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.
FAA Taking a 'Fresh Look' at Digital Device Use During Takeoff and Landing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not necessarily. While your point has merit, you are thinking too literally.
Assuming the things actually need to be tested, which I assume they need to be at some level, all that needs to happen is the FAA needs to establish testing guidelines and acceptance procedures. In order not to overly affect there workload load / budgets, the people doing this testing needs to be 3rd party.
It may be something like a new branch of UL/ETL or maybe a new company altogether.
In any case Apple could preemptively sign on, offering to pre-pay, so that the startup costs of the new business are handled, and thus encouraging them them to actually open the business in the first place.
Conceptually very similar to down-paying on large supply chain concerns, as they are known to (regularly) do.
This is most certainly not an over-night thing, but unless the FAA will completely drop the whole it-needs-to-be-tested thought process, this would seem to be a smart path forward.
Karl P
I fly regularly for work. I have noticed passengers, on many occasions, not only leaving their devices on, but also *not* in airplane mode, and sometimes actively receiving SMS messages and that sort of thing.
I never switch my devices completely off (just airplane mode) and typically just put my laptop to sleep.
The reality is that is these things caused problems for the aircraft, we'd have seen a lot of planes nose down in the dirt by now.
I never switch my devices completely off (just airplane mode) and typically just put my laptop to sleep.
The reality is that is these things caused problems for the aircraft, we'd have seen a lot of planes nose down in the dirt by now.
They tested two iPads in the cockpit of each aircraft type that they'll be used in. (And I don't think the airlines even took the time to certify all their types.) It's a far cry from testing all sorts of devices in every corner of the aircraft.
As any pilot will tell you: at cruising altitude you usually have more time to discover and recover from a worrisome situation. When you're minutes or seconds away from landing, you don't.
As for picking 10,000', it's an altitude that already has a lot of meaning to pilots, as flight rules change above and below it.
The rules were not created for any other reason than concern for interference.
I agree, it's generally a good idea to actually do some research on a topic before posting arguments or conclusions.
Hint: Look up NASA ASRS reports. Here is an interesting one:
Here's another report which tells us that newer aircraft might be less susceptible:
I'll try to find the time to look up one I'm thinking about that caused an aborted auto landing in fog. However, the FAA is half in bed with the airlines; they want passengers to not worry.
At the least, interference can cause unnecessary distractions for the pilots. Only the most self-centered people think that's okay.
Last edited:
To quote a very testy flight attendant out of SFO on a flight I was on:
"They didn't ask us before they called it that."
Smartphones don't enter into it - they cannot be operated in airplanes, if for no other reason, than the fact that FCC regulations don't license them for aeronautical use (when they're up in the sky, they see too many cell sites and cause interference). But if you put a smartphone into airplane mode, it's not a smartphone anymore, it's a PDA.
As for your other point, many airframes were either certified or have been re-certified since the proliferation of portable electronic devices.
If you do a little research you will find that the FAA has never actually done any official testing of cellphones in air planes.
They took the results of one study in the UK, using simulated cellphone signals and air plane avionics as gospel.
Then the FCC said that active cellphones in planes _might_ cause towers to become overladed, and since cellphones are licensed for use only on the ground, they may not be used in a plane.
No safety study.
No real data.
It's time to put some science behind all this BS.
Oh, and if you believe that even 10% off all those phones and iPads in bags and purses are actually switched off in light, you are a fool.... You hold down the power button and slide the switch to off, remember? Yeah, right.
They took the results of one study in the UK, using simulated cellphone signals and air plane avionics as gospel.
Then the FCC said that active cellphones in planes _might_ cause towers to become overladed, and since cellphones are licensed for use only on the ground, they may not be used in a plane.
No safety study.
No real data.
It's time to put some science behind all this BS.
Oh, and if you believe that even 10% off all those phones and iPads in bags and purses are actually switched off in light, you are a fool.... You hold down the power button and slide the switch to off, remember? Yeah, right.
Really?!?!
REALLY!?!? Has our society gotten to the point that we can't be detached from out ipad, iphones, and other electronics for the first 15 minutes and last 15 minutes of every flight?! To the people who think this is a problem, you really should reevaluate things.
REALLY!?!? Has our society gotten to the point that we can't be detached from out ipad, iphones, and other electronics for the first 15 minutes and last 15 minutes of every flight?! To the people who think this is a problem, you really should reevaluate things.
Unfortunately, it has....
If you're having lunch at a restaurant - look around and
- count the number of people engaged in conversations with others at the table
- count the number of people silently poking at glowing screens
Caution is Needed.
An aircraft cabin can act like a resonating cavity and remember aircraft electrical cable shielding can fray over time and they can behave like antennas. Although devices are FCC certified, they too can be modified by the owner/operator inadvertently. It is a risk that needs careful study.
Here is a link to an IEEE report from 2006:
Unsafe at Any Airspeed?
An aircraft cabin can act like a resonating cavity and remember aircraft electrical cable shielding can fray over time and they can behave like antennas. Although devices are FCC certified, they too can be modified by the owner/operator inadvertently. It is a risk that needs careful study.
Here is a link to an IEEE report from 2006:
Unsafe at Any Airspeed?
I don't really know why this is a big deal. Passengers should be paying attention during take off and landing. The two most dangerous parts of the flight. I see the ban as a safety precaution - not because the electronics may interfere with aircraft operation.
