Mobile Phones

[AJ]

Anyone else fed up with exasperating arguments with pax over the use of phones aboard? What exactly is the OBSSESSION with having to text or phone on the plane?!

Our airline, like many others I assume, bans their use completely at all times except in the case of a long delay where Captain has final say.

There have been 2 incidences in which phones have interfered with the flying of the aircraft at our airline, so whatever anyone else says, there is definitely a case for them being switched OFF!

Sorry for the outburst, but we had a major argument with a stupid passenger on a flight to Madrid the other day - she had to be threatened with being offloaded before she switched the damn thing off! :mad:

The senior took down her name & address after informing her she had been in breach of CAA and airline regulations - I think she set an excellent example to the other passengers.

ok, rant over...

[pink flamingo]

dear AJ
have a look at this document which may give you a further knowledge about whatever problem arises on board. You could use your knowledge to confront reckless passengers.
Hope it helps
http://www.jaa.nl/section1/jars/443844.pdf
what you mentioned is on page 9, the document itself is quite thick but it deserves to be read by now and then just clarify that pax quite often make up their on rules either mentioning your collegues on other flights with the same airline or a different one.

Airlines in europe are almost standardized to the same regulation however some company policies i have not heard of someone permitting the use of mobile phone yet.

Certainly your senior acted professionally and surely gave a clear example of how much we are into safety and security.

PF

[barbiegirl]

another one that gets me going!!

the minute the wheels touched down and all you can hear is the beeps , 'your on holiday , i thought it was meant to be getting away from it all,' i think to myself.

it really annoys me when you ask a passenger to switch their phone off and they reply "it is" and then give you death glares for daring to ask them to not use their 'precious' or they are actuually chatting away and you ask them to stop , and they say ok, and carry on, telling the person thay are talking to that the nasty lady has made them stop.


and if they look further, when you buy a phone, the little handbook that comes with it actually states it is illegal to have it switched on on board an aicraft.

so i think you can gather i'm with you on this one AJ!

[KTPops]

Also, what is the deal with these new exciting phones that have a standby function?

I've lost count of the amount of times I've spied someone tapping away inflight and confronted them, only to be told by some spotty oyk that "it's on flight mode!"

Does that mean that there is no interference to the a/c systems?

:mad:

[AJ]

Hi guys

Thanks, good to know it wasn't just me (and the senior) being hard-nosed. What really wound us up was:

1) All passengers are asked to switch their phones off at the gate

2) The Senior who first encountered this lady asked her to switch it off as she walked down the aisle. She complied with this request.

3) When I walked past her about 2 minutes later, she had switched the phone back on, and was furiously "texting" away, completely oblivious to the fact that she had already been asked twice to switch it off.

4) Last but not least, we've had two real incidences of radio interference in the flightdeck during descent - both were traced to mobile phones that, although not in use, had been left on and might possibly have been receiving voicemail or messages at that point.

Regarding the "flight mode" function, our rules remain unchanged - all phones have to be switched off at the gate. Cabin Crew cannot verify for sure whether a phone is compatible in some way or not. I suspect a minority of passengers would use the 'flight mode' explanation as an excuse in any case. It just ain't worth the aggro - a major argument ruins the day for me. And it's embarrassing for the other passengers too.

cheers

[flapsforty]

AJ, instead of the standard company spiel, I insert the following into my welcome PA. It's not 100% failsafe, because there will always be people who don't speak English or who never listen, but it has a very high success rate in getting pax bums off seats, fumbling in overhead bins to switch off their mobile phones . :) Perhaps some of your No1s would be interested?


Ladies and Gentlemen, your mobile phones. (pause) If your phone is still on standby, it will search for contact with a ground station even if you are not talking into it. This can interfere with the systems in the cockpit, especially during take off and landing. These are the busiest times for our pilots and hearing beep-beep beep-beep in their headphones can be very distracting. That is potentially dangerous and does NOT help them get us safely on the ground.
So please make sure that your mobile phone is switched of completely!

