FAA Advisory Committee Recommends Relaxation of Electronic Device Restrictions on Commercial Aircraft

[zhenya]

No mention in that news report what was used to keep the plane on course. Magnetic compass or otherwise. It could be other systems could be affected, such as GPS ect. The device effected does not necessarily has to be located close to it. It could be the wiring going to that device that runs close to the cell phone itself.



Often it can't be confirmed. As soon as the plane lands the passengers leave taking their cell phones with them. That particular make and model cell phone that effecting the avionics can't be tested in that particular model of plane. By then its too late. but it does not mean it did not happen.



Which also contradicts what's been reported by pilots & flight attendants in the ASRS database.

So now a gps, an electronic device, might be interfered with by the very electronics they are housed in. Brilliant.

Again, a few reports with minimal or no proof compared with billions of flight hours with no incidents. You got me.

 

[kdarling]

Let me ask you a simple question. What does a compass measure?

You actually think that a DVD player or cell phone can affect the earth's field enough to sway a compass by 30 degrees?
...
Your quote from the pilot is just someone ignorant about basic magnetics inferring something he knows nothing about from a 'feeling'.

Sigh. "Ignorance" is making comments about things that are clearly way outside your knowledge or experience.

Even a simple charter jet uses an HSI (Horizontal Situation Indicator - "compass" to you) slaved remotely to a gyro and a flux compass over wires.

An airliner will be using that or a FMS (Flight Management System) that takes info from the VOR/DME radios, Inertial Reference System (if it has one) and/or GPS receiver (if it has one). The FMS controls the autopilot. TCAS receivers in the tail give collision alerts.

All of this is wired together and susceptible to interference. For example, here's an example of a false TCAS alert (RA - Resolution Advisory) while taking off.

As noted by the shaken pilots, this is dangerous, because a plane is at risk trying to keep its rate of climb-out. And just imagine if the command had been to "descend" back into the airport environment instead.

Situation:

FLT XXX, A B737-800 ZZZ-ZZZ1. AFTER TAKEOFF NEAR MAX GROSS WT, PRIOR TO FLAP RETRACTION RECEIVED A RESOLUTION ADVISORY 'MAINTAIN VERTICAL SPEED' WITH RED AREA NOT TO DECREASE TO 1500 FPM OR LESS RATE OF CLIMB.

Narrative:

DELAYED THRUST REDUCTION AND FLAP RETRACTION TO COMPLY WITH RA AND SCANNED FOR TRAFFIC. TCAS INDICATED A CO-ALTITUDE TARGET (RED CIRCLE) LESS THAN .01 BEHIND US. THIS OCCURRED AT 1000 FT MSL, AND CLEARED UP APPROX 30 SECONDS LATER.

SECOND RA OCCURRED NEAR 12000 FT MSL. SAME TARGET INDICATION, A RED CIRCLE CO-ALT LESS THAN .01 BEHIND US. NOW THE RA ADVISED 'DESCEND, DESCEND, DESCEND.' WE STARTED THE DESCENT, ADVISING ATC OF THE RA AND SCANNING FOR TFC. ATC ADVISED US THERE WAS NOTHING IN OUR VICINITY, AND TCAS WAS CLEAN OF TARGETS FOR NEARLY 10 MILES.

BEGAN TO SUSPECT EMI FROM CABIN. STARTED TO CLIMB AGAIN -- IGNORING THE TCAS RA COMMANDS. THE BOX WAS QUIET. RECYCLED THE TRANSPONDER POWER. AT 14000 FT, WE GOT A THIRD TCAS RA. SAME DISPLAY AND DESCEND CALLOUTS. WE IGNORED THEM.

CALLED CABIN FOR A CHK OF EQUIP THAT MAY HAVE CAUSED INTERFERENCE. FOUND PAX SEATED IN FIRST CLASS WITH LAPTOP ON. MODEL HP 6220 WITH WIRELESS FUNCTION ENABLED.. ONCE HE DISABLED THE WIRELESS FUNCTION, ALL OK.

IS THE TCAS ANTENNA CABLE SHIELDED FROM INTERNAL (CABIN COMPUTERS) EMI? I HAVE NOT SEEN AN EVENT LIKE THIS BEFORE.

