Slashdot Mirror
FAA To Reevaluate Inflight Electronic Device Use
coondoggie writes "If you have been on a commercial airline, the phrase 'The use of any portable electronic equipment while the aircraft is taxiing, during takeoff and climb, or during approach and landing,' is as ubiquitous but not quite as tedious as 'make sure your tray tables are in the secure locked upright position.' But the electronic equipment restrictions may change. The Federal Aviation Administration today said it was forming a government-industry group to study the current portable electronic device use policies commercial aviation use to determine when these devices can be used safely during flight."
How many people are going to have to die before the FAA changes it's mind and re-bans these devices?
The last thing needed in a crowded airplane are self-important loud mouths blabbing on cell phones.
Why can't people just turn them off for the 30 minutes or so the plane needs to take off, climb-out, execute final approach and landing?
What's the big deal?
with half a dozen mobile devices, or more - and most of them are on w/ cell signal while I'm flying...
They really should review that policy.
I'm ok with the FAA loosening up on those poor, persecuted, electromagnetic waves that have historically been singled out for persecution and discrimination.
However, I would like to see the draconian measures previously reserved for in-flight electronics applied with redoubled fury against those who have the temerity to emit high volume and/or pitch sound waves, or substantial levels of visible-range electromagnetic radiation during nighttime hours. Those are the true hazard to consumer aviation.
Permit wifi and crack down on screaming children.
"The Federal Aviation Administration today said it was forming a government-industry group to study" = no changes for at least 5 years.
Didn't Mythbusters cover this?
Yes.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
I would bet that more than 50% of devices on planes are already left on for takeoff and landing. The only thing being turned off is the screen.
the phrase 'The use of any portable electronic equipment while the aircraft is taxiing, during takeoff and climb, or during approach and landing,' is as ubiquitous
I've never heard that phrase before. usually they say somethigna bout the devices not being allowed, tho.
I don't think they'll reduce the restrictions much, if at all. If it were truly a case about interference and radio waves, then why do they have phones on the planes, tv's built into every head rest, and large tv's in front of the isles? All of those electronics are just fine to use whenever because you have to pay for them. If they start letting us use all of our own stuff up there then that'll be less profit.
Hey, wait. Why is this post adjacent to "How Long Do You Want to Live?"
The general problem on passenger aircraft is orders given by flight attendants over the speaker system that begin/end with "...in accordance with federal regulations..." are parroted and observed with no understanding of why they are in place.
Having the FAA remove the requirement that electronic devices are off does not solve the problem that commercial flying is laden with laws bearing heavy consequences that at times have no connection to common sense, like the electronic device issue.
Philip K Howard points out that the general problem goes much deeper than the FAA, but in the context of "rules on an airplane" the public is very comfortable blindly following laws seemingly without reason. If you disagree, try asking someone on board the next time you take off why you have to have the window shades up, or the seats upright, or the tray table stowed, etc.
...we have the safety zealots who believe that if bans of electronic devices in-flight reduce the risk of crashes by .00000001% then the ban makes sense, because, hey, who's in favor of crashing an airplane? (Those of you raising their hands in favor, please stay seated, a TSA agent will be with you shortly).
In the other corner, we have the airlines, who are opposed to in-flight use of devices to the extent that using such devices denies them their God-given right to monetize every last moment spent on an airliner and that even if making a cellular data connection call in flight wasn't likely to be unreliable, it might keep someone from having to spend $19.99 on BoGo in-flight internet service.
Watching, of course, are all the people who have inadvertently and intentionally left their electronics on and somehow managed to land safely at their destination with the most harrowing part of the flight being the gross weirdo in the seat next to them or the smell coming from the aft lavatory.
Here in Canada at least you are not supposed to use cell phones while you are in the building.
Very annoying, since when you go to the hospital you have no idea how long it will take and it can take longer than many flights.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
I was listening to Mac Power Users today, and they had an interview with a pilot today that said nearly 50% of pilots use an iPad as a replacement for expensive, bulky and very short shelf-life paper maps. So the pilots are running an iPad during take off and landing!
