aircraft have their own certified wireless devices (inflight WiFi, aircraft WiFi, picocells are starting to come out, etc.). You can't certify those systems without showing they won't interfere with the aircraft. Airports are also relatively high RF environments so you have to show that external RF won't cause unintended effects.

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 26):
It also raises the question that airlines or the FAA should just be as paranoid about a broadcast transmitter being picked up by the aircraft’s VHF antenna or radar LNA as a cell phone inside the cabin, which is not the case.

They are. Just look at the fiasco over LightSquared and GPS.

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 26):

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):
Things that can be shielded are shielded. But if your equipment is *designed* to pick up RFI (communications, navigation, GPS, etc.) you can't shield it from RFI.

If that would be the case you would not be able to watch TV, listen to radio, or get onto a WiFi network. and making a cellphone call next to your TV would immediately result in interference on your TV.

That's a totally different issue...receiver selectivity. Devices that receive RF have to receive RF, you can't shield them. What they do with the received RF is entirely a function of the device.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 27):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 24):
I also know of one series of flight deck displays that will blank in the presence of just the wrong kind of WiFi signal.

Honeywell Phase 3 Display Units?

Yep.

Tom.
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:03 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 27):
Plus, the iPad in the cockpit will have it's GSM/GPRS/3G mode switched off when in use in the cockpit when not at the gate. WiFi use, depends on the type of aircraft (Some cockpit flight displays did not like wifi interference or EMI caused by devices interacting through wi-fi and blank themselves out)...

Since AA is the only USA airline authorized to use iPad in the cockpit for ALL phases of flight --as of yesterday, only on the 777 fleet-- I can tell you that the AA authorization requires ALL electronic devices approved for the Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) program to have ALL external communications turned OFF. That includes 3G/4G, WiFi, Bluetooth.... everything.

I am amazed this "debate" continues. If you (the passenger) wish to use your electronic device aboard an airliner during times it is NOT authorized (i.e. takeoff and landing phases of flight), then spend the time and money to have your device tested... on ALL airliners for ALL airlines (different configurations) and ALL seat locations. Do that, present your scientific data to the FAA and you WILL receive ALL airlines' backing (airlines don't like the restrictions any more than the passengers) and quite possibly get your device approved for use. Until that happens, the FAR's remain in force.

AA spent 6 months getting FAA approval for iPad use in the cockpits of its 777 aircraft, but only with ALL external communication capability turned off (at ALL times). It will take another few months to get FAA approval for the 737 fleet (testing starts in January). The 757/767 fleet will follow and I doubt the MD80 fleet will even make the attempt.

For those who still believe electronic devices cause no problem, please cite your scientific study that supports your position. It is worthy to remember that AA spent almost a YEAR (and more than $1M) just to get cell phone use approved AFTER landing (no testing of navigation or flight control systems). Even then, the A300 and MD80 planes required extensive modifications to eliminate the (then) newly discovered (and proven) interference problems.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 5:30 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 27):
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 22):
Command bars on FD's disappearing, comparator warnings, etc. The FD bars were certainly due to a cellphone; the autopilot and comparator issues were unknown as they required a missed approach, after which I asked the FA's to check for PED's. They found several on including phones, so I don't know. I made an announcement explaining the situation and all was better. No idea what the offender was.

People seems to refuse to believe just because the plane didn't crash, it didn't put the flight at risk...
It may not cause a plane to crash, but it definitely would erode the safety cushion the flight has... so instead of needing a lot of bad luck, a little bad luck could make everyone's day a very very bad one!

*Btw, did you experience these things in the "Kitchen stove" days as well?

Well the kitchen stove was pretty well shielded in that it was made of string, paper clips, and some cams and pulleys milled from limestone. Or that's what I recall, anyway!  
Quoting AAR90 (Reply 29):
For those who still believe electronic devices cause no problem, please cite your scientific study that supports your position. It is worthy to remember that AA spent almost a YEAR (and more than $1M) just to get cell phone use approved AFTER landing (no testing of navigation or flight control systems). Even then, the A300 and MD80 planes required extensive modifications to eliminate the (then) newly discovered (and proven) interference problems.

Thank you AAR90. I too, don't know why people can't just grasp that it's not safe to hurl around the sky in a fragile machine using tons of electronics at hundreds of miles an hour in all kinds of weather and randomly decide to turn on any electronic appliance they own because they believe it's safe.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:44 pm

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 28):
They are. Just look at the fiasco over LightSquared and GPS.

