FAA Taking a 'Fresh Look' at Digital Device Use During Takeoff and Landing

[notjustjay]

I understand people who dislike the social ramifications of having cell reception on phones (you thought the lady with the loud baby was annoying? Wait till a teen talks on the phone next to you the whole trip).

But the fact that the airlines think that a kid playing his iPod or GameBoy- devices with no wireless communication whatsoever- can bring down a plane and have to be shut off is crazy if we can have cell phone repeaters on planes in the UAE.

There is absolutely no reason that Airplane Mode would be insufficient during takeoff and landing for an iPhone/iPad.

I agree, but you also have to look at the practicality of implementing the rules. If the rule was "your device has to be in airplane mode" then would you expect the flight attendants to know how to check everyone's device? They'd have to know how to check Wifi and network settings on iPhones, iPod touches, iPads, Android devices, BlackBerries, PlayBooks, Kindles, Kobos, Nooks, MacBooks, Windows XP, Windows 7, Linux, ..... or would it be easier to simply say "Sir, please turn that off and put it away"?

As for wireless interference, sure it's unlikely, but I am reminded of the keynote where Steve Jobs had to tell everyone to turn off their WiFi because all of those devices in the same room were apparently interfering with the keynote demo.

 

[Ozy]

I never understood the crews saying the devices must be turned OFF, even if they have an airplane mode. To me its called 'airplane mode' for a reason...

Power Trip. I've flown so much and it seems like some flight attendants need to be supreme commander over something in their career, and this is it. YOU MUST TURN IT OFF... OFFF!!!! ... TURN THAT THING OFF!!!!11111oneoneone

And as your finishing up on the taxi... if u'r not done quickly, people look at you as if you have a lit fuse that's about to blow the ass of the plane if you don't hurry up. sigh...

 

[D.T.]

Ok for iPad owners. But what about Galaxy Tab owners?

I guess those 10 people will just have to wait like the rest of us.

 

[baryon]

Every flight I take is just a bit longer than 2 hours, which means I only have a bout an hour and 20 minutes to watch a movie because of takeoff/landing, which is never enough. It's really annoying because that's pretty much the only thing I'm willing to do while on a plane, as listening to music is impossible and playing games gets really boring after 10 minutes.

If I could start watching a movie during takeoff and finish during landing, that would be pretty awesome.

I'm talking about doing this on an iPod Touch though...

 

[Small White Car]

I always thought it was weird that the e-ink devices were counted as electronic devices. They should have been exempt from the moment they were invented.

Seriously, those things have got to put out less radiation than the music playing in the armrests.

 

[Hodar1]

C'mon - it has NEVER been about airport "Safety".

What it is about, is getting people onboard, seated quickly - and then getting them off the plane as quickly as possible. People finishing up a game when the plane hits the gate, means that there will be problems with other passengers trying to catch a connecting flight.

Is there anywhere on the face of the planet, with more antennae than an airport? Even MythBusters ran a show showing that a cell phone, placed NEXT to the equipment - had practically zero effects upon the navigational equipment when receiving a call, making a call, or during a call.

It's done for the AIRLINE'S convenience - not safety. I'm a frequent flier (2-4 round trips a month). Shutting down prior to landing means that everyone has their stuff put away - so everyone can exit quickly and catch their next flight.

 

[Konrad9]

I am 100% all for this, as nothing would be more annoying than a plane full of people on their phone. I wonder if they'll allow iPhones during taxi/takeoff/landing as long as they're in Airplane mode.

...you realize the iPhone is a Smart Phone? The very thing you said it is a good thing they aren't being considered?


Also, this has nothing to do with interference, it has to do with people not having laptops and tablets and etc on their laps during takeoff/landing in case of an emergency. The last thing you want is an extra 50 hard plastic items getting in the way of everyone trying to evacuate.

 

[Boomchukalaka]

Alec Baldwin thinks this is great news!!

 

[GFLPraxis]

As for wireless interference, sure it's unlikely, but I am reminded of the keynote where Steve Jobs had to tell everyone to turn off their WiFi because all of those devices in the same room were apparently interfering with the keynote demo.

True, but Jobs' devices were using WiFi as well.

I really doubt that airplanes use WiFi and Bluetooth to communicate

 

[MacOG728893]

Are they going to use the new iPad or the old iPad

 

[GFLPraxis]

I always thought it was weird that the e-ink devices were counted as electronic devices. They should have been exempt from the moment they were invented.

Seriously, those things have got to put out less radiation than the music playing in the armrests.

Some e-ink devices (such as the 3G Kindles) have the ability to communicate over both WiFi and cell networks.

