Slashdot Mirror
Research: Mobile Phones Disrupt Aircraft
threeturn writes "Another contribution to the ever-popular "mobiles on planes" topic. Every time this is discussed on /. lots of people say "there is no danger - its just the airlines trying to make a buck on their skyphones". Well, now the UK Civil Aviation Authority has done some research which shows mobiles on planes do disrupt safety systems and interfere with compass readings and other navigation equipment. Also reported by the BBC. So do us all a favour and switch your mobiles off next time you fly."
Well, when it comes to airplanes and flying I think the expression "better safe than sorry" fits the bill quite nice.
The biggest problem when flying and using mobile phones is the phones themselves. When you are flying, the phone may try to communicate (roam) with many towers which causes cell network problems. Imagine the area of towers you could hit at 30,000ft in the sky.
if consumer legal transmitting devices cause problems on planes then the planes should have thier certificate of airworthness revoked PERIOD
if governments cant grasp this then flying will become a very dangerous way to travel
Can anyone explain why apparantly 802.11b wireless connections do *not* pose a problem in planes?
My karma ran over your dogma
Seriously... the system as it stands couldn't be any more broken, as it depends for its safe operation on the active opting-out of every cell carrying passenger. I mean, phones ring in college lectures all the time -- I've seen it happen to professors who have very clear policies about turning them off.
Granted, it takes the airlines forever to agree to small safety changes like, oh, I don't know... Installing non-flammable seat cushions?!? I guess we can't really expect too much in the way of retrofits, particularly in today's economic climate.
We bail 'em out, they waste it, we'll just bail 'em out again.
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
...using your cellphone on board an aircraft is a Bad Idea. Even if you disregard the safety issues, there's another issue: the cellphone system depends on each phone being seen by a small number of cell sites. This works fine on the ground, but at 37,000 feet, one cellphone can activate literally hundreds of sites. The cellular network cannot deal well with this situation.
The cell network can, however, detect this condition, and report the number of a phone that's on use in the air (by the sheer number of sites it talks to). The FCC has issued fines before to people who have used their cellphones inflight. Want a fine? Then turn yours on.
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
who needs to use there cell phone... IN AN AIRPLANE?? If you need to call someone.. just wait a couple hours until your plane lands then hit the nearest pay phone.. if its an emergency... your on a friggin plane anyway..theres nothing your going to do.
Besides.. alot of the larger planes have phones built into the seats anyway, why not just use those?
And for those of you who need to play nibbles or whatever... you need to unplug and get more fresh air or something.
we should punish those people who try to use cell phones by taking thier cell phone away and making them use satalite phones(when they get off the plane that is)
Selling software wont make you money, selling a service will.
There are already compatibility problems between cell phones and cordless phones (at least, I and others I know can't use both simultaneously because of interference)and I'm sure other problems will surface with the flavors of 802.11. But wireless technology just keeps advancing without much assessment of the risks, and the FCC seems more concerned with spectrum selloff and taxing modems than with the actual effects of the technology.
I also wonder, given the apparent senstivity of aircraft to the weak signals from cellphones, how safe are they really when powerful radar systems lock onto them? In the past, I have come across (ground-based) cases where directional radar caused severe interference and the military simply denied the existence of the radar (sorry, guys, panoramic receivers and signal strength meters are more reliable than base spokesmen.)It looks like this whole issue needs a lot more transparency and joint investigation. It isn't good enough just to say "OK, can't take this, switch them off". If there is an EMC problem with current aircraft, it needs to be investigated properly and we need to be told about it.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
Dildos dont generate anything, they are dumb devices, its vibrators (yes there is a difference)that are powered.
The applied interference field strengths were up to 50 volts/metre for a single frequency, and 35 volts/metre for dual frequencies.
ok now how about running the same test with REALISTIC amplitudes... no cellphone on this planet can generate 50V per Meter.
