There was never any proof that electronics cause any problems. As someone who has to deal with permissability, it comes down to testing. They never wanted to go through all the testing of every single device to guarantee there was wasn't any interference. We also use to not sail far into the oceans because we believed we would fall off the side of the world. Things change.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Airline Industry Remains Divided Over Personal Electronics Usage During Takeoff and Landing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There was never any proof that electronics cause any problems. As someone who has to deal with permissability, it comes down to testing. They never wanted to go through all the testing of every single device to guarantee there was wasn't any interference. We also use to not sail far into the oceans because we believed we would fall off the side of the world. Things change.
I vote for smoking back on the plane too...
Of course I'm not asking for freely smoke at the seat... maybe a confined and contained smoking room is much better than craving 17hrs on a transpacific flight.
The people claiming it is unsafe have the duty to prove their claim. The *vast* body of current evidence is to the contrary. The millions of documented flights every day where a wide array of devices have been active and have *NOT* caused any issues is more than sufficient to shift the burden of proof from "we don't know, so err on the side of caution" to "provide reasonable evidence that there's a risk".
Nope. It's to ensure the passengers read $ky Mall and see the ads in the airlines' crummy magazines. (Bill, head of sanitation at the Dallas hub, just passed the current record of air-toilets emptied--all while learning to speak Japanese at night. Yay.)
Michael
Complete and utter nonsense. I work with the calibration of the most sensitive magnetometers you can buy at any price. We notice when the train yard half a mile away moves a car. Yet there are typically 3-4 active cell phones in the room during any given step in our operation. The effect falls off so rapidly that it is a total non-issue unless the phone is sitting ON the magnetometer.At that point who can tell if it's the mass of the phone or the EMI?
I believe you, but I also believe what I saw firsthand. Clearly, there are multiple facets to the issue.
If the risk is *already* immeasurably small, it's probably not worth 'mitigating'.
In the hundreds of millions of flights since the advent of consumer electronics, not a single airline accident has been caused by interference from consumer electronics. So, right now, the measured odds you're concerned about 'mitigating' is already significantly *less* than 1/100,000,000 if you measure by flight, and in all likelihood less than 1/10,000,000,000 if you measure by consumer electronics device.
You're more likely to lose a plane full of passengers to a bit of debris on the runway than to consumer electronics.
If you get the "pleasure" to hear that it is only because the passengers have been waiting so long that there is fear of mutiny. So, the captain--presumably after getting approval--throws out that bone to keep the cargo calm.
Michael
Fine...I think you can live at most an hour without your electronic device. Read a book, a crossword, heck draw... do what people did before they played snake
Of course. In a technical sense is it possible for interference to occur? No doubt.
The practical argument is that the real effect is so small that it isn't worth pursuing any further at this point. You can never eliminate every risk, and right now, while the airline industry is astoundingly safe, there are other issues they would be better served to focus their attention on.
Yep. And I've sat at a gate and listened to much the same announcement (and you better listen, because they'll know) before the plane took off. Guess what. At *least* 3 people still had their phones on, including the guy behind me with a window seat who *answered* his phone during takeoff.
The announcement and wait is a bit of psychology they use to get people to self-enforce a rule that serves the purpose of preventing something with no documented effect.
----------
Cell phones are radios. Radios, including those much more powerful than cellphones, have been around for *much* longer than any airframe in current commercial use.
But given EMI is a 100% proven risk on aircraft, simple methods to minimize that risk is prudent given the insignificant amount of work it takes to do it.
Well first off it was an older plane. I learned later that the plane had one of its antenna wires running down the back of a plane. The shielding might of been damage so it was causing the famous GSM buzz in it for him. Simple as that.
But you are so entitled keep your phone on for those few minutes.
Cell phones are not relevant to the discussion. No one proposes to allow cell phones to be other than in Airplane mode. No one proposes to allow radio transmitters (other than those permitted by FCC Part 15) to operate at any phase of aircraft flight.
FCC Part 15 electronic devices are what we're discussing here. And, yes, those have been around longer than any airframe in commercial use as well.
Don't forget to multiple that risk by the 25,000,000,000 processor hours incurred per fleet each year. Given that EMI has been shown (with certainty), to be a real risk it is prudent to minimize that risk especially if the risk mitigation is basically free and very very simple. And yes, I have seen some data suggesting a full cabin is more susceptible to small processor glitches (as in failsafes) than an empty cabin. This may (or may not) be a result of PED.
Fine...I think you can live at most an hour without your electronic device. Read a book, a crossword, heck draw... do what people did before they played snake
I can live without a lot of things. Given pleasant weather I can live without clothing. What relevance is there at all to what one *can* live without when there is *no reason* that they should be so deprived?
This. Beyond that, however, there's no reason airplane mode shouldn't be sufficient for cell phones and tablets.
And don't get me started on having to "turn off" my Kindle.
----------
It's not about importance, it's about entertainment. Why can't I continue playing a game and be left alone when there is zero chance that doing so endangers anyone or anything?
If cell phones on planes were remotely dangerous, they'd be outright banned. Just like "bottles of water" and everything else that poses even the slightest threat.
----------
I intentionally never turn my phone or tablet off. Ever. Mostly (if I remember) put it on airplane mode. And I fly 2-4x per month.
That's just BS. Air Force and Army definitely have a lot of electronics that may cause tons of problems for your aircraft. Now, perhaps your iPhone 4 will not do that. Unfortunately you can't allow fliers to use iPhone 4 but not any other devices (who is going to check what exactly they use?).
That is my point, I would expect that most planes take off with handsets on, and these planes aren't going down.
So why do we need this mobile devices off rule at all?
"Off course" and "falling out of the sky" are not even remotely the same things.
Anyway, my response to the post was to point out that RF interference doesn't have to result in airplanes "falling out of the sky" for it to be a problem. This was a perfect example of a reduction to the absurd argument.
Yes, exactly -- that was my point. The problem being mitigated by the current rules on portable electronics usage has nothing to do with airplanes falling from the sky. Anything that can interfere with safety of flight is a serious issue. But in every thread I've ever seen on this subject several if not lots of people go straight for the ridiculous "proof" that if their iPhone has never caused an airplane to burst into flames, then it could not possibly be causing any safety of flight problems. Reductio ad absurdum.
Fine...I think you can live at most an hour without your electronic device. Read a book, a crossword, heck draw... do what people did before they played snake
My electronic device (ie. Kindle App on ipad or a Kindle device itself) is MY book. In fact, it carries hundreds of books, weighing far less and taking up far less room than individual physical books. It also can include crosswords, puzzles and drawing applications.
So what is your point?