Oh God! Not that one!
Damn "smart" idea... let's authorize L-band spectrum for horizontal terrestrial use... on the L-band zones next to the GPS L-band freq range! *bangs head on table*

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 29):
Since AA is the only USA airline authorized to use iPad in the cockpit for ALL phases of flight --as of yesterday, only on the 777 fleet-- I can tell you that the AA authorization requires ALL electronic devices approved for the Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) program to have ALL external communications turned OFF. That includes 3G/4G, WiFi, Bluetooth.... everything.

This shows one of the 2 different approaches to using EFBs...
1. Use a normally connected through wireless means device as an EFB, and then switch all the connectivity features off.
2. Use a ruggedized tablet PC, and plug it to a satcom... and yes, you can now get real time info and pass ATA messages without the whole world knowing about it using ACARS decoders (coz it doesn't use the ATN)... but... if the airline's IT department is an idiot, you'd end up with pilots playing angry birds and putting the airplane on hold because he needs to make an urgent reply to an a.net topic!   

*sorry AAR90, the above are just the jokes running around the airborne connectivity industry! Excuse the sarcasm*

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 29):
For those who still believe electronic devices cause no problem, please cite your scientific study that supports your position.

Fact 1. Using your electronic device does not mean you'd cause the airplane to crash.
Fact 2. Just because #1 didn't happen, does NOT mean you're not going to crash thanks to the extra risks your PED is now imposing on the aircraft (through interference).

I wish people would understand the above! *my christmas wish*

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:26 pm

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 31):
Quoting AAR90 (Reply 29):
For those who still believe electronic devices cause no problem, please cite your scientific study that supports your position.

Fact 1. Using your electronic device does not mean you'd cause the airplane to crash.
Fact 2. Just because #1 didn't happen, does NOT mean you're not going to crash thanks to the extra risks your PED is now imposing on the aircraft (through interference).

I wish people would understand the above! *my christmas wish*

Mine too! Merry Christmas! Now turn your PED's off when you're supposed to!
 
YokoTsuno
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 1:21 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:24 am

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 30):
Thank you AAR90. I too, don't know why people can't just grasp that it's not safe to hurl around the sky in a fragile machine using tons of electronics at hundreds of miles an hour in all kinds of weather and randomly decide to turn on any electronic appliance they own because they believe it's safe.

Should passengers believe that it is perfectly safe to land an airplane with certified brakes? If your analysis is to be applied consistently, commercial flight would no longer be possible.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 29):
For those who still believe electronic devices cause no problem, please cite your scientific study that supports your position.

That's asking the same as citing a study that engines never fail, of course they do just as cellphones could or could not interfere.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 31):
Fact 1. Using your electronic device does not mean you'd cause the airplane to crash.
Fact 2. Just because #1 didn't happen, does NOT mean you're not going to crash thanks to the extra risks your PED is now imposing on the aircraft (through interference).

That's preciely my point, so the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost, nothing else.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 28):
They are. Just look at the fiasco over LightSquared and GPS.

Are you saying that all transmission is switched off in the surrounding of airfields. I don't think so. My office is just next to the landing path off SIN and there is transmission going on within that area. Lots of it.
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:17 am

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
That's preciely my point, so the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost, nothing else.

In a way.... yes. To date, there has been nobody else willing to spend the time/money to get PED's approved for use during takeoff/landing time frames. AA has done it, but only for one type device [iPad] and in only (so far) one location [cockpit] on one acft [772].

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
That's asking the same as citing a study that engines never fail, of course they do just as cellphones could or could not interfere.

Nice try, but it doesn't work. There is no study showing engines never fail and planes are designed/certified for the eventuality when (not if) one does. There is neither for the "unlimited PED use" argument. Simply put... nobody knows for sure what may or may not happen, so -- the safe course of action is to keep them turned off until the proper testing/certification is accomplished.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
seven3seven
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:55 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:54 am

Please dont question the airlines and the FAA.

Just sit there and do what we say
My views are mine alone and are not that of any of my fellow employees, officers, or directors at my company
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:55 am

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
That's preciely my point, so the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost, nothing else.

