PDA

View Full Version : It's a Mad, Mad World we live in.


ExSp33db1rd
3rd May 2012, 21:11
Excerpts from AVwebFlash Complete Issue (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/2199-full.html)

According to defense attorneys, hero pilot Sully Sullenberger of US Airways Flight 1549, might also be indicted because he "likely 'harassed' the flock of birds" that he smashed into with his plane, and "he probably 'harassed' fish when he arrived in the Hudson

World's Gone Mad.

FAA Warns Passenger Over iPad Use

A passenger on a Delta Air Lines jet shot video last month of a flock of birds flying into the engine minutes after takeoff from New York's John F. Kennedy Airport -- which was good -- but he took the picture using his iPad -- which was bad. The passenger, Grant Cardone, said this week that after his video was made public, he received a stern letter from the FAA saying they wouldn't take enforcement action against him, but would keep a record of the incident for two years..........................
...........................The FAA said in its letter that Cardone's failure to comply with FAA rules requiring that electric devices be turned off "could have affected the safe outcome of the flight." After the bird strike, the airplane returned to JFK and landed safely on one engine, and nobody was hurt.

I might consider that the safe outcome of the flight was more seriously affected by the loss of 50% of engine power !

I guess the issue is that the only way that anyone could photograph a bird strike is if a video camera was in use at the time, and as this was part of the all singing, all dancing iPad it must have been switched on and turning and churning, so to speak, which is illegal, but suppose this had happened on a flight where all were killed, and this video was the only evidence of what had happened - as might have happened to Sully - would this passenger then have been posthumously congratulated or similarly castigated ?

G-CPTN
3rd May 2012, 21:15
Aren't all cameras now electronic devices?

Cacophonix
3rd May 2012, 21:32
"Master Jack" 4 Jacks and a Jill - YouTube

Caco

pigboat
3rd May 2012, 21:42
If that report had not appeared on AvWeb I would have said it had been created by a being from another planet, possibly under the influence of a mind-altering substance.

LeadSled
4th May 2012, 08:55
pigboat,
In AU, CASA seem to have a unit dedicated to scanning YouTube and similar sites,TV series, etc., looking for "evidence" of breaches of regulations --- as several documentary and feature film makers and pilots have found out the hard way.
Tootle pip!!

compressor stall
4th May 2012, 12:22
I have no problem with the regulators chasing pax videos of takeoffs as the airlines strictly state that electronic equipment must be off. It the airline says you do it, then you must do it. Turn it off or face the consequences. :ok:

As for the ducks :mad:

Granite City Express
4th May 2012, 13:13
I have no problem with the regulators chasing pax videos of takeoffs as the airlines strictly state that electronic equipment must be off. It the airline says you do it, then you must do it. Turn it off or face the consequences.What about all the airlines that use iPads as EFBs? There is no difference between the commonal garden iPad in the cockpit with approach plates on it and the one in the cabin with mahjong.

finfly1
4th May 2012, 13:32
When FAs solemnly intone that the use of a hikers GPS by the window in row 37 "might interfere with flight instruments", I recall the captain who placed my Garmin GPS on the glareshield of his airbus on a trip from Nepal to Dubai to see how the information correlated with his (then pre=gps) flight instruments.

But I always turn it off when asked, since now it is possible to get the specific track of your flight off the internet minutes after it pulls to the gate.

lomapaseo
4th May 2012, 14:10
I have no problem with the regulators chasing pax videos of takeoffs as the airlines strictly state that electronic equipment must be off. It the airline says you do it, then you must do it. Turn it off or face the consequences

I doubt that the regulator can take action against the passenger though. I would think that the action must be taken via the captain while the passenger is onboard since it was an airline interpretation of a regulators rule that was involved.

I'll keep watch to see if any similar events ever get prosecuted against a passenger by the likes of the FAA.

Obviously we have seen numreous other videos taken by passengers with nary a hint that a regulator has rebuked the passenger.

radeng
4th May 2012, 15:21
So if you were using an old fashioned film camera with no electronics in it?

In any case, not all electronic equipment can be (or should be!) switched off. Pacemakers and hearing aids, for example. Both of them these days can have radio transmitters in them.

tony draper
4th May 2012, 15:24
Can one switch off a Pacemaker?:uhoh:

lomapaseo
4th May 2012, 15:43
Can one switch off a Pacemaker?

