Slashdot Mirror
FAA May Let You Use Electronic Devices During Airplane Takeoff and Landing Soon
colinneagle writes "Members of an FAA advisory panel are reportedly meeting this week to make changes to the ban on the use of electronic devices on an airplane during takeoff and landing. The new regulations will allow the use of electronic devices to access content stored on the devices, including e-books, music, podcasts, and video. Sending emails, connecting to Wi-Fi, and making phone calls will still be prohibited. The announcement is expected to be made later this month, and the rules put into effect next year, according to the report."
So you are going to make the flight attendants know if someone is reading an ebook and not sending an email? Seems ridiculous, they have a lot to do on take off and landing already.
"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." -- Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
Now all that I need to do is to get my home made EMP device small enough to carry on ....
Finally!
A use for the "airplane mode", except "I want to play and not be disturbed".
run that
Because the undercover air marshal will be the only one not fooling around with electronic gizmos during takeoff. :)
Possibly the pilot, too.
At 9 comments in, I am surprised there isn't one yet.
That 20 minutes or so where I was disconnected from grid was intolerable. Sometimes it would be as long as half an hour! Half an hour without 'liking' anything! Also, my virtual farm was practically in ruins and my digital pets were thirsty.
Considering all the passenger videos of takeoff and landings that are on Youtube, some all the way from the gate pushback, taxi, all the way up to level flight, they haven't been doing a good job of enforcement anyway. And it's pretty clear modern personal electronic has little to no impact on operational safety of the aircraft.
For the last ten years I've been part of an unofficial and unpaid test team that has been examining how safe it is to use mobile phones and similar transceivers during take-off and landing. My planes have never had problems.
The FAA gives us some crumbs while the TSA takes the main course. I'd rather have my electronics have the batteries temporarily confiscated than have to endure radiation or gropings.
Oh man, I'll be so glad if they start letting us listen to headphones during takeoff again. When I was a teen with a discman, that was the highlight of every flight for me...choosing a kickass track, and cranking it while accelerating down the runway.
It seems to me that while this is good, the FAA should be concentrating more on the bad press from the security nonsense and unreasonable searches (why I don't fly into the US any more) than worrying about using my iCrap on take off and landing.
Mean what you say...say what you mean.
TSA will make it illegal
Technically, the TSA cannot make anything illegal. But that is just the issue. Once upon a time, in order to control the citizenry, you had to make laws, and the citizenry had some say into what was law and what was not. Now, you have regulatory agencies that don't make laws at all but are given jurisdiction to make what is held as equivalent to law in that if you disobey their rules, you can be charged with a crime. This is not appropriate at all and everybody should be outraged that this is happening.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Consumer digital cameras and portable camcorders were available before the takeoff/landing ban and they were used. But some of the high-sensitivity motion-capable DSLRs and EVIL cameras would be able to capture much more of the beauty of flight. It would nice to see these taken off the ban as they are mostly harmless. I've often thought of bringing a vintage wind-up (mechanical) 8mm or 16mm movie or 35mm film camera to photograph the interesting early part of a flight.
During later parts of the flight atmospheric haze makes photographs dull but I found that the camera's "infrared" RAW developing profile (fiddles with the red channel), really does cut through that haze. Some night flights (especially transatlantic great-circle routes over Greenlend) go far enough from cities and far enough north to give passengers a view of the northern lights. I've seen some airlines broadcast a view from a cockpit camera on one of the TV channels. It is a shame we're told to close our cabin windows so we end up watching some ridiculous B-movie when one of the most beautiful sights in the world is just outside
Why Can't You Use Phones on Planes?
Hmm... Thought most of the reasoning against iPods and other mp3 devices which had no ability to transmit/receive was that by wearing the earbuds you were inhibiting your ability to hear any announcements or instructions by the flight attendants...
When you buy the ticket and board the plane, you agree to play by their rules. They have the property rights and have sold you limited rights to your seats with stipulations.
It's not their rules. It's the FAA rules. The FAA is part of the US government. Hence the F.
As long as we are allowed to throw the skymall magazine at them if they get too loud, I am find with it.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Wait, who was the "they" that already had a lot to do while strapped in their seats?
I can see the the tweets streaming in from pilots now.... "OK, landing gear is coming out..."
Rule followers caused the holocaust!
Also we tend to have higher blood pressure :( It bothers me when people keep talking on their phone, even though I know it shouldn't. And deep down, I wish I was daring enough to continue reading my eBook, even in airplane mode. Also, seriously, why don't people signal when they are changing lanes?
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
What about having people ready to MOVE during an emergency? Isn't that why bags, tables, and everything is put away during takeoff and landing?
I thought it was about avoiding/reducing injuries from flying luggage or hitting the seat or table in front of you with your head or adam's apple if the plane bumped into something, ran off the runway into the dirt beside it, or otherwise decelerated or experienced strong G-forces during some mishap.
Same reason they ask you to go back to your seat and belt in if the run into turbulence midflight - though the latter (almost always) has less extreme forces.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
So here's the thing: It's their plane.
When you buy the ticket and board the plane, you agree to play by their rules. They have the property rights and have sold you limited rights to your seats with stipulations.
