Airline Industry Remains Divided Over Personal Electronics Usage During Takeoff and Landing

[TC03]

How many people do really turn off their devices? I think it's not an abnormal assumption that on every flight with 100+ passengers, at least one mobile phone is turned on while still in someones bag or pocket.

If it really was a problem, we would be forced to hand in our phones during take-off and landing.

If you were looking for incidents and causes, I think you can find a correlation for everything. Like the number of people wearing red shoes and the average compass deviation or whatever.

 

[zhenya]

My degree is in computer engineering, but I have both amateur radio and pilot licenses. And, I concur. If you don't think your phone or laptop can interfere with avionics, you aren't qualified to make an assessment. There are some laws of physics that you can't change.

The possibility is rare, which makes it difficult to measure. But, it is a real possibility. And while pilots are trained to recognize avionics problems and switch to a backup, a failure at an inopportune moment can contribute to a cascade of problems that leads to an incident.

At what point is the risk acceptable? We know right now that it is less at 1 in 250 million or so. That's 0.000000004% if there were even 1 incident to draw from. Your chance of dying in a car crash in the US in any given year is approximately 0.00014, or approximately 35,000 times that of an airplane being affected by an electronics device (if there had been even 1 incident in 250 million flights, which there hasn't). Presumably you get in a car every day though, no?

 

[NoNothing]

Well...please provide solid evidence that you know that it does cause interference. Just because you have a degree in EE and have a pilot's license...it doesn't mean you are an expert in EMI and shielding for avionic equipment.

I also have a degree in EE and do have a clue of what I am talking about and my experience is that many people turn their screens off their devices, but do not actually turn them off. So far, I don't have any evidence that this has any impact on the avionic equipment.

Also, I would point out that while that has been my experience, it does not make me an expert and does not provide any hard data for either side of the argument.

My degree is in EE but I have been doing low-level software design for 30+ years and actually do "software engineering". I specifically, for the past decade, have been working on issues that go bump in the night on flight avionics ranging from timing, cosmic ray induced SEU and EMI interference. I do consider my-self very well versed in this specific area but perhaps not an "expert".

We have seen trends of slightly more incident reports with a full cabin when compared to an empty cabin on some sub-systems. Now this is all taken from the stand-point of looking at incident reports from fleets of 100's of planes each with 1,000's of processors running for 1,000's of hours per year. 10's of billions of processor run hours per year.

 

[baryon]

It's crazy how they just can't figure out the effect of one man-made object on another, despite detailed studies and the well-known properties of electro-magnetism and electricity.

The small current in a portable device generates a small magnetic field, I highly doubt that this field would overpower the Earth's natural magnetic field. Unless of course the iPhone wasn't in Airplane mode, which would mean it could still send strong signals (the ones that can easily interfere with amplifiers and antennas).

Also, even though they tell you to turn off your phone, with smartphones, people just tend to put them to sleep, making it look like it's off but as we know does not turn them off at all. If this was such a big deal flight attendants would long have had to confiscate all electronic devices and place them in a radiation proof safe made of lead or something.

 

[handsome pete]

No we don't. Your premise is that he anecdotal evidence of the lack of effect is proof, which it is not. Negates the rest of your argument.

Millions of flights with electronic devices left on is not anecdotal.

 

[BvizioN]

Would it be effectively the same thing if you turn off Wi-Fi and cellular data? I would imagine that those signals have potential for interference; but if they're off, I don't see why you can't leave the iPhone and iPad on; just wondering.

The Airplane mode is meant to do just that. To stop any outgoing/incoming signals/radio waves that usually interfear with other digital equipmetns. Personally i don't see how a point to shoot camera for example (digital equipment) would interfear with other equipments but do be honest am not bothered to sqich everything OFF during take off or landing.

 

[smithrh]

The posts here show that engineers, unfortunately, either aren't taught the scientific method, or have forgotten it.

Put another way, engineers (and pilots) aren't scientists.

Isolated data points are worthless.

The ONLY path to end these arguments is scientific experiment.

 

[John.B]

I don't see why people make such a big fuss over being temporarily unable to use their devices...you have the rest of the flight to use them.

People object because it seems to be based solely on junk science and anecdotal evidence.

 

[mytdave]

try honesty

Electronic devices, even malfunctioning ones, have never caused a plane crash, and likely never will.

It's simple. Those that actually know something about electrical engineering, know that any electronic device can cause EMI, but also know that aircraft are shielded to reject such interference.

Airlines are now replacing books with iPads in the cockpit. It should now be obvious to even the most lay person, that electronic devices are not a problem.

It's time for honesty. The real reasons they want you to stow your devices at take-off and landing, and not use cellular service at any time, are:

1. In an emergency situation, loose articles can become projectiles, or simply be an obstruction.

2. They want you to pay attention to flight attendant announcements.

3. The cellular companies don't want you to use cell service while in the air because it causes switching problems with their cell towers.