I've gotten a lot of positive feedback from pax about this. They say they like getting the explanation of why they have to switch it off, rather than just being given the order.
Pax are just like normal human beings really. ;)

[Trislander]

Flaps 40

That's a really good idea, never thought of that before. I might have to incorporate that PA into my welcome on board PA's.

Happy Flying,

Tri:ok:

[CD]

Here's some other information from earlier this year...


PluggedIn: Stow luggage, not phones, while in flight

AMSTERDAM, April 13 (Reuters) - 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 U.S. 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 Centre 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 (nyse: BA - news - people) 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 (9.1 kilometers) 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 (30 centimeters) 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.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here are some more links with views from both sides:

Boeing: Interference from electronic devices (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_10/interfere.html)

TCCA Advisory Circular - Use of Portable Passenger Operated Electronic Devices Onboard Aircraft and Occurrence Reporting (http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/commerce/circulars/AC0106r.htm)

US House of Representatives - Portable Electronic Devices: Do they really pose a safey hazard on aircraft (http://www.house.gov/transportation/aviation/hearing/07-20-00/07-20-00memo.html)

Boeing Service Letter - Passenger Carry-on Electronic Devices - 9 March 2001 (http://gpsinformation.net/airgps/boeingsvcltr.pdf)

Aviation Safety Network - Portable Electronic Device Articles (http://aviation-safety.net/events/ped/ped-art.htm)

Airborne Operation of Portable Electronic Devices (http://www.calce.umd.edu/general/published/papers/abstracts/2002/AirPED.htm)

Wired.com - Is phone interference phoney? (http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,41273,00.html?tw=wn_story_related)

[pink flamingo]

hi CD
thanks for the precise information you've given us. I was aware of some sort of programme related to the internet uses and cellular phone but to be honest i'm quite impressed by your detailed explanation and links.

Take this occasion to thank you for sharing your knowledge.
PF

:ok:

[flapsforty]

Hear Hear, agree 100% wiht Pink Flamingo!
Good stuff CD. When that happens, it will certainly save us & the pax a lot of aggravation.
Bring it on I say.

Will read your links this weekend at leisure, looking forward to that.
Thank you for taking the effort and posting all that on the forum for all of us to better our understanding of this thorny problem. :ok:


PS: Most welcome Tri, happy flying to you as well. :)

[Dogs_ears_up]

flaps - nice PA, and your point that if people understand they might be more likely to comply is valid. Hope you don't mind, but I'll nick it and adapt it for my own use! I won't give you direct credit, but instead, I'll ask the pilots to include your user name as a cockpit check on final approach - that way you'll live for ever!:O

However - The rules may change in the future, but until they do, I will require my passengers to comply with the existing procedures. My employer does not ask me to interpret the rules, according to my own understanding, but to apply them according to theirs. The point is that until the rules are changed, we don't know for sure that phones are safe to use, although we might suspect otherwise. If we are wrong even once the consequences could conceivably be catastrophic, and with that in mind, I'll back the opinion of the "experts".

I agree with AJ - the use of the phone sometimes verges on the obsessional and I don't understand it. To me, not using a mobile phone seems a relatively minor imposition, especially since the existing concerns are safety related. As so often, I seem to be out of step with the majority... (Sigh)... must be my age!

[Xtra Crew]

Some airlines as Iberia allow passengers to use their cell phones on board whilst on the ground and doors are open. As every airline has different rules, pax dont understand this and get angry

[qfmike737]

Xtra crew yes you are right. On the Qantas website it does say that Frequent flyers are allowed to use their phones or something until the aircraft doors shut whilst it's on the ground...but I notice that the PA announcement say otherwise??

Sometimes when the aircraft are stuck out on the tarmac waiting for a gate to open the Captain makes announcements that they are allowed to use their phone.

[AJ]

Hi

Thanks for all the useful information.

