Slashdot Mirror


First Cellphone Use On Airplane Given OK

s31523 writes "With over 1 billion cell phone users worldwide, and with so many business travelers, using the cell phone on the airplane has been a recent hot topic. Emirate airlines is announcing they will give the OK for cell phone use on their planes, making them the first airline to do so. The FCC and FAA still ban the use, but are working to determine safety implications, if any."

63 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. Anybody Try to use one on a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Tough to keep a signal at 500 kts and 36000 ft.

    1. Re:Anybody Try to use one on a plane? by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Tough to keep a signal at 500 kts and 36000 ft.

      Shouldn't be a problem, all the people hijacked on 9/11 were making calls with their cellphones, wasn't a problem for them.

    2. Re:Anybody Try to use one on a plane? by Cauchy · · Score: 2, Funny

      And the planes still managed to find their way to their destinations/target. Didn't seem to interfere with the navigation systems.

    3. Re:Anybody Try to use one on a plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The people on the planes during the 9/11 atacks used Airfone, not their cellphones. Airfone was installed in thousands of airplanes since it's introduction in 1984. It's costly to use but somehow I don't think people really cared about cost at that time.

      How else did you think the Airfone operator got hold of the recordings we've all been able to hear? You think the mother of Mark Bingham had a recording device ready just in case her son's plane would be hijacked and afterwards gave the recordings to Airfone?

    4. Re:Anybody Try to use one on a plane? by FirienFirien · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember an earlier post here something like a year ago, when one person left his phone on while in his two-seater (mechanical control = less worry about getting bricked out of the sky even if you're pretty sure it shouldn't interfere).

      He mentioned he got a cease-and-desist-please letter from his provider, because his phone being in contact with so many cells at once was causing their network to shit itself.

      As mentioned above - the problem is that, unlike wifi, the cellphone is designed to hand off seamlessly as you travel between cells. Think of 802.11s, wireless mesh networking, which measures signal strength and reconfigures the shared network to suit. If you have one box racing across the grid at high speed, it'll be reconfiguring hard and fast as the signal strengths change and it works out where the box should fit at each given instance. If you have 50, or however many you'd normally have on a commercial airline, the system will shit bricks. Routing packets outwards is easy - to route inwards you need to know where to send to, and if you're going fast enough then you're racing the sum of (signal (negligible) + processor cost of working out where you are + switches + rerouting + collision detection...)

      On a lighter note, if you have a satellite phone you're probably ok.

      --
      Browsing with +2 to insightful posts and a higher threshold makes the average post seen seem a lot more ingenious
  2. To those confused by MindStalker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To those confused, the real problem with cell phone use on airplanes is that you are traveling so fast that you are switching towers once every minute or so. One person is fine, millions doing it (which is what would happen if legal) would be a HUGE strain on cell phone networks. Airlines are installing cellphone tower equipment into their plane to eliminate this problem.

    That is all class.

    1. Re:To those confused by fdrebin · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The other problem will be ME going postal when the impolite person sitting next to me yaks and yaks for 5 hours straight on a flight.

      OK, I won't have a firearm, but I am large, strong, and will have become extremely psychotic.

      /F

      --
      Stupidity... has a habit of getting its way.
    2. Re:To those confused by fdrebin · · Score: 2, Interesting
      More like the WASP answer to excessive provocation.

      Perhaps my comment is best viewed with a sense of humor... It was intended to convey displeasure, hopefully to not actually predict the future.

      /F

      --
      Stupidity... has a habit of getting its way.
    3. Re:To those confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      To quote Yoda:
      "If yakking on his phone for 5 hours he is, yak at you for 5 hours he will not."

    4. Re:To those confused by noidentity · · Score: 2, Funny
      Airlines are installing cellphone tower equipment into their plane to eliminate this problem.

      Next problem: how to deal with a hundred foot tall cell tower sticking out of the top of the plane.

