FAA Taking a 'Fresh Look' at Digital Device Use During Takeoff and Landing

[MacAddict1978]

Maybe someone has mentioned this already... but the concern about electronic devices goes beyond interference with the plane's systems during landing and take off.

They can become projectiles.

At take off, the plane in inclined... turbulence during that time could send a device flying backwards and injuring someone or even killing them.

For that reason, I doubt they'll change their mind about the 10,000 feet rule. You already are instructed to put those things away during bad weather and long periods of turbulence for that reason.

 

[kdarling]

The only way for them to know that every device is off is to check everyone's pockets and bags. I'm sure many devices have been left on on many planes during take off and landing. What does that say?

Well, it partly says that the FAA and the airlines, who also took decades to start using cargo hold fire suppression systems to save hundreds of lives, figure it's better to roll the dice than make people unhappy or spend millions of dollars.

Here's more reports of interest from the NASA database. Notice the false collision (TCAS) alerts causing rapid climbs / descents, something that's especially dangerous during takeoff and landing.

Many people think they're being "smart" when they tell their seat companion, "Oh, it's only about keeping people from being distracted." You want to be really smart? Stop repeating that myth and instead factually state there have been many reported (and no doubt many more unreported) cases of personal devices apparently causing potentially dangerous situations.

Synopsis

FLT CREW OF CRJ-700 RPTS THAT AURAL INTERFERENCE IN VHF COMS CEASED WHEN PAX WERE ASKED TO ENSURE ALL FORMS OF 2-WAY COMS WERE TURNED OFF.

Narrative

ON CLBOUT FROM CLT WE HEARD WHAT SOUNDED SIMILAR TO A FAX MACHINE SOUND OR A MODEM SOUND. WE THOUGHT IT WAS JUST AN ANOMALY, BUT IT HAPPENED AGAIN AND AGAIN IN REPETITIOUS INTERVALS. I ASKED THE CAPT WHAT HE THOUGHT, AND HE SAID IT WAS PROBABLY A 2-WAY PAGER BECAUSE A SIMILAR INCIDENT OCCURRED TO HIM A FEW TRIPS AGO. HE FOUND THAT OUT AFTER ASKING A FLT ATTENDANT TO INVESTIGATE THE SITUATION, AND SHE FOUND SOMEONE WAS TYPING MESSAGES ABOVE 10000 FT MSL SO THAT THEY COULD BE SENT UPON LNDG.

WE ASKED OUR FLT ATTENDANTS TO TAKE A WALK THROUGH THE CABIN TO SEE IF ANYONE WAS USING ANYTHING OF THE SORT. NONE WERE FOUND AFTER SHE RPTED BACK TO US. HOWEVER THE ANNOYING NOISES STILL CONTINUED.

IT WAS ANNOYING AND LOUD ENOUGH TO ALMOST CAUSE US TO ALMOST MISS RADIO CALLS. SO, AN ANNOUNCEMENT WAS MADE TO PLEASE MAKE SURE CELL PHONES AND 2-WAY PAGERS WERE TURNED OFF BECAUSE IT WAS INTERRUPTING OUR COMS, AND IF THIS WAS NOT DONE WE MAY HAVE TO RETURN TO CLT.

AFTER THAT, NEARLY THE ENTIRE PLANE GOT UP TO FIND AND MAKE SURE ALL THE DEVICES WERE TURNED OFF. THE NOISES THEN STOPPED. NO MAKE/MODEL INFO WAS GATHERED BECAUSE: THE FLT ATTENDANTS WERE DOING THEIR SVC, WE WERE STILL CLBING, AND WE ASSUMED NO ONE WAS GOING TO ADMIT GUILT FOR FEAR OF PROSECUTING ACTION.

RECOMMENDATION: I WOULD HIGHLY ENCOURAGE MANY MORE IN-DEPTH STUDIES TO BE PERFORMED PRIOR TO ALLOWING CELL PHONES AND OTHER COMS DEVICES TO BE USED ON BOARD ACFT INFLT.

Synopsis

B737-800 FLT CREW EXPERIENCED SEVERAL TCAS RA'S ALLEGEDLY GENERATED BY A WI-FI ENABLED LAPTOP COMPUTER.