FAA/Airlines - tell the truth. You'll get much better 'mileage', cooperation, and credibility when you just tell it like it is and stop blaming interference.

 

[zhenya]

No accidents but 1,000's to 10,000's of incidents. Two different things. On one system, we still had cell-phones on the fish-bone as the most probable cause when the investigation was post-pined waiting for more data.

This is the problem with people that know nothing about probability and statistics and safety imagining they do.

Your first sentence does not lead to the other. Incidents are one thing. That said, am I particularly concerned if we can trace an incident of a bad sensor reading to an electronics device? Not really, because the statistics show that in the aggregate, the chance of there being an issue serious enough to cause an accident is so small as to be negligible. I'm far more likely to choke to death on tonight's dinner.

 

[Antares]

I can understand banning the use of cell phones or other devices with an active cellular connection during takeoff and landing since they are essentially a “powerful” transmitting and receiving device. Really, any device that would have active transmissions taking place. However, all other electronic devices should not be banned from use…i.e. cameras, iPods, laptops, iPads, etc. should be fully allowed. This includes cell phones which have their cellular function disabled. Such low power devices would be very unlikely to passively emit enough EM radiation to cause any actual interference

 

[fivedots]

Different issue. No one cares about making phone calls during take-off. The issue is reading an electronic book, newspaper or other such material. Or perhaps playing a game against the computer to pass the time.

Hence why I started my comment with "unrelated".

I agree that at the very least anything that isn't transmitting a signal should be fine to use at any point. I find it especially odd that they request that you fully turn off phones and not use airplane mode as well.

Bottom line, if this was a legitimate safety issue, they would require all electronic devices to be in checked baggage or held back at security. You can't take liquids or sharp things but you can take a potentially interfering electronic device that no one verifies is actually off? Sure. Makes sense.

 

[AppleDude]

The True Menaces to Society

ABSOLUTELY!!!!

People who bring young kids on flights are the most selfish obnoxious people around.

How selfish of a dad to bring his kid to a hospital in another state to get the specialty care needed for his unique heart defects.

How selfish of the parents to bring their kids with them when they relocate for a better job/location.

How selfish of Mom to bring her kids with her when she goes to take care of business after "nanna" passes away.

How selfish of dad to bring his kids to meet their extended family.

In fact, forget cell phones in planes--these parents are the true menaces to society!

 

[zhenya]

The posts here show that engineers, unfortunately, either aren't taught the scientific method, or have forgotten it.

Put another way, engineers (and pilots) aren't scientists.

Isolated data points are worthless.

The ONLY path to end these arguments is scientific experiment.

And there are plenty of scientists who are so involved in the laboratory that they forget there is a real world where experiments can be carried out on a scale that they can never fathom.

That's where scientists and engineers diverge; scientists will say 'yes, this is physically possible'. An engineer will take that info and say, ok, but in the real world there has never been a known issue from that phenomenon, and we have work to do, so let's get moving!

 

[spacehog371]

I have sat at a gate when before and had the pilot come on the intercom and say "Will the jackass who has not turned off their cell turn it off. This plane will not move until then"

Yeah, I'm sure that happened.

Cell phones cause interference... what I meant was that it caused interference with the plane.

As I already said... On every single flight, there will be numerous passengers who have not turned off their phone or other electronic devices. Despite this, there has never been a single recorded incident where a cell phone has caused an issue. No, anecdotal evidence from a flight attendant isn't credible.

 

[iisdan]

Why is this a decision? If it ****s with ****, turn it off, if it doesn't then let them keep their **** on. If you dont have proof, then **** and let them keep their **** on until you can prove it.

 

[notjustjay]

And there are plenty of scientists who are so involved in the laboratory that they forget there is a real world where experiments can be carried out on a scale that they can never fathom.

That's where scientists and engineers diverge; scientists will say 'yes, this is physically possible'. An engineer will take that info and say, ok, but in the real world there has never been a known issue from that phenomenon, and we have work to do, so let's get moving!

Agreed. I predict the results will be: Yes, the risk exists. No, it is is so impossibly low that it shouldn't ever be an issue in the real world today.

 

[nsayer]

Let me make this easier for you to understand. Cars don't fall out of the sky and kill 100+ people when something goes wrong.

No. Instead they crash into each other killing 1-4 people dozens of thousands of times per year with the result that 3000 more people die per passenger mile than in the air.

 

[Arcus]

I think that many people think they are in compliance if they put their iPhones into airplane mode,.

Are you trying to say that this is not compliant?

 

[Mr_Ed]

My reading material is electronic (via Kindle app on iPad). I'm entitled to read it that way and not have to buy a physical book.

And you can't stop reading for the 10-15 minutes it takes for the plane to take off and reach cruising altitude? C'mon . . . .

 

[glutenenvy]

The real question is, "Why do we continue to fly in equipment so old and so electronically unshielded some pilots think a smartphone could take it out?"

Counter question, "Why do we fly with pilots afraid of smartphones and other electronics?"

