Slashdot Mirror


Alaska Airlines Jettisons Paper Manuals For iPads

fullymodo writes "Alaska Airlines has become the first major US airline to hop on board the paperless bandwagon. While it's not quite ready to ditch paper navigation charts just yet (though that is under consideration), the airline has announced that it will be replacing its traditional flight manuals with iPads, which will be loaded up with the GoodReader app and PDFs of 41 different manuals and other materials.' So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?"

220 comments

  1. Misunderstanding of intent by iluvcapra · · Score: 4, Informative

    So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

    If the plane has a bird strike and has to ditch in the Hudson, they don't want you to miss announcements because you're busy flinging Angry Birds. It's not about the electronics, it's about them having your attention during the two parts of flight where all the crashes happen.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    1. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by amicusNYCL · · Score: 5, Funny

      If the plane has a bird strike and has to ditch in the Hudson, they don't want you to miss announcements because you're busy flinging Angry Birds.

      And God help you if you fling a bird directly into the engine.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because your e-reader isn't flight-critical and theirs are.

    3. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then they're stupid. just read a book through the whole thing instead.

    4. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      I don't buy it. There's very little that a passenger can do in the event of a crash other than ensure they've got their seatbelt fastened and head down. There's not a whole lot they can say that will help. In the event that they do say something, the general hysteria in the cabin will inform those who were reading an e-reader. If it were about having your attention, they wouldn't allow passengers to sleep during take off and landing. I can assure you that people are far more attentive while using an e-reader than they are while asleep. And I can also assure you that there's almost zero difference between the attention levels of someone reading an e-reader and someone reading a dead-tree edition, which is not only allowed but encouraged by all the reading material they provide you (newspapers, SkyMall, etc.)

      I think it's more about a show of dominance. Just like you can do while training a dog, the more you assert your dominance, the more people will act submissively during the rest of the flight experience. And when people are disobedient, they tend to challenge the least sensible rules first, so having a rule against any electronic device means they'll attempt that rather than the cell phone rule, the seat backs and tray tables rule, the seatbelt rule or the bathroom usage rule.

    5. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      And that is different from reading a book or napping, how?

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    6. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are a cynic. :-P

    7. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

      More importantly, the flight crew has better things to do than become experts in electronic devices. It's easiest to just say shut everything off.

      Is your device in airplane mode?
      Is your device simply an iPod with no radio?
      Is this an Apple iPad or is this a Chinese knockoff that is spewing radio frequencies outside the expected range?
       

    8. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by phme · · Score: 1

      But it's perfectly ok to read a newspaper?

    9. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by the_other_chewey · · Score: 0

      And that is different from reading a book or napping, how?

      Headphones.

      Yes, the plane's own entertainment system uses headphones too,
      but the PA system ties into those, so the crew can still get your attention.

    10. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Have you ever flown on a turbulent flight? When the plane starts dropping precipitously, you know it.

      It's not as though anything you'll do prior to the crash is going to help you, except wearing a seatbelt (which you'd be doing anyway). Still, assuming that you've eclipsed that mark, humans are still cooperative enough that the person next to you might just poke you on the shoulder and notify you that, hey, didn't you notice the plane has lost a lot of altitude really fast? And the oxygen mask dropping in your face might be a good cue, too.

    11. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      And yet headphones were OK on flights for a long, long time. The ban on electronics is only about 20 years old (except for radios, which have been forbidden for ages). Lots of flyers had Walkmans (Walkmen?) with them in the 80s.

    12. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      It usually takes some time for rules to adapt to new technology, Portable mediaplayers with headphones was new technology.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    13. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always thought it was because a vast majority of the population is incredibly stupid with electronics meaning that just because you personally are aware enough to turn off the wifi (or have a non-wifi device), most people won't know how to do it. By just saying "Turn it off" they cover their bases.

      Arguing with your flight attendants to have your device on for the short time from takeoff seems pointless to me. You've got three possibilities here. Either they're smart enough to understand and leave you be (which would cause other people to also start complaining meaning they have to explain exactly how the fuck wifi works to multiple people), stupid enough to just keep insisting that you turn it off since they don't know what you're saying, or they're just trying to follow the rules and tell you to turn it off anyhow.

    14. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by JonySuede · · Score: 1

      on Lufthansa a nice attendant ask me to put down my journal while she spoke. After her speech, she then gave me a beer, Lufthansa airline rocks !

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    15. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

      If the plane has a bird strike and has to ditch in the Hudson, they don't want you to miss announcements because you're busy flinging Angry Birds. It's not about the electronics, it's about them having your attention during the two parts of flight where all the crashes happen.

      Really?! If we're about to ditch, do you really think I'm going to ignore what's going on just to finish another page? The flight crew won't be competing with an e-reader for my attention in an emergency. A paper book, which is apparently ok to read during take-off, is equivalent to an e-reader IMO.

    16. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) You can be losing a whole lot of altitude without really noticing. Just take a look at flight 447, they didn't realise they were falling so fast until it was too late.

      2) You only get oxygen masks falling when you lose cabin pressure. It's very possible to have a major issue with the aircraft and maintain pressure.

      This may well add up to a plane full of people not wearing seat belts and not realising what's going on.

      Besides all that, we're talking about takeoff and landings, not cruise conditions. In these two flight phases everyone expects some bumps. The flight crew would need to get everyone's attention really quickly to tell them to brace for an impact (not a lot of time until you hit the ground). It's also quite likely to have a half decent survival rate on takeoff or landing since you're not falling from 30,000+ feet. The likelihood of survival decreases if idiots are playing on their toys and not paying attention.

    17. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by jdpars · · Score: 1

      There is also a good reason not to have cell phones and 3G-enabled devices on, though. At high enough altitudes, your uninterrupted signal can connect to multiple towers, thus hogging up many more than you would on the ground.

    18. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by TheInsaneSicilian · · Score: 1

      The likelihood of survival decreases if idiots are playing on their toys and not paying attention.

      Does the statement "and nothing of value was lost" apply here?

      On a more topic-related note, the flight crew does not need to have attention from 100% of the passengers. Likely they would need less than 50% and hopefully at least 1-2 per row. If you are sitting there, completely not paying attention, and you don't notice the flight attendants waving their arms and shouting instructions, you will probably notice the person next to you flinging themselves forward and putting their head between their knees.

      While I understand your point that the chances of survival increase if people are paying attention to authority figures / those in-the-know and actually listen to their instructions, it is naive to believe that just because someone isn't playing with some toy that they are actually paying attention. There are those that will be daydreaming out the window, dozing off or engaged in some conversation with their travel companion.

      It makes sense for people to read the instructions in the seat-back pocket at least once in their life. It makes sense for people to actually listen to the flight attendants during their overview of safety procedures at least once in their life. And it makes sense for people to actually be aware of their surroundings, to at least know that something is not right and that they should seek out someone that might be able to help them (i.e. flight crew)...

      In the end, no matter how many things we ban or how many rules we impose on having to pay attention, there will always be some people that will be over-prepared in a crisis and those that are under-prepared. If some crisis happens, I just hope I'm sitting next to an over-prepared person who notices I'm asleep and nudges me awake. Thank you in advance, fictional person!

    19. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by scribblej · · Score: 1

      Right, that's obvious bullshit, since I read a book when I fly, and am completely inattentive. No one minds.

    20. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      If you do actually get Lufthansa when you book it. Damn Star Alliance shit put me on a United cattle wagon on my last transatlantic flight. That's like booking first class and getting put into the cargo hold instead.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    21. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that truly is a consideration, then all airlines are guilty of reckless endangerment.
      "Turn of your e-reader because we can't have you reading on an electronic device but please feel free to flip through our compementary magazine filled with photo ads designed to attract your attention."

    22. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Not that new, really. The FM radio rules came out in 1961, which was the same year that FM acquired the ability to broadcast stereo, about 5 years after the transistor radio started to become popular, and still quite a bit before the popularity of FM broadcasting. The personal-electronics rules weren't issued - as far as I can discover - until late 1993, or 13 years after the introduction of the Walkman to the US.

    23. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      And how many people were lugging FM radios on planes?

    24. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by war4peace · · Score: 1

      If people don't feel like paying attention, they won't pay attention.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    25. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by JonySuede · · Score: 1

      I have booked on Expedia and my ticket where specific for Lufthansa, they were not the, cheaper by an iota, Star Alliance one (which Lufthansa is a member of).

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    26. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      Lucky. I booked via a local travel agency. I assumed that booking a flight that shows up as Lufthansa in a german travel agency would actually get you a Lufthansa flight. Well, I learned my lesson....

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    27. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by JonySuede · · Score: 0

      was the lesson : do not trust the German on anything else than beer, anal sex and rigorous mechanical engineering ?

      --
      Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
    28. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The likelihood of survival decreases if idiots are playing on their toys and not paying attention

      Does the statement "and nothing of value was lost" apply here?

