Take-offs and landings are statistically the most hazardous parts of flight. Most accidents have taken place on the ground during taxi, on the runway during roll, shortly after wheels-up, and on approach for landing. I can recall flights that have taken off in foggy weather and hit a mountain, planes that have collided with each other on the ground, engines that have fallen off shortly after take-off, planes that enountered wind sheer and crashed on final approach, early Airbus fly-by-wire software glitches that overrode pilot commands and crashed into the forest right after take-off, etc. The first and only crash of Singapore Airlines happened at the Taipei airport; a nighttime take-off from a closed runway with construction equipment lying downstream. The pilot did not see the signs, the runway itself was not blocked off, and just prior to wheels-up the 747 bound for Los Angeles struck construction equipment, crashed and burned. There were survivors, but 82 fatalities.thecow said:Does anyone know why you aren't supposed to use electronics during those times?
Well, technically no device is ever "off" there's always a slight drain on the batteries. Which is why all electronic devices have the "if stored for a long period of time, remove the batteries" speech on themgco212 said:Doesn't the iPod never really turn off anyway? Isn't it really just in standby mode? Or am I wrong, or does standby mode give off different signals or something?
Yes, but there have also been studies that have shown the opposite. The NTSB and the FAA aren't claiming that an iPod or GameBoy does necessarily cause interference, just that any electronic device has the potential to cause interference. Furthermore, there is the possibility that a modified device in an iPod shell could be used in an active attempt to interfere with what really are very sensitive instruments used in plane navigation. Part of most commercial aircraft design is a certain consideration that the whole plane is on some level a conductor. Do some research into lightning strikes on planes and you'll see some of the issues, but you'll also see most planes running through unscathed. Same with electronic devices--most might cause no harm, but why risk it? The planes are expensive, the people are expensive, and bad PR is expensive. I have been on flights with both instances (a lightning strike in Miami that caused no problems, and one somewhere in the Midwest (Dallas?) that caused an aborted takeoff (sadly, it wasn't one of those high-speed ones; that would have been exciting).pdpfilms said:Two of my friends are private aircraft pilots, both retired Air Force pilots with experience in both combat jets and large-scale refuelers. They both agreed there have been tests conducted, with results that prove there is absolutely no interference caused by devices that do not actively transmit or recieve any type of requency (i.e. radio, cellphone, etc.) I think the previous poster is correct.