Cell phones on planes!!

[1279shp]

The next time a flight attendant asks you to switch off that handheld computer phone, keep smiling - and pull out a copy of the latest plane safety guidelines.

Clever computer and handset makers offer an option called "flight mode," which disables the radio. As a result, the British Civil Aviation Authority has decided passengers in planes under its jurisdiction should be allowed to use these portable devices as a calendar or photo viewer because they do not interfere with the electronic circuits and radio systems used by the pilots.

The CAA says airlines should let travelers write messages, read documents and perform all other nonphone functions on phones that double up as computers, just as they can now work on a laptop, play on a GameBoy or listen to music on an iPod at cruising altitudes.

But some flight crews still fume when they spot a passenger toying with a computer phone. Airlines from no-frills JetBlue to United and British Airways have their crews scanning the aisles for them.

"How do we know which mobile is on, and which isn't?" a British Airways spokeswoman said. "It's not for our crew to decide which mobile can be switched on and which not."

In fact, the CAA says it is. Airlines would do well to train their crews to make sure "intentionally transmitting devices" like cell phones, remote control toys and two-way pagers are operated in their "safe" modes, the agency said in a recent circular.

"Any operation of these devices when the transmitter has not been turned on, should be controlled in the same manner as for any unintentionally transmitting device," the CAA added.

Unintentionally transmitting devices like radios, laptop computers and pacemakers emit negligible signals from electronics circuits.

The CAA does demand that electronics companies make it clear when the radio is turned off. Sony Ericsson's P900 smart phone, for instance, has "FLIGHT MODE" plastered over its display.

The US Federal Aviation Administration did not return calls requesting comment.

No Reason To Fear Cell Phones

In any case, flight crews are fighting a losing battle against cell phones.

About half of the world's largest airlines plan to offer wireless Internet and mobile phone access on board within two to four years, according to a survey commissioned by WirelessCabin. This consortium of large European technology companies and the German Aerospace Center is working to bring these services to planes.

"We will do a test flight (with a wireless network) on an Airbus A340-600 this summer," said Axel Jahn, a spokesman for WirelessCabin, which expects a trial run on a commercial airline next year.

Boeing Co.'s Connexion is working on a similar system.

It may be 18 to 24 months before planemakers and airlines offer such services, Jahn said, as the technology still needs licenses and approval from aviation and telecommunications regulators in Europe and North America.

The imminent approval of mobile phones on flights prompts the question whether the decade-long ban against them was ever justified.

Aviation authorities admit that mobile phone radiation poses only a modest threat. The worst incidents include setting off a false smoke alarm in the baggage compartment or interrupting communications in the flight crew headphones.

"...Many (including pilots) ... question whether a genuine problem exists," the CAA says in a cell phone safety study.

However, at maximum distance from a radio base station, say 30,000 feet above the Earth, many mobile phones will transmit at maximum power to make contact. This can disrupt a compass or a positioning system if it is 12 inches away from the phone.

The WirelessCabin systems remove that risk by putting a radio base station on board the plane. Because of its close proximity, it will force cell phones to "whisper" at 1,000th their normal output power.

"With this approach," Jahn said, "we minimize interference with the aircraft and even terrestrial networks."

As a result, flight attendants may soon shift their attention to passengers who shout into their mobile phones, interfering not with the pilot's radio system but with their fellow travelers' privacy.

:ok:

[Quidnunc]

Nice try. Don't forget that airlines are perfectly free to impose restrictions that are more restrictive than the CAA / FAA if they choose.
e.g many airlines use crew hours limitations that are more restrictive that CAA - no good waving a piece of paper at them when the crew say they are out of hours.

[onehunga]

During the safety speal on my BA UK domestic flight on Monday morning the CSD said regardless of your phone or other device having a "flight mode" to turn it off until you are off the aircraft at the other end. Didn't realise what a flight mode was until I read this post.

[eal401]

In fact, the CAA says it is. Airlines would do well to train their crews to make sure "intentionally transmitting devices" like cell phones, remote control toys and two-way pagers are operated in their "safe" modes, the agency said in a recent circular.
So in addition to everything else they have to do, the crew must physically check each phone being used? How else can you tell if the person is playing a game or about to send a text?