      That rather depends on whether the idiot is between you and the emergency exit, doesn't it?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    29. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Transistor radios weren't very large; a Sony TR-63 from 1958 would easily fit in a jacket pocket, so I'm not sure I'd call it "lugging". My point, though was that the technology was banned almost as soon as it became available, not a decade later.

    30. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      If the plane has a bird strike and has to ditch in the Hudson, they don't want you to miss announcements because you're busy flinging Angry Birds.

      So now the pilots are going to miss ATC instructions because they're busy flinging Angry Birds.

    31. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by tibit · · Score: 1

      We the people, with our two-bit brains. Electronics on, attention off. Electronics off, attention on. Easy, right?

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    32. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And based on their A320 amongst other issues, do not trust their mechanical engineering.

    33. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by ryanov · · Score: 1

      Which would you rather be smashed in the face with: the in-flight mag or an iPhone?

    34. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why am I allowed to read a novel, or the in-flight magazine?

    35. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by arisvega · · Score: 1

      Star Alliance has the cutest attendants.

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
    36. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      So how is a kindle more distracting than an actual physical book then?

    37. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, Yeah? And how about banning paper books? You known, sometimes, the stories printed in dead trees can be as much distraction as any iPad game.

    38. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, when reading a book or napping, you're not using your ebook reader. :-P

    39. Re:Misunderstanding of intent by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Exactly. If we already have people foolish enough to text and email on their blackberrys WHILE they're driving and that don't see what the problem is, imagine how attentive they would be when they're sitting in an armchair in 1st business class.

      Well, flight safety and electronics aside ...

      Yes, I know there are floor lights and where they are, yes I know how the damned oxygen mask works and to put mine of first, yes I've checked where my nearest exit is, no I don't believe that the "wreckage location/floatation devices" will help in any way in the event of a water landing, and I do in fact know how to put that damned inflatable vest on and to use those little tubes on the sides, my seat belt is already buckled ... now, where's by damned beer?

      For anybody who has flown more than about 5-10 times, we pretty much know what the safety speech says, and we know how it all works.

      Angry birds or no, I'm not exactly paying close attention now ... I still understand why I need to be listening in case something goes wrong (and why I can't use headphones not attached to the plane), but the flight safety speech hasn't changed in the 17 or so years I've been flying.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  2. So late? by Michael_gr · · Score: 1

    I was working for a company that developed a tablet-like device for airline pilots back in 1996! Sure, it didn't have touch and it was 486 based and it was thicker, but it's really nothing new. What do pilots from other countries use? I won't be surprised to hear that the US is very conservative in this area.

    1. Re:So late? by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      I was working for a company that developed a tablet-like device for airline pilots back in 1996! Sure, it didn't have touch and it was 486 based and it was thicker, but it's really nothing new.

      I think the innovative part is that an iPad can be had for $500 and the pilots can keep it updated without paying hundreds of dollars a year in subscription fees to Jeppesen or some service provider.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:So late? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      ...and the pilots can keep it updated without paying hundreds of dollars a year in subscription fees to Jeppesen...

      It is unlikely that any FAA requirement for flight pubs can be fulfilled by random downloads from the Interwebs. Alaska is almost certainly contracting with Jeppesen for a lot of their material, as Jeppesen is an accepted and RELIABLE source.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:So late? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alaska is almost certainly contracting with Jeppesen for a lot of their material, as Jeppesen is an accepted and RELIABLE source.

      Yes, that is correct. The pilots are carrying the same information they always were, it's just not printed out and carried in a notebook.

      I'm posting as AC because I'm not a company spokesperson.

  3. Misread by professorflipwig · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else read the title and think they were throwing iPad manuals out of planes?

    --
    Hostes futuri sint socii.
    1. Re:Misread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did anyone else read the title and think they were throwing iPad manuals out of planes?

      Chalk one.

    2. Re:Misread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did anyone else read the title and think they were throwing iPad manuals out of planes?

      tout les francais

    3. Re:Misread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only way it can be read as far as I can tell. My guess is that someone really wanted to have jettison and iPad in the title.

    4. Re:Misread by Lanteran · · Score: 1

      Me.

      --
      "People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.
  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Why PDF? by hackertourist · · Score: 1, Interesting

    OK, I know why. PDF is easy to create, and they probably already had the documents in PDF formats anyway.

    But if they want to do it right, they'll need to at least create PDFs in an iPad-specific format (page size and font size optimized for easy reading, without having to scroll on the page).

    Better yet, don't use PDF at all but a format more suited for digital documentation. Even HTML would be a step up.

    1. Re:Why PDF? by Fnordulicious · · Score: 3, Informative

      Navigation charts are bigger and more detailed than what could fit on a single screen, so scrolling is necessary anyway. The navigation plates (terminal procedures, approach, departure, etc.) can fit all on a screen and for the US all of them are already available as PDFs. Here’s an example iPad app that Googling produced: http://www.ipadappsdude.com/plates-chart-viewer-navigation/

    2. Re:Why PDF? by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      Navigation charts are an example of information that can benefit from being put onto a computer. The computer can overlay the chart with all sorts of information that you need, but can't necessarily find on a navigation chart, like the navigation plates you mention.

      The next step would be to provide a GPS input to the reader, so it can place a position marker on the chart, and e.g. automatically pull up the correct navigation plate for the airport you're currently on.

    3. Re:Why PDF? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      Many of the iPad apps already include georeferenced approach plates and airport diagrams, and support third party GPS receivers with support for WAAS. There are already receivers and app support for ADS-B which isn't even supported by most of the carriers at this point.

  6. Why? by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Informative

    So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

    One, I'm sure they tested that model of iPad thoroughly in their cockpit to make sure it didn't interfere with anything. They also know they weren't modified an any way that could generate additional RF. They didn't test your gadget, and they don't want to take any chances.

    Two, people are far more willing to accept small risks when there's a tangible benefit. Switching to iPads saves weight, and thus money. Letting you use your device during take-off and landing doesn't benefit them at all.

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    1. Re:Why? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      Letting you use your device during take-off and landing doesn't benefit them at all.

      So the technical answer really is "they're assholes"? Good to know!

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    2. Re:Why? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      So the technical answer really is "they're assholes"? Good to know!

      If by "assholes", you mean that they're prioritizing the safety of everyone on the plane over your desire to read an e-book during takeoff and landing, then yes, they're assholes.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    3. Re:Why? by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 2

      Well, it infringes on his rugged individualism. After all, getting told to do something for the safety of the majority and to stop something that benefits only him would be SOCIALISM. Yes, comrade, SOCIALISM. We do not want that around here, do we?

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    4. Re:Why? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      If you read TFA you would see that they only use them while on the ground and above 10,000 feet. Coincidently about the same as the passengers.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    5. Re:Why? by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      That model? The same exact model I have? The same one made by the thousands at Foxconn? I doubt it has any extra shielding or anything.

      Airlines need to revise their rules. I dont see why I cant have an ebook on during take off and landing. And by "during" I mean 35 minutes before landing. Heck I'm okay for 5 or so minutes, but once it couldnt use it for an hour. That's also a problem.

    6. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure you could pay them to have your particular device certified to be used on their plane. But I'm also sure you couldn't afford it.

    7. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had lunch with a pilot friend of mine last week and let me assure you they "test" their iPads on the flight deck all the time.

  7. Non-wifi devices by jjohnson · · Score: 2

    You have to turn off your non-wifi ebook reader because when the flight attendants are getting things going, "turn off all portable electronic devices" is a lot easier and faster than learning to tell which are and which aren't, and checking that those passengers who are still poking a screen are using something non-wifi enabled.

    And really, it's not that big a hardship to turn off your device for ten minutes during takeoff.

    --
    Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    1. Re:Non-wifi devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say it is more than 10 minutes on average between "closing the door" and being above 10,000 feet. Upon landing, it may be closer to 10 minutes. The rules annoy me anyway, but this news is particularly irritating since I fly with Alaska Airlines every week. I use an e-ink ebook reader which has very low power usage and is as easy for a flight attendant or owner to discern from a backlit LCD tablet as a paper book. It is no more distracting than a paper book in the case of an emergency and is probably a less dangerous projectile than a hardcover book in the case of a quick change in velocity (crash or turbulence). Admittedly, flight attendants couldn't easily determine whether the wifi is turned on, but they just have to trust the user just as they do today when they tell us to stow our electronics. They have to trust that they have actually been turned off even though we have stowed them in a place where the flight attendants cannot directly confirm it.