Narrative

FLT XXX, A B737-800 ZZZ-ZZZ1. AFTER TAKEOFF NEAR MAX GROSS WT, PRIOR TO FLAP RETRACTION RECEIVED AN RA (RESOLUTION ADVISORY) 'MAINTAIN VERT SPD' WITH RED AREA NOT TO DECREASE TO 1500 FPM OR LESS RATE OF CLB. DELAYED THRUST REDUCTION AND FLAP RETRACTION TO COMPLY WITH RA AND SCANNED FOR TRAFFIC.

TCAS INDICATED A CO-ALT TARGET (RED CIRCLE) LESS THAN .01 BEHIND US. THIS OCCURRED AT 1000 FT MSL, AND CLRED 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 TRAFFIC.

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 CLB AGAIN -- IGNORING THE TCAS RA COMMANDS. THE BOX WAS QUIET. RECYCLED THE XPONDER POWER.

AT 14000 FT, WE GOT A THIRD TCAS RA. SAME DISPLAY AND DSND 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. THE PAX CLOSED THE LID WHEN WE WERE BOARDING ON THE GND, PUTTING THE LAPTOP INTO STANDBY/HIBERNATE MODE. ONCE HE DISABLED THE WIRELESS FUNCTION, ALL OK.

THE TECH PEOPLE SHOULD GET A HEADS UP ON THIS. GUESS THE WIRELESS FUNCTION WAS TRYING TO ESTABLISH A CONNECTION AND EACH TIME IT DID (OR A FRACTION OF THE ATTEMPTS) WAS INTERPRETED AS A TCAS SIGNAL. (CO-ALT, .01 BEHIND US.) THE DISPLAY WAS A RED CIRCLE, NOT A RED SQUARE. NO YELLOW OR WHITE CIRCLES PRIOR TO ANY RA EVENTS. 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 CLB AT DEP, PRIOR TO ACCELERATION AND FLAP RETRACTION AND THE 1500 FPM OR GREATER RATE OF CLB. (TRANSCON NEAR MAX TKOF WT.)

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

Synopsis

A B757-200'S L FUEL GAUGE BLANKED AFTER TKOF AND BECAME OPERABLE PRIOR TO LNDG. CREW SUSPECTS POSSIBLE PED INTERFERENCE.

Narrative

(snipped for space)

Synopsis

FLT CREW OF MD80 EXPERIENCE MISALIGNED HEADING INFO ON FMS DISPLAY. SUSPECT PAX OPERATED ELECTRONIC DEVICES.

Narrative

DURING TKOF ROLL, RECEIVED 'HEADING' ANNUNCIATIONS ON FMS FLT MODE ANNUNCIATOR PANEL (FMA) WITH ABOUT A 10 DEG HEADING SPLIT. WE ELECTED TO CONTINUE THE TKOF RATHER THAN ABORT AT HIGH SPD AND NOTED THAT THE FO'S HEADING MATCHED THE RWY HEADING MORE CLOSELY. THIS PROB OCCURRED INTERMITTENTLY FOR THE NEXT 5 MINS WITH AN 8-10 DEG HDG SPLIT AND THE HEADING CHANNEL (ROLL WINDOW) BLANKING OUT ON THE FMA. (THE AUTOPLT COULD NOT ENGAGE IN THIS CONDITION.)

I SUSPECTED ELECTRONIC INTERFERENCE AND DIRECTED THE FLT ATTENDANTS TO SWEEP THE CABIN AND CHK FOR USE OF PERSONAL ELECTRONIC DEVICES WHILE THE FO MADE AN ANNOUNCEMENT TO REQUEST PAX DOUBLE-CHK THAT DEVICES WERE TURNED OFF. FLT ATTENDANTS ALSO HAD PAX CHK DEVICES IN CARRY-ON LUGGAGE.

SHORTLY AFTER DIRECTING THESE CHKS, THE PROB CLRED UP, CAPT AND FO HEADING REFS AGREED WITH EACH OTHER AND THE WHISKEY COMPASS. THERE WERE NO PROBS FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE FLT, INCLUDING AFTER WE ALLOWED LAPTOP COMPUTERS TO BE USED. FOR ADDITIONAL REF, THIS WAS AN AHRS ACFT (DID NOT HAVE IRS-BASED HEADING SYS). ALSO, ALTHOUGH NO PAX ADMITTED HAVING ANY DEVICES ON, A FLT ATTENDANT WHO WAS SEATED IN THE BACK LATER MENTIONED THAT SHE HEARD AT LEAST 1 CELL PHONE RINGING ON TKOF ROLL. (THE FLT ATTENDANTS HAD MADE THE STANDARD PREFLT PA TO TURN DEVICES OFF.) WE HAVE AN ABNORMAL PROC IN OUR MANUALS FOR HEADING ERRORS, BUT IT WASN'T EFFECTIVE DURING THIS EVENT. SINCE IT WAS VFR, THIS DIDN'T SERIOUSLY DEGRADE SAFETY, ALTHOUGH IT WAS A DISTRACTING EVENT IN A BUSY ATC ENVIRONMENT.