WHAT MAKES IT HAZARDOUS -- IS THE RATE OF CLIMB AT DEPARTURE, PRIOR TO ACCELERATION AND FLAP RETRACTION AND THE 1500 FPM OR GREATER RATE OF CLIMB. (TRANSCONTINENTAL FLIGHT NEAR MAX TAKEOFF WT.)

WITH THE PROLIFERATION OF WIRELESS COMPUTERS, I AM SURE WE WILL BE SEEING THIS MORE OFTEN.

There are more reports like this in the NASA databases. You constantly read in the news about planes coming too close together, but there is plenty that is not publicized. Also, most pilots will just repeat their transmissions instead of filing a report about GSM buzz etc.

You say there are no "incidents". Of course there are. You just don't hear about them, because the pilots were able to work around the problems (so far).

 

[linuxcooldude]

So now a gps, an electronic device, might be interfered with by the very electronics they are housed in. Brilliant.

Again, a few reports with minimal or no proof compared with billions of flight hours with no incidents. You got me.

Not sure what you're talking about, but since most planes are shielded now they have to run wires outside the plane to get a signal for various devices. These wires may run along the inside the plane might be close enough to the passengers who are running their mobile devices.

I would not say "No incidents" Some incidents have been verified as the source of the problem.

 

[Berserker-UK]

the Polycom seems to be really susceptible.

... and not necessarily just to RFI, if my experience with them is anything to go by, but that's completely off-topic.

But all this discussion is about cellphone interference, which is irrelevant since the FAA isn't planning on allowing them.

How on earth the crew are going to enforce that distinction is another matter. Are they going to be required to inspect everyone's phones to check they're in Airplane Mode? No matter the number of times people are told, someone almost always forgets to do it.

 

[donutbagel]

Yes, cellular signals *can* interfere with speakers or microphones...

...*IF* they are within a few inches of an unshielded speaker or microphone wire. So, any phone interfering with the crews headsets is going to have to be *inside* the cockpit.

It's been happening to me with iPhones that are simply in the room, not even that close.

----------

It can be WAY longer than 5 minutes, depending on how busy the airport is. You can sit on the tarmac for 45 minutes or longer waiting to take off. So from the push back from the gate to 10,000 feet could easily be over an hour.

Reading on my ipad via my kindle app or on my kindle itself should be allowed during that time.

Whenever I'm on a flight, they only make passengers turn off their devices before they're actually going to go for takeoff (not the waiting period on the tarmac), unless I'm forgetting something.

 

[IJ Reilly]

You say there are no "incidents". Of course there are. You just don't hear about them, because the pilots were able to work around the problems (so far).

FYI, an "incident" is a specific term of art for the FAA and NTSB. It includes a lot of what everyone else might call an "accident," but it's still an "incident" officially if it doesn't result in "substantial damage" to the aircraft, death, or injuries.

 

[hexcalibur]

Common sense should tell you that if cell phones actually posed a threat to the electronics on a passenger plane, powering them down would NOT be left to the discretion of the passengers. It's a CYA policy, nothing more.

On my last flight (United - belch) the flight attendant said all devices had to be powered down. Airplane mode wasn't enough. As usual, I left my phone and iPad on -- BECAUSE IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE SAFE OPERATION OF THE PLANE.

It's the same security theatre crap that says you can't bring a 300 ml bottle of liquid through security, but you CAN bring 4 100 ml bottles of liquid...and an empty 500 ml nalgene bottle. Yes, no way a potential terrorist is going to spot THAT loophole.

I feel for the flight attendants, trying to get our attention for their potentially life-saving instructions, but they shouldn't raise false safety concerns to do so. Your 8oz Kindle has to be powered off and stowed, but that guy's 3 lb hardback copy of Infinite Jest isn't a potential hazard if things go pear-shaped at take-off? Where is the logic in that?

Happy to hear that a smidge of sanity might return to air travel. Anyone know when they'll let me keep my freaking shoes on at the security gate?

... and not necessarily just to RFI, if my experience with them is anything to go by, but that's completely off-topic.