    5. Re:To those confused by fdrebin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      To quote Yoda:

      "If yakking on his phone for 5 hours he is, yak at you for 5 hours he will not."

      To quote Frankie Vallie:

      "Silence Is Golden".

      --
      Stupidity... has a habit of getting its way.
    6. Re:To those confused by eln · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well I hope they've at least solved the problem of autopilots deflating while in flight. Or, at the very least, I hope they've moved the air intake nozzle somewhere other than the belt buckle. After all, you can't smoke on planes anymore.

    7. Re:To those confused by vtcodger · · Score: 2, Informative

      Good post, but may be a moot point with current cellphone technology.

      My frequently faulty memory tells me that somewhere -- probably here on slashdot -- in the last year or so there is a link to an article about a test of cell phones on aircraft in flight. At low altitude the cell phone worked fine. At higher altitudes -- above a few thousand feet -- connections were not so good.

      Here's a link to an article (not the one I had in mind) about some 2003 tests in the vicinity of London, Ontario using several different cell phones and both metal an fabric skinned aircraft. Bottom line: Cell phones work pretty well at low altitudes, but the liklihood of a usable connection drops off rapidly with increasing altitude. At 8000 feet, the liklihood of connecting and conducting a conversation is below 10%. If their lower altitude results apply at higher altitudes, they project the liklihood of a connection at 20000 ft to be pretty close to zero. http://physics911.net/projectachilles.htm. They also discuss the handover issue and seem to conclude that at 500mph, there isn't enough time in each cell to complete the handovers necessary for call continuity. At least that's what I think they are saying.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    8. Re:To those confused by ari_j · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was looking for your comment - I would have posted the same thing (maybe in a bit less friendly tone). There are already enough things on planes that piss me off without the addition of 200 people loudly asking "Can you hear me now?" for the entire flight. In a similar vein, I have started a practice of turning in all unattended bags in the gate area to airport security. Most unattended bags are left by annoying people in the first place, so having those people miss their flight because they failed to heed the repeated warnings about leaving their bags unattended has a positive effect on my flight. ;)

    9. Re:To those confused by Vengeance_au · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The other problem will be ME going postal when the impolite person sitting next to me yaks and yaks for 5 hours straight on a flight.
      Amen to that - I've done a number of bus trips up and down the east coast of Australia, and you always get some jackass who talk at top volume on their mobiles for hours. Worse is 2 or more people, competing to talk over their neighbour as they infer that what they hear is what the person on the end of the mobile hears. Absolutely frustrating, and thats just in a cabin with 38 people in it. Same experiment in cattle class in a 747-600.... I'm guessing "air rage" will take a spike. Going to make it tough for the air marshalls - is that person a terrorist, or are they just pissed at having to listen to aunt Marie talk about her grandkids?

      That being said, anyone doing work on a Maxwell Smart style cone of silence? I'm keen to buy shares :-)
    10. Re:To those confused by Bassman59 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      going postal when the impolite person sitting next to me yaks and yaks for 5 hours straight

      Your only defense will be noise-cancelling earphones. It's not clear whether society has figured out all the rules of propriety when using a cell phone.

      Noise-canceling headphones only work with steady-state noise, such as the low drone of the aircraft as it flies. It can't do squat about someone's voice.

    11. Re:To those confused by ari_j · · Score: 2, Funny

      I have a cell phone. I am rarely without it. I have in the past carried up to three phones. That doesn't change my feeling that they should not be allowed in planes any more than smoking still is. As to the annoying people in the gate area who do not leave their bags unattended, I haven't figured out a way to get them left behind short of the rapture. If you know a way, post it here. Thanks!

    12. Re:To those confused by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Interesting

      you always get some jackass who talk at top volume on their mobiles for hours

      Anyone ever figured out why people talk louder on cellphones? Are they actually talking louder, or is it just a perception we have? Is it because on of their ears isn't available to hear back their loud talking so they compensate? A J. Seinfeld would say, "What's the deal?"