My main gripe here was not so much the actual use of mobile phones in public ( I guess I don't like mobile phones anyway, but that's a different story...)

The main problem for me was 1) Ignoring safety-related PAs both at the gate, and aboard the aircraft before departure 2) Simple passenger disobedience.

I realise different airlines have different rules, but that's precisely why we keep reminding passengers that use of mobile phones is not permitted.

If I see a passenger using a mobile phone, I will kindly ask them to respect the rules, and turn it off. The problem (with a small percentage of passengers) is that they either point blank refuse to comply with your request, or comply with your request and then, like a 6-year old brat, disobey you as soon as you turn your back. That's when you get :mad: off!

regards

[witchdoctor]

As a dispatcher, I take great pleasure in bellowing across the tarmac with accompanying pointing finger for the hard of thinking, at the miscreant with their phone -

"EXCUSE ME, YES YOU, TURN YOUR PHONE OFF PLEASE. THAT BIG YELLOW TRUCK THERE IS A 20 TON FUEL TANKER AND YOUR PHONE IS A FIRE HAZARD!"

Not sure if the embarassment of being publicly highlighted to the other punters as a moron is the catalyst for action, or the fear of dying horribly. Or maybe it's just because I'm a big, ugly, bad-tempered, hairy-arsed bloke with a "don't even think about it" expression. ;)

Works every time.:D

[christep]

Except with people who understand that the fire hazard is in fact negligible, and point out that if this were not the case you would not be able to walk around with a radio on your belt all the time, demonstrating in fact that you are the one who is just blindly obeying rules without understanding why they are there.

[Itswindyout]

My only gripe is the "no phones on ramp" type arguement.
When I am "on the ramp", working, my phone is ON and operational. As is 99.9% or all airport workers. So why is it dangerous for a passenger to have the phone switched ON and a ramp worker who has their phone ON.

Recently had to ask, in a sarcastic way, of an orange airline cabin crew, why I could not use my phone whist waiting at the gate....I was given the usual banter...interupted by her phone ringing.....her face matched her coverall.....end of discussion.

what more can I say...

[AJ]

Be that as it may gentlemen, if you're flying with XYZ airlines, you stick to the rules of XYZ airlines, regardless of your personal opinions on the negligible (or otherwise) risks.

A sarcastic reply might result in yourselves being offloaded, especially if the crew have had to deal with similar clever-dicks on previous flights that day.

Take that as sound advice.

[CD]

So why is it dangerous for a passenger to have the phone switched ON and a ramp worker who has their phone ON.

Section 5.7.6 of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 407 Standard for Aircraft Fuel Servicing 2001 Edition states that, “Communications equipment used during aircraft fuel servicing operations within 3m (10ft) of the fueling equipment or the fill or vent points of aircraft fuel systems shall be intrinsically safe in accordance with UL 913, Standard for Intrinsically Safe Apparatus and Associated Apparatus for Use in Class I, II, and III Division I, Hazardous (Classified) Locations”.

Intrinsically safe can be described as “electrical equipment that is incapable of releasing sufficient electrical or thermal energy under normal or abnormal operating conditions to cause ignition of a specific hazardous mixture and air”. These devices may be used in hazardous areas as they are designed with additional shielding and safeguards to reduce the risk almost completely.

However, normal consumer electronics and cellular telephones are not required to be certified as intrinsically safe and are not constructed or manufactured to this higher standard.

It is also interesting to note that in December 2003, the UK CAA published updated guidance related to passenger use of cellular telephones during aircraft refuelling:

1 USE OF CELLULAR TELEPHONES DURING AIRCRAFT REFUELLING

1.1 FODCOM 17/2003 highlighted CAA Paper 2003/3, which contains the full results of the research carried out to identify the susceptibility to interference of vulnerable avionic equipment from commonly used transmitting devices.

1.2 Following the publication of this CAA Paper, an enquiry has been received requesting clarification as to whether it is now acceptable for cellular telephones to be used on board aircraft during refuelling operations, contrary to the guidance given in CAP 74 – “Aircraft Fuelling: Fire Prevention and Safety Measures.”