If that were true, they'd be able to chose to let you use your equipment on takeoff and landing. Some of them would likely do so, to attract more customers in the highly competitive market, or to make it easier on their flight staff (and maybe get away with less flight staff).
But that's NOT the case. This is a federal regulation. The government tells them to do this. It's not a matter of contract between them and you, it's a matter of the government running the show as a dominating third party.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Here is a protip from an experienced traveler: If the cabin starts rotating past 30 degrees, or if it pitches or yaws significantly, stop whatever you're doing and look up.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
When you buy the ticket and board the plane, you agree to play by their rules. They have the property rights and have sold you limited rights to your seats with stipulations.
It's not their rules. It's the FAA rules. The FAA is part of the US government. Hence the F.
My bet is that even if the FAA gets tid of it (not likely as the plane manufacturers are behind it) Airlines will still chose to keep it because.
1. They really need you to pay attention to the safety announcement.
2, They really need you to react when something goes wrong.
3. They dont trust you, butterfingers, not to lose it when a 200 ton plane does 0-100 in 3 seconds.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
>What is so earthshakingly important that it cannot wait until the takeoff or landing phases are completed ?
Your rights.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
well, you would not want to miss a hilarious opportunity to void your bowels in public.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHooBjxmoXQ
Whoa, lots of comments here from people who think the issue is one of radio interference. No. No, that's not been a worry for a very long time.
No, the issue is one of projectiles and idiot passengers.
Personally I don't want to die from:
(1) Having survived decceleration from 200 knots to 0, being hit in the back of the head by the tablet from row 30
(2) Smoke inhalation whilst waiting to get out of the plane, because the guys nearest the exit are trying to figure out which of the smashed up tablets and phones on the floor is theirs.
I'd rather they kept the ban.
-- Dave
>Now, you have regulatory agencies that don't make laws at all but are given jurisdiction to make what is held as equivalent to law in that if you disobey their rules, you can be charged with a crime. This is not appropriate at all and everybody should be outraged that this is happening.
We learned this in Sociology 25 years ago. It happened in the 1930s. There's a great scene in The Great Gatsby, when Rockefeller-equivalent calls up "his" Senator and tries to get something done, still thinking personal influence matters... and some bureaucrat at the Federal Housing Authority of the time, given the power by Congress, blocks him just to spite the big guy.
Think of that, next time you watch the murder / suicide in the movie... trope, for the US.
Also, the "more legroom" is also a thing of the past in many places... the seat next to you will be free but the seat pitch is the same throughout the aeroplane on many short-haul flights.
Esli epei etot cumprenan, shris soa Sfaha.
I just want to be able to read my Kindle during takeoff and landing. I'm a nervous flyer, and having something to distract me from the mass violation of the law of gravity and the impending death that I fear every time we push away from the stand would really help!
It does keep me buying books in the airport stores though :)
Also, the "more legroom" is also a thing of the past in many places... the seat next to you will be free but the seat pitch is the same throughout the aeroplane on many short-haul flights.
Ahh yes, the new BA planes are like that. Right pain in the ass (or leg).
Adjust your work pattern so you don't fly shorthaul.
The FAA is part of the US government. Hence the F.
For the NSA, the "F" is hidden, but it quickly becomes obvious if you type something like "terror bomb" in a private e#NO CARRIER
So I should be able to use my HAM radio on board!
I always thought that the opposite is true. But right now I can't find any good reference to back it up. Certainly drunks often suffer only smaller injuries or bruises in various incidents compared to those who are sober - because they don't control their muscles so much and/or don't realize/react to what's going on and so are more relaxed.
Watch as the Luddites crawl out from out of their caves to tell us all how they think it's ridiculous people can't be without their devices for 30 minutes during the takeoff and landing and how they don't want to hear someone talking on the phone etc. Get of my lawn!
Hehehe, yeah, I HATE IT when those arguments are thrown around - when 1. being able or not to detach from a device can not be ascertained as easily as those making that argument make it seem, and 2. Just because a phone is an electronic device doesn't mean that they are including it in the allowed category, outside of airplane mode... something they'd be able to see for themselves IF THEY ACTUALLY READ THE ARTICLE[S} ON THE MATTER .
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
A single iPod isn't going to cause any interference with flight electronics. But I've wondered what it might be like if everyone on the plane were using cellular devices at maximum power. Could that be a problem?
Also, during times when the plane is not completely level or experiencing turbulence or headed for an uncomfortable emergency water landing, I would not appreciate having someone's iPad slip out of their hand and fly into my face. Just saying.
No, you have always been explicitly allowed to wear passive earmuffs or earplugs.
It is always intriguing when a post with no "troll" characteristics, is intentfully factual, tactful, spawns discussion, and is modded to at least (+3 Insightful) is eventually moderated down to "Troll".
Call me crazy, but I think people just might actually moderate based on agreement of opinion instead of the descriptors "insightful, informative, funny, etc.".
All the major airlines have adopted policies to mirror the Federal requirements. Thus they are their own policies as well.
Moreover, to your point, the originator of the rule/policy/law doesn't matter so long as the owner of the plane accepts and enforces it.