      Regular phones have what is called "sidetone", which is your own voice coming out your earpiece. This is the natural result of all parties on a landline communicating on the same circuit. This feedback mechanism essentially allows you to monitor your own volume level by letting you hear what the other person is hearing. Cell phones, on the other hand, do not have sidetone. Your outgoing voice and the other party's incoming voice are on two separate channels. Since people are not "trained" on the use of cell phones, and are even somewhat programmed by landline usage to expect sidetone, they exercise little control over their volume levels. Since the automatic reaction to not hearing your own voice clearly in a sidetone system is to speak louder, the ones that really shout into their cells are mindless morons who are allowing their programmed behavior on landline phones to happen on their cells.

      Basically, it comes down to this: if they're speaking above a normal conversational tone on a cell, then they're unthinking fools who can't adjust to lack of sidetone because they're too stupid to realize it's not there. The world is full of unthinking fools.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    13. Re:To those confused by aevan · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's all about distance.

      You see on a landphone you are connected to the person you're talking to over a wire, no problem.

      On a cell phone, you have to go thru the air first to the tower, and from there it goes thru a line to the other person. Because of that distance, you have to speak louder (c.f. shouting across the street). I'm assuming you are not the person being called, but in the presence of the cell phone user and hence your confusion about his volume. Rest assured on the other end his volume is just adequate.

      *Basing this on a coworker who I've noted talks louder depending on how far away the person is he's calling...inside the same building, over the same internal lines. >.

    14. Re:To those confused by MindStalker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually if you havn't noticed most all hospitals now let you use your phone in most areas.

  3. Good news for Bose by wbean · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sounds like good news for Bose; there are going to be a lot of people buying those noise-cancelling earphones.

    1. Re:Good news for Bose by devilspgd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, they don't do a fantastic job of blocking voices. In my experience it's actually easier to hear conversations using noise canceling headphones then without, since the headphones cancel out the other background noise.

      --
      Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
    2. Re:Good news for Bose by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nah, what you really want are a pair of canalphones. Personally, I have a pair of Shure's which were a godsend on my last flight, when I got to experience two cowboy-types behind me spending a full hour talking loud enough for half the cabin to hear them...

  4. Keep the ban for the sake of quiet by Retired+Replicant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't care if they determine that there is no need to ban cellphones because of interference with plane electronics -- I'd still rather the ban is kept anyway in order to keep flights from turning into cacophonous gab-fests. Flights are already uncomfortable and headache-inducing anyway...lets not make them noisy as well.

    1. Re:Keep the ban for the sake of quiet by WormholeFiend · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'd *much* rather listen to cellphone chatter than high-pitched informationless shrieking.

      How do you know those babies arent trying to communicate something about the bad airline food, the moran pushing/kicking on the back of the seat, someone's B.O./fart wafting through the cabin, etc.

  5. If flying wasn't bad enough by tulmad · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because if being crammed into coach wasn't bad enough, now you can be crammed into coach next to some asshat having a loud conversation on his phone for the entire flight. Sounds like a damn good time!

    --
    "In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
    1. Re:If flying wasn't bad enough by jav27 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think the rates that Emirates will charge are about $2 per minute. not bad compared to Airphone rates, but still expensive enough to make most people cautious about long use. Most likely on top of the $2 per minute, the carrier will also bill you for international roaming.

  6. Considering the way. . . by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Funny

    the vast majority of people drive while on the phone, I don't think I'd want to be on a plane with a pilot who's on his cel phone the whole time.

    Oh, you meant the passengers. I'll pass. I really don't need to have an entire flight filled with, "Guess where I'm at! Yeah, it's great! I can finally use my phone to call you from somewhere over [insert country/state/territory/ocean/whatever]. So how are things going? You get that urine problem taken care of."