HAD THIS HAPPENED DURING AN APCH IN IMC CONDITIONS, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE SERIOUS. PERHAPS THE TRAVELING PUBLIC NEEDS TO BE MADE MORE AWARE THAT PED USE DURING FLT IS A SERIOUS CONCERN.

Synopsis

A FALSE TCASII RA SENDS A DC9 FLT INTO A CLB TO AVOID A POTENTIAL TARGET 5 MI SE OF BUNTS INTXN, PA.

Narrative

WHILE LEVEL AT 6000 FT 5 MI SE OF BUNTS INTXN AT 250 KTS CLEAN, WE HAD JUST BEEN HANDED OFF TO PHL FINAL APCH WHEN WE GOT A TCASII RA TO CLB FULL SCALE 6000 FPM WITH NO PROXIMATE TFC PRELIMINARIES. THE FO AS PF IMMEDIATELY BEGAN A MAX PERFORMANCE CLB WHILE I WENT HEADS UP TO ACQUIRE THE TFC WHICH HAD POPPED UP AT 12 O'CLOCK POS LESS THAN 1 MI ALT -03. I DID NOT SEE ANY TFC AND BY THE TIME I COULD GET A WORD IN EDGEWISE ON THE FREQ TO TELL ATC ABOUT THE RA, THE RA HAD EVAPORATED WITH NO 'CLR OF CONFLICT' ANNUNCIATION.

(INITIALLY, THE TARGET HAD APPEARED TO CLB WITH US, MAINTAINING A -00 ALT DIFFERENTIAL.) THE FO LEVELED OFF AT 7000 FT AND THEN BEGAN A DSCNT BACK DOWN TO 6000 FT AND ATC SAID THERE WAS NO TFC NEAR US WHICH SHOULD HAVE PROVIDED AN RA.

I TESTED THE TCASII (TEST OK) AND ASKED THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT TO DO A PED WALK, SHE RPTED NO OBVIOUS PED USE. AS APCH HANDED US OFF TO LCL, HE TOLD US THERE WAS VFR TFC BELOW US AT 3500 FT AT THE TIME OF THE RA.

WHEN WE GOT TO THE GATE, THE LEAD (attendant) CAME UP TO SAY THAT A FLT ATTENDANT HAD CAUGHT A LADY TRYING TO CALL HER DAUGHTER ON HER CELL PHONE AT THE TIME WE 'PULLED UP.'

 

[ReallyBigFeet]

I was always under the impression that the banning of electronic devices during takeoff and landing had less to do with possible interference with instrumentation and more to do with ensuring that the passengers aren't pre-occupied during takeoff and landing.

Then again, I'm one of those passengers that sleeps the second I'm buckled in and often times I sleep right through the takeoff and don't wake up again for an hour or more.

 

[Eric S.]

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."

And would you expect them to ask flight attendants?

 

[kdarling]

What really should worry everyone these days are the number of batteries that explode and catch fire in flight.

The number of reports in the NASA database of batteries or adapters catching fire is astonishing. Fortunately, so far they've been located inside the cabin where the crew can try to handle the situation.

But it seems just a matter of time before an airliner is taken down by someone's stored device or batteries in their checked baggage. Yes, there are rules against that, but who follows the dumb rules, right?

The following report concentrates on the pilot's worries about the passenger's behavior, but that's not what caused the baggage fire. Check it out. An Airbus with 144 passengers got lucky.

Synopsis

A BATTERY FIRE IN CHECKED BAGGAGE AND UNUSUAL BEHAVIOR BY ITS OWNER PRIOR TO GATE DEP CONCERNS CAPT OF AN AIRBUS ACFT. IGNITION CAUSED BY LITHIUM BATTERY PACK FOR VIDEO GAME.