1.3 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. This position takes account of the energy levels of cellular telephone transmissions, absorption and attenuation of that energy within the cabin, and the separation that would exist between an onboard cellular telephone and an external fuel vapour source.

1.4 It is proposed to combine CAP 74 and CAP 434 – “Aviation Fuel at Aerodromes” into a new document, and to remove the text relating to the use of telephones by passengers on board during refuelling operations. Pending this revision, operators may relax their current restriction and permit the use of cellular telephones inside the aircraft during fuelling operations.

FODCOM 30/2003 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/FOD200330.PDF)

[willfly380]

you wont believe it but it happened to me about 9yrs ago.the cell phones had just started in my region and one day in the holding pattern i put my phone on and called my wife. we were at about 10000ft. it was ok for about a minute then suddenly all my screens went blank and the flight computers failed , i immediately put my phone off and things started to come on. i was the captain of the flight and the industry was not really aware about the results of such actions. i didnt report it as such but quietly spread the word around through anon means.
so please make sure they put their phones off.
cheers and happy landing
ps i have never put mine on again in flight[the phone]

[witchdoctor]

Maybe so christep, but I never use the radio around a tanker refuelling an aircraft. Getting hit by a car doing 30mph shouldn't kill you either, but only a bloody fool would put the statistic to the test.

As for comms I actually prefer to use the phone as you can never get a word in edgeways on gthe R/T anyway for all the inane chatter from the pax handling girls.

[almostthere!]

i have been PIC on numerous occassions and have used my cell/mobile phone to call friends/send msgs etc and low and behold the plane never fell out of the sky!!

It is totally a myth, my opinion from my experience, that mobile/cell phones affect a plane whilst in the sky.

[390cruise]

I dont know about australia but in europe should you try to use
your mobile phone in flight over land you will find it has no
service... in flight it will be "in line of sight" of many cells and
I think this causes the phone company computer to " turn you
off".... do not fear however back on the ground it will work fine again.. 15 years ago I used to use my old analogue phone
from the flight deck all the time!!!

[Ranjha83]

Hey does mobile phones work in the air with range anywhere in the world? I know they dont but just wanted to makesure...:confused: :}

Thanks

[Inflight BBQ's]

Have come across this twice now...

Opened the toilet door onlt to find some pratt who has forgotten to lock the door, in there trying to use their phone. Freakin' ridiculous!

Did the honourable thing and informed them of yadda, yadda, yadda.... etc. Then took down their details in a similar manner of AJ's desc.

Think they understood and realised that we do take it seriously.:hmm:

[qfmike737]

lets be realistic the chance that a mobile may cause an ignition is still quite low nevertheless there is that possibility. On the note of realistic flight attendants/pilots and engineers always use their mobile onboard or in the aerobridge perhaps not when the aircraft is being refuelled but it's a common thing that happens thank goodness! haha

[DishMan]

CD
Excellent info thnks.

I work in Satcoms and have a pretty good knowledge/understanding of the technical aspects of RF (radio frequency) transmissions their risks etc. I have reviewed, as part of my job, much of the Conexxions By Boeing technical studies. Believe me it is a very thoroughly researched technological breakthrough.
While, personally, I do not believe there is any danger to in-flight systems (unless the phone is operated immediately adjacent to equipment susceptible to RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) ) my phone is switched Off/On according to the policy of the airline with which I am flying.
Why?...
1/ I am a passenger and in buying my ticket essentially agree to governed by the Policies regarding passengers for that airline.
2/ Each airline is different, some days I can win and phone my wife/kids in a last minute call before the doors close as I remember to say I will be late happy birthday whatever. Other times I will have to wait 6/8 hours and call later to appologise.
It's called life :)
3/ FA/CC are performing a job intended to keep me safe and do so according to the rules of the company they work for. You don't tell me how to do my job - I don't tell you how to do yours.
4/ It is common courtesy when all is said and done to respect the rules whatever they are where-ever you are.
5/ Is it really wise, especially at the beginning of a flight, to p1ss off the person who will be looking after your safety and in-flight comfort??
;)

