Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Proof That Cellphones and Airplanes Don't Mix

mac 2005

mac 2005

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Apr 1, 2005
782
126
Chicago
<rant>

All the people who think cellphones on commercial airlines are a good idea and that we can trust people to moderate their behavior confuse the hell out of me. Here is proof that allowing cellphones on airplanes will be very, very annoying. If people won't stop using them when a substantial fine is involved, what is going to be the incentive when all that's at risk is annoying a bunch of strangers?

</rant>

Exhibit A
 
Aside from the FAA's rules being fairly bogus (the ban is at the behest of the FCC, dating back to higher-powered, analog cell phones, although since every phone can't be tested against every piece of nav or comm equipment, still understandable), I agree. Too bad the cabin couldn't be lined with a mesh, turning it into a Faraday cage. That's solve the problem right there.
 
JohnNotBeatle said:
Too bad the cabin couldn't be lined with a mesh, turning it into a Faraday cage. That's solve the problem right there.
Click to expand...

I thought the solution would be to find a way to accommodate cell phone use? Maybe some sort of some satellite link and a plug on phones? Then there's the 700Mhz spectrum, IIRC that's available (for public use) since google bid over ~$4 billion.
 
You are talking about the technical aspect of cell phone use in flight.

What about the rights of the passengers around you??

Either text, or shut the hell up.

Crying babies are enough. A least they have an excuse.
 
iJohnHenry said:
What about the right of the passengers around you??
Click to expand...

What "right"? Is that the same "right" not to be stuck between a pair of 300-pounders? Or the person with bad body odor? Or snores? Or sneezes uncontrollably? Or lifts the shade when you want it dark (or vice versa)? Or crawls over you ten times in a two-hour flight to use the lav?

Why people think that traveling on a plane is imbued with more rights than any other shared carriage is beyond me.

Ya pays yer money, ya takes yer chances.
 
Except for lifting the shade, the other actions might not be of a nature to be controlled by the "miscreant".

Cell phone use does not fall into that category.

No one cares to hear how you plan to take over the world. Just get over yourself, and let others get on with their lives with minimal discomfort.
 
:p
iJohnHenry said:
Except for lifting the shade, the other actions might not be of a nature to be controlled by the "miscreant".

Cell phone use does not fall into that category.

No one cares to hear how you plan to take over the world. Just get over yourself, and let others get on with their lives with minimal discomfort.
Click to expand...

Moi? I've been over myself for at least the last thirty years.

You're so adorable when you're incensed! :p
 
JohnNotBeatle said:
You're so adorable when you're incensed! :p
Click to expand...

You picked-up on that, did you.

Kiss lower, so I can enjoy it too.

But seriously, I was required to carry a pager in the '70's for a bank clearing operation, and I hated every minute of it.

The intrusion of technology into people's leisure time has to stop.

Not to mention the highway carnage cause by cell phone users under/over the speed limit. Better over please, then they will get the hell out of my way before they kill themselves, or someone else.
 
If you read my OP, you'd note that I agreed with the "shut them the hell off" philosophy. I travel for business about 40 weeks/120 flights a year, and I'm ready to kill the Crackberry fool next to me most days.

As a motorcyclist (when I'm not in the air), I am tempted to shoot most SUV moms talking to whoever the hell they feel they have to when driving. Being splattered because of someone's lack of attention/concern is not really my cup of tea.

My Faraday cage idea was only half-jest; maybe checking your electronics with the FA's on boarding would work. All I know is that it's annoying as hell.

As for going lower, I'm afraid you're on your own, there! :p
 
JohnNotBeatle said:
Aside from the FAA's rules being fairly bogus (the ban is at the behest of the FCC, dating back to higher-powered, analog cell phones, although since every phone can't be tested against every piece of nav or comm equipment, still understandable), I agree. Too bad the cabin couldn't be lined with a mesh, turning it into a Faraday cage. That's solve the problem right there.
Click to expand...
The FAA is not the problem, it's the FCC and the lighting up of multiple cell sites at altitude.
Remember they were set to allow use of cell phones in airliners and then for "social" reasons the airlines resisted.
Who are they fooling? They already have a phone at every other seat.
Do these phones encourage people to speak softly? No, but they do encourage the passenger to use his Visa card!
And by the way, there is no proof that cell phones interfere in any way with navigation.. Although there are a few anecdotal unproven tales of cell phones interfering with autopilot servos.
The Faraday idea is interesting, except that very little of the avionics are in the cockpit, they are in huge racks outside the cockpit. And the servos are located close to the flight surfaces. And wiring is everywhere.
By the way. Most pilots keep there cell phones on, while they request that you turn yours off! This I know as fact.
 
Aside from the fact that is what I already said, modern PCS phones can't hit microcells from typical cruise altitudes, anyway. Their range is, at best, 1/3 of analog systems, and at 5-7 miles up, definitely out of range. None of my cell phones has ever grabbed a signal in flight when I forgot to turn it off.

