I don't doubt that there have been instances of interference. There's inherent risk in flying anyway, because what goes up, might come crashing down.
I personally believe the rate of occurrence where it could cause a major issue falls within the zone of acceptable risk. And I believe the FAA is finally recognizing that, thank goodness.
An "acceptable risk" is one where all reasonable safety precautions have been taken.
This is more like a political "calculated risk", where
managers remove some safety rules, throw the dice, and bet that nothing bad happens. (Like launching the Challenger in the cold.)
Some things to note:
-- The FAA is not the NTSB
This is the same airline-friendly FAA that for years ignored the NTSB's recommendation for smoke detectors and fire extinguishers in passenger plane cargo holds... because the $350 million installation cost to the airlines would be more than double the $160 million (*) in lives that they estimated would be lost to fires.
That is, until ValuJet 592 caught fire inside its hold and mercifully dove into the Everglades at 500 mph. That was 110 lives lost at once in a horrible way, which finally tipped the FAA and airline monetary and political scales into it no longer being an "acceptable risk".
(*) Back then, the FAA used $2.5 million per life as the calculation as to whether or not a safety feature was needed. Now it's $3 million.
-- Critical phase still exists
The FAA covered its butt by adding that "
In some instances of low visibility about one percent of flights some landing systems may not be proved PED tolerant, so you may be asked to turn off your device."
In other words, for the average 250 US flights a day that must land by instruments, the pilots might have to ask the passengers to turn off their devices anyway.
To which the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) has understandably expressed its concern that passengers will face mixed signals (no pun intended) when pilots ask that devices be turned off in such situations.
-- Age of the fleet
Jet Blue has applied for approval right away. Considering that most of their airliners are fairly new, that's understandable.
Some of the other airlines have planes averaging up to 20 years old. Many have avionics suites that are years old. That is, they were designed before passenger electronics became a big issue.
I think this will be the biggest problem: that allowing usage all the time makes sense in some aircraft, but not others. One day all aircraft in service will be hardened against interference, but we're not there yet.