      I just wish a major e-ink reader company *ahem* Amazon *ahem* would lobby the airlines and/or FAA to adjust these rules. It would be to Amazon's benefit. I don't use my ebook reader very much at all any more because, so far this year, I would have lost 12 to 24 hours of reading time thanks to my flights. I buy or check out physical books (thanks library!) just because of this rule and I probably won't buy another ebook reader until the rule changes. I have plenty of coworkers who feel the same way. It is unfortunate, as ebook readers are generally convenient and would be popular for travelers like myself since we always try to travel as lightly as possible, but then we can't even use them during part of one of the most sensible times on our schedule (our commute). I got away with keeping it on during take off and landing for probably about six months until flight attendants got half way educated about ebook readers, but not learning the important half about e-ink. It was frustrating to have to put away my ebook reader while the senior citizens around me could continue reading their heavy books.

    2. Re:Non-wifi devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they just don't want shit flying all over the cabin in the event of a rough take-off/landing.

      They won't let me even carry a pocket knife onto an airplane, if there was even the slightest risk of any electronic device causing issues the TSA would be banning them as well.

      It's simply a case of telling people that it avoids flying objects in the event of a problem not doing much to convince people to stop using them. But if you tell them that using the items will cause the problem in the first place, now it's a matter of self-preservation and people are more likely to comply.

      In reality, people use all kinds of electronics all the time. The only reason I bother to shut my phone off is to save battery life.

  8. the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's right there in the article, fullymodo.

    'The iPad is considered a Class 1 electronic device, meaning it is stowed during takeoff and landing under Federal Aviation Administration regulations.'

    So your book reader has to be stowed and this iPad is too.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by PRMan · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Hope they don't need to reference the manuals in an emergency takeoff or landing situation...

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Noughmad · · Score: 0

      It's right there in the article, fullymodo.

      'The iPad is considered a Class 1 electronic device, meaning it is stowed during takeoff and landing under Federal Aviation Administration regulations.'

      So your book reader has to be stowed and this iPad is too.

      Then what's the point of having it on board, when the majority of accidents happen during takeoff or landing?

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    3. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Then what's the point of having it on board, when the majority of accidents happen during takeoff or landing?

      Well, as to that, if I'm ever in a plane-crashing-disaster-movie sort of situation on take-off or landing, I'm really hoping the pilot isn't up from flipping through the manual at the time....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Hope they don't need to reference the manuals in an emergency takeoff or landing situation...

      Me too! If that's the case, then they should probably do something else for a living.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Fnordulicious · · Score: 1

      You don’t need plates and charts during takeoff and landing. During those periods you should already know exactly where you are and what you’re doing, and tower will provide any extra advice you need. Paper would be stowed at the same time to keep it from bouncing around the cockpit, so stowing the iPad isn’t really any different. Also since it’s a class 1 electronic device it will be turned off during those two critical periods as well. It’s already legal for IFR general aviation to use things like iPads for navigation reference, it’s just that Alaska Airlines is the first commercial airline to do so.

    6. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Splab · · Score: 2

      Actually, during emergencies they are using a quick reference manual on how to get the plane down safely.

      (Although quick is a relative term, they are meant for planes at altitude, take the one ditched on the Potomac, they only managed a few checkpoints before they had to ditch the plane.)

      Having an iPad for looking up might be good, my personal experience with the iPad is it isn't doing what I want it to do - the advantage of a book with paper in it is you aren't risking a software crash.

    7. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then what's the point of having it on board, when the majority of accidents happen during takeoff or landing?

      Well, as to that, if I'm ever in a plane-crashing-disaster-movie sort of situation on take-off or landing, I'm really hoping the pilot isn't up from flipping through the manual at the time....

      It happens... go listen to the FDR audio from flight 1549.

    8. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by gman003 · · Score: 1

      In a takeoff or landing accident, you don't have time to look things up in the manual. An all-engines-out accident at 40,000 ft, you've got nearly a full minute, going straight down. Gliding, potentially a full hour. And that's in what's very close to a worst-case scenario. In a more common accident, such as a malfunction in one engine, you could theoretically continue without fixing it (redundant systems), but you still want to try to fix it, or at least make sure it's not a symptom of something else. So if, say, one engine's fuel pump stops, you can have the pilot continue flying the plane while the copilot looks it up on his iPad, tries a few things to fix it in-flight, and if all fails, makes sure that it isn't a sign of something else going wrong.

      Plus, I imagine the manuals are used frequently on the ground. A pre-flight checklist might be on there, or even just maintenance procedures.

    9. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by egranlund · · Score: 1

      Why would they need to study charts in an emergency takeoff or landing? In those situations it's not "lets get the plane to this city" it's "lets get the plane somewhere where it won't blow up when we get it there".

    10. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realise that a lot of commercial aeroplanes glide like rocks, right? That hour you talk about is highly unlikely (even for large planes that glide remarkably well) and you're more likely talking minutes before you hit the ground.

      Manuals are used by pilots in both takeoff and landing situations. Each airport is different and each airport requires different approach procedures. And that's all without taking into account different regulations for different countries. Pilots use charts and manuals on each and every flight and I really wouldn't want them to be without their reference material.

      From the pilots I've met (I work in aviation) I wouldn't trust them to be able to deal with software issues on the ground, never mind when it actually matters. Not saying they're stupid, just that many of them are not very computer literate and there's a lot less to go wrong with laminated manuals than there is with iPads.

    11. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hope they don't need to reference the manuals in an emergency takeoff or landing situation...

      How do you think they used the paper manuals? Kept them on their lap during take off in case they needed them for an emergency?

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
    12. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that in any emergency, usually one pilot is flying the plane, while the other runs through the troubleshooting checklist and manuals.

    13. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe "manual" doesn't mean to me what it means in aviationland. I imagined they would have a paper (or similar) checklist all right, though. When things get scary people forget things.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1

      I don't know if this applies to commercial pilots, but here goes.

      Military pilots are required to write, word for word, the emergency procedures for their aircraft. Yes, the manuals and checklists are still there, but it's nice knowing that you already have it committed to memory.

      --
      I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
    15. Re:the iPad is stowed dring takeoff and landing by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      They can glide for more than a few minutes unless they're already low, for example British Airways Flight 9 (747-200) could have glided for 23 minutes and covered 91 nmi from FL370, but they were able to restart the engines.

      A320, 747, 767 have a better glide ratio than the typical Cessna 172 trainer, meaning they can cover more ground and have a higher possibility of getting to an airport without the engines, which is the real concern.

  9. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Our Emergency Procedures checklists will continue to be available in the cockpit in hardcopy.

  10. Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan...] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

    Because computers have internal electronics that generate electric currents in the GHz range, and it is not impossible that these electrical currents could radiate enough energy to interfere with airplane electronic and navigation systems.

    Presumably they have tested the particular devices that the pilots are using, and verified that these particular devices don't interfere. If they haven't tested your particular device, then they don't know that it won't interfere. Probably it won't. They don't know that for sure.

    And, also, how do they know that it doesn't have wifi? Are they supposed to inspect all electronic devices on boarding? (Are you willing to be charged extra to pay for a person to do that?)

    This is, undoubtably, absurdly over cautious. However, the penalties for failure are very large, and the cost for being overcautious (in the form of inconvenience) is paid by you, not by them.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  11. Pilots also turn off the iPad below 10,000 feet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In another version of the story ( http://www.king5.com/news/Alaska-Airlines-pilots-using-iPads-in-cockpit-122475984.html ) it says that the pilots also do not use the iPad during the same period that passengers are prohibited from using electronic devices.

  12. a pad of paper isn't expensive if it breaks by kd8our · · Score: 0

    can't break a pad of paper and if you do it isn't going to set you back a few hundred. also people are not going to steal paper as much and if it is stolen see prior argument. ipads are nice, but they are a high end toy for people with money to blow. there are a handful of situations were a device like this is really useful. apple is better at marketing than any company i know in the tech world. they have people convinced that x86 intel hardware should sell for the prices of over a decade ago. unless the ipad is a stable and supported platform that isn't constantly updated while older versions go unsupported i don't see its use outside of a few areas. no since investing in ipads for the company when 2 years later you got to do it again and the old ones no longer get updates. most places i work for expect about 4-5 years of service out of a desktop or laptop. many of them have abandoned apple over the years because of the falling prices of intel and AMD hardware, once apple jumped to intel they saw little reason for the price. older systems are not supported by the new OS, i can still install XP or 32bit windows 7 on 10 year old PC's i built. the old macs have built up in my closet. i watched numerous graphic desgin departments abandon apple and pic up dell when apple dumped CRT. i don't see anything different with the ipad. it's a nice toy, but for work the market has many tools. i don't see it replacing solid and useful products from the likes of telxon/symbol. nor do i see apple offering long term support for products like those companies. if apple made an industrial version of the ipad that did have long term support, well then i think we might have a winner. it doesn't seem the same company i grew up with.

    1. Re:a pad of paper isn't expensive if it breaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Memory can't be stolen and it weighs less. This shift to paper is a temporary fad.