No, the rule is OBE, but the FAA kept their dictum in place (for their own reasons). And Airphones? None on any of the flights I'm on anymore. Either nonexistent or permanently disconnected & powered off.

As far as no proof of interference, I agree, but there's no proof they don't, either. As I already said, not all combinations can be tested to satisfy certification requirements, so that's a useless argument.

The pax container inside the skin, equipment bays, and cable runs could be shielded, at the cost of a few revenue-producing seats. That'll never happen, not when the whole point is to reduce weight, not add it.
 
On Virgin Trains in the UK they designate a Quiet Zone where you're not to use a mobile phone and basically just keep quiet. It's great and hopefully they can get that into planes too, so long as they're deemed as safe for use on a plane.
 
raggedjimmi said:
On Virgin Trains in the UK they designate a Quiet Zone where you're not to use a mobile phone and basically just keep quiet. It's great and hopefully they can get that into planes too, so long as they're deemed as safe for use on a plane.
Click to expand...

The ironic thing being about the Class 220/221 trains operated by Virgin and CrossCountry along with the Pendolino are like giant Faraday cages, albeit poor ones, so just getting cell phone reception at any one time without standing in the main carriage doorways is very hard over large parts of the journey. The quiet coach is a good idea but it is not really enforced which is a shame.

On the question of personal comfort I get more annoyed by people with personal stereos blasting there ear drums out. There is just no need to have them that loud even with poor fitting ear buds I just don't know how they can stand it. It becomes a self perpetuating thing, you need it loud because of hearing damage so you end up causing more damage as a result.

I think if FCC regulations standardised cell phone digital emissions more than there would be no problem with them on phones and no comeback. I do not believe there would be any danger to an aircraft with normal phones, just think about how much data is actually being transmitted through various delivery systems every day.
 
Don't care if it is proven or not that cellphones can cause electronic interference in flight. If a rule is made, for what ever reason, then a rule it is. You can debate and discuss as much as you want, but if you break the rule then you should be held accountable.

I know an uneventful-flight is not a right (what with crying babies, bad food, small seats, etc) and the use of a cell phone is not aright either.

I know, I am being simplistic. But I would rather not have to listen to people prattle on while taking a flight.
 
I don't care for the technical reasons for not using a mobile on an airplane. I don't know if they're true or not.

I just don't want them used on an airplane. I have no tech-based reason for it.
 
JohnNotBeatle said:
Aside from the fact that is what I already said, modern PCS phones can't hit microcells from typical cruise altitudes, anyway. Their range is, at best, 1/3 of analog systems, and at 5-7 miles up, definitely out of range. None of my cell phones has ever grabbed a signal in flight when I forgot to turn it off.
Click to expand...

Finally someone without just an opinion about it. :cool:

the fact remains you CAN NOT make a cell phone call from cruising altitude.

This little thing called range...
 
Consultant said:
However it would be a bad idea if they cannot make sure people talk at a low volume and quickly.
Click to expand...

What's going to happen is that the flight attendants will be called upon to resolve disputes, and I can't imagine it's going to be pleasant for anybody. Particularly as the price comes down.

I imagine the US $3/minute cost will provide something of a deterrent for consumer use, but not a concern for business travelers who will write it off on their expense accounts.
 
JohnNotBeatle said:
Aside from the fact that is what I already said, modern PCS phones can't hit microcells from typical cruise altitudes, anyway. Their range is, at best, 1/3 of analog systems, and at 5-7 miles up, definitely out of range. None of my cell phones has ever grabbed a signal in flight when I forgot to turn it off.

No, the rule is OBE, but the FAA kept their dictum in place (for their own reasons). And Airphones? None on any of the flights I'm on anymore. Either nonexistent or permanently disconnected & powered off.

As far as no proof of interference, I agree, but there's no proof they don't, either. As I already said, not all combinations can be tested to satisfy certification requirements, so that's a useless argument.

The pax container inside the skin, equipment bays, and cable runs could be shielded, at the cost of a few revenue-producing seats. That'll never happen, not when the whole point is to reduce weight, not add it.
Click to expand...
Very good points. As far as FLs are concerned, obviously a cell phone can't find a tower. The concerns are on departure and approach
when they can.
 
iAlan said:
If a rule is made, for what ever reason, then a rule it is. You can debate and discuss as much as you want, but if you break the rule then you should be held accountable.
Click to expand...
It's not a rule actually, the FARs give the pilot in command the discretion to decide. Commercial airlines run on Company Operations Manuals which will not allow as much discretion as the FAA. In private jets cell phones are used all the time and work pretty well through about 10-15,000 msl.
It's not a good idea to tell Tom Cruise to turn off his cell phone in his own jet.LOL
He may report you to RH.
 
megfilmworks said:
In private jets cell phones are used all the time and work pretty well through about 10-15,000 msl.
It's not a good idea to tell Tom Cruise to turn off his cell phone in his own jet.LOL He may report you to RH.
Click to expand...

Exactly, ~3miles or less for digital cellphone reception.

Id talk of line of site and interference, but when you are in the sky, those are pretty moot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back