 

[nsayer]

I'll say it again:

Cell phones - be they smart phones or otherwise - are in a class of their own. Their radios can cause interference with cellular systems on the ground when they're up in the air because they "see" too many cells.

But that's why there's airplane mode. A phone in airplane mode magically becomes a FCC Part 15 device. And if an airplane has any trouble operating properly at any point in its flightplan with a cabin full of operating Part 15 devices, then that plane should not be considered airworthy.

This rule is patently nonsensical, and needs to die.

 

[notjustjay]

Every flight I take is just a bit longer than 2 hours, which means I only have a bout an hour and 20 minutes to watch a movie because of takeoff/landing, which is never enough. It's really annoying because that's pretty much the only thing I'm willing to do while on a plane, as listening to music is impossible and playing games gets really boring after 10 minutes.

Why can't you listen to music? Just get yourself a nice set of noise-cancelling headphones if you're worried about ambient noise.

I always thought it was weird that the e-ink devices were counted as electronic devices. They should have been exempt from the moment they were invented.

Many of those devices have wifi, and some even have 3G cellular radios, like my Kindle. It's another example of just saying "put it away" rather than training the flight crew (and explaining to the passengers) that if you have model "x" then put it away, but model "y" is OK, etc.)

 

[mike2q]

No way.

No way does this have anything to do with what you can do with a phone to track the plane ect. First off, half the flights I take now have PAID wifi services available that could do all those things and more. You could have a full on skype session from a lot of planes right now if you didn't mind pissing off the other passengers. Furthermore there are at least a dozen or so websites that have live flight tracking utilizing google maps so this isn's a concern either. I can't stand having to sit and read the crapy airline magazine or stare into space for 15 - 20 min while we're taking off. I just want to listen to music, play a game or watch a movie to kill the time. Landing is even worse as I've already read the whole crap magazine they provide.

I have a feeling that a lot of the issue revolves around the fear that an electronic device will be used to detonate an explosive device somewhere else on board.

Or using your phone to setup tracking for an outside source to down a plane.

It has nothing to do with any device interrupting the pilots ability to control the plane - although wouldn't it be cool to use an app like flight control and start maneuvering the real plane using your finger on the app?

The FAA will make the testing so cumbersome and time consuming that it will effectively kill the ability to get any product certified. The fact that they're already using iPads should tell you that their testing methodology is just a deterrent.

 

[chezhoy]

I don't have an iPad and use my iPhone like one. I wouldn't be talking on it in-flight unless there was an emergency. You can't group everyone with your statement. You didn't strike a chord with me, just showing you the other side for those like me.

I am 100% all for this, as nothing would be more annoying than a plane full of people on their phone. I wonder if they'll allow iPhones during taxi/takeoff/landing as long as they're in Airplane mode.

 

[DogHouseDub]

Leaving my phone on could bring a plane down, but you'll let me bring it on board because you trust me to turn it off? Meanwhile you're X-raying shoes and doing full body scans to look for weapons and explosives? Who needs to stick a bomb on their taint when you can bring a plane down with a cellphone...

 

[nsayer]

As for wireless interference, sure it's unlikely, but I am reminded of the keynote where Steve Jobs had to tell everyone to turn off their WiFi because all of those devices in the same room were apparently interfering with the keynote demo.

The difference was that Steve was trying to demo something using WiFi. The plane can certainly go from point A to point B without using WiFi to do so.

 

[mike2q]

Really?

If everyone was busy finishing a game of angry birds I'd get off the plane a hell of a lot quicker then I do now. Think about it, all those people would be sitting rather than standing in the isle blocking my path when I never cary on any luggage. Getting on the plane and seated has nothing to do with it either.

C'mon - it has NEVER been about airport "Safety".

What it is about, is getting people onboard, seated quickly - and then getting them off the plane as quickly as possible. People finishing up a game when the plane hits the gate, means that there will be problems with other passengers trying to catch a connecting flight.

Is there anywhere on the face of the planet, with more antennae than an airport? Even MythBusters ran a show showing that a cell phone, placed NEXT to the equipment - had practically zero effects upon the navigational equipment when receiving a call, making a call, or during a call.

It's done for the AIRLINE'S convenience - not safety. I'm a frequent flier (2-4 round trips a month). Shutting down prior to landing means that everyone has their stuff put away - so everyone can exit quickly and catch their next flight.

 

[mrxak]

You don't want your cell phone on during flight anyway because the constant searching for a good signal with a tower will kill your battery rather quickly. Cell towers are optimized for ground signal, not way up in the air, and besides, you're traveling so quickly you'll be constantly passed off to the next tower as you go along. All in all, it'll drain you quicker than if you were on the ground.