But all this discussion is about cellphone interference, which is irrelevant since the FAA isn't planning on allowing them.

How on earth the crew are going to enforce that distinction is another matter. Are they going to be required to inspect everyone's phones to check they're in Airplane Mode? No matter the number of times people are told, someone almost always forgets to do it.

 

[ptb42]

How on earth the crew are going to enforce that distinction is another matter. Are they going to be required to inspect everyone's phones to check they're in Airplane Mode? No matter the number of times people are told, someone almost always forgets to do it.

That's a good question. As I noted earlier, I see lots of people that diligently turn off their cellphone during take off, then turn it back on during cruise -- and don't enable airplane mode.

If you really want to be amused, turn on your iPhone, iPad, or laptop when at cruising altitude, then enable your WiFi connection and look at all the available connections. I almost always see various WiFi hotspot devices. They contain substrings like "MiFi" and "JetPack". I also see something like "John's iPhone" a lot.

 

[IJ Reilly]

I feel for the flight attendants, trying to get our attention for their potentially life-saving instructions, but they shouldn't raise false safety concerns to do so. Your 8oz Kindle has to be powered off and stowed, but that guy's 3 lb hardback copy of Infinite Jest isn't a potential hazard if things go pear-shaped at take-off? Where is the logic in that?

Granted there's a lot of inconsistencies in the cabin rules, but I've never seen this one. I've never been asked to stow my iPad. I'm sure on most airlines you'd be more than welcome to leave it on your lap. I've done that on Delta, Alitalia, and Air France flights recently, and nobody seemed to be concerned.

 

[Berserker-UK]

If you really want to be amused, turn on your iPhone, iPad, or laptop when at cruising altitude, then enable your WiFi connection and look at all the available connections. I almost always see various WiFi hotspot devices. They contain substrings like "MiFi" and "JetPack". I also see something like "John's iPhone" a lot.

Turn on Bluetooth and I'm sure you'd get the same, though over shorter range. I can just imagine the announcement though - "This is the Captain speaking, would John kindly turn off their iPhone" - then you want to see if anyone responds!

To make matters even worse, wi-fi is becoming more common on aircraft now. I wonder how many people turn off airplane mode to use it!

 

[caesarp]

Common sense should tell you that if cell phones actually posed a threat to the electronics on a passenger plane, powering them down would NOT be left to the discretion of the passengers. It's a CYA policy, nothing more.

On my last flight (United - belch) the flight attendant said all devices had to be powered down. Airplane mode wasn't enough. As usual, I left my phone and iPad on -- BECAUSE IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE SAFE OPERATION OF THE PLANE.

It's the same security theatre crap that says you can't bring a 300 ml bottle of liquid through security, but you CAN bring 4 100 ml bottles of liquid...and an empty 500 ml nalgene bottle. Yes, no way a potential terrorist is going to spot THAT loophole.

I feel for the flight attendants, trying to get our attention for their potentially life-saving instructions, but they shouldn't raise false safety concerns to do so. Your 8oz Kindle has to be powered off and stowed, but that guy's 3 lb hardback copy of Infinite Jest isn't a potential hazard if things go pear-shaped at take-off? Where is the logic in that?

Happy to hear that a smidge of sanity might return to air travel. Anyone know when they'll let me keep my freaking shoes on at the security gate?

Common sense is not relevant anymore. Our world is run by fear.

Oh no, you have a million to one chance of dying in a terrorist attack. So let's have security theater, NSA domestic surveillance, endless wars and only clear bags mind you at nfl games.

Oh no, a criminal may attack me. Let's not have any gun control at all.

Oh no, an imaginary man disapproves, let's not allow gay marriage.

Oh no, I might get in trouble in the after life (that may be real) so I better follow these Bronze Age rules.

Oh no, there's a billion to one chance my ipad will effect avionics. So let's have unenforceable rules banning their use on takeoff and landings.

Oh no .....

We'll you get the point. Fear rules us. Particularly americans. Home of the brave (not). All you need do is raise a fear and the masses will obey.