As others have said, this is not about electrical interference but social control. What's the difference between someone reading harry potter on a 1lb device or reading it in it's 10 lb hardcover form? The greater danger is from the projectile the book becomes in a crash. But since there is no FUD means for banning the book, they allow you to read it. But in reality there is no difference so long as the plane doesn't crash.
Who are you? The new #2 Who is #1? You are #617565. I am not a number, I am a free man! Muhahaha.
The FAA said it is looking for comments in the following areas:
Comments can be emailed to: PEDcomment@faa.gov
If they really were a threat to the flight safety, they would just confiscate it before departure, and give it back to you after landing.
Heh - like you would get a signal at that height. I didn't read TFA but the only way you will get a decent signal on a plane will be via a system designed to work at 30000ft by people who would sooner their plane not crash because you sent a tweet.
How many planes have crashed due to somebody not switching their phone of?
The moment I have to sit and listen to the guy next to / behind / in front / etc. of me talk all flight long on his cell phone is the moment I stop flying. Cell phone usage should still be banned unless people can fully embrace the Japanese culture around public phone usage (i.e. go hide somewhere people can't hear you, and then still whisper and cover the phone).
MadCow.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
Are they more or less likely to spontaneously errupt in flames when on, or when off?
Look at the folks whining about the risks of interference, in this supposedly informed audience.
Think about it for a minute. If there was ANY real risk of a cell phone or any other electronic device IN ANY WAY interfering with aircraft electronics, do you really think that the FAA would even allow them aboard? Would they allow 150 cell phones, all supposedly capable of interfering with the electronics and bringing the plane down, onto every single flight? 150 terrorist weapons on every flight! Really?
Have you never seen anyone forget or simply refuse to turn off their devices and have no effect on the aircraft at all? Have you, as have I, not ever innocently forgotten the cell phone turned on in your pocket to no effect at all? I'll wager that 25% of them are left on during every flight.
They won't allow you to carry on more than four ounces of spring water(liquid)! But, they don't have any problem with this "dangerous" device on everyone's hip? Think people! Think!
P.S. For those of you that will now link to obscure pilots reports of "strange" behavior of the aircraft's electronics and their self attribution of that behavior to passenger electronics; forget it. These reports have been repeatedly debunked. The fact is that it is proven that many pilots are very capable of driving a plane while still being complete idiots; reporting interfering passenger electronics and flying saucer sightings and flybys.
Nobody ever bothers me about my devices when the plane is in-flight. My phone is in "airplane mode", the wifi is off on my eReader, and the tablet similarly has wifi/bluetooth/etc turned off.
Nobody's ever given me any grief about it so long as the devices are off for takeoff/landing. Most airlines do mention having the cellphones turned off, but the rest are just suppose to be not broadcasting. I suppose if I wanted to game with other people in-flight through wifi it might be needed, but what's the issue here?
what i don't want to hear is that a Pilot 1 Got a High Score in Angry Birds 2 "landed" a Plane in a Mountain
oh and for those that say "But I have an IPod Pico so why should i have to turn it off" i give you a lesson in basic Physics
Mass Times Acceleration = Force so even 2.31 grams flying about the cabin (at 45meters per second) can hurt somebody
(and btw im all for a Pilot having an iFly (Commercial Pilot edition) Ap installed just stay away from Angry Birds while In Flight)
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Memorable quotes for
Looker (1981)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/quotes
"John Reston: Television can control public opinion more effectively than armies of secret police, because television is entirely voluntary. The American government forces our children to attend school, but nobody forces them to watch T.V. Americans of all ages *submit* to television. Television is the American ideal. Persuasion without coercion. Nobody makes us watch. Who could have predicted that a *free* people would voluntarily spend one fifth of their lives sitting in front of a *box* with pictures? Fifteen years sitting in prison is punishment. But 15 years sitting in front of a television set is entertainment. And the average American now spends more than one and a half years of his life just watching television commercials. Fifty minutes, every day of his life, watching commercials. Now, that's power."