    2. Re:a pad of paper isn't expensive if it breaks by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

      my guess would be each flight manual is 5 to 10 pads (I've found one @700 pages). might be a tad lighter, and a tad easier to search.

      don't let that interrupt your rant, though.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    3. Re:a pad of paper isn't expensive if it breaks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny... the place I work has lots of PCs and are taking on Macs in their place as the PCs fade out. In several arenas (media editing and longform program creation for web and cable), the PCs are real productivity killers compared to Macs. In other arenas where Apple isn't really competitive (backend systems), everyone I work with wishes Apple was so they can ditch those PCs too.

    4. Re:a pad of paper isn't expensive if it breaks by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      You're not talking a pad of small paper, you're talking multiple "pads" of several hundred pages if not over a thousand, which have to be periodically updated and replaced but maybe not every page at that time, so you can't even just recycle the whole book. Moving to an electronic chart probably has quite a bit of savings just in man hours alone.

  13. I don't trust anyone by Seven_Six_Two · · Score: 1

    Is there a chance that wifi disrupts some critical system? Could it also be the case that nobody in their right mind would trust that you *know* it's disabled? Maybe you do, but how about the old lady sitting next to you that really wants to finish the chapter in her Sue Grafton book? Personally, I wouldn't trust anyone while sitting in a chair 30,000 feet in the air.

    1. Re:I don't trust anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If wifi devices were really dangerous, then we have a huge security hole because it's terribly easy to leave it on even when stowed. Second, people leave these things on all the time. I've even done this when I didn't notice we were landing.

    2. Re:I don't trust anyone by CheerfulMacFanboy · · Score: 1

      Is there a chance that wifi disrupts some critical system?

      Simply put it in Airplane Mode?

      --
      Fandroids hate facts.
  14. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Emergency engine restart... lets see, oops.. when the plane lurched when the engine cutout, the iPad fell hard onto the floor and the screen cracked... crap, I can't read the instructions...

    "This is the pilot speaking... we've lost and engine, and the digital manuals of the procedure to follow - we're resorting to the one procedure you all know... say your prayers and kiss your butt goodbye, we're going down!"

  15. what happens when the batteries die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what happens when the batteries die?

    1. Re:what happens when the batteries die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:what happens when the batteries die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So as usual, Apple will happily sell you a solution rather then let you have a more simpler solution for free.

  16. Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Aphrika · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Easier to read in a cockpit (and they can get real glarey), search across books, longer battery life. I'd also go out on a limb and say they're more reliable...

    anyway, as long as they don't start using Flight Control HD to land the damn things, I'll be happy.

    1. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Tapewolf · · Score: 1

      Ewww. I don't know what's in a flight manual, but I tried sticking a Studer A807 service manual on a Kindle once. It's unusable, at least for the circuit diagrams. No way to pan it properly when you're zoomed in, and the display is too small to read the component values when you aren't.

    2. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by HTMLSpinnr · · Score: 1

      Many private pilots use Kindle DX for their approach plates - the PDF forms are available for free from the FAA. Much better than printing them off or using the bag of thick books that have to be replaced every 56 days. The format of the approach plate is perfect for the DX, who's screen is only slightly bigger than the real plate.

      --
      $ man woman *
      -bash: /usr/bin/man: Argument list too long
    3. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paper manuals have a far longer "battery life" than even an iPad or a Kindle :-P

    4. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by digitig · · Score: 1

      Maybe a Kindle would be better. Until you're in the middle of an emergency and you discover that Amazon have remotely bricked it because of an account dispute.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    5. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      More reliable than paper? I'd at least keep a paper manual somewhere in the cockpit.

    6. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Artemis3 · · Score: 1

      An eBook reader makes much more sense than iPADs or any sort of LCD/LED screen device for many reasons; but not the Kindle and its wireless junk.

      The Chinese Hanlin and similar devices, accept open formats and don't have any wireless connectivity. Being true eReaders, they don't spend energy showing content in the screen, only changing it. They also have no backlight so they must be used just like printed paper, with a source of light.

      Such an eReader could be reliably used for running checklists or having plenty of information available in a light, maybe rugged device; which could be "Class 2" (strapped in place). Those things can change like 8000 pages on a single AA battery.

      As for "Flight Control HD", one could argue thats what a glass cockpit is, so you are kinda late... How useful the cockpit remains if the glass cockpit shuts off (ie loss of power) is another issue.

      --
      Artix
      Your Linux, your init.
    7. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by a_hanso · · Score: 1

      Kindle does not have a touch screen. Having one might help browse the manual faster.

    8. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      They are useful for checklists and text manuals, not so much for diagrams and charts, which the iPad will also be used for. Charts are large and need quick pan and zoom action, they also have colors.

    9. Re:Surely a Kindle DX would be better? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I own a DX and an iPad2 with good reader. The iPad is millions of times better suited for reading and navigating PDFs. I love my DX, still use it all the time. This particular use case is no contest.

  17. Re:Alternative Headline by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can see the ads now : "Meet local girls in Pacific Ocean, right now." (shamelessly ripped off from the ever relevant xkcd)

    Anyway your argument is false for a couple of reasons:
    - this is Apple, not Google. Apple isn't an advertising company and doesn't send home your browsing behavior AFAIK.
    - they need not give the iPads access to the internet.
    - they can block anything they don't want to leave the internal network using a firewall, which they should already be doing.

    --
    If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
  18. Oops! by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

    Alaska Airlines extends its deepest sympathies and apologies to those affected by the latest plane crash. It is our corporate policy that all fancy electronic gadgets be fully charged at all times. Unfortunately, it appears that our low-wage pilots either disregarded or disobeyed our well-thought-out plan and as a result failed to keep the flight manual's battery charged, sending a fully-loaded passenger flight into the ocean at 600mph. We anticipate a fine by the FAA, but as we bribed the corrupt politician Sarah Palin we don't anticipate any legal problems. Sucks to be you. Sincerely, corporate America.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Oops! by ffejie · · Score: 1

      Interesting that you chose to single out Sarah Palin, the "corrupt politician". I'm not Palin supporter, but couldn't you have picked at least a practicing politician, or one that is at least working with the FAA or the NTSB? You know, someone it's feasible they could have paid off to get favorable treatment? If you pay off Palin, you might get some nice comments at a rally, but no actions.

      --
      Disagreeing with me does not mean you get to mod me troll.
    2. Re:Oops! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Corrupt politician" is redundant.

    3. Re:Oops! by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      Funny. You might like this ipad comic I drew:

      http://www.gentletentacle.com/2011/05/secret-of-his-success/

  19. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Informative

    The definition of the various electronics classes doesn't have much to do with electromagnetic radiation. They primarily are related to the physical design of the gear and how it's mechanically interfaced with the aircraft.

    Class 1: Anything commercial off-the-shelf and not purpose-built for the plane is Class 1 and must be stowed during takeoff and landing, because they're loose equipment and can become a hazard in turbulence. (Even these iPads have to be put away during takeoff and landing.

    Class 2: Can be off-the-shelf or purpose built, but it has to be bolted down using a certified mounting or a kneeboard. You don't have to stow a class 2 during takeoff and landing.

    Class 3: Installed in the plane, subject to airworthiness certification and the hardware has to be designed for the purpose. Only class 3 EFB gear has to be tested for radio emissions.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  20. Bullshit. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They don't ban books, or conversations, or any number of other reasons we might ignore those announcements. Also, even if this were the case, it's a bit depressing that the only way they can make this happen is by lying to us on every single flight.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:Bullshit. by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

      None of those things can entail headphones or bright colors -- they don't want to get into a whole litany about "you can use electronic devices without headphones, but only ebook readers and only if they don't play music, and no electronic games, but it IS okay to read a book or sleep because we have studies that show that it's easier to wake someone up than to get them to put down a videogame." Just easier to say "put away electronics."

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The depressing thing is that they need to do it, otherwise people wont listen.

    3. Re:Bullshit. by basotl · · Score: 1

      But when I use earplugs or my in-ear phones without electronic device as ear plugs, then that is okay? Because that has been what I have been doing.

      --
      HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
    4. Re:Bullshit. by muindaur · · Score: 1

      It depends. Mytthbusters found that in the 800-900 MHz range it can interfere with unshielded instruments in older aircraft. Lets not forget there are some aging 747s out there.

      Now, in this case the pilots can see if there is a problem. Though isn't there also a way to turn off the wifi and 3G at the same time like with the Kindle? I know from looking it up you can turn off the 3G to have it go to WiFi, but I couldn't find anything saying the iPad would do both (though i think it would to allow for battery saving reading.)

    5. Re:Bullshit. by kylemonger · · Score: 1

      "Airplane mode" turns off 3G and WiFi on an iPad. But to save the battery the number one thing to do is set screen brightness to the lowest level and invert the display so you get white text on a black background.