 

[flat five]

To make matters even worse, wi-fi is becoming more common on aircraft now. I wonder how many people turn off airplane mode to use it!

you can use wifi (and bluetooth) while in airplane mode (on an iphone at least)..

switch to airplane mode which disables everything but then you can individually turn wifi and/or bluetooth back on..

regardless, there's no rule now that a phone has to be in airplane mode when using it during flight.. the 10000' chime dings then the announcement 'feel free to use your devices now' (or whatever).. there's never "feel free to use your devices now but they need to be in airplane mode".. you're free to use them with the same settings as you have them on the ground.. searching for cell signals etc if you wish.. (although there is an FCC (not FAA) rule stating cellular phone use is not allowed while flying on a plane-- due to something like the speed of the plane is too fast for tower switching? not really sure)

 

[flat five]

There's a pretty severe inversion error in these arguments-- I'm knowingly accepting while you're blindly rejecting.

Ignorance, even in the grand service of throwing off the yoke of the nanny state, remains ignorance.

well, at least you downshifted to calling it ignorance instead of sociopathic behavior.. that's a decent start.

but even then.. is it really ignorance? are people in this thread with opposing views as yours saying or implying things like "i want to use my phone therefore i'll use it whenever i damn well please!! i don't care what the facts or history or rules are!!".. or, are they all giving reasoning other than that?

just to (once again) point out some of the things on the side of people wanting relaxed rules in this scenario:

--there is no (zero) occurrence of a plane's passenger causing the death/injury/etc of another passenger due to them having a phone on. (this pretty much cancels your whole stance of me putting you in harms way if i don't power down my phone during takeoff/landing)

--Delta stated they received 27 reports of possible device interference in 2,300,000 flights.. none of which were confirmed (that is .001% of flights had a report of possible interference and zero of these were proven to be factual)

-- the FAA has conducted many very specific and detailed tests with devices and planes.. tests such as taking each specific device (ipad1, 2, 3, etc) onto an otherwise empty plane (and various planes at that- 727,737,747,etc) and have found no adverse results.. the same people that did those (i assume incredibly expensive and drawn out/scrupulous/specific) tests are now recommending passengers should be able to use their devices during all phases of flight

-- amazon has conducted their own tests in which they fill a plane with powered up kindles.. no harmful effects were found

-- millions of everyday people have personally experienced what happens when they themselves have a powered up device during takeoff/landing. nothing.. many inadvertently and many by choice (and yes, this is probably the only part which can be pointed out as straight-up ignorance-- or at least the first year or two worth of people that did it)

-- the entire flight crew is and have been allowed to use devices during all stages of flight.. these people are either sitting in the cockpit or nearer the cockpit than any of the passengers

-------------------

i honestly feel there is overwhelming evidence saying devices on planes are safe.. to ignore all of the above and just start calling people ignorant sociopaths because (i don't know why exactly) comes across to me as ignorant..


sort of the same applies to many of the 'experts' in this thread.. i mean, if you really do know what you're talking about and think you know more than the people that are specifically testing this stuff and coming up with results different than yours than you need to speak up.. and not to some random people on the internets.. you need to be talking to the people making the decisions and pointing out their flawed testing methods or how their results are somehow being misinterpreted-- because that's what your arguments are saying.. they aren't saying that i'm wrong (well they are-- but that's not what's important here)rather your arguments are saying that the experts and/or people whose entire careers are based very specifically around this exact topic-- the people who are actually capable of putting many lives in danger (ie- my 'arguments' have no say in this) -- are wrong
you see?

 

[PracticalMac]

I always thought these restrictions were nonsense, ESPECIALLY the one where I can't have a radio that's receiving FM signals (not even sending!), but what's so wrong with having the rules? People can't stop using their stuff for like 5 minutes?

All electronic devices produce radio noise, but yes, it is somewhat weak and mostly contained in the case of the device.

I guess it was expanded to all devices because stewards did not know if it transmitted radio freq or not.

 

[kdarling]

FYI, an "incident" is a specific term of art for the FAA and NTSB. It includes a lot of what everyone else might call an "accident," but it's still an "incident" officially if it doesn't result in "substantial damage" to the aircraft, death, or injuries.