Looks like the last haven of no mobile phones is being slowly eroded. :(

[Nineiron]

There may come a day when all aircraft have equipment and wiring screened from pulse interference. There may come a day when the cellular network can accept signals from above. Until that day comes why should we take the slightest risk of missing what may be one vital word on the radio being blanked by a 'dibi-dit' or one spurious deviation of the ILS at minima.
As some modern equipment appears to cope with digital interference that is no reason to take a risk with all aircraft, just because a few spoilt brats can't be parted from their toys for a brief part of their lives.

[LXGB]

Monarch state phones with flight mode should be switched off for the duration of the flight in their pre-takeoff safety announcement.

LXGB

[NigelOnDraft]

Any UK operators changed their procedures yet?? BA wef 22 Apr

[BEagle]

Another reason to avoid flying ba then!

Please let's not permit the use of cellphones in flight EVER! In-flight internet with 802.11b enabled laptops is reasonable; idiots yattering away endlessly on mobiles would be infuriating.

I was on a train the other day in a 'quiet' carriage which prohibits the use of mobile phones. Some woman must have got up 5 times to answer her phone (but not in the carriage) when it rang...noisily. Another kid answered her phone twice despite the clear signs indicating prohibition of use.

:mad:

[NigelOnDraft]

Another reason to avoid flying ba then! Please let's not permit the use of cellphones in flight EVER!Who said BA permitted / would permit cell-phones in flight?? And anyway, in-flight phones have been aorund for years...

[BEagle]

Sorry, NoD I misinterpreted your post. I thought you meant that, w.e.f. 22 Apr, ba was allowing passengers to use cellphones on board - though not in flight.

A sat-phone 'kiosk' away from the rest of the pax - fine. But having to sit next to someone yapping away "Yeah, 'ello Chris. We met the clients, they want more payment details.....yeah, nah - told 'em we couldn't.....OK..." etc for hours on end?

I hope not!

[KingoftheRoad]

Any UK operators changed their procedures yet??

bmi, wef 19 jan '04

SUBJECT: Use of Cellular Telephones during Aircraft Refuelling
FODCOM 30/2003 states:
The CAA is satisfied that fuel vapour ignition, due to the use of cellular telephones on the aircraft, is unlikely when passengers are onboard during fuelling operations.
As a result, it is now bmi policy to permit the use of cellular telephones by passengers during fuelling operations.



Roger Miller

[NigelOnDraft]

BEagle...

BA have allowed PAX to use phones, when engines not running except during re-fuelling. As of 22 Apr, the refuelling issue will be removed...

However, in that most BA notices are re-issued, clarified and corrected 2-3 times we'll see what the final rules says. Seems from the above post that BMI were somewhat quicker off the mark

A sat-phone 'kiosk' away from the rest of the pax - fineYes - but more and more seats, certainly towards the premium cabins, have a phone in each IFE controller. US airlines have had them for years... The only disincentives were the very high charges...

ATB
NoD

[Load Toad]

Quite apart from the obvious 'safety' aspect there are two reasons not to allow h/p to be used on planes:-
- The ringing of the infernal machines is highly irritating at the best of times. In an enclosed space (lets say a well loaded cattle class cabin) having to put up with the ringing and then the inane chatter (usualy a good few decibels above normal conversation) will be just one more added misery.
- Air rage will know new bounds as some half drunken fool decides they have to call all their mates waking up people trying to sleep 6 hours into that long haul (hell) flight.

Please let the aircraft cabin be an area of relative peace.

[WHBM]

Wirelesscabin and Connexion may well use an on-board base station which allows mobiles to work on minimum power. But what happens when it fails ? All the phones will go up to maximum strength looking for a signal and we will be back at the old problem again.

And of course once the rollout is announced there will be the "know alls" who say "BA allow mobiles now" and just switch them on everywhere.

[propulike]

So is this 'anti-mobile 'phone' because they're a safety hazard, or just 'anti-mobile 'phone'? If it's simply that you'd like the use of mobile 'phones to be discouraged don't use Flight Safety as an excuse - it weakens that powerful argument like the boy crying wolf.

Unfortunately, in flying aircraft that are older than me to aircraft where I have more hours than they do I've yet to encounter a flight safety issue caused by the use of mobiles.