Cripes, my ham gear transmitting at 25 watts is only at 11 volts per meter as measured by a field strength meter...
Sheesh I might as well report that cellphones make cars unsafe because when I put the car's computer in my microwave oven and set it for 10 minutes the electronics fry out..
Call me when they perform a real test.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
No discman, no PDA, no notebook... nasty. More research like this would show exactly which electronic equipment can cause disruption and which are safe.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
Just to check in --
Airplanes can be crashed / have their course change by a sufficient number of people turning on their cell phones during flight?
RIGHT. This is why they search your shoes for bombs, but don't bother to take away your laptop, cell phone, and pager. Because the laptop cell phone and pager are HIGHLY dangerous articles.
If the FAA were convinced, even slightly, that your cellphone could have a legitimately bad effect on the safety of the flight, THEY WOULD NOT LET YOU HAVE IT. That should be obvious to anyone who has flown in the last two years.
You are right of course, but this is why the danger exists. Many aircraft have been certified with way-back technology, and it doesn't pay to re-certify these airliners with hot, new goodies that are designed to live in peace with mobile phones and other wireless toys.
Avionics system designs are very conservative, it's all designed to work forever. Latest-and-greatest simply doesn't fit their books. With the track record of modern software, I don't think we should be sorry for that..
Besides the danger to the aircraft, the mobile networks are also not designed to handle mobile phones moving between cells at 500mph and 'visible' to every cell in a 100 mile radius.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
When all the redundant power in an airplane fails, the hydralics and compass will still work. The pilots don't use the compass much whent he much more advanced electirc systems are working. So when the plane is hit but lightning (or something else which takes the power out) the pilot really needs the compass to know which way to go, and just then, every joey on the plane fires up his cell phone and the compass goes haywire.
I'm a private pilot, and I always thought the reason cell phone usage was restricted wasn't interferance (on a clear day, you don't need any electronics in the plane, just spark to the plugs) I thought it was becuase the massivly increased range of the phone screws up the cell to cell protocol.
M@
Krispy Cream is people
Clearly they need to install shielding. People taking phones onto planes and leaving them on is inevitable even if you tell them to switch them off. Having the safety of a plane rely on the goodwill of its passengers to follow instructions is ridiculous and is just a convenient way for airlines to shift the blame.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
I see your point. I do think it would be cool if the avionics folks had some sort of testbed set up for mobile phone developers, etc. I mean, just because the phone folks are capable of moving as quickly as they do doesn't mean that they have no responsibility to ensure that their devices don't muck up systems that are already in place. I really think that the responsibility lies on both parties. Given that there are decades of avionic system documentation and error logs / fixes (presumably via IV&V or a similar mechanism) you'd think that the involved parties could slow down and communicate a little bit. Neither aircraft nor telephones are going away anytime soon, so at some point they need to work this out.
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
Groucho Marx
So to prevent the airlines having to spend money, we have to be put at risk everytime we fly? If mobile phones really pose a risk to the safety of an aircraft then something more needs to be done than simply asking people to turn off their phones.
I'll second that.
Having read the article, there are some interesting points. First off they aren't alleging that using your cellphone will make the plane crash, but rather that it might cause some sort of distracting noise in the crews headsets and at worst could conceivably cause a false alarm on one of their warning lights. Sounds a little iffy to me, but ok, better safe than sorry on a plane... then I read on.
Turns out it doesn't matter on new jets - only ones certified pre-'89. So why don't they let people use their mobiles on the newer planes where it's not an issue? Back to the old 'conspiracy theories' on that one. Controllers like control. And the high prices on the sky phones can't hurt either.
Plus, as you kind of hinted at, if a cellphone can really cause even minor systems disruption on a pre-'89 jet, just imagine what someone that was seriously trying to cause a problem could do. It's absurd. If those jets really do have systems that can be so easily disrupted, they should be grounded until they're fixed. So either way, something doesn't add up here, either they're lying (or maybe just stretching the truth very far and very consciously) or they're not even trying to do their job, take your pick.
