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

[nsfw]

Sounds like TSA idiocy. Totally lacking logic.

If somebody wants to do either of the above things, they can do it today. Think though this for a nano-second. How does the flight crew know if you turned off that gadget in your pocket?

Bottom line, I would bet a million ipads that there is at least one phone turned on in every single flight. People just forget to turn them off. Simple stuff.

There is for sure. There is at least one phone and other electronic device left active on every flight. Either overhead, in pocket, or down below in the cargo hold.
There was a time when analog cell phones would mess with the towers on the ground. It was never an issue with the pilots communications.

 

[joepunk]

Although it would be nice to be able to use my iPad or iPod on and before takeoff, it's really not that big of a deal. Read a magazine or do a crossword for 15 minutes.

I found out that if I am really tired I can sleep through most of the bumpy takeoff and landing portions of a flight.

 

[Azathoth]

Reasons for the ban on electronics during TO/Landing:

One, it is desirable to have the possibility of full attention of the passengers at short notice as an emergency close to the ground has a shorter window of reaction - therefore it is preferable that people aren't messing around with gadgets, have ear buds on, no reclined seats (impediments to evacuation) etc. NB cabin lights are dimmed during nighttime take-off/landing to improve passenger night vision in case of evacuation.

Two, until the relatively recent harmonisation of the EMC limits, there was a very lax attitude to transmitters and other radiators by the manufacturers. Toy cars from Taiwan, hand-held game consoles, these would often emit RF levels 100x to 1000x greater than the FCC and CE allow today, multiple instances of those operating onboard are clearly undersirable.

It's still not allowed to use transmitters on-board (or, receivers, because poor direct conversion designs can radiate a lot of LO).

I don't think it's a bad idea at all to be conservative on this - I just wish that the airlines were forthright in explaining the reasons.

 

[kingtj]

Nope... it's still bureaucracy!

If you buy into the "safety" argument, you can't find ANY electronics devices acceptable -- because there's simply no way to know that a given passenger didn't bring "revision B" of a device on-board, when you only tested "revision A" of the same unit. What if rev B. radiates more interference?

Or what about the person with a defective piece of electronics? What about the person who messed around with his/her device, perhaps removing some of the RF shielding material normally found inside it, for the purpose of doing a hack or upgrade of some sort?

IMO, the far more practical thing for govt. to do is require the aircraft to have sufficient shielding against electrical interference to ensure nothing operating at the power levels we'd have for personal devices is able to get through. Honestly, in 99% of the cases, this is already probably true anyway. (Do you *really* believe passengers have always obeyed instructions to turn their devices off during takeoffs or landings?? I'm almost positive people don't always turn their cellphones to "airplane mode" when boarding. Yet we don't see pilots throwing fits about their instrumentation going wacky and having to ask stewardesses to hunt down the offenders.)

Several pilots I know already admit that honestly, the regulations are essentially bogus -- but simply repeated because they're the easiest way to get the general public to stay off their devices during the critical takeoff/landing parts of flights where they might need peoples' undivided attention if anything went wrong.

The story seems to imply that this is "bureaucracy." But in the interests of safety, of course each device will have to be tested in each airplane. The radiation emissions will be different, and the wiring of each model of plane is different.

 

[scottw324]

Although it would be nice to be able to use my iPad or iPod on and before takeoff, it's really not that big of a deal. Read a magazine or do a crossword for 15 minutes.

Some people have crosswords or books/magazines on their ipads, iphones, ipods, etc... Why carry more if you do not have to?

 

[Drunken Master]

The U.S.'s stance toward electronic devices on planes crossed the line in to absurdity a long time ago. There are planes in the UAE that have cell phone repeaters hooked to satellite receivers to tie them in to the mainland lines so that everyone on the plane gets cell reception and can text and make calls.


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.

Agreed, I flew on Emirates two weeks ago and in the back of every seat is a touch screen (not very good though) and a telephone that detaches and doubles as a remote, though that's nothing new.

You can use the menus given to you to send texts, e-mail and make phone calls from the flight.

 

[ccsicecoke]

Apple should ask Boeing to integrate iOS into flight panel

 

[ncri]

Why do we have to be able to use our iPads all the time?? Why not just relaxing and not doing anything for some minutes? Would do good for overly busy people... and that's most of us. ;-)

 

[kingtj]

Yeah, and this ....

...is exactly why I refuse to fly anymore, unless it's a dire emergency.

The prevailing attitude of everyone I encounter in the entire flight experience has this attitude that I'm some idiot to be barked orders at, and it's my job to prove to you I'm not a terrorist threat before I can even use the expensive ticket I paid for.