Yes, I know. When I was learning to fly, I spent a lot of time reading NTSB reports related to small planes, hoping to glean some insight into what situations to avoid.

One interesting side item I noticed in the narratives, was that pilots who had made forced landings which came to an abrupt halt in something like a dirt field or ditch, often reported how painful it was when their headsets flew forward off their ears. This made me mentally add "remove headset" as the last item in my real emergency landing checklist

 

[flat five]

How on earth the crew are going to enforce that distinction is another matter. Are they going to be required to inspect everyone's phones to check they're in Airplane Mode? No matter the number of times people are told, someone almost always forgets to do it.

they aren't going to enforce it.. they're either going to conclude in their tests that flying on planes with devices in standard modes is safe and acceptable -or- they're going to find a true danger in this and ban devices entirely from flights..

there are millions upon millions of people flying these days and humans being humans will definitely forget to do things at times.. we all do it at some point.. there's no way they're going to place this type of risk in the hands of that many people and simply rely upon a bazillion humans to remember to put their phones in airplane mode.. and if someone happens to forget, the plane will crash..

if they do actually try to make a "ok, but only in airplane mode" rule.. this same crap is just going to keep repeating into the future..

 

[kdarling]

--Delta stated they received 27 reports of possible device interference in 2,300,000 flights.. none of which were confirmed (that is .001% of flights had a report of possible interference and zero of these were proven to be factual)

It's already been noted that it's essentially impossible to "prove" an in-flight problem, so that argument is meaningless.

As for low percentages, that's a red herring. For example, there's only been one major entertainment center fire on an airliner in many more millions of flights. But it killed hundreds when SwissAir flight 111 crashed into the Atlantic.

-- the FAA has conducted many very specific and detailed tests with devices and planes.. tests such as taking each specific device (ipad1, 2, 3, etc) onto an otherwise empty plane (and various planes at that- 727,737,747,etc) and have found no adverse results.. the same people that did those (i assume incredibly expensive and drawn out/scrupulous/specific) tests are now recommending passengers should be able to use their devices during all phases of flight

The FAA doesn't usually do its own tests. Link? Thanks.

-- amazon has conducted their own tests in which they fill a plane with powered up kindles.. no harmful effects were found

Good for Kindles, then.

-- millions of everyday people have personally experienced what happens when they themselves have a powered up device during takeoff/landing. nothing..

It doesn't matter what the passenger experiences. What matters is what the PILOTS experience.

-- the entire flight crew is and have been allowed to use devices during all stages of flight.. these people are either sitting in the cockpit or nearer the cockpit than any of the passengers

Those particular devices have been tested in the places where they will be used.

i honestly feel there is overwhelming evidence saying devices on planes are safe.. to ignore all of the above and just start calling people ignorant sociopaths because (i don't know why exactly) comes across to me as ignorant..

Non-pilots calling pilots ignorant for reporting such interference, is far worse logic.

 

[flat five]

You say there are no "incidents". Of course there are. You just don't hear about them, because the pilots were able to work around the problems (so far).

the report you posted, while not to be ignored, should (imo) have more to the story..

it can be read this way:
- pilots experience glitch
- 5 minutes later, they experience it again
- 2 minutes later, it happened again (for the last time)
- 5 minutes later, we asked a passenger to disable wifi and that stopped the problem

you see the glitch in there? there are way too many other possible factors which could of caused the problem and/or there's way too much leeway saying the laptop could have been a coincidence..

where is the follow up report stating "we asked the passenger to turn wifi back on and immediately experienced glitch again" (dumb idea, i know.. just sayin).. but more realistically, where is the follow up showing the results of a controlled test with an hp6220 in an airplane.. because if you think that test didn't happen after this incident then i think you're being a little shortsighted (that might be a bad choice of word? i'm not trying to offend you with it.. it's just that i'm no poet )

----------

It's already been noted that it's essentially impossible to "prove" an in-flight problem, so that argument is meaningless.

As for low percentages, that's a red herring. For example, there's only been one major entertainment center fire on an airliner in many more millions of flights. But it killed hundreds when SwissAir flight 111 crashed into the Atlantic.

well even then- 1 major fire which killed hundreds is a helluva lot different than 0 problems and 0 deaths.