They are d@mned annoying though.

[ShamRoc]

I am with BEagle and propulike on this one. Let us not get involved in Flight Safety here. The bottom line is that in the confined space of an aircraft cabin, just as in a train, mobile phones can be a nuisance and intrusive.
You see it every day. On landing as soon as the seatbelt sign is off there is a rush to switch on the mobile phones. What is that important that it cannot wait until disembarked. It is as if there is a need for a phallic symbol to be clutched to the ear in a "look how important I am" gesture!
If there is a Flight Safety hazard it will be due to an increase in 'air rage'.
I understand it is possible to purchace 'jammers' that cause interference at short(ish) range on mobiles. They have been used with success on trains and coaches. Now there might be a Flight Safety hazard.........!

[Globaliser]

NigelOnDraft: BA have allowed PAX to use phones, when engines not running except during re-fuelling. As of 22 Apr, the refuelling issue will be removed...But there's been a quiet change to the onboard announcements. They used to say "when engines are not running" referring to departure and arrival, but now for arrival they say "don't switch them on until inside the terminal building". Is that going to change again?

[NigelOnDraft]

What the PAs say, I do not know. The CC books on PAs change so often, I am not surprised you get mixed messages.

As an aside, BA (and your fellow PAX) would probably rather you disembark first, and then use your mobile, than hold everyone up in the aisle, trying to conduct a conversation with one hand, and also collect your 3 items of handbaggage with the other (but that's another story !)

NoD

[Danny]

I remember from my days on the BALPA Airworthiness Study Group that there are devices available that can detect mobile phone signals and one company even produced a device that would flash the overhead light in the PSU nearest to the source of a mobile phone signal, alerting crewmembers so that they could investigate. Can't remember the name of the company that produced it but it was already certified and available for installation in several different PSU's.

A quick Google produced the 'Stealth Mobile Phone Detector (http://www.aeisecurity.com/mobiledetector.html) and there are other companies that produce these items. Anyone care to explain why devices similar to these (http://www.maui.net/~emf/MicroAlert.html) cannot be adapted to use in aircraft?

To be honest, apart from the annoyance factor of selfish loudmouths who are too ignorant to realise that their overheard, one-sided conversations are the equivalent of someone invading your space, I don't think that there is much risk of cell phones being left on inadvertently or otherwise. In hospitals in the UK there is a paranoia about cell phones being able to upset the machines that automatically add drugs to intravenous drips or will throw heart/lung machines into runaway mode. In the USA and Canada, the mobile phone usage in hospitals restriction was removed years ago after none of the urban myths associated with the cell phones was able to be proved or repeated.

So far, there never has been any reported accident or incident involving an aircraft and cell phones. There are many urban myths and much speculation but no substance. No doubt the 'no phones at any cost' brigade will demand full and complete testing before the removal of any ban should be considered and there will be others who will weigh up the statistics and odds and tell us the there is a much higher probability of an aircraft being brought down by a bird strike or something and therefore can be considered an acceptable risk.

At the end of the day, cell phones of the type we all carry with us don't work much above about 3,000' and at normal cruising levels of most jets are useless and will show no signal at all. If anyone claims that they have used their cell phone much above 3,000' then they are probably making it up or badly mistaken. How many of you pilots have forgotten to turn off your cell phone before a flight only to have it go off during the approach with a 'welcome message' from the local mobile telephone service provider? :\

[pprecious]

I doubt you'd be able to hold a conversation for any length of time anyway, if at all.

The terrestrial base stations have their antenna coverage patterns based around ground clutter, so the majority have down tilted antenna. So coverage not be contiguous, as you expect on the ground.

The other point is that GSM was, I believe tested up to a maximum handover speed of 150mph (I recall the testing was based around trainbourne radios at that time), before the system can't cope with the changes (we are looking at coverage radius of about 5 - 10Km max), therefore with the speed of the aircraft I doubt the network would catch up.

The handset, when it loses radio coverage starts to scan on all frequencies (no transmissions at this point) for a signalling channel, once it finds this it will try and communicate with the network, so even it found a cell, locked on and started the negotiation, it would still be out of range of that cell by the time the network responds.

