Slashdot Mirror
FCC Chief Urges FAA To Ease Airplane Electronics Ban
Hugh Pickens writes "AFP reports that Federal Communications Commission chairman Julius Genachowski is calling for an easing of the ban on using mobile phones and other electronic devices on airplanes during takeoff and landing, saying devices such as smartphones 'empower people' and can boost economic productivity. 'I write to urge the FAA to enable greater use of tablets, e-readers and other portable electronic devices during flight, consistent with public safety,' the FCC chief said in the letter to FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. The ban is in place based on the assumption that devices could interfere with an airplane's navigation equipment. But a number of news stories have questioned the validity of this claim, and many point out that some people forget to turn off their devices during flights. The FCC studied the question several years ago but found insufficient evidence to support lifting the ban at the time. But not everyone has been forced to put their gadgets away. Earlier this year the FAA approved iPads instead of paper flight manuals in the cockpit for pilots, but the agency still refuses to allow passengers to read on Kindles and iPads during takeoff and landing."
Wow... 10 minutes when I can't use my iPad. If this is your biggest problem in your life, celebrate like there's no tomorrow.
Is this for real? Can people really not go without using their stupid devices for 5 minutes at takeoff and another 5 minutes at landing?
SERIOUSLY! You're going to be in the plane, in the air, for an hour, if not far longer. A few minutes at the beginning and end of the trip won't have much impact at all on "economic productivity".
If they ease the ban and it turns out that there IS a device that could mess with an airplane's electronics, people will be complaining that the FAA didn't warn them. The FCC should stay out of matters that could potentially kill hundreds as well as cost airlines money and costumers. It's better to be safe than falling to your death from a couple of miles up.
I always assumed it was because takeoff and landing are done at the lowest altitiudes, and have a higher risk of an emergency happening. Having items stowed and not being distracted may help in surviving an emergency. The fact that passengers can't even manage the feign interest in the safety instructions makes me question if people could pry their eyeballs away from their super important game of angry birds in the event of an emergency :) I've seen plenty of people (of all ages) get sucked into tv and computers so much that it appears they are in a trance and they don't respond to verbal directions as if they hadn't even heard them. I fly frequently, but I say keep them off.
Honestly, do people *really* need to have phone and other electronic devices during takeoff and landing? They can't put the stuff aside for 15 minutes? Are they that dependent? What next, you HAVE to leave the tray table down, you MUST leave your seat back? You're on a fricking plane. Put your stuff away and prepare for landing/takeoff.
I've never really understood why it's so difficult to stop using these things during the crucial parts of the flight. Aside from the electronic signals part, it's also better not to have a bunch of hard, breakable glass, and/or relatively heavy objects floating around the cabin space. Stuff should be stowed below the seats in case there is turbulence or some other issue with the takeoff/landing. It might also be a good idea to have passengers' full attention in case the phrase "brace for impact" comes over the sound system.
I'm a pilot, and as much as I think the ban is BS, I also understand. The problem is that the FAA cannot (practically) garuentee any level of quality or standard compliance for any piece of electronics that a passenger may bring on board (think $50 imitation iPad that may have bad or poorly designed radio components and transmits way outside the frequency band and power limits of wifi).
Another half truth I've heard is that it keeps passengers more focused on their surroundings, so you may be able to take instructions from flight attendants faster if there were an emergency, versus oblivious to the outside world, buried in your work.
An account that was created today, has first post and endorses a Microsoft product? I've seen this before.
Shill.
If you demonstrate, for example, that a Nintendo does not cause interference, then the approval would apply only to the model tested, and not to any other gaming devices.
One could argue that this is overly cautious, but there are devices out there which do interfere with the aircraft. FM radios, for example, can and often do interfere with VOR navigation receivers. If they err, it is on the side of safety. It would take one really bad accident traced to an unapproved device to have the NTSB screaming for the head of everyone concerned.
Disclaimer: I hold airframe and powerplant mechanics certificates, an inspection authorization (lets me inspect aircraft on behalf of the FAA each year), and a general radiotelephone certificate.
One single device won't. That's why one passenger ignoring the instructions may happen a lot, but isn't a real issue.
The problem is having several radio devices in close proximity transmitting at the same time, because of intermodulation. Two transmitters can produce interference at a third frequency - one that neither device is designed to transmit on. The more devices you have - and the more frequencies involved - the more likely such interference is, which increases the chance that some spurious product lands directly on a frequency critical to the aircraft.
Any commercial radio will reject other frequencies quite well; *no* radio can reject interference on a frequency it is trying to receive.
While you might like your Microsoft Surface Tablet, I do not think they specifically should be allowed on airplanes or in fact any public transport.
The user will soon start cursing and may potentially throw said Microsoft Surface Tablet in shear frustration, causing, at best, distractions with the possibility of bodily harm. An extreme case of Windows8-itis may cause said frustrated user to completely loose sanity, lashing out at those nearest him or her.