The FAA doesn't usually do its own tests. Link? Thanks.

i think it may have been more like-- the FAA is requiring these tests as opposed to they themselves are conducting them.. either way, i'll find the link in a minute so you can see what i read.

Non-pilots calling pilots ignorant for reporting such interference, is far worse logic.

who or who isn't ignorant here is irrelevant. there is plenty of evidence on the side of the people arguing for relaxed rules.. i think even people arguing against them can see that ,yes, at least they have some ground to stand on and aren't completely off the mark here.. so it's (imo) more of a 'which side of the fence are you on' type of situation as opposed to any side being more ignorant / less logical than the other

----------


••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

The FAA doesn't usually do its own tests. Link? Thanks.

i think it may have been more like-- the FAA is requiring these tests as opposed to they themselves are conducting them.. either way, i'll find the link in a minute so you can see what i read.

here:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/disruptions-time-to-review-f-a-a-policy-on-gadgets/

it's a year and a half old and i assume we're now seeing some of the results of these 'fresh looks'.. those results being that an FAA advisory panel is recommending to the FAA to allow devices during all stages of flight

(i guess if the story is factual, the FAA are actually the ones doing the tests themselves)

 

[linuxcooldude]

Common sense is not relevant anymore. Our world is run by fear.

Oh no, you have a million to one chance of dying in a terrorist attack. So let's have security theater, NSA domestic surveillance, endless wars and only clear bags mind you at nfl games.

Oh no, a criminal may attack me. Let's not have any gun control at all.

Oh no, an imaginary man disapproves, let's not allow gay marriage.

Oh no, I might get in trouble in the after life (that may be real) so I better follow these Bronze Age rules.

Oh no, there's a billion to one chance my ipad will effect avionics. So let's have unenforceable rules banning their use on takeoff and landings.

Oh no .....

We'll you get the point. Fear rules us. Particularly americans. Home of the brave (not). All you need do is raise a fear and the masses will obey.

I see it differently: It's not a big deal if lifting the restrictions if it's an inconveniences to us. But when an airliner goes down due to this problem and its somebodies sister, brother or wife then its a big deal. Then people wonder why nothing was done about it. Then the bigwigs in Washingtons are scrambling to cover their butts.
Especially after some senators are pushing for the FAA to allow these consumer devices onboard and threaten to make legislation to bypass the FAA.

Its also a big liability for the airliners because they are ultimately responsible along with any possible lawsuits.

 

[DougiePhresh]

I fly fairly often and 75% of the time I am sitting next to some people I would rather not talk to, so I put my headphones in, listen to some music, and fall asleep before the cabin door is even closed. I almost always put my iPhone on Air Plane Mode, but there is that few and far between occasion when I land and my phone is buzzing because I forgot to switch Air Plane Mode on and it is receiving messages as soon as I get signal back, oops. Never has a plane I been on crashed, obviously; or even shown the slightest bit of trouble. I cannot be the only person who doesn't turn their phone off during take off and landing, can I? I know there are many many many others of us out there; and to date, I have heard of zero incidences of a plane crash because someone was playing Infinity Blade during landing. Like many before me have said, it is an egregiously outdated protocol and the government needs to step out of our lives; it can start with repealing this policy. Or at the very least, leave it up to the individual airline.

 

[Tech198]

Isn't this kind of bad when you think about it ?

I mean what good is Airplaine mode since Nokia and others do not cut of communications (you can still make emergency calls)..... this can cause interference therefore...

So, all in all, its not the best way, than just keeping your phone switched off, since you don't know, and i guess the manufacture could change how these settings operate at any time..

You may say "emergency calls" over-ride everything, but that would prohibit the intended goal here..

This FAA thing is about as as bad as saying "Wi-fi is causes health risk"

No proof of that either....Some people tried to prove that, and was dismissed by the courts as "Not enough evidence" ..... I reckon the same thing here with the FAA too..


Could be just hype.

 

[Max(IT)]

This thread is a very interesting example of human behavior on a forum ...