    6. Re:Bullshit. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that would be a priority to fix, though. I mean, if I'm a terrorist, and I know certain frequencies screw up the pilots' instruments or communication, and those are allowed on the plane anyway...

      Or, hey, if I'm just a disgruntled passenger.

      Let's not forget that they give us the same story on planes which have built-in wifi. Really, the technology is there to be able to handle this safely. I honestly don't see a good reason for this policy anymore.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    7. Re:Bullshit. by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that the pilots can see there is a problem. If the interference is subtle, it may only cause a VOR or DME to point slightly off of where it should be pointing, which could be compounded into very real navigational issues. Of course, you would hope ATC calls you out if you're flying way off course.

      I don't think that's as realistic an issue as the threat of LightSquared 4G which is already known to disrupt GPS.

      The iPad has airplane mode which turns off all the radios.

    8. Re:Bullshit. by Wovel · · Score: 1

      They will notnlet you use a kindle... It is fact driven by the mistaken belief that all aircraft are in imminent danger of spontaneously falling from the sky if someone turns the page on their kindle. I have had this discussion with dozens of flight attendants, none of them ever indicated it has anything to do with attention and all have said they are told it is for the safety of the aircraft...

  21. Great idea! by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Because as you know, paper books are always running out of battery at the worst possible moment.. and break every time they fall on the floor due to turbulence.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Great idea! by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      And paper books are never out of date, missing pages and take up such a small volume.

      As for batteries running out I bet there will be a charger installed in the cockpit. If that charger dies that probably means the pilot has no electricity at all and reading a manual is the least of his concerns.

    2. Re:Great idea! by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's not like they'll be used exclusively in an environment where there's just no source of 5V DC power... oh wait.

  22. Re:Alternative Headline by obarthelemy · · Score: 1
    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  23. So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi ... by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 2

    Because if there is a crash, your handheld device is going to turn into a flying projectile and womp someone else in the back of the head. In fact, FAA regulations state that all items must be stowed at takeoff and landing for this precise reason -- just because it's handheld now doesn't mean you'll continue to hold on to it.

  24. airlines by fishermen7777 · · Score: 1

    Recently airlines demand to switch off all electronics onboard.

  25. Interesting priorities by amanicdroid · · Score: 1

    "So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?"

    If the pilot is reading a manual during take-off, you've got bigger concerns than what happens to Lennie Small.

  26. iPads are expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iPads are expensive, and they will forever be tied up with Apple. Is it worth it?

  27. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

    I'm assuming they had at least 2 physical copies of the procedure manuals on board before in case someone spilled coffee on one or something. Now they can replace 1 with an easier to use digital version and keep the paper backup copy in the supply closet.

    --
    If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
  28. Flying debris, not "distraction" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They actually tell you to stow it away not to pay attention, but to avoid flying debris. Same reason why you are suppose to put away your paper book too.

    Getting hit by an iPad flying at 200mph is quite deadly.

    1. Re:Flying debris, not "distraction" by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Your grasp of physics must be rather poor if you believe that an iPad is going to end up traveling at 200 MPH relative to any passengers on a commercial flight.

  29. interesting read... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cheers for that Timothy - I honestly don't know how you have the time to find all these gems, especially when you must be permanently busy sucking steve job's wood :) What will you do when the great evil one croaks...?

  30. If they were a software company by Cyberllama · · Score: 2, Funny

    They'd patent this idea and then sue anyone who tried to follow suit.

  31. Re:So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi by John.P.Jones · · Score: 2

    hardcover books should be subject to the same regulations, I'd be willing to chance being whacked with a paperback though, trade paperbacks are a nebulous gray area.

  32. replace non-smoking signal by naringas · · Score: 1

    Since all flights are always non-smoking the whole flight, it's about time they replace the (now) useless non-smoking signal with a no-electronics signal.

    1. Re:replace non-smoking signal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd prefer they give us smoking back.

    2. Re:replace non-smoking signal by brusk · · Score: 2

      Some planes I've been on have done this.

      --
      .sig withheld by request
    3. Re:replace non-smoking signal by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Look, smokers aren't the brightest of people, they need constant reminders. They are like braindead children.

  33. Screen breaking? by Hadlock · · Score: 1

    iPads have screens that can break. I hope this is a suppliment, rather than outright removal of the paper copies. I'm not *that* old, but I still feel that I could look up "stuck aileron" in the glossary and then find the correct page in the manual faster than I could type those words in on the touchscreen and wait for it to return the results. Especially when we're losing 5000ft of altitude per minute, everyone is panicing, and the whole plane is shaking.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:Screen breaking? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      I'm not *that* old, but I still feel that I could look up "stuck aileron" in the glossary and then find the correct page in the manual faster than I could type those words in on the touchscreen and wait for it to return the results.

      Really? I just tested it -- I timed how long it took me to google "stuck aileron" on my iPhone (starting with the iPhone in screen-off mode). I had results in 14 seconds (including the time it took to switch to my computer to start and stop the timer, and the time it took to fetch the data over Wifi).

      I suppose someone who was really familiar with a paper manual might be able to beat that -- but only if they knew in advance roughly where the page they were looking for was. If they had to first find the glossary, then manually scan through it to find "stuck aileron", then manually turn to the indicated page, I doubt they could do it in less than 30 seconds.

      OTOH, the upside of the paper manual is that even if it is slower, it's more likely to work as expected.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  34. Re:So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

    yes, and the radio waves bounce of the floor and strike you at the back of the head, which is way you have to turn off gsm and wifi radios.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  35. Huston we have a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iPad crash=Airplane crash

    Yes I know it isn't that simple I'm just trying to make the point that the technology may not be reliable enough. People have questioned for years why shuttle computers aren't as powerful as PDAs. With the radiation and other factors PDAs would have a potential for failure not to mention they are mass produced crap. Shuttle computers are hardened and they still fail. I'd be more interested in the technology for this use if it was designed for industrial use. Industrial laptops are extremely expensive and lack the power of most laptops but they still function when you run over them with a car and can run under flowing water. Make a professional hardened version of an iPad and I think it's an excellent idea. Otherwise I'd count on redundancy which is hard given the nature of the devices, no removable memory like thumb drives. You need redundant iPads and to have all the information including flight plans loaded into all devices. I'd make sure as well as the pilots and co-pilots that there's one in the cabin that has the updates remotely wifi'ed to it. Pilots are underpaid and over worked these days. Imagine the co-pilot forgets his on the desk and the pilot's goes down right after take off. They are cheap enough to have several back ups. The point is whether cost cutting airlines would bother or not.

  36. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by PRMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    My friend's Dad was an engineer at Boeing and tested exactly this. Beyond old planes (DC-9 and older), electronics were not a problem, as everything was shielded enough not to interfere. But people have a hard time understanding "you can do it on this plane, but not on that one" if they are used to a behavior.

    Cell phones are a problem for the cell towers, not the planes. The number of handoffs that happen on calls from the air is pretty bad.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  37. eReader by lucian1900 · · Score: 1

    I would think an eReader would be more appropriate. There are plenty of cheap ones out there, too.

  38. Is she really a pilot? by antdude · · Score: 1

    Is that lady in the photograph/photo. really a pilot? ;)

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:Is she really a pilot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm...yes? (I don't understand the question... is there some reason to doubt that she's a pilot?)

  39. ugh by Osgeld · · Score: 2

    You like apple? fine, but historically they are constantly breaking compatibility with themselves which makes it hard for serious people who want a bit more of a long term investment than a buzz-headline.

    I see stories like this and think, hunh here is some tard tossing a pile of money down a proprietary hole for what? to look "cool"? Thanks I know where not to waste my money.

  40. bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is a really bad idea.
    Replacing paper that is durable has withstood the test of time with an electronic device that depends on a charge, cannot be dropped, contains dangerous materials, has an internal cavity, unknown workings, cannot get wet, and sometimes explodes?

    Lets say you need to get to page 10 really fast, perhaps in an electrical storm. Paper books rarely fail that test. computer need working ram, disk, pointing device

    1. Re:bad idea by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Lets say you need to get to page 10 really fast,

      Note that the pilot's flight kit is big and easily weighs over 50 lbs. You would be about as likely to "need to get to page 967" as to "need to get to page 10" "really fast".

  41. Never had battery die by Katchu · · Score: 1

    I've never had the battery run down on a paper map.

    --
    Keep Doing Good.
  42. huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last flight I took, the plane did a takeoff roll past a megawatt microwave transmitter (the airport radar) and then turned by a megawatt AM broadcast tower.

    If that can't get a signal into a poorly built amplifier, then my ipod probably can't either.