##
"The United States has it's own propaganda, but it's very effective because people don't realize that it's propaganda. And it's subtle, but it's actually a much stronger propaganda machine than the Nazis had but it's funded in a different way. With the Nazis it was funded by the government, but in the United States, it's funded by corporations and corporations they only want things to happen that will make people want to buy stuff. So whatever that is, then that is considered okay and good, but that doesn't necessarily mean it really serves people's thinking - it can stupify and make not very good things happen."
- Crispin Glover: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000417/bio
##
"It's only logical to assume that conspiracies are everywhere, because that's what people do. They conspire. If you can't get the message, get the man." - Mel Gibson (from an interview)
##
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." - William Casey, CIA Director
##
George Carlin:
"The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else.
But I'll tell you what they don't want. They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago.
You know what they want? Obedient workers people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And, now, they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it. They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking place. It's a big clu
Turn the goddamn off! Like that old joke, "Tray up, bitch!"
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
That would be nice.
Interferes with the avionics equipment on a plane, then that equipment is poorly built, and I'd be more concerned about satellites and solar flares.
I know for a fact that two cell phones not in "airplane mode" don't affect anything and are not detectable. I don't know about an entire plane full of cell phones, but I would suspect there would be no interference.
If your phone can connect to a tower 32,000’ away including all the scattering that buildings cause then there's no reason why it couldn't just because the signal is travelling in a more perpendicular direction with no obstacles.
Cellular antennas are optimized to receive signals in a horizontal "circle" parallel to the ground, so reception above/below a tower is poor.
If you're in the air, you're not connecting to a tower 32,000' below you, you're connecting to a whole bunch of towers 32,000' feet below you and 20+ miles away. Cellular signals will actually go pretty far with clear LOS, although the phone has to up the signal strength quite a bit, which is why a phone with a cellular antenna left on in-flight will burn a ton of battery.
paintball
They have to do something to get people to stand in line for a grope, er, I mean security pat down.
Please for the love of all thats Holy make sure you maximize how "happy' the kid is.
1 dress the kid in clothes for Comfort Not Fashion
2 sort out enough "snax" to keep the kid fed
3 make sure you have enough changes for the kid (and please get a bag from the Staff to dispose of the "spent" changes)
4 invest in an airline capable power cable and earphones for the kids media device (have they started providing USB power ports in seats yet??
5 have a couple doses of any meds the kid is taking (allergy meds cough drops ect)
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/children/index.shtm ---- note you can carry meds as needed
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
The electronic device ban has been kept in place at the airlines request... so they can sell you the bullshit back-of-the-seat movie/map thing for $30/flight. Now they are realizing that everyone's ignoring the damned rule so now they want to sell in-flight wifi and will ban cellular traffic "because it's dangerous"
If a 747 could be brought down by some random device I bought at best buy, I think terrorists would have a lot easier of a time doing their jobs.
This ban on wireless has always been a red herring. Mobile devices typically operate at a couple of watts, tops. Meanwhile, while taking off or landing, a plane is going to pass fairly close to many cell towers, each of which is belting out much more powerful, much more continuous signals.
And nothing happens.
Planes are also hit with radar from ATC, MET, TCAS, and more, plus massive signals from broadcast media. All the time.
And nothing happens.
Banning this stuff was partly out of what-if fears, and partly because it was an area where the agency and airlines could impose their control upon the public. They really and truly get off on being able to tell us to stand there, do this, don't do that, don't bring water, don't use your phone, don't use your GPS, don't use your laptop, and so on, with "it's against the law" as justification 1, "it's policy" as justification 2 and "We'll arrest you sucka!" as justification 3, and finally to sum up them all: "OMG the plane might crash!"
Sig for hire.
If it were likely that "accidental" cell phone use would crash airplanes it already would have happened. It doesn't even have to be very likely for a ban on bringing cell phones on planes. They even ban carry on shampoo. The whole thing is a farce.
Well during an emergency maneuver or accident any quick deceleration might mean a mobile device could go airborne. I don't think I would like to get slammed in the back of the head with someone's mobile device. It should be stowed. Most aircraft equipment have 20g structural retention requirements so that in the event of an accident the equipment don't do any collateral damage. Remote possibility, but it could happen.