PS I did once forget to switch my phone off - remembered 1hr into flight and felt VERY embaressed to open the overhead to switch it off :\

[CD]

:hmm:

Miami Traveler Allegedly Slaps Air Marshal

POSTED: 11:41 pm EDT June 8, 2004
UPDATED: 10:00 am EDT June 9, 2004

MIAMI -- A plane passenger slapped a federal air marshal after refusing to sit down and ignoring instructions to end her cellular phone call, which she said would have been "rude," prosecutors said Tuesday.

Lilia Belkova has been jailed since being charged with assaulting a federal officer and interfering with a flight crew last Wednesday as a US Airways flight prepared to take off from Miami to Philadelphia.

A bail hearing was set for Thursday. It was unclear late Tuesday if Belkova, 38, had yet been assigned an attorney.

According to prosecutors, Belkova refused flight attendants' instructions to turn off her cell phone as Flight 26 taxied for takeoff, saying: "It is rude to hang up on people. I don't have to turn my phone off."

After ignoring more flight crew instructions, one of two air marshals ordered Belkova to be seated and put a hand on her shoulder to show her where to sit.

Belkova reached back and slapped the marshal across the face, causing "minor swelling," according to court papers. She was handcuffed and taken off the plane.

[barbiegirl]

well , did a flight yesterday and in the middle of servng meals, reach a row where some guy is quite happily texting away. he tells me the phone is switched off, so i asked to have a look, it wasnt , so he begrudglingly switched it off, saying he couldnt get a signal anyway. he then proceeded to give me dirty looks the entire flight, making comments each time i went past, ooh look out, here she is to tell me off again etc.

what is it with these people and simple instructions.

anyways, he got his hands slapped again later on whilst trying to pilfer out of the duty free cart when he thought my colleague wasnt looking. he obviously didnt realise us hosties have eyes in the back of our heads!!!

[sinala1]

Dishman - you are welcome on my flight anyday!

At the end of the day folks, there will be arguments back and forth back and forth until your coffee has gone cold over the risks of using your mobile on board an aircraft. But remember 2 things -

(a) In Australia, CASA (our governing aviation body) says that on board an aircraft, you MUST TURN YOUR MOBILE PHONE OFF!!!!!!!!
(b) You fly with an airline, you follow that airlines rules

Very simple concept....

Oh and by the way if you wanted to get really pedantic, in australia (and no doubt similar regs apply around the world) a passenger who does not follow the instructions of an airline officer is breaking our CAR's (Civil Aviation Regulations) and can be technically classified as a disruptive passenger and can therefore be referred to airport police...

(and no folks I have never done that by the way, I always always diffuse a situation rather than inflame it, but its good to know just in case :E :ok: )

[ehwatezedoing]

Never though about it before but how about pagers ?
Do they fit under "cell phone" category !?

I guess not, it's only a receiver but still an electronic device so....

Maybe another "louce" to look for :}

[CD]

New devices worry FAA

Washington - Consumers are not the only ones impressed by the proliferation of new portable electronic devices. So is the Federal Aviation Administration - but not favorably.

Portable electronic technology is changing faster than air safety rules, according to experts at the agency, the airlines and elsewhere, who are scrambling to keep up.

Wi-Fi cards, wireless modems, hand-helds with wireless e-mail service and even cell phones with games are all what the FAA calls "intentional emitters," devices that put out radio energy at a variety of frequencies.

Passengers are carrying them onto planes that have long relied on radio navigation beacons on the ground; lately the planes also need signals from fainter sources orbiting the earth, the Global Positioning System satellites. And the planes often have their own wireless systems for equipment that was added after they were built, like emergency lighting along the aisles.