I've missed a flight before, and come VERY close to missing a couple others. So what? The industry should EXPECT this is going to happen and treat it like part of the process. Airline terminals are huge places, with a LOT of distractions (such as stores or restaurants that may take longer than you estimate to get your transaction completed). I've run into some incredible delays with the in-terminal rental car agencies too. If you ever fly with kids/family, you know there's CONSTANTLY a risk that someone will leave something important behind that you have to go back for, making you late. Plenty of things can happen that don't make you a "dumbass" for being a victim of them!

As far as overhead bins go? Let's face it.... That only became an issue because the AIRLINES made it one. Constantly losing people's checked luggage ... charging big fees for extra bags ... putting people at risk of others accidentally taking their bags at the carousel at the end of a flight.

What really COULD/SHOULD be a fun experience has been turned into a stressful, miserable one with the combination of the TSA and the attitudes and policies of the airlines.

I used to work for the airlines. Most of the folks who fly fall in my general catagory of dumbasses. Can't make it to the airport on time, think they can cram a full size suitcase in an overhead, feel like they are entitled to do what ever they want on the plane. People need to get in, sit down, shut up and hold on.
That is why people in the business call the passangers 'the Clampetts'....

 

[steviec]

The older man seems upset in the photo. The younger one looks like he messed up on something.

The older guy had just asked the younger guy was angry birds installed. The younger guy replied "seriously - all I loaded was this stupid map and flight control. How else will I know how to land the plane"

 

[firewood]

But yes, my understanding has always been that the rule was more about removing extra distractions during the two most likely phases of flight for a crash to occur. If an evacuation is necessary, you need passengers paying attention.

That's not the reason for the rule...

That is not the stated official reason for the rule.

But if you talk to pilots and senior cabin crew, it is a strong reason why they don't want this rule changed. Passengers can be unruly enough without an even greater percentage not paying attention during takeoff and landing (where over 90% of aviation "incidents" and other injuries occur). It also helps the cabin crew "mark" the idiots who don't turn off their devices at the appropriate times as potential problems during any actual emergency.

One doesn't need the equivalent during an evacuation of people texting while driving in traffic, and running red lights because the coast is clear.

 

[adversus]

I fly a lot.

I'm slightly irked that I'm asked to turn off devices during take-off landing, but you know what? You can use those devices in between.

I just can't wrap my head around people who **** bricks when asked to turn off a device. Is that 20 minutes of interruption that important? Even when I'm working during transit it's never a huge inconvenience.

Flight attendants are supposed to be authoritative. They are responsible (along with the pilots) for the safety and well being of the passengers while they're on board. People who refuse to turn off devices when asked are just being a dick for the sake of being dick, either because they get their kicks off it or they think that all authority is Bad and the policy is hogwash.

If you think the policy is stupid, great, change the policy. Call your airline and complain, whatever, but don't make a goddamn scene on the airliner, agitating more people and possibly causing the flight to be delayed.

The line between "standing up for your beliefs" and "being a douchebag" in these situations is very thin.

 

[nsayer]

Although it would be nice to be able to use my iPad or iPod on and before takeoff, it's really not that big of a deal. Read a magazine or do a crossword for 15 minutes.

I'd like to use my camera. Like virtually all cameras made anymore, it's an electronic device, so I can't. And once above 10,000 feet, the scenery is far less photogenic. The last time I flew into Newark, I was able to get a truly stunning view of the NYC skyline, including the empire state building beautifully lit. I can't share that memory because of FAA stupidity.

 

[joneill55]

The older man seems upset in the photo. The younger one looks like he messed up on something.

Looks like they are discussing the approach plates on their devices and discussing complexity of ground traffic issues.

 

[jmgregory1]

I fly a lot.

I'm slightly irked that I'm asked to turn off devices during take-off landing, but you know what? You can use those devices in between.

I just can't wrap my head around people who **** bricks when asked to turn off a device. Is that 20 minutes of interruption that important? Even when I'm working during transit it's never a huge inconvenience.

Flight attendants are supposed to be authoritative. They are responsible (along with the pilots) for the safety and well being of the passengers while they're on board. People who refuse to turn off devices when asked are just being a dick for the sake of being dick, either because they get their kicks off it or they think that all authority is Bad and the policy is hogwash.

If you think the policy is stupid, great, change the policy. Call your airline and complain, whatever, but don't make a goddamn scene on the airliner, agitating more people and possibly causing the flight to be delayed.

The line between "standing up for your beliefs" and "being a douchebag" in these situations is very thin.

Very well put - I agree completely. Frankly, I like getting the down-time of being on a plane. There's something nice about sitting down and falling asleep even before the plane takes off.