It is absurd to have a no electronics on rule and have no way for the flight crew to enforce this rule. I've heard a phone ringing during takeoff on my last trip and we didn't blow up. It could just be coincidental or by using rules based out of fear government is using its citizens to help create and maintain a nanny-state. Enough people don't understand or want to understand electronics enough that they let what they believe to be true to be dictated by government officials or other authority figures.

There is more of a window of opportunity to hack into a plane using its customer wifi. I would like to know all customer wifi systems are on a completely separate network and network hardware than the network used for any of the plane equipment and pilot iPads. I suspect that given human error, carrier budget and government regulation, many network areas will be shared causing room for concern. This is in addition to the security concern of the near realtime communication that wifi on a plane presents.

TSA monies can be better spent on monitoring and blocking communications while on a moving plane than paying somebody to grope your grandparents, children, and disabled people. Yes a fake leg could blow up a plane but to make it movie plot ready, it needs the in-air wifi connection so it could be done from the ground. TSA people are very likely not qualified to determine if electronics in a bionic leg are genuine or have been hacked into another purpose.

The question to ask yourself is not, "Do ya feel lucky? Well do ya?", but "What is this particular thing/rule/agency designed to do or control socially or monetarily?" Identify money/power/fear and work backwards.

 

[John.B]

When going on vacation, leave your smartphone at home.

For starters, my smartphone allows me to text my teenaged kid who's seemly always off doing his own thing, it's also my camera, it's the GPS navigation system for my rental car, it plays videos and music (Bluetooth car audio FTW!), it lets me track weather radar, and it holds all my reservation information for the trip. Oh, and it's a cellphone. Why on God's green Earth would I want to go on vacation without it?

 

[JAT]

Pretty cavalier attitude with the lives of 100+ people who aren't you, wouldn't you say? Personally, I'm not OK with the schmuck in 10D making a decision that could end my life.

What I would like to see is an exhaustive, controlled, scientific study of the potential effects, instead of relying on anecdotal evidence. And until they are 100% certain that electronic devices can't interfere, leave things as they are.

"Exhaustive" is not a scientific term, it is a subjective term, which makes it convenient for you, you can claim in perpetuity that nothing is adequate. Here is reporting on studies by the mfgr, on specific devices claimed by pilots to have caused problems. The scientific studies proved these devices did not cause problems. Boeing recommends turning off, anyway, which was a fear-based decision.

----------

And you can't stop reading for the 10-15 minutes it takes for the plane to take off and reach cruising altitude? C'mon . . . .

As we post every single time this discussion arises....

That is the best time to be distracted for most people, when they will be most nervous. Reading is a good distraction for a flight.

 

[NoNothing]

Your first sentence does not lead to the other. Incidents are one thing. That said, am I particularly concerned if we can trace an incident of a bad sensor reading to an electronics device? Not really, because the statistics show that in the aggregate, the chance of there being an issue serious enough to cause an accident is so small as to be negligible. I'm far more likely to choke to death on tonight's dinner.

You do understand the difference between and accident and an incident I assume? If you can't link the first and second sentences I don't think you see the distinction.

They are radically different things. Yes there are redundancies built in to the systems with highly critical systems having backups to the backups to the backups. When you choke to death, you choke to death and people across the nation will not hear it on the news (unless you are Larry Page or a Tim Cook or Tom Cruise type). When a major sub-system fails (be it mechanical, software or electrical) you can have 100's of people die and it ends up on the nightly news over an entire nation.

As a result, the industry is highly conservative and is very risk adverse. As someone that flies, this makes me feel good when I travel. I also sleep better at night knowing when designs I have done have been tested out the ying-yang and are safe and people actually worry about a single crashed processor even if the EXACT cause is never traced down.

The standards we use for incidents is between 10^-9/hour to 10^-12/hour depending on the system and criticality. A full fleet of 1,000 aircraft will log between 100^9 to 1,000^9 processor flight hours per year since a given aircraft can have 1,000's of processors. The statistics, in the aggregate, makes even unlikely events more likely than we would like.

 

[kiantech]

As a pilot with a degree in electrical engineering, I shall sit back and enjoy the proclamations of "There's no way an electronic device could interfere with navigation systems onboard an aircraft" made by people who have no clue what they are talking about....

I have a degree in electrical engineering and I don't see why there would be interference. All of the components have tighter specs and are shielded up the wazoo.

Second, if everyone puts their phone on airplane mode then all the radios are disabled, no problem. Airlines provide wifi now, people connect with their mobile devices, I guarantee you 5 years ago having wifi on would have been against the rules.

Also you think will the millions of people who fly everyday around the world 100% all remember to turn their phone off? That is something impossible for humankind to achieve, and yet there has been 0 incidents where a cell phone took down a commercial plane.

I think people should not look at their devices while landing / taking off, however, when the flight attendant has a power trip telling people the phone must be off, and airplane mode is not enough, that's what annoys me.