Cellphones On Airplanes

Bonker writes "According to this USAToday article two companies, AirCell, and Verizon, are developing technology to let airline passengers safely use cellphones while in flight. The system would block frequencies normally used by cellphones and force cell customers to 'roam' on the new network. Saftey concerns aside, I thought that a plane cabin was the one place I would never have to deal with people who won't quit talking on the phone."

Comments

Re:Can someone explain

[FreeUser]

Why the use of ANY electronic device is prohibited below a certain altitude, except when sitting still at the gate?

Because in some geometries, under some conditions, a cell phone or laptop can disrupt radio reception and navigational equipment. I have forgotten to turn my cell phone off more than once, and I routinely use my laptop to listen to ogg files while flying my Beech Sundowner on long cross country flight. The vast majority of the time there is no noticable effect, by on two different occasions I have had my laptop completely block my radio reception.

Now, before some smartass, thinking they know what they do not, blurts something stupid like "how did you know you missed radio reception if you couldn't hear it?" I'll go ahead and point out what should be obvious:

1) You get weather data prior to requesting permission to taxi. This whether data is broadcast on a looped tape, updated once per hour if it is ATIS, updated constantly by automated equipment if it is ASOS, etc. In one case the ASOS was silent with the laptop on, perfectly audible with it off (this was confirmed by power cycling the laptop severa times).

2) When you call clearance delivery or ground for taxi instructions, you expect a reply. If you don't get one, you call again. If this persists, you probably have a problem (usually you've dialed up the wrong frequency, have your volume turned down, or aren't transmitting). Turning off my cell phone immediate resulted in my hearing "N6708R, how do you read?" to which my reply was, "Loud and clear, now." Meigs ground had tried to respond to my request several times, the transmission was blocked whenever I had the phone turned on.

So, while such interference is rare, it can and does occur from time to time. Do you really want to risk having a Boeing 747 miss a call from the tower to hold short for crossing traffic while taxiing to or from the runway just so you can call your wife and let her know the plane is about to take off/just landed, or just so you can edit that Word document one more time prior to takeoff?

Does not matter

[ninjadoug]

They will Ban them again, not for safety reasons but 'for the comfort of other passangers'. I would choose an airline with a 'no-cellphone' policy. especially on long haul flights.

Burden of Proof

[Shadow Wrought]

I have read several comments along the lines of "there's no proof that cell phones are harmful," or that airlines are "overreacting". The burden of proof does not lie with the airlines to prove that they are harmful. Rather the burden of proof lies with the insecure yokel who cannot let go of the phone for a couple of hours.

Until it is proven, conclusively, that electronic devices cannot, under any circumstance, affect in any way shape or form the performance of the aircraft's systems, then they should be banned.

On a final note, doesn't anyone think about scale? ala "My laptop shouldn't cause any problems," or "My cell phone shouldn't be an issue." What about a plane full of cell phones, PDA's, laptops, and gameboys? One person using an electronic device may not cause a problem, but maybe a hundred of them stuck in a metal tube a couple hundred feet long might.

I think that while most people haven't thought of this, the airlines have.

Re:thicker skin

[Anonvmous Coward]

'Now, my experience with people who get annoyed by people talking on cells is thus; they are simply annoyed by people carrying on a conversation with another party that they cannot see/hear. Perhaps it looks unnatural seeing someone going about their business talking to noone, but the personal feelings of the annoyed are, nonetheless, irrational.'

I had an experience like that once. I was at a McDonald's having a little dinner while I talked to my Dad on the phone. He lives 2,0000 miles away so I don't get a whole lot of time to talk with him. This old woman kept glaring at me. She mouthed a not-so-subtle comment about how I needed to get off the phone and eat my dinner. (no, I wasn't talking too loud.) She just had this thing about cell phone use.

I think that she was mad at me because other people with cell phones had riled her up. I got the feeling it wasn't me specifically she had a problem with, but other people had annoyed her and I was 'one of them'.

I'm not a big fan of being guilty of other people's crimes. I take extra care not to be annoying with my phone. As a matter of fact, right now my phone is on a low ring mode and set to vibrate. When it rings, my cubicle neighbor can't even hear it. I let my voice-mail get the call if I'm in the middle of a convo. I make a point of putting my phone on silent at a movie. I don't know about most places, but the theaters here ask you to make them silent.

As you can see, I put a great deal of effort into not being a nuisance. So hopefully you can understand why I don't take too kindly to stories about how some public places (like malls) are considering the jamming of cell phones. That'd essentially 'ground' the offenders, but what about all the people out there who aren't being offensive?

Half of the population of the US has a cell phone. If 110 million cell phones were ringing, I would understand the problem. We all know the number's nowhere near that high. In other words: Find a better solution.