Narrative

CHECKED BAG CATCHES FIRE DURING BOARDING, THE LOADMASTER INFORMED US THAT A RAMPER HAD REMOVED A CHECKED BAG THAT 'WAS ON FIRE.'

FIRST OFFICER (I WAS ON THE PHONE AT THE MOMENT) ASKED TO HAVE THE PAX IDENTIFIED AND TO VERIFY IF HE HAD ANY MORE CHECK LUGGAGE OR CARRY-ON BAGGAGE. THE PAX WAS ASKED BY THE GND SECURITY COORD IF HE KNEW OF ANYTHING IN HIS BAG THAT MAY HAVE CAUSE THE FIRE. HE ANSWERED 'NO.' THE GND SECURITY COORD INFORMED THE PAX OF HER INTENTIONS TO REMOVE HIS ENTIRE CHECKED LUGGAGE FROM THE FLIGHT AND LEAVE IT BEHIND. THE PAX AGREED WITHOUT ANY HESITATION OR ARGUMENT WHATSOEVER. HE INDICATED THAT HE WOULD RETRIEVE IT ON HIS WAY BACK. WE LATER DISCOVERED THAT THE PAX HAD ONLY A ONE-WAY TICKET.

THE LOCAL FIRE DEPARTMENT, LOCAL AIRPORT POLICE, STATION GND SECURITY, OPS MANAGER AND THE FLIGHT'S DISPATCHER WERE INVOLVED, ALONG WITH THE FLIGHT CREW, IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS OF THIS EVENT. WE ALL AGREED THAT IF THE PASSENGER WAS TO BE RE-SCREENED WITH ALL HIS PERSONAL BAGGAGE AND SUBSEQUENTLY CLEARED BY THE TSA FOR RE-BOARDING, WE WOULD ALLOW HIM TO CONTINUE.

WHILE THIS WAS ON-GOING JUST OUTSIDE OF THE AIRCRAFT DOOR IN THE JETBRIDGE, I MADE A PA ANNOUNCEMENT TO THE 144 PAX ON-BOARD OUR FLIGHT TO INFORM THEM THE REASON OF OUR DELAY. SHORTLY AFTER THIS, I WENT TO THE JETWAY TO FIND OUT MORE INFORMATION AND WAS MET BY THE GND SECURITY COORD TELLING ME THAT THE PASSENGER VOLUNTARILY AGREED TO BE REMOVED FROM THIS FLIGHT AND THAT HE WOULD FLY ON ANOTHER DAY.

THE FACTS SURROUNDING THIS EVENT IS WHAT MAKES IT QUITE DIFFERENT AND IN MY VIEW, SUSPECT. THE PASSENGER REACTIONS ARE THE MAIN REASON FOR THIS REPORT (NOT THE BAG ON FIRE). PASSENGER IMMEDIATELY AGREES TO LEAVE HIS CHECKED BAGS BEHIND. HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT COULD HAVE CAUSED THE FIRE IN HIS BAG (IT WAS LATER DETERMINED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT THAT IT WAS A BATTERY PACK FOR A PSP HANDHELD BATTERY OPERATED VIDEO GAME), ALONG WITH A BUNDLE OF WIRES/CABLES.

A ONE-WAY TICKET. HE AGREES TO NOT DELAY THE FLIGHT ANY FURTHER AND DECIDES TO FLY A DIFFERENT DAY WITHOUT ANYONE ASKING HIM TO.

AS FO (first officer) POINTED OUT, HAD WE LEFT THE GATE ON-TIME, WE WOULD HAVE BEEN AIRBORNE WHEN THIS BAG IGNITED. KIND OF WEIRD THAT BEING LATE WAS WHAT SAVED THE DAY.

THE OBVIOUS QUESTIONS: WHO WAS THIS INDIVIDUAL? WERE HIS ACTIONS INTENTIONAL? WHY WAS HIS BEHAVIOR SO ABNORMAL? AN ALERT RAMPER SAW THE BAG IN FLAMES. HE SAVED THE DAY. BATTERY PACKS, ESPECIALLY LITHIUM BATTERIES ARE VERY RISKY AND NEW REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PUT IN PLACE. THE ONLY COMPLAINT THAT I HAVE IS NOT BEING ABLE TO TALK TO CORPORATE SECURITY. I KNOW IT WAS LATE ON A SUNDAY, BUT A SECURITY RISK SHOULD BE GUARANTEED A RESPONSE FROM CORPORATE SECURITY. I INDICATED TO THE OPS MANAGER THAT I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THEM, I PROVIDED MY CELL NUMBER BUT NOBODY CALL.