Android or iOS users may be uncomfortable being in the same cabin as a Microsoft Surface Tablet User, since the MSTU will require specially designed restraints to keep them under control.
Boeing has an explanation of the rationale and the steps they've taken to examine the effects of electronics on aircraft in their "Aero" magazine. This is pretty old (2000) and would certainly benefit from an update, but they did real live technical investigation instead of just mixing assertions with quasi-technical arguments. A link to the full text:
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_10/interfere_textonly.html
TLDR Summary:
After receiving very specific, detailed claims/complaints from airlines, Boeing inspected the frequency range output and dB level of electromagnetic emissions from several specific devices. Their biggest concerns in the testing seemed to be the EMI due to frequency harmonics and interactions between devices--the premise and conceptual explanation seems unlikely but isn't completely meritless. No airplane susceptibility was demonstrated. Boeing clearly said that since they tested specific items, the testing was not conclusive for all devices and all interactions.
The excerpt on cell phones in particular deserves to be fully quoted, as it illustrates their thinking:
*Cell phone tests and analysis.*
Boeing conducted a laboratory and airplane test with 16 cell phones typical of those carried by passengers, to determine the emission characteristics of these intentionally transmitting PEDs. The laboratory results indicated that the phones not only produce emissions at the operating frequency, but also produce other emissions that fall within airplane communication/navigation frequency bands (automatic direction finder, high frequency, very high frequency [VHF] omni range/locator, and VHF communications and instrument landing system [ILS]). Emissions at the operating frequency were as high as 60 dB over the airplane equipment emission limits, but the other emissions were generally within airplane equipment emission limits. One concern about these other emissions from cell phones is that they may interfere with the operation of an airplane communication or navigation system if the levels are high enough.
Boeing also performed an airplane test on the ground with the same 16 phones. The airplane was placed in a flight mode and the flight deck instruments, control surfaces, and communication/navigation systems were monitored. No susceptibility was observed.
Telephones installed and certified on the airplane by Boeing or operators are not actually cell phones, but part of an airborne certified satellite system. These phones are electromagnetically compatible with the airplane systems because their emissions are controlled. In contrast, the emissions from passengers’ cell phones are not known or controlled in the same way as permanently installed equipment.
You do not just accidentally create a crappy device the throws out 1000 times the normally allowed power
Actually, that's pretty easy to do. Its not a matter of 1000 times the 2 Watt allowable transmitter power. Its 1000 times over the -43 dB (or more) maximum allowable out of band emission. That's still down in the milliwatt range.
Have gnu, will travel.
Parent needs to be modded down.
There is nothing insightful, intelligent, researched or valid about this argument.
I was almost done writing a very detailed, intelligent explanation of how EMI manifests in many ways with a few anecdotes from my experience building aircraft and as an audio tech, but then I remembered this is the internet and you're clueless and probably not interested in being corrected.
So, I'm posting for the benefit of other Slashdotters in the hope that this post will help a few people who modded parent up realize that he or she is full of it.
A Faraday cage doesn't protect the things inside it from other things inside it. The airlines don't lobby for the FAA to increase regulation that inconveniences them or their customers and they charge exorbitant amounts of money for sandwiches to try and make up for the fact that their profit margins are negative for flights that don't sell all of their seats.
ethos:
I have built aircraft(not just parts of them)
I have education in electronics and aeronautical engineering
I have a father who was a pilot and started and ran an airline
I have dealt with EMI as an audio tech. Weird things happen with low-quality transmitters.
P.S. Please use your mod points to reduce the visibility of parent post. It is completely undeserving of the credibility(albeit small) that up-modding brings it.
They'll leave airplane mode so your battery doesn't die in 30 minutes while it transmits and maximum gain searching for a tower it can't talk to.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
A Faraday cage doesn't protect the things inside it from other things inside it.
/facepalm
Building a kit plane doesn't give you any inside into how a modern commercial aircraft works. My father was an electrical engineer for the US airforce for 20 years, but I didn't quote that as a source and post anon because it's fucking stupid and irrelevant. You're dad told you so? Give me a break. Show us a real scientific test in which some piece of modern aircraft equipment failed because of interference with an iPad.
Your quote above reveals just how little you understand about how this works. The "Plane" can not be hurt by any electronic device. It's a giant piece of God damned aluminum. All that can be damaged are the instruments inside the cockpit. Those devices are inside the cockpit, which is itself a Faraday cage. Then you have each individual piece of equipment... having its own grounded case. Then you have each chip in that piece of equipment, again grounded and shielded. If they weren't, they'd interfere with themselves.
And of course, there is the most obvious piece of evidence there is: Everyone uses these devices on planes every day, all day long in spite of the rules... hundreds of thousands of flights, millions upon millions since the invention of the cellphone and not a single plane has gone down due to radio interference. Not one.