I've gone on a number of flights over the past few years and really do enjoy shutting everything off and having a few minutes of peace and quiet.
I imagine allowing use of an iPad would keep kids busy during the flight and maybe less restless, which would be a plus, but I constantly am seeing people too preoccupied on their phones to even pay attention during takeoff and landing. It's annoying.
Also, a problem I see with allowing people to use their devices on Airplane mode is that people would simply not turn their phones on to Airplane mode. When I'm on an airplane, I'd rather not take any chances.
I imagine allowing use of an iPad would keep kids busy during the flight and maybe less restless, which would be a plus, but I constantly am seeing people too preoccupied on their phones to even pay attention during takeoff and landing. It's annoying.
Also, a problem I see with allowing people to use their devices on Airplane mode is that people would simply not turn their phones on to Airplane mode. When I'm on an airplane, I'd rather not take any chances.
And the TSA should examine why hand cream poses such a danger to aircraft.
But keeping devices off during takeoff/landing is not a bad idea.. especially if an emergency were to arise. The FAA should use a proper explanation instead of the tin-foil hat argument of interference.
But keeping devices off during takeoff/landing is not a bad idea.. especially if an emergency were to arise. The FAA should use a proper explanation instead of the tin-foil hat argument of interference.
They would probably like to take a "fresh look" at how much they should charge you to use your device under 10,000 ft. They can suck my left nut!! ******* em!! I'll just sit here in my God*** house!! Weather sucks outside anyway.
A Bit off topic, but there is only one rule that changes at 10,000ft MSL, and that is the speed of the aircraft. in the US and its territories, unless overwritten by the Administrator (read: the FAA), an aircraft may not exceed 250kts. Outside of that, VFR aircraft and IFR aircraft can occupy the same airspace up to and including 17500ft MSL. 18000ft (FL180) and higher are for IFR aircraft only (exception being VFR-on-Top, but that requires an IFR flight plan).
Back on topic, like I said before, it is interesting that this 'rule' does not apply for General Aviation, or Part 91 or 135 operations. This only applies to Part 121 (Commercial) operations. This means that on any general aviation or private aircraft, this rule doesn't really apply, and you could use your laptop, iPad, iPhone, what have you at any time.
BL.
Are people that desperate to use tablets etc on a 4-5 hour flight that they can't spare 5 mins at either end to just sit and relax? Does it make any difference whatsoever? I love my iPad on flights but i'm not having a hernia about not being able to use it during take off and landing.
You've been able to talk on the phone even before cell phones were around. You simply had to pay the $1/minute or whatever ridiculous rate the airlines charged you back then.
To be clear, I'm all for a ban on making cell phone calls in-flight, but it's not like you weren't able to do this in the past.
Speaking of which, I'd also like to see a ban on a number of annoyances that I've experienced (not likely, but I can dream):
- Loud talking - nuff said, I think
- Screaming/crying babies on overnight flights - Love kids (of all ages), but not when I'm exhausted, sick, and trying to sleep during an overnight, 8+ hour flight
- Barfing - Sat next to a kid who threw up in the beginning of an overseas flight (felt sorry for him, but the smell was pretty bad)
- People who spill over into an adjacent (my) seat - Most uncomfortable flight EVER
- Draconian enforcement of nonsensical "rules" - Had a flight attendant give me grief because I hit pause on my iPod but the screen wasn't off. He wanted it completely shut down because it could apparently cause the plane to fall out of the sky :roll eyes:
Btw, I'm kidding about the barfing thing, at least the banning part. It really happened to me.
Besides the speed limit...
10,000 feet is also usually the top for Class B airspace.
10,000 feet and below is where the FAA advocates a "sterile cockpit" rule.
There's also the Mode C veil, which requires a transponder up to 10,000 feet.
In Class E and G airspace, the visibility and cloud clearance requirements change for VFR flights above and below 10,000 feet.
I'm in northern NJ, where we can hit almost all those things
Yep. It's a lot easier to take care of your own equipment or that of passengers within head-slapping range
Actually, the older guy looks befuddled with the magical slate before him. "Such curious markings! How dost thou open it up to find yonder pages?"
The younger guy shows him how it's done.
"Sorcerer!!!" the old man proclaims, stabbing the young man dead in the eye with a silver dagger. One of the those wiggly ones. With a jewel-encrusted hilt.
*the end*
That flight attendant apparently forgot that they are... a flight attendant. I'll go ahead and trust engineers over someone who pours sprite in to a plastic cup for me.
My response probably would have been "Why would they?" but after some recent stories to hit the news they probably would have found a reason to get me kicked off the plane for being a smart ass.
If that were the case, they'd ban reading or doing crossword puzzles during takeoff and landing.
Except that can’t really force you to pay attention, put your hands on your lap, etc., there’s a small amount of personal space they can’t really invade unless there’s some kind of “safety” issue. Tray table? Safety. Seatback? Safety. Bag under the seat? Safety. My paperback book? That would be quite a stretch.
With electronic devices they can use some “science” to support the safety of issue of having them turned on, which may really be what the poster indicated: just a way to reduce “noise” (figurative and literal) in the passenger area.
I honestly don’t know, but I do know someone who knows quite a bit about aircraft design and instrumentation and he seems to think the concept of no electronics is pretty outdated.
Funny topic since we’ll be flying tomorrow ... oh joy ...
Takeoff and landing only take a few minutes, its not a huge deal for me to turn off my devices.