There are professional pilots and some competent chaps saying almost the same thing (use of electronic devices during critical phases like takeoff and landings DO involve some risks) but people with clearly no idea of what are they talking about still speak, and speak and speak .... over and over.

Last things I red about magnetic compass and how nearly impossible a problem during takeoff is (in my career I had at least three high speed rejected take offs) are just a prove that continue in this conversation is pointless.
Like someone of the "experts" said above "they don't have to believe me", no matter if this is our job and we are speaking about procedures we are applying every single day.

 

[ptb42]

This thread is a very interesting example of human behavior on a forum ...

Yeah, my favorite is the people that claim that since they have left their phone on (and not in airplane) mode when they fly, and nothing bad happened, it must be safe.

These are the same people that text while driving, and believe it is safe because they've never had an accident.

 

[kdarling]

(leaves on devices) Never has a plane I been on crashed, obviously; or even shown the slightest bit of trouble.

The point is that YOU will have no idea if your device caused a problem or a distraction to the pilots.

They're not going to tell the passengers that they missed a critical ATC call, or got distracted while trying to track down a goofy directional indicator, or had to make an unnecessary diversion because of a false collision alert.

That's information we only get from sources like the NASA reports.

i think it may have been more like-- the FAA is requiring these tests as opposed to they themselves are conducting them.. either way, i'll find the link in a minute so you can see what i read.

Now you have it correct. As your later link noted, the FAA did not do the massive testing that you earlier claimed.

The FAA itself does not test devices. They leave that up to the airlines, who simply do not have the money or spare aircraft to verify every device on the planet in every airplane in every location.

--

Btw, another common misconception is that "the FAA approved all iPads for use in the cockpit". No, the FAA does not generically approve consumer devices. Each airline has had to test their own installation and methodology in each of their aircraft types and models.

Interestingly, I ran across a post on an aviation forum from a pilot who was talking about his airline getting iPads approved.

He said it took over a year, and that they ran into problems with initial placement because the iPad was interfering with the compass indicator on one side.

They also had to get shielded tablet mounts because they were getting headphone buzz at times from the iPad's internal electronics.

--

who or who isn't ignorant here is irrelevant.

Distinguishing between reality and layman misconceptions is very relevant.

Just look at all the posts with incredibly incorrect electronic and flight claims.

Debate is good. It just has to start with facts, not myths.

This thread is a very interesting example of human behavior on a forum ...

There are professional pilots and some competent chaps saying almost the same thing (use of electronic devices during critical phases like takeoff and landings DO involve some risks) but people with clearly no idea of what are they talking about still speak, and speak and speak .... over and over.

+1

Every pilot knows that takeoff and landing are the most critical phases of flight.

In aviation, it is ALWAYS better to err on the side of safety.

As the saying goes, it's better to be on the ground wishing you were flying, that being in the air and wishing you were on the ground.

 

[flat five]

Now you have it correct. As your later link noted, the FAA did not do the massive testing that you earlier claimed.

The FAA itself does not test devices. They leave that up to the airlines, who simply do not have the money or spare aircraft to verify every device on the planet in every airplane in every location.

i guess i read the link different than you.. it says the FAA took the position of being much more involved in the tests by overseeing/organizing a collaborative effort between all involved parties as opposed to requiring each individual airline to perform the tests on each of the types of planes in their fleet.

you may also be missing the part about these test are actually being conducted. i don't have the actual numbers but i assume we're talking about hundreds of devices tested separately on hundreds of planes.

the official findings on these tests aren't publicly known yet but according to the OP, the panel overseeing the tests have proven it to be safe and think the current rules should be relaxed.


if i were to believe everything you say, at some point i'd have to conclude the FAA will knowingly be putting millions of lives in danger if they change their rules.. or that they've ignorantly done the same (i.e.- "we have very strict testing procedures/requirements in place but let's just drop those rules and no longer require these tests prior to letting people fly with devices").

you understand that you're indirectly saying one of the above, right?

i mean, what are you going to say if next year, you board a flight to albuquerque and realize people are allowed to use their devices during takeoff? are you going to be saying all the same stuff as you are today (i.e.- not board the plane) or will you have changed your tune by then?