The thing that always gets me is the "cell phones but not other device" allowed until you reach the gate. How is is that, during the flight, cell phones send signals to the flight control and radar telling them to turn on their human masters, but everything else is okay, while once the plane is on the ground, cell phones are okay, but somehow if I use an mp3 player that DOESN'T have a phone plan attached to it, arcs of lightning will shoot out and melt everyone's eyeballs.
Obviously it's really hard to pin down why this rule went into effect in the first place, but a flight instructor of mine said that the rule was put into place on behest of cell phone carriers to protect cell phone towers from getting overwhelmed. He argued that the signal from a single cell phone in the air would propagate much further than one on land, and thus put an undue burden on cell towers within line of sight of the plane, especially when we are talking about planes full of people taking off from major metropolitan airports.
I'm not sure if this is true or is bullshit, but I thought I would throw it out there as a possible reason.
-- Marcio
WHile there's never been a crash or serious incident, there ARE cases of probable interference in-flight. In general, they notice unexpected sensor readings, so they assume the sensor has failed or is otherwise unreliable, and move on.
Do you want to take the chance that it's something like, oh, the angle of attack or other airdata sensor when you're flying at altitude where small changes have big effects? (viz Air France plummeting to the ocean off Brazil).
That said, I think the real value is in getting people to take the earplugs out during takeoff and landing, when the documented probability of "bad things" happening is much higher.
Nothing like passengers, that's you people, telling me in the cockpit how there is no interference. You are correct, if your mobile is a CDMA device, I won't hear it in my headset, but GSM is another matter, AT&T's frequency band being the worst offender. Granted the interference is subtle, but the "tower pinging" is most definitely there. Not all the time, typically around 10,000' and below. But please continue to explain how it doesn't bother me, or my fellow pilots. After all, you are the paying customer, and the customer is always correct.
Electronic devices are forbidden because you get DISTRACTED in delicate moments of flight!!!!
Not because of some strange kepler belt related issue!!!
Please... Really... WAKE UP!!!
An era of new computing begins today at Computex 2010 as AMD races ahead of the blue giant to show off the world's fist Accelerated Processing Unit (APU) - a fusion of traditional CPU and GPU functions in one die. Find out what it is and what you can expect from it.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/03/faa-to-revisit-the-use-of-certain-personal-electronics-on-flights/
They even make you turn off an analogue cassette player. Nonsensical.
If 're going to crash and burn on take off or landing, I want to at least enjoy it.
As a pilot, and one who used to fly frequently prior to the DHS (our version of the Stasi) ruined all air travel in the US, I would routinely leave several cellular phones, and other electronics turned on for the duration of my commercial flights, and throughout the duration of my private flights.
NEVER have I ever encountered any disruption, or any signals interference with any of the communications, GPS, or electrical systems inside the aircraft that I was Pilot in Command of, and nor have there been ANY FAA incidents filed in any of the aircraft that I've flown commercially.
Simply put, if some idiot's smart phone could take down a commercial airliner, we'd have seen that done already. Has everyone forgotten that we're in a "war on terror!"? The terrorists would have already tried to do this.
The FAA has cow-toed to the big corporation's and their inability to keep their technology up with the changing times. The major issue on this restriction was the tower-hopping at >500mph, as the cellular network was never designed to handle that speed. It was only designed for ground vehicles, and ~100mph. The major problem is that they use a temporal algorithm to calculate your airtime charges, and when you travel too swiftly, you aren't properly charged for your air-time, and you "get away" with free service.
For those morons who believe that this will "destroy" an aircraft, keep dreaming. The FAA would NEVER give an airworthiness certificate to an aircraft with systems that could be so easily impacted by something as small or weak as a cellular telephone. If it were a 50W Military Radio, I could see some concern, however, cell phones aren't even close.
Air rage will be a major cause of interrupted flights, if people blather on their phones in the air like they do on the ground. Bus rides usually aren't that long. In trains you can move to a different car. But cooped up in a tin can on a long-haul trans-Pacific flight with someone who won't stop yakking?
Death penalty. It's the only punishment that fits the crime.
But how much do you want to bet that once they magnanimously allow blathering, the airlines will start charging more for seats outside the blather zone?