 

[GutBomb]

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.

"Us" is referring to the airline they are the representative of. And you know they do more than just pour drinks right? They go through rigorous safety training so in the event of a crash they can help get your ungrateful, sorry ass off the plane safely, all while being treated like a waitress, being paid jack squat, and living out of hotels for years on end.

 

[kdarling]

Pilots have a cautionary saying:

"It’s better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than to be in the air wishing you were on the ground."

A corollary saying for passengers could be:

"It's better to obey the rules and wonder if they're necessary for safety, than to disobey the rules and one day find out they really were!"

 

[AidenShaw]

Pilots have a cautionary saying:

"It’s better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air, than to be in the air wishing you were on the ground."

A corollary saying for passengers could be:

"It's better to obey the rules and wonder if they're necessary for safety, than to disobey the rules and one day find out they really were!"

...but the "entitled brats" on MacRumours have the saying

I want it now! I deserve it! Who cares about anyone or anything else!​

 

[Aussieiphone]

People are way too addicted to Facebook

An idiot next to me was using his iPhone to update his page on take off when I had to ask him to stop. Then he tried again briefly before getting up and going to the restroom with his phone out on FB - when he returned he realized 3G wasn't working and ordered the wi-fi...

Asking people to place the device in Airplane Mode on take off (as a proposed solution here) is hilarious - turn them off. If there is even the slightest chance that 300 passengers simultaneously using a device could harm flight systems, IT AIN'T WORTH IT!

Bad enough see idiots texting whilst driving - or holding their phone on handsfree mode an inch from their face! Two hands on the wheel people - news flash, you're not Danica Patrick or Jimmy Johnson and even with their skills, I'm sure they're smarter than that...in any case whatever you're texting, typing, speaking, not that important - nobody really cares, give it a rest and concentrate, ok? Save a life.

 

[yeseter]

Next Disaster

Next disaster will be related to the use of iPads instead of real maps.

 

[b_scott]

the reason, as said by many employees, is not at all because of device interference. It's so everyone looks at and listens to the flight attendants speaking about the emergency procedures.

 

[tigress666]

What really should worry everyone these days are the number of batteries that explode and catch fire in flight.

The number of reports in the NASA database of batteries or adapters catching fire is astonishing. Fortunately, so far they've been located inside the cabin where the crew can try to handle the situation.

But it seems just a matter of time before an airliner is taken down by someone's stored device or batteries in their checked baggage. Yes, there are rules against that, but who follows the dumb rules, right?

There is a reason you actually are not allowed to pack a loose rechargeable battery in your checked in baggage (Seriously, that is the one thing I"ve found they require you take on the plane with your rather than check in the bag, usually it's vice versa). And it's loose cause the problem doesn't happen when they are plugged into something.

For exactly that reason (if it goes on fire, they want it somewhere that people can access it and find out right away).

But yeah, there always are idiots. But they do actually check checked in bags and a battery would show up even on the scanners they had before 9/11 (batteries are dense and show up quite well). So most likely they'd catch it.

 

[kdarling]

But yeah, there always are idiots. But they do actually check checked in bags and a battery would show up even on the scanners they had before 9/11 (batteries are dense and show up quite well). So most likely they'd catch it.

Hopefully. However, there's a big hole in the current way things are handled:

Because of all the checked luggage fees, many people have gotten into the habit of deliberately taking a large carry-on through the gate, knowing that it'll be put into the checked luggage cargo hold for free.

So while a bag would've gotten scanned (and passed) on the way to the gate with carry-on batteries, there's apparently nothing to prevent it being diverted into the cargo hold and ending up like that fire case I posted above.

Regards.

 

[diffuser]

iPad Case?

What cases are the pilots using?

 

[WordMasterRice]

Some of the misinformation in this thread is astounding.

To everyone who says obviously we know that devices without wireless aren't going to mess with anything, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. The type of interference that is experienced in planes has nothing to do with the frequencies where data is transmitted. Most have to do with the sharp clock edges that devices create and then radiate.

Most of the devices on aircraft are pretty sensitive and can be influenced by these dirty clocks or any number of other interference that comes from an electronic device simply being on.