Interference between passengers' devices and the planes' systems is difficult to gauge and probably rare, experts say, but the possibility of stray signals is stirring anxiety.

"It is thorny, and it gets messy fast," said William E. Winfrey, a specialist in advanced technologies at Delta Air Lines.

Winfrey is a co-chairman, with a Boeing expert, David P. Carson, of a committee established last year at the request of the FAA to explore the problem. Scores of experts from airlines, aircraft equipment makers and consumer electronics companies have been meeting since early 2003 and hope to issue recommendations in about 18 months.

Yet new products are entering the market so fast that the committee's recommendations will be quite broad rather than tied to specific products, Winfrey said.

While travelers may know that cell phones are signal producers and comply with rules banning their use in flight, their understanding of the risks posed by other devices is fuzzier. Passengers with laptops equipped with Wi-Fi cards may turn on the laptop without grasping that it is broadcasting, looking for an access point. Some may turn on a wirelessly equipped hand-held to look at a calendar and forget that it, too, is radiating.

The seriousness of the problem is hard to gauge. Winfrey and Carson are not certain that there has ever been a problem in flight that was traced directly to electronic interference originating on board. But the idea haunts safety experts.

In theory, all devices are putting out radio frequency emissions only in the ranges assigned to them by the Federal Communications Commission and thus should not interfere with each other. But electronics experts worry about signals straying outside the assigned range. Those emissions would not have to be large to cause a problem.

http://www.jsonline.com/bym/tech/news/mar04/218154.asp

[andyw34]

heres my experience........a group of british football fans giving hassle all flight, start with drinking own alcohol, swearing, getting a bit rowdy and in the way. All ok and handled. During final cabin secure check before landing we realise 1 pax on phone.....when asked get the reply..."what phone?", my reply....the one attatched to your ear, "its not mine", is the response.......when told to turn it off get a mouthfull of abuse. Try talking to pax, bearing in mind he is in mid conversation on the phone that only i can see, when the beep beep of a received message heard behind me, not only one more phone on, but 2. At this stage at 1500 ft and cpt making pa about phones, they are interfering with communications.........result, passports taken from pax and had them arrested with full backing of company.......what an expensive holiday as we also refused them carriage home.

[Old Smokey]

There is absolutely no doubt in this pilot's mind that cell phones / mobile phones DO pose a significant threat to aircraft safety. It is true that they do cause interferance with radio communications, we hear the distinctive sound of their interferance every day, but frankly, it's not particularly a problem, radio reception is distorted but still understandable.

What is of far greater significance is their effect upon radio navigation facilities, these electronic devices do not have the human brain's facility to unscramble mobile phone interferance and integrate the 'good' and the 'bad' signals received into one common signal. Thus, a pilot may be flying what seems to be a perfectly good 'on-course' signal, but may, in reality, be significantly off track. On at least 2 occasions in my own experience, when tracking errors were suspected, they have been resolved by asking the cabin crew to check on mobile phone use, with dramatic change in tracking indications after the offending phones were turned off.

There is at least one fatal crash (a wide body) in which mobile phone use was a prime suspect for erroneous indications in the Instrument Landing System (ILS) leading to off-course flight into the ground. Although not the 'official' culprit in the final crash report, surviving passengers reported a flurry of mobile phone activity after the aircraft had made 2 missed approaches, and was engaged in the third.

Ladies and Gentleman of the cabin crew, you're doing a marvellous job in our front line defence, the other posts here of your handling of the cell phone addicts gives me cheer - well done!

[G-Foxtrot Oscar 69]

I am never sure why people try to use phones on board any way.

I once tried to call ops on my cell phone from some where in the region of FL170 and got no signal. Talking to a friend who works for Nokia it is because you are basically above the antenna and out of range. So what hope does a user have of getting a singal at FL300

This doeas caus a greater risk though I guess that pax can use them at lower altitudes when the radio nav is far more critical ie ILS.