I wish it is that simple (although in a way, it is). Power, frequency range, EM radiation wave bands and modulation...

No one thought that WiFi beams making it into the cockpit within "normal usage power" in the cockpit would kill Honeywell Phase 3 Display units... but it did... (but it didn't affect Phase 1, 2 and 4 display units).

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
Are you saying that all transmission is switched off in the surrounding of airfields. I don't think so. My office is just next to the landing path off SIN and there is transmission going on within that area. Lots of it.

On what frequencies?    It's not just any transmission. It is certain types of transmissions on certain frequencies.

AAR90 mentioned Lightsquared (specific)... Lightsquared planned to use 1525 - 1559MHz frequency ranges.
The GPS frequency ranges are 1559 - 1610MHz ranges for civilian use. The military GPS use other frequencies (lower).

The problem is that some of the allocated GPS bands (apart from 1519-1610MHz) fall within the Lightsquared bands.

This, combined with Lightsquared also beginning to use its frequency bands for satellite use down to your PEDs, is where the real problems start. Inmarsat's L-band range also fall within Lightsquared's spectrum allocation.

In the end, LightSquared and Inmarsat has come up with certain spectrum sharing deals, whereas for GPS, Lightsquared decided to not deploy on the frequencies nearest to the GPS freqs till a later date... and also to reduce it's base stations transmission power by 3dB.

FAA backed tests were conducted on several uses of Lightsquared frequencies near the GPS bands... guess what? The GPS signals was interfered and in some cases, died...

And... in most (if not all countries) the liability on EMI is not on the manufacturers, but on the airlines. Apart from shavers, portable voice recorders, heart pacemakers and hearing aids, it is up to the airlines to decide (and in a lot of cases, obtain approval) what kind of PEDs are to be allowed to be used in airplanes and on what conditions. (121.306 I think, on the FARs... and 121.306 for our (Indo) CASRs, other countries would have similar basic operating regulations... but each country is free to slap more strict specific items on top).

If you want, a coffee discussing this during the Singapore Airshow would be good!   
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
cmb56
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:18 pm

There is no certification for the use of iPads or any other personal electronic device used onboard a commercial aircraft. Passive, non-radiation devices are called PEDs while those with a "radio" in them are called T-PEDs.
FAA regulations are written such that the FAA does not approve any of these devices. The operator of the aircraft is responsible. Whether that be an airline with hundreds of aircraft or a single charter operator.
The process to approve them for use by the crew is very extensive and nearly at the level of an STC but the end result is the airline issues its own approval and their local FAA accepts that after review.
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:18 pm

did any one notice AA made a mount for the iPad, so it has a place in the cockpit? (I assume that could be part of the reason the FAA has allowed it during all phases as opposed to just the time on the ground or above 10k feet.)

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 3):
http://www.slashgear.com/american-ai...-cockpit-approval-by-faa-13202062/
Boiler Up!
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:15 pm

Quoting web500sjc (Reply 38):
did any one notice AA made a mount for the iPad, so it has a place in the cockpit? (I assume that could be part of the reason the FAA has allowed it during all phases as opposed to just the time on the ground or above 10k feet.)

Err... yes... "placed/mounted" on the place where the class3 EFB would be... so, they either fixed-mount it there (to be come a class 2... ie: allowed to be used on all phases in terms of handling), or, it remains Class 1 but thank to the "place provided", it is a Class 1 with Class 2 Previledges... *but then... is that even possible?*
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
AAR90
Posts: 3140
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 11:51 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 8:45 pm

Quoting cmb56 (Reply 37):
The process to approve them for use by the crew is very extensive and nearly at the level of an STC but the end result is the airline issues its own approval and their local FAA accepts that after review.

iPad use in airliners requires FAA authorization in the airline's Operations Specifications (OpSpec A061 in AA's case).

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 39):
Err... yes... "placed/mounted" on the place where the class3 EFB would be... so, they either fixed-mount it there (to be come a class 2... ie: allowed to be used on all phases in terms of handling), or, it remains Class 1 but thank to the "place provided", it is a Class 1 with Class 2 Previledges... *but then... is that even possible?*

According to our OpSpec, the 777 is Class-1, Type-B (software). The "mounting" requirement is being driven by the FAA's POI at AA --or so I am told. Mounting the iPad in the 737 is supposedly THE major "issue" that needs to be resolved to his (the POI's) satisfaction in order to get OpSpec approval for the 737 fleet.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
 
cmb56
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:08 pm

The local level FAA office that has oversight for each airline has a lot of authority to decide what gets approved. In the case of the iPad this may result in one airline having significantly different use policies than another.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:33 pm

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost

Yes, missing an ATC call to go-around in low visibility and smashing into an aircraft on the runway is very expensive.