In an age when we know there are people trying to bring jetliners down, it's absolutely absurd to be flying jetliners that are so poorly insulated against EM interference that a mobile phone is a threat to them. Period.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
"I had fuel indications on the FMC going crazy on board the B737, that returned to normal when all electronic stuff in the back was switched off. I suspect a "Gameboy" electronic game device to have interfered, but this is no more than a guess. No, I did not ask to switch the toy back on again and investigate more in depth as I was responsible for the safety of 140 passengers and this would have been extremely irresponsible! This is not a situation in which to do such testing! This [ever-present responsibility accounts for why] there is no "proof" of the relationship."
Quoted from http://www.bluecoat.org/reports/Ladkin_97_EMI.pdf
...but there are two stages to addressing this problem:
1) Passengers, do obey all instructions from the crew. Even if you don't get yourself and your fellow passengers killed, you can get in serious trouble for wilfully interfering with the operation of a vessel under way.
2) Airlines, FIX YOUR AVIONICS. Anything *that* fragile should not be associated with terms like "safety", except in a negative sense. No legally purchased electronic gizmo should be able to disrupt flight systems, period.
Unfortunately they spend a substantial amount of their money on Congresscritters. Probably more than they would spend on retrofitting, but the point for them is not to have to listen to you ;).
How much is your bribery budget? Feed a Congresscritter today! :)
What about the cumulative effect of a hundred phones at once? If you don't ban them, then almost all passengers will leave them on.
I'm not sure if this really matters or not.... I'm asking.
plus-good, double-plus-good
It all came to me on 9/11, when I was watching the news. I'm a frequent flyer, so I know all about how they say you can't use your phone, disrupts frequencies, magnetic fields, blah blah blah...
But on the news, here's what they said that stuck in my mind. When the planes hit, Prez Bush was in the air on Air Force One. Security immediately went back to the press corps who were also on Air Force One and said turn OFF your cellphones NOW, we don't want anyone to be able to track us by the cellphones.
So ok, the MOST IMPORTANT PLANE IN THE COUNTRY can afford to have a press corps full of cellphones on during flight, but the plane I'm on is going to crash and burn if there's even one?
Riiiiight..
Despite my total lack of belief regarding the issue of disruption of flight operations, I do think that if you use a cell on a flight you should be beaten with a sack full of hammers. No one wants to listen to your stupid conversation with you boss/wife/frat buddy, that goes for buses, trains, theaters, bars ......whatever.
thats myI perfectly agree with you!
I know myself, when I talk on the cell phone I sometimes drive. I have no problem driving and talking at the same time... sometimes even avoiding other people attempting to swerve into my car at the same time. Company business is important, and if some people can't accept the fact that others have to speak with other people at certain times then I don't know what to say.
When a normal person talks on the cell phone, it's relatively silent, unless they are special or just rude. If people don't like hearing part of the conversation, then they shouldn't be listening in! it's worse than someone complaining about your diarehea sounds when your in the bathroom.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
If you've ever had your GSM phone sitting within a few feet of your stereo when it's contacting the cellsite and heard the horrible electronic noises that come through, or had it next to a monitor and seen the screen jumping, you must be pretty thick if you can't figure out for yourself that maybe, just maybe, your cellphone has the potential to mess with flight systems on an aircraft...
Ah, snopes. Yes, I ended up following a number of links today researching this topic. I also found information on the Exxon program referenced by the friendly attendant. It seems indeed to be the result of a series of urban legends which were believed by lawmakers and oil company execs who got scared and issued a bunch of warnings/laws/etc. Motorola also seems to have been trolled successfully.
Once again, like the cell phones + airplanes FUD, it seems to be a matter of bad/no science backing ridiculous regulations. Of course it is clear there is a growing prejudice against cell phone users which has resulted in a slew of nonsensical, reactionary laws that have nothing to do with real safety concerns.