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Considering the way. . . by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      You will be communicating with via a cell inside the plane. This leaves you with two choices:
      1. Pay a huge premium for the privilege of using the plane's cell, or
      2. Pay a huge premium for using the phone installed in your seat.
      Either way, it's likely to be so expensive that only real idiots would use it just to say "Hello! I'm on the plane!" I've flown quite a lot this year, and I don't think anyone used the in-seat phones on any flight I was on.
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. Health and safety issues by ShadowEFX · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope one of the health and safety issues they look in to is the effect a cell phone has on a trachea when forcefully inserted by an enraged passenger tired of hearing the unfortunate cell user blather for five continuous hours...

    1. Re:Health and safety issues by zoftie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thats what earlugs are for. :) I think they should mandate though microphone masks, so they keep their sounds to their face. Or something like talk booths where they go and talk all they want.

    2. Re:Health and safety issues by Brett+Buck · · Score: 2, Funny

      >I hope one of the health and safety issues they look
      >in to is the effect a cell phone has on a trachea
      >when forcefully inserted

            Trachea?

            Brett

    3. Re:Health and safety issues by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'd rather the make the offending caller use a Cone of Silence

  8. Does it mean... by ifchairscouldtalk · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... that I can play Snake on a plane now?

  9. Issues are technical, not just regulatory by bugnuts · · Score: 4, Informative

    Let's ignore the issues of cellphones interfering with the flight controls. We'll ignore that search for a random cellphone on some oriental airline long ago, purported to be messing up the landing.

    From what I understand, cellphones work by associating themselves with "cells" of coverage. The closer they are, the less power they use, and so on. When the user moves cells, the network switches them over to the new cell.

    From the air, a cellphone will see many, many different cells as being equally good. It will also have to switch across cells much faster than normal. Without the plane itself acting as a roving cell tower for the occupants, it seems to me that this would cause a lot of problems. Not only will all the cellphones be transmitting at full power, but the network will potentially have to handle many many more switches cell to cell, and faster than normal. There's evidence of this from TFA when it said some upscale, long-haul airlines are installing equipment onboard that will allow for cell phone use.

    I'd love to hear from anyone in the business that could shed more light on these technical issues, and whether they are as big of a problem as I suspect if airlines were to just say "Sure! Use your phone!"

    1. Re:Issues are technical, not just regulatory by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative
      With a cell site in the plane, your phone will go into low power mode and just talk to it, not any of the towers on the ground (in theory, at least). It may see other towers, but won't try to switch to them, because they will be weaker signals than the one a few metres away.

      The cell in the plane will communicate with a base station somewhere, probably via LEO satellites, without interacting with the rest of the phone network. Once the call reaches the ground, it will be routed accordingly. Equipment for the second part (getting the calls to the ground) is already in many planes for the phones you will find built into seats. The only difference is that now you can pay a lot to use your own handset, instead of theirs.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  10. Time of the loud mouth jackass begins in the air by Secret+Rabbit · · Score: 2, Funny

    We have all be subjected to the loud mouth jackass before. You know, the one that answers his/her phone in a restaurant and basically yells so that everyone can see/hear how important they are. Now the one save place we have from these people is going away.

    Perhaps we can convince the airlines to make the engine noise louder to drown them out.

  11. Cellphones don't endanger planes. by bananaendian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This "Cellphones in Airplanes" type of article appears periodically in /. and every time I have to rise from my grave to correct the false speculation about cellphones interfering with avionics.

    Cellphones do not cause aircraft to crash and burn! There. Thank you.

    Here's my longer explanation for those interested: Avionics ABC

    Airlines offering the use of GSM cellphone services equip the cabin with a basestation similar to one used RF-secure buildings and underground facilities. It will handle all the calls within the cabin and connect to the phone network via satellite datalink. It's all compatible, safe and tested method that has been used for years now on business jets.

    --
    www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
    1. Re:Cellphones don't endanger planes. by thpr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your prior post is interesting, detailed, and well-informed reading, but you fail to address an existing, published study stating that cellphone use on aircraft may be dangerous.

    2. Re:Cellphones don't endanger planes. by bananaendian · · Score: 3, Informative
      Your prior post is interesting, detailed, and well-informed reading, but you fail to address an existing, published study stating that cellphone use on aircraft may be dangerous.