Therefore, if it rings during cruise then someones left their alarm switched on........

[angels]

Not being directly involved in the aviation or telecommunications industries, I have but one question.

What is the source of the C&P news item that started this whole thing off?

The Sun (non-credible story)? The FT (possibly credible story)? Aviation Weekly (more likely credible story)?

I think we should be told.

If I've missed the source, I'll happily apologise and pull this post.

[Globaliser]

NigelOnDraft: As an aside, BA (and your fellow PAX) would probably rather you disembark first, and then use your mobile, than hold everyone up in the aisle, trying to conduct a conversation with one hand, and also collect your 3 items of handbaggage with the other (but that's another story !)Seriously, though, it was useful the other way around. You know how the instant the aircraft stops, everyone stands up in the aisle and then stays put for at least 5 minutes while the aircraft clears from the front? That used to be a great little opportunity to make a quick call to the car park to tell them to bring the car to the terminal, whilst staying comfortably seated in my seat, temporarily widened by lifting the armrest.

[Instrument Ranting]

Danny - our local hospital has just such devices installed.

I know they work, as I've seen one flashing and making an smoke alarm type noise while a midwife stood underneath it with her finger in one ear and her mobile phone against the other!

IR

[Vortex what...ouch!]

As pointed out earlier mobiles do not transmit, most of the time, when looking for a cell in idle (not making a call) mode.

To expand on what Danny and Precious said. The GSM system (not sure about N American CDMA systems but I suspect it is the same) was not designed to work at speeds above 300KMH. As Far as the height is concerned basically he is right as the whole network is designed to look at the ground and not the sky, so as you go higher the signal levels will be very poor. Thousands of people zipping across the sky would also cause massive interference problems on networks as well as a huge signalling overhead.

There is a prameter that can be set so that if a mobile is travelling above a certain speed (easily calculated on a regular basis) you could not be allowed access to the network. So as the aircraft climbs and accellerates through 300KMH the phone would be logged off the network. There are still other issues with the phone keeping trying to log back on but I think you’ll get the point.

So I wouldn’t worry too much about the problem, the networks themselves almost certainly wouldn’t allow it and the phones wouldn’t work most of the time anyway.

That’s a relief then. :ok:

[BEagle]

Well, I've used GSM phones on the flight deck (on the ground) since 1995. Long before anyone thought that there would be any problem. Apart from the 'handshake' noise if the phone was close to a headset, there was never a problem. Admittedly that was on one of HMFC's coal-fired VC10s with clockwork-and-string systems. Probably the most up-to-date comms system we had though - it used to mystify our operations centre to get calls from the ac in places like Iceland!

If GSM use is ever accepted universally in flight, there'll be no way to escape from Wayne-the-mouth shouting his sales figures for 14 hours unless the use of voice phones is strictly controlled. Such as:

1. Throughout the cabin when engines are not running.
2. In flight only in 'approved areas'. But that'd require seats to be removed - so that's hardly likely to happen.
3. Remove the 'no smoking' signs and paint the words "NO SMOKING" on the back of each seat. Then replace the 'no smoking signs' with 'No Cellphones' signs....

There is a time and place for cellphones - the cabin of an aeroplane in todays 'stack'em high, sell 'em cheap' seat layouts is most certainly NOT one of them!

Oh - and bill them at €10 per minute!

[witchdoctor]

Although I wasn't particularly listening, whilst I was dispatching a Ryanair flight today I'm fairly certain the No.1 said in her PA that the use of mobile phones (and other electronic thingies) on board was illegal.

Do the Irish CAA have a definite ban on them, or was this just some strong discouragement from the crew?

Personally, I would join most of the posters here in favouring a ban as I just can't see what the whole world and his wife has suddenly found is so bloody important in the last 10 years that they can't go 5 minutes without having to make a call, regardless of where thay are or what they might be doing at the time that the overwhelming need to communicate strikes them.:*

[av8boy]

dung...

There's a post that cries out for a winking smiley-face. I fear it may have been just a touch too dry for general consumption (not to demean the ability of PPRuNers to "get it." --Just based on personal experience)...