It's really the only time I can say I can't be reached and even then, with the expansion of wifi on more flights, I'm as guilty as the next person of continuing my work days to include time in transit. Damn you gogo inflight wifi!

 

[TimSHB]

starting to get board of this photo...

Airline pun or spelling mistake?

 

[flynndean]

Entitled much?

Perhaps. But then, maybe it's just that I'm intelligent enough to at least question why the rules/laws that control me are in place.

 

[kdarling]

I'm almost positive people don't always turn their cellphones to "airplane mode" when boarding.

Yet we don't see pilots throwing fits about their instrumentation going wacky and having to ask stewardesses to hunt down the offenders.)

Actually, there are plenty of recorded cases where pilots tracked down idiots who tried to use their cell phone especially during landing, and screwed up either navigation or automated landings.

What we see too much in these threads are posts from people who are neither engineers nor pilots.

They say ignorant things like "Well, my fill-in-the-blank doesn't have a radio so it can't interfer." Folks, anything with a CPU inside is a possible transmitter simply due to its internal oscillator. Even receive-only radios are often inadvertent transmitters for similar reasons.

They also have never read through all the anonymous NASA safety forms where pilots and crew have entered times that personal devices have apparently almost caused accidents.

The upshot is, every device would have to be tested in every possible location and combination on every type of plane. It's just not possible.

Until such time as airlines consider it worthwhile to armor the heck out of all planes' systems, it's not worth jeopardizing your family's lives just so you can play your games during take-off and landing.

 

[nsayer]

Reasons for the ban on electronics during TO/Landing:

One, it is desirable to have the possibility of full attention of the passengers at short notice as an emergency close to the ground has a shorter window of reaction - therefore it is preferable that people aren't messing around with gadgets, have ear buds on, no reclined seats (impediments to evacuation) etc. NB cabin lights are dimmed during nighttime take-off/landing to improve passenger night vision in case of evacuation.

Bogus. If attention were the important factor, then they'd disallow newspapers and magazines.

Two, until the relatively recent harmonisation of the EMC limits, there was a very lax attitude to transmitters and other radiators by the manufacturers. Toy cars from Taiwan, hand-held game consoles, these would often emit RF levels 100x to 1000x greater than the FCC and CE allow today, multiple instances of those operating onboard are clearly undersirable.

Any device that does not meet FCC Part 15 emission limits cannot legally be imported into or offered for sale in the US. There are multiple instances every year of the FCC levying fines on importers of such devices.

It's still not allowed to use transmitters on-board (or, receivers, because poor direct conversion designs can radiate a lot of LO).

Then those devices cannot possibly be in compliance with Part 15 and are, therefore, illegal to operate at all.

I don't think it's a bad idea at all to be conservative on this - I just wish that the airlines were forthright in explaining the reasons.

I think any airplane that cannot operate safely with a cabin full of operating Part 15 devices should not be considered airworthy.

----------

Actually, there are plenty of recorded cases where pilots tracked down idiots who tried to use their cell phone especially during landing, and screwed up either navigation or automated landings.

[citation needed]

 

[Rocko1]

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

I don't think Greyhound Bus cares if you have your device on while they pull away from the curb.

 

[joneill55]

There is nothing to prevent somebody from doing this already though. If somebody really wanted to use a device in this way, they could just turn it on and ignore the nagging stewardess.

Honestly this whole thing should be a non issue, take off and landing are the most dangerous parts of plane travel. Devices should be put away in case of, oh I don't know... an emergency. Hold on, the plane is going down! Let me put away my Kindle before I put on my oxygen mask. Or just what I need is to not survive a plan crash because I got whacked in the skull by somebodies iPad.

Flight Attendants, they are called Flight Attendants, not "Stewardess". Have you flown in the past 30 years?

 

[GenesisST]

I once asked an uncle who's a doctor about why we must turn off turn off cell phones in hospital (at least in my part of the world) and he basically told me it was ********...

Doctor's all have a pager and a phone...

But then again, a plane can do more damage...

 

[nsayer]

But then again, a plane can do more damage...

Oh, I don't know. Many many millions more people have died in hospitals than on airplanes.

 

[D.T.]

Looks like they are discussing the approach plates on their devices and discussing complexity of ground traffic issues.

Actually it looks like a map of the food court.

“Hey, it’s my turn to pick, and I say we’re going to Chilis”

 

[firewood]

Bogus. If attention were the important factor, then they'd disallow newspapers and magazines.

Not bogus at all. There were far fewer complaints about people driving while reading the newspaper or a map, compared with idiots driving while texting. More states have laws against the latter, not the former. Newspapers, maybe due to the lack of interactivity or something, turn out to be less distracting of attention and/or causes of rudeness.