      I'll address this again then.

      The study says there is an 'increased risk', 'higher than was previously thought'. What they did, was find that more often than thought before people's cellphones were on during critical parts of flights. They also found that laptop wifi and bluetooth were emitting RF. All they actually did was log the spectrum from these emissions on some flights. That is all their research found.

      Now, what they imply is that this is somehow more significantly dangerous then we previouly thought. My essay I think covered most of the things why this is not so dangerous.

      However I want to stress here the fact that any potential emissions from consumer RF-devices in the cabin will have a hard time competing with all the structures and shielding between the device and the antenna outside the aircraft or inside in the avionics bay. And no such device can dream of competing the awesome power of the spectrum from a fairly common natural sources, such as static build-up and lightning, under which such avionics have to perform on a daily basis.

      And if people are already leaving their cellphones and laptops on during flights by accident, where's the harm in allowing them to use them during flights in a controlled and tested environment. This might actually help people remember to turn them off more often during takeoffs and landings.

      --
      www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
    3. Re:Cellphones don't endanger planes. by Coffee.RF · · Score: 2, Informative

      You need to go back and watch that episode again. I've worked in both avionics, and the wireless industry, so I recorded it and have watched it several times just for laughs. The situation you are referring to was TOTALLY bogus. Instruments out of the rack, no shielding for the wiring, etc... You can't get much further from a real aircraft installation. (btw, it was a GSM handset, and I think they were testing at 800MHz) Additionally, when they did try a real aircraft, there was absolutely no effect from the cell phone. Given the frequency domain differences, cable shielding, and spatial diversity in an aircraft makes the amount of energy from your cell phone the equivalent of 'a bug on the windshield'.

  12. Re:Counting down... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 4, Funny

    I doubt it. After being readied by your pleasant trip through security where you begged for your insulin back, the comfort of flying with your knees crushed into the back of the seat in front of you while a kid kicks the back of your seat will sooth your troubled soul. And if that isn't enough you can eat your bag of pretzles (only on select flights) on your tiny tray. Then you can join the 10 person long line to the toilet only to get to the front in time to be ordered by the flight attendant to get back to the your seat because they'll be landing in 1 hour.

    No, I see no passengers being bothered by this.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  13. Bring back separate sections... by LGV · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...only this time instead of smoking/non-smoking, we need cell phone and non-cell phone sections. Or better yet, talking and no talking sections.

  14. Re:Counting down... by Stanistani · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ah, but you never know which straw is the one that finally blows out the camel's back, do you?
    Let's hope at some point airlines and our security apparatus will try to improve the airline travel experience.

    Enabling cellphone use on airliners ain't it.

  15. Oh the humanity! by k2dbk · · Score: 2, Funny

    The last bastion of semi-peace and quiet is gone.

    Assuming that your definition of peace and quiet includes high-volume white noise and even higher-volume crying babies.

  16. Re:The other issue ... by eln · · Score: 2, Informative

    You probably have a CDMA phone. GSM phones, such as those used by Cingular, cause interference with various noise-emitting devices. My desk phone at work always buzzes about a second before I get a phone call on my Cingular phone.

  17. Re:Can we keep it banned? by soft_guy · · Score: 2, Funny

    When the President is flying coach on Delta, we'll take your point seriously.

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  18. New reality show by DreamingReal · · Score: 3, Funny

    "What do you get when you sit 120 people in seats designed for Erkel for 4 hours with 2 bathrooms, no smoking, available alcohol, and constant cell phone use?

    Aluminum-Tube Deathmatch at 36,000 Feet!

    Premiering this July on SPIKE TV!"