  43. Air Canada has done this too. by toby · · Score: 1
    Toronto Star report.

    changes to procedures or updates are easily updated electronically, compared with paper. While some manuals remain on board, the move has eliminated about 50 pounds of paper

    --
    you had me at #!
  44. Fine, but considered for flight charts? iBrick? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    Seriously this is retarded. Doesn't anyone remember how some electronic devices occasionally lock up or outright refuse to boot, and features stop working (alarm clock, Zune brick for a day), due to stupid programming errors concerning time and dates?

    IMHO, sure, have tablet PC for in-flight data -- but also have the critical stuff as a paper backup, just incase a retarded developer decides to write their own time/date algorithms instead of using the standard libs (or accidentally creates some other time-bomb)... If it happened before it can happen again.

    The great thing about paper is that once you print it out you know the UI and display are going to work later (with a small margin of error). With electronic devices / documents: just because you verified the doc once, doesn't mean it will ever be displayed again (not with any amount of certainty approaching that of paper documents).

  45. this may be redundant by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 1

    So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

    So that you're not fucking with what can very easily become a deadly projectile during the most dangerous parts of the flight.

    1. Re:this may be redundant by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      You're allowed to hold all sorts of non-electronic objects that fit that category. I think it's more about crew not having to determine which device you're actually using.

  46. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by ledow · · Score: 1

    Not sure I'd want to be a commercial airliner where the pilot didn't know such a procedure by heart and had practised it several hundred times in a simulator (or even for real).

    If you're digging out bits of paper mid-crash, that's probably the reason you crash.

  47. Re:Alternative Headline by Goaway · · Score: 1

    It is so alternative that it is completely untrue. Nice job, there.

  48. Re:If this works out by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2

    Will other devices be allowed to be used? I hate Apple, and hope other device like the Kindle or Android based Tablets/ebook readers can be used like they are using the iPad now.

    Are you a pilot for Alaska? The question might then be relevant, since this story is talking about company-issued flight pubs for Alaska pilots.

    Remember, it's a device that replaces company issued / FAA required flight pubs, not a personal eReader for the flight crew. It is company equipment, not personal equipment.

    So, my guess is "no", Alaska will not be making their flight pubs available on Kendle of random Android tablets. Why would they?

    Speaking of which, a lot of our C17 pilots here at McChord AFB take iPads loaded with pubs and forms and other personal pilot-type apps, on the road with them.

    I don't own *any* Apple hardware, I can't afford it. But our guys like the iPad.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  49. iPad not a proper EFB. by Knightman · · Score: 1

    Buying iPad's isn't a substitute for proper EFB's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag), but I guess it will help with the amount of documentation in dead-tree form the pilots have to lug around.

    It's a cheap solution that will work in some situations, but if they buy a proper EFB-solution they will get a much better ROI.

    Here's one manufacturer of EFB's if want to read up on some of the capabilites EFB's have: http://www.navaero.com/

    --
    --- Reality doesn't care about your opinions, it happens anyway and if you are in the way you'll get squished.
    1. Re:iPad not a proper EFB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buying iPad's isn't a substitute for proper EFB's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag), ...

      The FAA Begs to differ:
      FAA approval of iPad EFB for Executive Jet paves way for industry

  50. Seriously? by SuperBanana · · Score: 2

    If the plane has a bird strike and has to ditch in the Hudson, they don't want you to miss announcements because you're busy flinging Angry Birds. It's not about the electronics, it's about them having your attention during the two parts of flight where all the crashes happen.

    As someone whose father was a pilot, that is the stupidest thing I've ever heard; if something happens that is important enough, trust me, you'll notice, big time. Foreign Object Damage, for example, if a blade lets loose from the jet engine, will sound like someone set off a bomb on the wing (don't worry, most jet engines these days are designed to contain several blades failing.) And trust me, your flight attendants will make it reaaaaaaally damn clear if they need you to do something, and you'll notice everyone around you, well, doing it.

    They don't want your device interfering with instruments during takeoff and especially landing if ILS is in use (now high-accuracy GPS landing systems are becoming more prevalent), and the rule was the best solution they had to "do electronic devices interfere with plane instruments?" You can't test every device out there, even if you only had to test a dozen instruments, and there are thousands of different avionics packages in hundreds of different planes out there. So the easiest assumption is, when hundreds of lives are at stake: turn off the cell phones, keep the portable devices off, etc. Keep in mind that with GPS, the signal from the satellites is about fifty watts, making for incredibly low signal, so even modern gear could be affected what seems like very low leakage by your music player.

    My father and I tried an experiment once - back in the late 90's, we fired up an ultraportable laptop with jeppesen data on it while we were on the ground. The damn thing was like an RF bomb. It caused noticeable interference with the radios, the VOR went a little wonky, and the stormscope interpreted some RF noise from the laptop as lightning strikes (noise on the stormscopes is actually fairly common, but the laptop had a clear effect.) Guess what? Being off-course (VOR) has fuel implications, traffic avoidance implications, etc. Yes, pilots are supposed to check and cross-reference stuff (in fact, much of the busy work a pilot or copilot did pre-GPS-everywhere...was checking one navigation system against another...ADF vs VOR vs GPS vs LORAN), but the rule in aviation is to minimize ANY problems, because they have a nasty habit of snowballing. Aviation disaster reports are full of "this little thing wasn't working, and so-and-so didn't repair ____ quite right, and..."

    1. Re:Seriously? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Any commercial aircraft without shielding against everything you described must be grounded immediately...

    2. Re:Seriously? by PipsqueakOnAP133 · · Score: 1

      Um, I'm certainly not a radio engineer but doesn't shielding mean that no signals get in?
      So, if no external signals get in, how do you shield nav electronics and radios?

  51. Caution by jbengt · · Score: 2

    parent link is goatse

  52. Re:Alternative Headline by murphtall · · Score: 0

    article from january *2010* and this is May *2011*

  53. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously no one here has flown in greece, their cabins sound like an `80s arcade with cell phones and electronics..... now imagine if you could use the phone on the plane..... or better yetthe douche next to you 'yammering on for ours about his inflamed colon.....good times....

  54. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Iâ(TM)m sorry, but this is the same bullshit as those "ooh, mobile phone radiation makes me suck" idiots. Urban legends takes for facts.

    Those must be some seriously shitty non-FCC-approved, unshielded electronics, to be manipulated by standard FCC shielded electronics. Also, if they are so shitty, how come their own on-board electronics of the plane don't make each other go crazy. After all, they sometimes even sit in the same case. How come the crosstalk of all those thousands of lines of wiring don't kill each other?

    They're shielded. A lot better than any consumer electronics. The rest is bullshit, and NPCs programmed on groupthink spreading it.

  55. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also 1 or 2 pilot ebooks radiation 200 passengers radiation

  56. iPads came with paper manuals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who knew?

  57. Not the first corporation though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Caterpillar (the heavy equipment manufacturer) went to CD's and DVD's instead of paper manuals years ago. It costs 2.5 cents to spin out a CD. It cost $2.50 to publish a manual. Transportation costs are less with CD's and DVD's too. 20 years worth of CDs occupy 1 foot of shelf space when stored most efficiently. 20 years worth of manuals will occupy 5 feet of shelf space when stored in their most efficient manner. The only place where manuals win, is when they are partially damaged, the undamaged half is still readable. A half damaged DVD or CD renders all of it unusable. On the other hand, CDs and DVDs can survive flood damage, paper manuals can't. Neither can survive fire damage.

  58. Re:So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "just because it's handheld now doesn't mean you'll continue to hold on to it."

    Then why don't they make you stow babies? Not intended as a counter to your argument. I just don't like babies on planes.

  59. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by ElementOfDestruction · · Score: 1

    Mod Down - Goatse

  60. I hope they disable the motion sensor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It will be impossible to read anything on the Ipad if there is turbulence since the screens orientation will keep changing.

  61. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  62. what are you going to do 20s from landing... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    By pulling out the manual? Can you even find the page you need?

    Look at QANTAS flight 32.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_32

    They had a very significant uncontained engine failure incident. And yet the crew spent 50 minutes going down a list of airplane computer fault codes to figure out what went wrong.

    This kind of situation is where you can pull out the iPad for reference. Otherwise, the pilots have to go on what they know and what the computers/instruments tell them.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:what are you going to do 20s from landing... by kaiidth · · Score: 1

      And then you discover that the iPad is out of battery or is for some other reason b0rked.

      Manuals are a good idea. Manuals that don't require a battery are an excellent idea. I can see benefits to having both, but I can't understand at all why one would actually stop carrying the dead-tree version.

  63. Re:If this works out by CTU · · Score: 0

    According to the artical the only device the FAA allows is the iPad. I was asking because if no other device is allowed to be used, then it means Apple has an unfair advantage over other devices. I also hate Apple and would rather not see an Apple products the only legal replacement for paper manuals.

  64. how come? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?"

    1. To get your attention
    2. To make certain that any object that will become a projectile upon a sudden stop is stowed
    3. To foment silly questions and attempt to create a distinction between the IQ of the very general public and the collective IQ of the authorities (clue: all cut from same cloth)

    1. Re:how come? by Kredal · · Score: 1

      To your answers to #1 and 2... I could bring the latest Stephen King 1000+ page hard cover novel, which weighs significantly more than a Kindle, and read it through the whole safety briefing, take off, climb to 10,000 ft, yet if I wanted to do the same with a Kindle, I'd be branded a terrorist.

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  65. NASA Did this for space shuttle manuals 1994-ish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 1994, NASA did this for manuals in the control centers and on space vehicles. A custom e-reader flew on space shuttle missions first in 1995 and on early space station missions. At the time, PDF was much too slow and didn't support search. This program saved millions since many thousands lbs of paper didn't need to be carried to LEO at $4-8K/lb or shipped all over the world to the different mission control center locations for each flight.

    I don't know if these tools are still used - I left NASA in 1996 when the development and deployment was completed. I heard that the flight controllers hated not having paper and revolted at JSC.

    The new part to this is that civil aviation pilots have the documents this way. Many other locations have done this with service manuals. As long as their checklists are still paper (even as backups), I'll feel safe. On trans-ocean flights when planes are completely out of contact with ground stations, having all the manuals easily available for reference could be a huge safety bonus.

  66. iPad anywhere near "mission critical" reliability? by CCTalbert · · Score: 2

    I'm really uncomfortable with this, being as the iPad is a consumer-grade device built as cheaply as possible with it's #1 function being generating profit for Apple, and I don't think the device was designed with critical use in mind. It's made to be *just* reliable and durable enough that the warranty return rate isn't too high, and no more. (If I were Apple I'd be really uncomfortable with people using them for anything more than entertainment! for liability purposes!)

    From what I've seen using iPhones in a business environment, they're NOWHERE NEAR being what I would consider business class devices- we've had many of them not survive 1 day of use before breaking. Not that they weren't dropped or abused, but that's life of mobile devices and I imagine daily use in a cockpit isn't any cakewalk.

    I guess I'm a bit of an Apple-hater at my core, but even considering this I just don't think this is smart at all. Appropriate devices can certainly be built- there are specific military standards for devices durability in the field, lots of devices built to those standards, and that could be a minimal starting point. I would think the FAA should publish (or adopt an existing) standard for non mounted cockpit devices?

    I used an old Sanyo "rugged" phone until I upgraded to an Android recently. It had survived too many drops onto concrete to count, being dropped in a lake at least twice, and even flying off the top of my car at 40+mph (took a long time to find the battery!)- it looked like hell but it never failed. Had to reboot it about twice in the 5 years I used it. Lots of other devices are designed to be, and are, that tough. That's the kind of reliability you have to have for a critical device.

  67. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL, I meant "makes me sick"! But okay... that's also fine. ;)

    P.S.: The "'" is Slashdot failing at a real Unicode apostrophe. Somebody should write a Greasemonkey mod.

  68. Additional GPS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good. An additional GPS in a smart phone or tablet could have saved Air France flight 447.

    1. Re:Additional GPS by pnevin · · Score: 1

      No it wouldn't. The motion sensor might have helped, though.

  69. The reason you have to shut off your ebook reader by troll+-1 · · Score: 1

    It's called safety paranoia. And the most paranoid people always win the argument. There are lots of examples. According to Timothy Taylor (Economist at Standford) the law requiring child proof containers for drugs cost ~$30 million to implement yet had no affect on the number of emergency room admissions for child overdoses. The safety lobbyists are a formidable group who make a living from sitting around all day coming up with what-if scenarios and they especially love airline safety because it plays to people's fear of flying. You don't really need a demonstration on how to fasten your seat belt or a verbal warning about smoking when you fly but safety paranoia always wins.

  70. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

    Checklists and procedures are categorized by urgency. The essential stuff, like the mentioned engine restart, is memorized and gets trained in the simulator regularly. There is a whole lot of non-critical shit though, where you would want to pull out the manual before doing it. Failure of one of a triple-redundant hydraulic pump, stuff like that. You still gotta work a checklist/workflow after that, and for this, you pull the manual.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  71. iPad not a proper EFB. by Tacvek · · Score: 1

    The iPod is a proper EFB!

    AC 102-76A defines the types and classes of EFB hardware and applications. Any portable electronic device not using a mounting system, and using only certified power interfaces (like the standard Cigar lighter port) is a candidate for being Class I hardware. The airline must show that it is properly stowed for take-off and landing, and must have documentation showing that they have tested the device for interference to the point where they would allow passengers to use the device.

    Thus the iPad is trivially a Class I EFB hardware device.

    AC 91-78 permits replacing the paper documents with any Type A or Type B Application Running on Class I or Class II Hardware that complies with FAR 92.21 (no interference); is current, up-to-date, and valid; is functionally equivlent to the paper being replaced (i.e. does not lack information from the original).

    So any approved Type A or Type B application can be used with the iPad to create a proper EFB.

    Indeed, Jeppesen has already approved Type A software for the iPad.

    --
    Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
  72. Re:iPad anywhere near "mission critical" reliabili by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

    Hm. Exactly what kind of business environment are you in that breaks iPhones within one day? You might try to use them as phones instead of trying to hammer in nails with them.

    --
    Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
  73. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by camperslo · · Score: 2

    Because computers have internal electronics that generate electric currents in the GHz range, and it is not impossible that these electrical currents could radiate enough energy to interfere with airplane electronic and navigation systems.

    It's not absurdly over cautions to restrict unknown electronics that might cause interference. Even the local oscillator in an simple old-fashioned analog tuned F.M. broadcast radio can affect some communications. Digital gear is worse. There are pulses at many different rates far below microwave frequencies in digital gear, and because they are pulses and not sinusoidal waveforms, they're rich in harmonics. The noise generated extends down even to relatively low frequencies due to main power supply inverters and in some cases inverters for screen backlighting. Try taking an ordinary analog tuned AM/FM radio and putting it very close to a laptop and compare the noise between stations or heard on weaker signals.

    It is doubtful that they're using anything that is particularly sensitive to interference from WiFi.
    No one in their right mind would expect WiFi to be interference free and use it for anything critical. Read the F.C.C. notice in the manual for ANYTHING that uses WiFi. You'll see something like "must accept harmful interference, including that which may cause undesired operation".

  74. Re:They are giving iPads to pilots? by pnevin · · Score: 1

    In The Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande, the author makes a pretty convincing case for using checklists for mundane procedures (like pre-surgery steps). Even highly experienced doctors would miss single steps otherwise, leading to high post-surgical infection rates.

    Makes sense in the aviation context. In an in-flight emergency in a cockpit, you really don't want missing steps.

  75. iPads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?""

    Because if you don't have an iPad... You don't have an iPad.

  76. Re:If this works out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe you should really look at Apple products so you can hate them with a little knowledge behind it instead of blind ignorance or relying on Ed Bott for your news. Which Android product should they select instead? Something with 4 hours of battery life? Something which won't run the next Android update? Something which needs to be rooted and hacked before it runs the current iteration of Android? A few different versions of Android tablets which can't run the same apps? Something which runs Flash at a snail's pace? There's a real good chance you won't hate Apple nearly as much if you really try it first.

  77. Electronics do interfere by NivenHuH · · Score: 1

    EMI from electronic devices do affect navigational systems. If you want a demo of this in your house, put your iPad next to a magnetic compass and watch it swing.

    In the little Cessna that I fly, my portable GPS will cause the compass to be off by as much as 3-4 degrees.

    I know this is much different than commercial jetliners -- I don't claim to know how commercial jet navigational systems are built. I do know that most of the FAA regulations (such as turning off portable electronic devices) are typically created from incidents that have happened in the past.

    --
    Just when you make it idiotproof, some idiot builds a better idiot.
    1. Re:Electronics do interfere by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

      That's also why your compass has a sheet that corrects for magnetic deviation, because even the built in radios and equipment cause it to be inaccurate by a few degrees at certain points, and those systems are designed specifically to be used on aircraft.

  78. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Alien+Being · · Score: 2

    Allow me to simplify what you said. These aircraft are built to crash into the ground with the simplest of provocation. Consumer RF is one example, butterfly farts are another. Don't even think about bringing a butterfly aboard an A380.

    Fuckwads. Ground them all.

  79. Re:If this works out by CTU · · Score: 0

    "Maybe you should really look at Apple products so you can hate them with a little knowledge behind it instead of blind ignorance or relying on Ed Bott for your news" I don't know who he is and don't get anything from him

    "Android product should they select instead?"
    I just said Android since it is an alternitive

    "Something with 4 hours of battery life?"
    Kindle has a 2 month battery life according to amazon thatg is one option and it is a long battery life.

    "Something which won't run the next Android update?"
    does it matter if it is for reading and not surfing the web or playing angry birds?