;)

Dave

[Pax Vobiscum]

Sorry BEagle, but once you get one of these shiny BA/LH flights with 'Connexion by Boeing' I can't see any way to stop someone with a Skype (or similar) Voice over IP capability on their wireless-equipped laptop spending hours on their 'virtual' phone.

You can just hear it, can't you:
"I'm on the plane - ... - nah, it's rubbish!"
(apologies to Dom Joly)

[paulo]

Pax - hmmmm... you got a good one there. I really like the idea of internet access... looks like I'll have to temper that with having to share a plane with a load of yakking people. :hmm:

Still, at least with VOIP there might not be the awful ring tones and BEEP-BEEP!! message alerts.

[Bletchley]

The thing that the sad individuals who always have to use their mobile phones so noisily fail to understand is that REAL importance/seniority brings with it the need NOT to have to use the phone at all when travelling.

It also NEVER fails to amaze me exactly what sort of confidential information is spoken loudly enough for everyone to hear.

I was once able to establish the name and company of a particularly obnoxious individual on a train. I rang up and insisted on speaking to the Co. MD.

I assume that said individual got a serious rollicking subsequently about giving out sensitive information.

[View From The Ground]

Is there not a little bit of hypocrisy going on with the airlines here? The consensus on this thread seems to be that mobiles are not a safety risk....however they are a right royal pain in the backside if you happen to sit next to someone speaking loudly...or indeed in an aircraft cabin.....quietly into one. The airlines however seem quite happy to have spent many millions on sat phones in seat backs which to this day, despite thousands of hours paxing (new verb?) about, I have never seen one being used. Surely these phones would be no less or more annoying in conversational use, although of course there are no annoying inbound calls with accompanying amusing...hmmmm...ring tones. I wonder whether the ban on phones in flight is more to do with two factors (a) a vain attempt by airlines to encourage use of expensive (to use and install) sat phones (b) concerns from the mobile phone companies about their networks being swamped by signals from unexpected directions....i.e. above.
Personally I would favour some kind of area with a sound proofed booth for people to make calls by whatever means possible/available. Can't see it happening because it would cost a seat or two's worth of space....and therefore revenue.
As for in flight internet....can't wait so long as its restricted to written and not verbal (i.e. voice over ip) use.

[cargo boy]

Which bit about "above 3000 feet altitude or above about 200 knots plain vanilla cellular phones won't work" didn't you understand? To be able to use a phone at cruise level and cruise speed in a jet, you need to be interfacing with some kind of satellite system. Even an Iridium personal handset, the size of a housebrick (and about the same weight), if it would work without line of sight access, would cost you an arm and a leg to use. Ergo... the airlines invest a hefty sum of dosh to install a satellite based system on their aircraft and you still want the Vodaphone £25 a month AnyTime AnyNetwork rate! :rolleyes:

You probably haven't seen one used because the charges made to use them are designed to recover some of the cost of installing and maintaining them and most cattle class plebs would rather watch the film and save a hefty sum by waiting until they get back on terra firma. In the hallowed domain of the business or first class you might see it a bit more often but there you are assigned much more privacy and again, are not actually likely to actually witeness someone who can actually afford to use the built in system.

(Shakes head in disbelief and wonders "why do I bother?".)

[Memetic]

Just for info installing a pico cell base station inside an aircraft would offer lots of options for controlling cell phone use and marketing.

If you have control of the base station you can choose when calls can be made, so you could switch off access for x hours during a long haul to allow sleep, or just switch the signal on in certain areas of the cabin to provide quiet zones - perhaps we will need to wait for the A380 for the space though.

As for marketing you can drop SMS messages onto all phones that are switched on, for example informing of in flight call costs, desitnation weather / onward transport information etc. That in turn is likley to lead to sponsored adverts for duty free goods, car hire etc to subsidise the costs. Calls may not be the problem, it might be SMS alerts - in my case a very noisy "Message for you Sir" form Monty Python! (Yes I would set the phone to silent...)

[Van Der Hum]

If the upshot of all this is that phones are allowed to be used onboard then we won't be able to play the bet on how many voice/text messages are received during the "phones must remain switched off till you reach the terminal building" announcement game.

Always a fun way to make a few quid at the end of a flight.

Seriously though, peace and quiet in the cabin please.