    --
    We want some answers and all that we get
    Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat

    - Ministry
  19. First you will hear this really stupid tune by nephridium · · Score: 5, Funny
    Then you will witness an endless flow of words that apparently just won't ebb down: "Yea, hello? Hello? Hello? Yea, can you hear me? Hello? Can you.. Yea. I can hear you. Yea, the reception is lousy. The reception. The RECEPTION. RECEPTION. Yea. Uh-huh. Yep. Yea, I'm in the airplane now. We can now make calls from the plane, ain't that great? Yea, we took off just a couple of minutes ago. We TOOK OFF. Yea, I'm actually calling you from the sky, I'm like god, except that I have a better ring tone [hysterical giggle]. Ah, nice we're getting dinner now [makes hand movement to stewardess (inquiring about his culinary preferences) indicating he's in an important conversation]. Yea. Yep. No, haven't eating for hours, it's great that they serve dinner now, I'm starving. How's the dog? [...]"

    A man was brutally killed yesterday aboard flight AA322. Police reports indicate there was no connection to a terrorist plot. According to an eye witness "he was just a really, really annoying guy with a cell phone."


    --


    And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
    1. Re:First you will hear this really stupid tune by noidentity · · Score: 2, Funny

      And oddly, nobody on the plane saw who killed him. "He just died suddenly. I'm not sure what happened. All I remember is that I had this sudden feeling of peace and only later realized that someone had died."

  20. What about other electronics? by AlpineR · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't care about being able to use my cellphone, but can I please use other electronics on the airplane?

    I'd love to listen to my iPod for the entirety of my flight, not just the half hour between reaching cruising altitude and beginning descent. Ideally I could put the earbuds in when I sit down and keep them while we taxi, fly, taxi, deboard, and collect our luggage. The flight attendents would treat me as a terrorist if I did that now.

  21. Next year's blockbuster by SmlFreshwaterBuffalo · · Score: 2, Funny

    Coming next summer: "Cellphones On A Plane!"

  22. Not exactly news, but CNN thinks so by eggboard · · Score: 4, Informative

    Emirates said months ago that they were going to add this service, which uses an on-board picocell and relays calls very expensively very satellite. Should run at least US$2.50 per minute for calls. I wrote about this in The Economist back in September (not Emirates news): RyanAir will launch in-flight calling by the second half of 2007 on hundreds of its planes. That will be the first major deployment.

    --
    Freelance tech journalist for the Economist, MIT Technology Review, Macworld, and others
  23. Earplugs won't work... by MS-06FZ · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Earplugs are good at muffling excessively loud sounds, particularly keeping them from damaging your ears. But you can still hear them.

    People need to make two changes to their behavior in order to resolve this:
    1: Be conscious of what effect your cell phone conversations, etc. are having on others, and be reasonable. Be courteous to them, and maybe don't talk on your phone in a crowded space.
    2: If someone else is annoying you, confront them about it, but be polite. Getting them angry won't solve the problem, it'll make it worse. Sitting around being grouchy about it also won't solve the problem.

    --
    ---GEC
    I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
    1. Re:Earplugs won't work... by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem with this is the sheer number of selfish assholes in the world. It's bad enough on trains, but being stuck on a long haul flight with these bastards would be too much.

      I would never dream of holding a loud phone conversation in a quiet restaurant, or recklessly endangering people by using one while driving, or holding up a store queue by answering my phone while at a counter, or leaving the ringer on during a symphony or an exam because "my calls are important".

      Yet I have seen all these things happen over and over again. The worst thing is that the people who do them have such a sense of entitlement that they believe they are doing nothing wrong, and that you are an asshole for objecting to their sociopathic behaviour.

      I want to start a new political movement. Every time someone does something like this, you take their phone and smash it. Violence against the people who do it is also fully justified.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
  24. Re:re EM interference by jrockway · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You trust the Mythbusters? They do stunts for movies, not actual science.

    Here's an article from the IEEE Spectrum: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/mar06/3069.

    --
    My other car is first.
  25. Re:Counting down... by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was in front of this guy a few years back. He's on his cellphone, talking to his credit card company. He's trying to be quiet about it, but ends up giving them his full name, card info, mother's maiden name, and some password (I was surprised by this last one until I tried to talk to my own CC company recently...they were looking at the wrong account which apparently needed a password to access. When I gave them my account number again, my account wasn't password protected.).

