1) My company tells passengers in the initial PA announcement that phones must be switched off at all times, and no other electrical or electronic equipment may be used while the seat belt sign is switched on. At other times, passengers may request to use them. Therefore, depending on the phase of flight and type of equipment people want to use, all is at the discretion of the crew. If problems with aircraft equipment come to light, the cabin crew know who to ask to switch what off.
2) Passengers using equipment "surreptitiously" or "discreetly" without asking the crew implies to me (and to many others with whom I've discussed this) various possibilities - none of which I like terribly much.
3) Under the circumstances Slasher described, provided they ask in advance, I would have no problem at all with someone using a handheld GPS, provided it was one designed for use in an aircraft. I would, however, prefer that it be switched off for the approach.
4) As I mentioned in my initial post on this thread, I have heard worries from some quarters that it is possible some suicidal passenger may want to use a GPS to be sure they are over water before somehow bringing the aircraft down, thus avoiding investigation of the wreckage and possibly invalidating life assurance policies for their dependents. My personal view is that this is a little far-fetched, but there have been allegedly suicidal pilots in recent years, and why not suicidal passengers? It is merely a possibility, and I believe the likelihood of possibility becoming reality is very remote.
5) If it was discovered that someone on board my aircraft was deliberately and knowingly breaking whatever rules are there for flight safety, my instinct would be in the first instance to ask the #1 to issue a stern warning, and request an electronic device be switched off. Depending on the response, I would probably take it no further. However, if the response is a suggestion relating to sex and travel, or they are found repeating their performance, another warning about the possible consequences to them (viz., possible blacklisting, arrest upon landing, etc. etc.). Only a third time would I consider having the police meet the aircraft upon landing. And beyond that, I would consider diverting and landing asap if it appeared to me that the safety of the aircraft was being endangered.
6) I don't work in the IT market, which seems to have more than its fair share of pondlife among its passengers considering that because they're on holiday they can do whatever the heck they like. Most of our routes are largely business routes. Frequently people ask if they can use laptop computers, and there is no problem there. Moreover, the passengers are often very frequent flyers with us. The benefits of this are two-fold. Firstly, they know us, and respect the service we provide. Secondly, they know the likely implications for them if either they were to be refused carriage in the future, or a letter of complaint about them were to be sent to the person in their company who makes the flight bookings.
[This message has been edited by HugMonster (edited 08 January 2001).]