Considering tons of people don't bother or just plain forget to turn off their devices, not to mention all the folks in "airplane mode" which has no regulatory basis, and the complete lack of electronic device-caused airplane crashes, I think it's pretty safe to say a cell phone can't bring down an airplane. Heck, there are people out there who want to bring down airplanes, and none of them have yet to bring a plane down with a cell phone.

The only reason they're not allowed is because if there's a single malfunctioning device out there that might give out unintended radiation to interfere with radio transmissions between the pilots and tower for landing/take-off, that's a problem, and the FAA's asses are on the line. It's one of those better safe than sorry things. Even with the complete lack of definitive evidence that these devices can cause the sorts of problems the FAA is trying to prevent, it's not outside the realm of possibility. There are manufacturing tolerances, there could be damage to devices that can cause them to misbehave, there could be just some weird freak occurrence.

Me, I don't have a problem with a little risk. If I die because of some freak accident with somebody's iPad, well that's just life. You can't babyproof the entire universe and I could just as easily die in bed with a meteor crashing through my roof.

 

[parish]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)

Surely the question if using phones to make calls is a moot point? Aren't mobile phone masts designed to radiate most of the signal horizontally? Once you got above a couple of thousand feet the signal would be too weak. Also, on a plane you are in a large metal tube which would act as a Faraday Cage (even though the plane isn't earthed in flight). When a plane in flight gets hit by lightning the lightning is deflected around the fuselage and continues it's path to the ground so the same would happen to mobile phone signals

 

[Flood123]

Vindication for Alec Baldwin ? LOL

 

[jmgregory1]

No way does this have anything to do with what you can do with a phone to track the plane ect. First off, half the flights I take now have PAID wifi services available that could do all those things and more. You could have a full on skype session from a lot of planes right now if you didn't mind pissing off the other passengers. Furthermore there are at least a dozen or so websites that have live flight tracking utilizing google maps so this isn's a concern either. I can't stand having to sit and read the crapy airline magazine or stare into space for 15 - 20 min while we're taking off. I just want to listen to music, play a game or watch a movie to kill the time. Landing is even worse as I've already read the whole crap magazine they provide.

These are old rules - put in place at a time when the fear was that an "electronic device" or transmitter could do harm to the plane. Guess what, phones are transmitters. I'm not saying it is a smart rule, because it's not. The company I used to work for had a company plane. This was back when the brick cell phone was released and I remember making calls from the plane - the old brick phone had a hugely powerful (for the day) transmitter and never did we experience any sort of issues with flying, take-off or landing. That's just not what this is about. It's about a historical fear of people wanting to blow up planes using electronic devices.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I have a feeling that a lot of the issue revolves around the fear that an electronic device will be used to detonate an explosive device somewhere else on board.

Or using your phone to setup tracking for an outside source to down a plane.

It has nothing to do with any device interrupting the pilots ability to control the plane - although wouldn't it be cool to use an app like flight control and start maneuvering the real plane using your finger on the app?

First part of your post makes no sense b/c

1) Electronic devices are not banned from all use, just taxi, takeoff, and landing. If there was a security threat they'd be banned from the cabin just like every other item that poses a security threat.

2) I'm 100% positive that a terrorist isn't going to care about FCC regulations (see: Shoe Bomber, Underwear Bomber, etc.).

However, I do believe you are correct that these devices pose no real danger to navigation equipment. It's pure CYA. However, if the Obama Admin was as serious about being environmentally friendly they would fast track allowing Kindles and iPads, etc. for use full time in airplane mode. As it is now I still bring a newspaper or magazine onboard to read when I can't use electronic devices. It's pretty much the only time I ever touch old school media.

 

[charlituna]

Ok for iPad owners. But what about Galaxy Tab owners?

They will be testing those as well. But since this isn't galaxytabrumors.com it isn't being mentioned.

The fun part is that based on the regs if some Tab fails some test they will likely still ban all tablets etc because it would be too much of a headache to verify what each passenger is using or to deal with the guy with the Tab being pissed that he can't use it but all the iPad users can have theirs out. So they will stick with the 'nothing' rule

----------

I am 100% all for this, as nothing would be more annoying than a plane full of people on their phone. I wonder if they'll allow iPhones during taxi/takeoff/landing as long as they're in Airplane mode.

They will allow phones or not allow them. There are too many other things for the crew to do to have to verify that even phone is in and stays in Airplane mode.

 

[rdstoll]

are we as a people that starved for "something to do" that we can't wait half an hour for a flight to take off before whipping out our ipads?