    So I've already had my pad of paper out for a few minutes, I jot down all his information. When my stop comes, before his, I stand up, make a show of tearing the page out of my notebook, fold it up, and hand it to him. "Be more careful," I tell him, and walk off.

    And I'm not sure why some people talk so loudly on the cell phone. I don't fly often, but I agree with others...let people text or something, but no calls please.

  26. Re:I'll be happy when they allow 'other' things by winkydink · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wish you would be allowed to sleep completely flat (as in a bunk like a ship would be good enough for me). Would be great for trans-atlantic flights. I fly quite frequently and changing hours, planes and means of transport make me kinda tired. The average flight is 18 hours, with delays 24 hours of eyes-wide-open travelling fun.

    Most airlines provide this on long-hauls. It's called First Class.

    I also wish they would allow you to have sex on an airplane. Might not be for all Slashdotters, but as a frequent member of the High Mile Club,...

    Beating off in the head doesn't get you into the Mile High Club.

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  27. Re:wow...this is a hot topic by mark-t · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's always been technologically possible to make cell phone calls from the plane, it's just not actually ALLOWED.

  28. Re:Can we keep it banned? by Dynedain · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did I say I am making those calls? Did I say I want to annoy you?

    No.

    All I am expressing is that there are people that need to be able to be reached anytime, anywhere, and that the statement "Nobody is so important they can't be unreachable for a few hours." is completely false in the modern world.

    --
    I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  29. Cell phones are not a major threat to air safety. by Gordo_1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And the FAA knows it.

    Yes, I know... Mythbusters showed that a hugely amplified transmitter placed practically on top of the instrumentation could have a measurable effect. There was little even remotely cell-phone-like about the experiment at that point.

    Do you really think that after all the Draconian (though mostly useless) security checks they put you though at the airport, the FAA would just say, "oh well, there's this real threat posed to flight avionics by cell phones, but we'll just ask the airlines to have flight attendants smile and ask passengers to put their cell phones in 'Airplane mode' when they hand out pretzels"?

    No, they wouldn't. If they really thought that planes might go down from cell phone transmissions, they'd make you take out your cell phone battery at security and place it in a lead box with a key and then they'd scan the checked luggage compartment for cell signal and empty your socks and underwear on the tarmac in search of offending devices.

    Does anyone seriously think that of the thousands of flights and hundreds of thousands of passengers that fly in the US every day, not a single one of them receives an SMS, voicemail or email during flight? Likely billions of cell phone data/voice packets find their way to and from cell phones sitting in planes during takeoff, flight and landing every day.

    It's not crashing flights.

  30. Lying airlines (Anybody Try to use one ...) by mi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Tough to keep a signal at 500 kts and 36000 ft.

    These concerns are between the cell-phone users and their service-providers. Governments and airlines need not interfere. The etiquette (or lack thereof) of chatting for hours is similar.

    Airlines and the governments have been lying through their teethes to us on this and other matters for a long time... It is good thing, someone is finally breaking ranks:

    Please switch off all mobile phones, since they can interfere with the aircraft's navigation systems. At least, that's what you've always been told. The real reason to switch them off is because they interfere with mobile networks on the ground, but somehow that doesn't sound quite so good. On most flights a few mobile phones are left on by mistake, so if they were really dangerous we would not allow them on board at all, if you think about it. We will have to come clean about this next year, when we introduce in-flight calling across the Veritas fleet. At that point the prospect of taking a cut of the sky-high calling charges will miraculously cause our safety concerns about mobile phones to evaporate.
    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  31. No sidetone? by kalleguld · · Score: 2, Informative

    All my phones have had sidetones (at least if I've gotten the term right). Have you ever tried blowing into the mic on your cell? Then you can easily hear the sidetone.

    --
    Sigs are bad for your health