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 28):
They are. Just look at the fiasco over LightSquared and GPS.

Are you saying that all transmission is switched off in the surrounding of airfields.

No. The Lightsquared/GPS comment was a rebuttal to the accusation that the FAA/FTC doesn't take any action against potential interference...they do.

Tom.
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2249
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Wed Dec 21, 2011 4:06 am

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 30):
Thank you AAR90. I too, don't know why people can't just grasp that it's not safe to hurl around the sky in a fragile machine using tons of electronics at hundreds of miles an hour in all kinds of weather and randomly decide to turn on any electronic appliance they own because they believe it's safe.

Should passengers believe that it is perfectly safe to land an airplane with certified brakes? If your analysis is to be applied consistently, commercial flight would no longer be possible.

What are you talking about? A discussion of aircraft brakes, a certified and tested component integral to the design of the aircraft, has zero relevance to unknown and unnecessary consumer electronics which change at a pace far faster than certification takes, sitting at unpredictable places in the cabin, operating without testing during at a critical phase of flight. PEDs aren't certified for passenger use because there is no need, and as AAR90 pointed out, it was an arduous and rigorous process for AA to gain approval for a specific type of device, running specific software, in a specific configuration.

Here's the bottom line: if anyone thinks they know better than certification authorities or airlines in the operation of their personal electronic gear, they need to stay on the ground.

Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
Quoting AAR90 (Reply 29):
For those who still believe electronic devices cause no problem, please cite your scientific study that supports your position.

That's asking the same as citing a study that engines never fail, of course they do just as cellphones could or could not interfere.

No it isn't. The engine is, again, an integral part of the certified machine; the cellphone is not. We are trained for engine failures on a regular basis. Electronic interference is inherently unpredictable, and cannot be effectively trained for because it is spurious and subject to many permutations.


Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
Quoting mandala499 (Reply 31):
Fact 1. Using your electronic device does not mean you'd cause the airplane to crash.
Fact 2. Just because #1 didn't happen, does NOT mean you're not going to crash thanks to the extra risks your PED is now imposing on the aircraft (through interference).

That's preciely my point, so the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost, nothing else.

Cost is important, but the types of devices available have very short shelf lives, far less than the testing and certification process would take. Since there is zero valid reason for a passenger to need their electronics on during a critical phase of flight a cheaper, more practical, and safer course of action is to have them turned off.

Quoting AAR90 (Reply 34):
Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
That's asking the same as citing a study that engines never fail, of course they do just as cellphones could or could not interfere.

Nice try, but it doesn't work. There is no study showing engines never fail and planes are designed/certified for the eventuality when (not if) one does. There is neither for the "unlimited PED use" argument. Simply put... nobody knows for sure what may or may not happen, so -- the safe course of action is to keep them turned off until the proper testing/certification is accomplished.

  

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 36):
Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
That's preciely my point, so the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost, nothing else.

I wish it is that simple (although in a way, it is). Power, frequency range, EM radiation wave bands and modulation...

No one thought that WiFi beams making it into the cockpit within "normal usage power" in the cockpit would kill Honeywell Phase 3 Display units... but it did... (but it didn't affect Phase 1, 2 and 4 display units).

  

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 42):
Quoting YokoTsuno (Reply 33):
the conclusion I draw from this entire debate is that the only reason why wireless equipment is to be switched off is simply because of cost

Yes, missing an ATC call to go-around in low visibility and smashing into an aircraft on the runway is very expensive.

  
 
as739x
Posts: 5001
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:23 am

RE: IPads In The Cockpit?

Thu Dec 22, 2011 6:29 pm

There was a good article in the USAtoday about the argument of pilots using IPads vs. Passengers. It talked about multiple incidents when crews feared passengers using electronics interfered with cockpit instruments. However, when pilots use it, they will know first hand if their IPad is causing interference (they can turn it off) vs. if a passenger is using it, they will not be able to immediately turn it off.

Food for thought!
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests