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?"
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.
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.
Did anyone else read the title and think they were throwing iPad manuals out of planes?
Hostes futuri sint socii.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
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?
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.
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
Our Emergency Procedures checklists will continue to be available in the cockpit in hardcopy.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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 ----
http://i-visit.co.nz/2010/01/13/apple-buys-quattro-wireless-advertising-agency-for-300-million/
they're working on it
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
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.
Recently airlines demand to switch off all electronics onboard.
If the pilot is reading a manual during take-off, you've got bigger concerns than what happens to Lennie Small.
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.
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.
They'd patent this idea and then sue anyone who tried to follow suit.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
I would think an eReader would be more appropriate. There are plenty of cheap ones out there, too.
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).
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.
I've never had the battery run down on a paper map.
Keep Doing Good.
you had me at #!
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).
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.
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.
It is so alternative that it is completely untrue. Nice job, there.
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.
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.
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..."
Please help metamoderate.
parent link is goatse
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".
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.
Mod Down - Goatse
It will be impossible to read anything on the Ipad if there is turbulence since the screens orientation will keep changing.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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".
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.
No it wouldn't. The motion sensor might have helped, though.
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.
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
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.
Funny. You might like this ipad comic I drew:
http://www.gentletentacle.com/2011/05/secret-of-his-success/
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...
... 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...
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...
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.
" 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.
over those paper manuals that need to be rebooted all the time or suffer battery failure just when you need them.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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!!!
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
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.
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.
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.
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.