People always sight radio nave but think of all the other signals buzzing down wires from engines etc back to the data hubs on board. With more and more fully electronic aircraft the implications get far wider reaching.

Also how about Wi-Fi & blue tooth enabled laptops being used, they look for signals and push out signals. I would have thought far more worrying.

The clicking noise in your headset is so annoying. Especially when you open your flight bag at the other end and realise it is because you left your own phone on

I could not imagine anything worse than a cabin full of pax shouting down the mobile "Yeah I'm on the aircraft, yes we just took off, Sorry I can't hear you they are making an announcment on the pa system"

While we are on mobiles can they also be banned from resturants and trains :ok::\

[CD]

Also how about Wi-Fi & blue tooth enabled laptops being used, they look for signals and push out signals. I would have thought far more worrying.

Asian airlines take WiFi to the sky

ASIAN travellers who cannot stand being separated from email or the internet will soon be able to access both from their seats when top regional airlines offer high-speed wireless connectivity on long-haul flights.

Over the next six months, Singapore Airlines, All Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines plan to roll out airborne internet services by teaming up with Connexion by Boeing, an information services unit of US aircraft builder Boeing. China Airlines and Korean Air are expected to follow suit.

"We expect the services to be popular particularly among businessmen who have long requested such in-flight services," a spokesman for Japan Airlines said in Tokyo.

First implemented by Germany's Lufthansa last month, Connexion by Boeing allows passengers to access the internet on wireless-ready laptops at speeds comparable to those at home or in the office. Airlines will also have the option to offer wired connections using ethernet cables.

The system is fully compatible with planes made by Airbus, Boeing's fierce European rival.

The service, made possible by a global network of satellites, ground stations and special antennas fitted to the aircraft, was in fact inaugurated on a Lufthansa Airbus A340-300 flying from Munich to Los Angeles on May 17.

It will cost passengers as little as $US7.95 ($11.50) for 30 minutes. For customers who want to use the service for the entire flight, there is a fixed rate depending on whether the service is short-, medium- or long-haul.

The maximum price is $US29.95 for flights of more than six hours.

"How much is it worth to get the right information for a contract?" David Friedman, vice president for marketing and direct sales of Connexion by Boeing, said during last week's CommunicAsia 2004 trade fair in Singapore.

"How much is it worth to say good night to your kids?"

Secure corporate network communications will be available, while individuals can opt to be billed by their telephone or internet service providers back home if the firms have arrangements with Connexion by Boeing.

The most promising markets in Asia are Singapore, Japan, South Korea, China, Malaysia and Thailand, Friedman said.

"This is not only for the people in First Class," he stressed, saying passengers might simply want to pursue personal interests like sport.

"If I'm in flight for 10 to 12 hours, you're talking about 100 to 150 emails," he said, adding that having access to email "reduces e-stress, the stress of email pile-up".

Company spokesmen said Singapore Airlines planned to launch the service in the third quarter this year.

All Nippon Airways also plans to launch it in the northern autumn, while Japan Airlines will start it in December on flights between Narita and London, eventually offering it on flights to the United States.

Korean Air said it would start operating it in early 2005 on its 33 long-haul Boeing 747-400s and 777-200ERs.

Mr Friedman said revenue from access charges would be split with airlines, which will pay a service charge to have the equipment installed. Business jets and ocean-going vessels can also use Connexion.

In addition to getting a cut of the revenue, airlines would realise that internet access would be seen by passengers as an essential service, he said. Some might even switch carriers on the basis of connectivity.
(AFP)

[EasyBaby]

When pax board with their mobiles still on, or have it glued to their ears, i really want to show them my magic trick.


Place phone in a black bag, take one hammer, smash phone to piecies, then with a wave of my magic tea pot *****waves tea pot over the bag, chanting my magical gobbly gook**** open the bag and..............


....ta da, it falls out in peices:ugh:

Perhaps i just need more practice for it to turn into block of gold:p

i shall try harder tomorrow!!

EB ;)