    "Something which needs to be rooted and hacked before it runs the current iteration of Android?"
    Look at the last statement

    "A few different versions of Android tablets which can't run the same apps?"
    What apps would they really need? they would need to read manuals and that is pretty much it

    "Something which runs Flash at a snail's pace? "
    Why is flash needed here again?

    "There's a real good chance you won't hate Apple nearly as much if you really try it first."
    I used to own and iPod and used iTunes for in. I have never owned a mac, but I have used one a time or two. In the end I do not like any apple product I have used, I dislike how locked down they are with hardware/software (with iPhones/iPod touch) I dislike the interface, and most of all I can't stand the cost as Apple products are just to expensive for most everything they offer.

    I like the idea of an E-reader being used instead of paper here, but I believe the FAA needs to allow more then just Apple's iPad to be used as a replacement. How hard is it to understand that they are showing unfair favoritism to Apple if they do not at least consider any other option.

    I don't get /. sometimes I ask if anything else might be used instead of an iPad and I get modded down as a troll? I never said it was a bad idea, I just asked if the FAA was looking into any other option. Is it so bad to suggest using a non Apple product around here? Even now I am not saying Apple is the wost PoS ever, I just don't care for it personally. It is a sad day when /. people are so fixated on their "personal" wars that they mod down anybody who does not share their opinion, and until somebody can prove me wrong I am just not going to have any faith in anybody around here.

  80. ...because it's easier by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

    Because it's easier to tell people to turn off *all* electronics than it is to read out a detailed list of what can remain on and what must be switched off. It's also much easier to go down the aisle and just say "switch that off" that it is to figger out what "it" is an whether or not it can remain on...

  81. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by X0563511 · · Score: 1

    ... and because someone won't understand and will try to argue:

    Yes, the charts go away during takeoff/landing if they aren't secured on the kneeboard etc.

    The crew is far too busy at these times, they simply don't have time to refer to them. These phases are pre-planned as well, you don't just fly to the airport and "wing it"

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  82. So explain why... by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    the wiring of aircraft can't be gutted and replaced with proper shielded wiring... why it isn't all digital with checksums.. This is 1970's technology at the latest. Or wait maybe we could upgrade to 1980 tech such as fiber optics...

  83. Actually, it is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EFB, is Jeppesen's product. So is this. And the software on it IS a modified version of Jeppsensen's EFB.
    And for that matter, NavAero is PURE JUNK.

  84. newspapers, books - your theory is bs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so why then they allow reading books, magazines, and newspapers (and actually distribute these before take-off)?

  85. So explain it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because if you change your velocity too much during an accident even an innocent pencil could kill you as a projectile.

    One of my university teachers was an expert on car accidents. He worked for an insurer and he said one of the most dangerous thing on an accident are essentially pens, they are sharp and in a huge deceleration they become arrows.

    I have a difficult time imaging that but imagine that instead of decelerating from 100km/h you suddenly decelerate from 300km/h like it happened on Barajas airport like two years ago(killing 153, hurting 19).

  86. Possible future by PaSim · · Score: 1

    All manuals would be dowloadable from AppStore for free, and only when is paid advetairsment disappear... And sometime passengers would hear from cabin: Captain, please help me through this level of "any game"... When I read about long falling of Air France (3 and half minute) because (probably) frozen senors and bad decisions of crew, it would be night mare sometime in future to fly.

  87. reason's? we don' need no steenkin' reasons! by arikol · · Score: 1

    " So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?"

    Well. Because adding an hours travel time for the plane to circle over the destination while the stewardesses figure out which device emits radio waves probably isn't practical.
    That and they don't want you mucking about with crap like this if something happens, and they want you to hear any announcements that are made.

  88. At last! An improvement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    over those paper manuals that need to be rebooted all the time or suffer battery failure just when you need them.

  89. The invevitable delay.... by HockeyPuck · · Score: 1

    I can't wait for the next "3 hour sitting at the gate in a middle seat" delay, not due to mechanical problem but due to "The pilot needs to charge his iPad..."

    I'm sure that the airline has already thought of this...

  90. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep presuming. Man, you Americans will believe anything if it comes from some federal agency. And when you're not fed bullshit by the authorities, you'll make up your own.

  91. Re:If this works out by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

    The iPad is the only device that someone has had evaluated and tested by the FAA to gain that approval, and it wasn't Apple paying, it was the airlines that wanted to use it.

    If someone wants to use a Kindle, they will have to have it evaluated. Since the iPad has already been approved, there's a lower probability of someone going for another device unless it is somehow an airborne iPad killer.

  92. Re:If this works out by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 1

    These manuals are not just text. Approach plates and charts are large diagrams, and while they might display fine on the Kindle there is a lot of detail that needs to be zoomed in on. The touch interface is better for this, maybe some Android tablets could take that role, but that would require incentive for the airlines to have it evaluated. It doesn't matter if you hate Apple, it matters if it's cost effective for them to get something else approved, and if they're likely to have it obsolete and unsupported within a few months.

  93. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi-capable ebook reader during take-off and landing?

    This is, undoubtably, absurdly over cautious. However, the penalties for failure are very large, and the cost for being overcautious (in the form of inconvenience) is paid by you, not by them.

    hmm... absurdly over cautious... multi-million dollar piece of hardware that depends on numerous systems for guidance and control... yes, your life depends on every one of those systems working correctly... damn skippy they are going to be cautious, and the rest of what you said was on the mark... this was not... there have been numerous accidents caused by RF interference, it is neither absurd, nor overly cautious... and troubleshooting a transient issue for instance, say a bit of interference that only occurs when you have a particular device in a particular position in the confines of the fuselage can potentially affect the ability to do many things, accelerate, brake safely, even cause issues with certain flight control systems, takeoff and landings are NOT the time to have weird things happen... therefore, until it is proven benign, all electronics that have not been CERTIFIED BY THE FAA FOR USE ON AIRCRAFT should be off

  94. electronics on a/c's by RailsRunner · · Score: 1

    If it takes a cell phone to take an aircraft down, terrorist have it made, they don't have to charge the cockpit. They want your undivided time during the critical flight time. If an aircraft goes down it will most likely be at takeoff, 100% engine rated power. Pilots should not have electronics such as ipads on the aircraft, they might overrun their destination, checking their investment balance. It amazes me at how many people challenge the flight crew, it's a FELONY and you will be on homeland security's shit list, if you cant leave your phone or whatever for the time the crew says you need to go to the "Hello my name Bob" meetings; sorry Bob. Just do as the crew tells you STUPID!!!

  95. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cell phones are not a problem for the cell towers or the plane, only the FCC. FCC controls air to ground communications along with ground to ground and air to air. Cell phones fall into the ground to ground communication rules.

    Taking a cell phone into the air violate the air to ground rules and could make the company carrying into the air responsible.

    Here is a good start on the rules of air to ground. http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/index.htm?job=service_home&id=air_ground

  96. Re:If this works out by mrrudge · · Score: 1

    You're voicing a strong opinion, 'hate', on the entire range of products of a company whilst admitting you have little experience of using them. Some of these products are very complex ( OSX ) and take time to learn even if you're familiar with other similar products ( OSs ). I find some of their consumer product frustrating also. The same things that annoy me about the iPad make it perfect to be my mothers first 'computer'.

    I find their professional product, once learned, ( Mac Pro, OSX ) to increase my efficiency over all tested alternatives. ( tbh. I've only used BeOS a little )

    The FAA didn't chose this, the airline asked them to look into the 'look into' the iPad, and no one has paid them to 'look into' any other device. You're very welcome to.

    Please look at where your post could be considered a 'personal war'. It is not the responsibility of anyone here to prove anything to you, rather the opposite, it is your responsibility to prove your opinion is worthwhile by ensuring it is free from untested personal bias.

  97. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

    If this were remotely correct, you wouldn't be allowed to use at any time on the flight. I use my iPod Touch and iPad all the time, at all points of a flight, and I've never been in a crash, much less been proven to cause it.

  98. Re:Why no computers on take off? [Re:Misunderstan. by digitalsolo · · Score: 1

    Correlation != Causation.

    While I agree with your stance on the subject, what you said above is roughly equivalent to "I've robbed several banks and not gotten in trouble, so it must not be illegal".

    --
    Just another ignorant American.
  99. Re:So explain why I have to shut off my non-wi-fi by Wovel · · Score: 1

    I would rather get hit in the head with a cell phone (or even an iPad) then Cryptinomicon...

    Why do people keep trying to make execuses for this stupid rule. It all started with CD players back in the 80s. These may or may not have caused some problems with older aircraft.

    If any current commercial aircraft can be influenced by any consumer electronic device, then we really do need to stop all air travel until this absurd oversight is correct. The rule is still in effect because none of our elected officials have the balls or the brains to make the FAA justify their absurd rules.