U.S. Senator Promising Legislative Action Allowing In-Air Use of Electronic Devices if FAA Doesn't Act

So, I hope you all realize that the rest of the world is starting to realize how stupid these regulations are. Singapore air, for one, has an SMS service in the air which allows (on a roaming basis, so expensive) one to send and receive SMS. http://www.singaporeair.com/jsp/cms/en_UK/flying_with_us/inflight-connectivity.jsp

As someone who flies >200k miles per year (and might have even checked his email on roll or approach from time to time), I would never get on a plane I thought to be so vulnerable that a cell phone signal could cause interference to the point of interfering the flight. You'd have to be crazy to. Anyone who believes that no one has a phone turned on every time they get on the plane is crazy.

Finally, I can tell you with certainty that you will not get a signal on most carriers beyond probably 5-10k feet. Cell towers are shielded above. This is not to keep flyers honest, but because in the olden days one phone hitting 10s to hundreds of towers (as happens when you have clean line of site from the air) bogged down the system.

The regulation is very dumb. There is no reason not to txt or send and receive email on takeoff and landing.

If safety is the real reason on takeoff and landing, go ahead and ban listening to anything but in flight entertainment during takeoff and landing (IFE cuts in to the audio with announcements from the cockpit and FAs). On the other hand, if it's interference, don't ban ipods.

The logic is completely borked.

Not sure what the rule is in the US, but here in the UK we can't use a mobile phone at a filling station because if you do it will blow up.

deecasey said:

Surely the non-use during the beginning and end of flight is so that they have your full attention???

Click to expand...

This is just a small part in what it really involves, there are a couple of reasons, first the secondary navigation system relies on the magnetic energy generated by the northern pole, and the aircraft manufacturer, calibrates it according to they know is in the aircraft, equipment necessary for the flight, if everyone turn on an electronic device this secondary, as it is only used in emergencies, will not be accurate, the landing and take-off are the most dangerous moments of the flight, so as a pilot you need to have everything working properly, just to avoid, and keep 150+ people alive and safe through their destination.
The other reason is the one a person that really understands electronic fields could explain correctly, but as far as I know since the aircraft is pressurized, and the area is so small, if most or all the people leave their electronic devices on, the cabin wouldn’t be able to handle the pressure and crack or even blow up. There is a small chance that this could happen, and off course I know this is worst case scenario.

Trius said:

This is evidence that there is no threat in leaving devices on. I'm sure this is not the only person that blows off this rule. If it were a real issue, they would be confiscating personal devices at the gate.

Although, what does this senator know about wireless interference??

Click to expand...

One device may have minimal effect. 10 or 20 may not be benign. It's still a question for electronics experts, not for the general public or politicians.

God forbid people making Phone calls on a plane,strapped in and no place to go it would be the final straw for me.
They are talking about having the ability to use mobile phones in the Tube (london metro) when underground and that fills me with horror too.
Using a electronic gadget with headphones to kill the bordem or bratram (my word for the hellish situation of kids too young to fly being taken on planes and grizzle/scream the whole flight) thats fine.

OtherJesus said:

I see our Government Democrats at hard at work on the most pressing issues. Thank you!

Click to expand...

I call it multi-tasking. The Senator is on the committee that provides oversight of the FAA. She doing her job.

bradl said:

This is the common myth of what people believe would happen. this has less of a chance happening, especially over any cellular connection due to the science of how the signals are used. If they went over WiFi, that might be a problem, but you're looking at Facetime, Skype, Vonage, Nimbuzz, Google Voice, etc., all being used, which some airlines already have blocked. Cell phone signals would be hard to receive.

Cell phone towers are like TV station antennas. The signals are spread out in every direction, tent-shaped from the tower. So the higher the tower, the further down and out the signal can be received. That's why you notice that most TV station antennas are in the parts of town that have the highest elevation. Cell phone towers are nearly the same, but not as tall, and in more locations. The signal still goes down and out. So being above the tower, especially anywhere between FL180 and FL600 won't get you much signal.

Additionally, VORs operate in the reverse. From where they are based, the signal is received the further up and out, as opposed to down and out. Without getting into flight plans, routings, airways, and the blood/guts of how flights are routed, the only signal a phone could pick up are on frequencies lower than what it operates on.

Compass... that would be another story.

BL.

Click to expand...

You missed my point entirely, it had NOTHING to do with signal strength, but rather the noise level that would result from 100 people talking on the phone at once.

It would make the flight completely miserable.

yg17 said:

If someone's screaming brat is sitting in the seat behind me and won't shut up (which seems to happen to me every time I fly) you're damn right I want to have my headphones in with music blasting. Even if the law limits you to only listening to Yoko Ono or Bjork during takeoff or landing, it would be an improvement.

Click to expand...

You don't like being in public with babies/kids/toddlers - then by a private plane, or drive your damn self.

aleksivic said:

Im a regular traveller and not once have I ever switched any of my devices to airplane mode when asked to.

Finally somebody has the balls to act!

Click to expand...

you do not get to decide whether you do it or not. you are not the only one on the airplane. if flight crew ask you do something for the sake of safety then do it.

how difficult is it for you to turn off your device for 10 mins during take off and landing.

take off and landing is the most dangerous part of the flight. most crashes happen during those 2 times in a flight.

kdarling said:

You want to pay for that testing with even higher ticket prices?



That's true, and part of the problem is that the FAA is in bed with the airlines. They'd rather risk an occasional problem than scare passengers away.

Folks, one primary reason why the rules are in place is to prevent pilot distractions. The last thing your pilot needs to be doing, ESPECIALLY DURING TAKEOFF AND LANDING, is trying to figure out why his instruments or autopilot is acting wonky. Or worse, getting a false TCAS command to dive into the ground.

Non-pilots have no clue how dangerous the takeoff and landing phases can be if there are distractions or mistakes.

The reason why electronics are allowed above 10,000 feet is because the extra altitude gives the pilots more time to figure things out and/or to recover.

Click to expand...

Are you serious? Of course I am willing to pay for the testing if our entire commercial airline fleet has a serious safety issue because the emissions from an ebook reader can screw up instruments or communications devices and distract the pilot. You really don't see the need to immediately ground all the planes if what you are saying is true? Anyone could easily carry a five or ten watt transmitter on to the plane and bring it down. We are doomed.

Of course you don't see the need because you know what your saying is impossible. This rule started because some clown thought people wearing Walkman's would not notice the plane was crashing. The interference argument has always been a lie.