Yes

Mostly by intent

I shudder to think about it by accident :ooh:

I've had it even set off store alarms after a fresh operation

Been wanded lots of times and it never shut off

Have some turned off for some medical procedures

They use a radio coil wand and dial in the code via a laptop. I asked the guy if they could put a large coil in a ceiling and turn off everybody in a room.

He suggested that they were in the business of saving lives and never gave it a thought

radeng
4th May 2012, 16:54
lomapaseo

The inductive systems with a wand have a relatively low data rate. These days, Ultra Low Power Actoive Medical Implants (ULP-AMI) have transmitters operating between 402 to 405 MHz: channels are 25kHz wide, but up to 12 can be concatenated to give a 300 kHz wide channel. This gives around 200kb/s. The European Standard (used widely around the world) is EN301 839. The advantages of this are that:

1. It allows home monitoring, with the pacemaker performance being downloaded in the night to a unit by the patient's bedside and sent by telephone to a clinic, thus avoiding the need for regular vistis to the clinic, and and also allowing for misfunctions such as dodgy leads or low battery to be detected before there's a crisis.

2. During the implant process, it allows the programmer function and its operative to be outside the immediate sterile area, thus reducing the chances of infection.

A proposal from the European Commission (wouldn't you believe it?) is that all radio devices should have the method of placing them in a 'test mode' placed on a 'secure' website available to the enforcement authorities of all 27 EU countries. So a pacemaker could be put into test mode and left there to run the battery down......and the people from the Commission don't see that as a problem. At the moment, you have get the proprietary information from the manufacturer, which, as you can guess, is highly guarded secret. For enforcement purposes, manufacturers send their own technician along with the necessary equipment to maintain security: even the test house doesn't get to know it.

You might guess that ULP-AMI standards and regulations are my bread and butter - and even some champagne!

corsair
4th May 2012, 16:54
In AU, CASA seem to have a unit dedicated to scanning YouTube and similar sites,TV series, etc., looking for "evidence" of breaches of regulations --- as several documentary and feature film makers and pilots have found out the hard way.It wouldn't surprise me if other authorities start to do that too. As it is I asked someone to pull a video he posted on Farcebook because it showed some questionable activity involving an aircraft with which I have a connection. Although it wasn't me flying it on the day. But if the wrong person saw it. I would be first on the list to call. I could do without having to be reminded again that I have the right to remain silent. Then have them complain when I exercise it particularly when it wasn't me.

In fact a brilliant prank was pulled on a pilot when a flight of his was featured on TV. Later that day he received a call from an 'Inspector' who told him a complaint had been made and that an investigation was in progress in relation to his breach of the rules. The 'Inspector' even quoted the correct regulation. The poor guy was well and truly pranked. They even recorded the conversation. So we could all enjoy it.

The irony of it all was that he could actually be in breach of the rule. :mad:

compressor stall
4th May 2012, 22:22
What about all the airlines that use iPads as EFBs? There is no difference between the commonal garden iPad in the cockpit with approach plates on it and the one in the cabin with mahjong.

That may be so, but there are only two up front. The airline CAA FAA or whatever have determined that two won't interfere. Two hundred and twenty two down the back is a different story.

If you had an old hassleblad camera, then fair enough, but all modern cameras are digital these days and thus possibly banned.

Is it really that hard for people to obey a simple rule? :ugh:

LeadSled
5th May 2012, 05:23
Obviously we have seen numreous other videos taken by passengers with nary a hint that a regulator has rebuked the passenger.

Folks,
The CASA use of YouTube etc., is to launch prosecutions or other punitive action against pilots, for perceived infractions, with the video as the primary evidence.

Unfortunately, there are many matters in Australia that wouldn't raise any eyebrows in, say, NZ, Canada or US, but due to our highly prescriptive rules, are criminal offenses.

Search "Qadrio", the helo. pilot claims he was avoiding birds, CASA claimed he was doing low level aeros. The criminal prosecution was dropped by the CDPP, but he still lost his license and livelihood as a result of CASA administrative action ---- a much simplified summary of the case.

Several ( as above) have been the subject of threads on the Australian GA section on this site, a new one coming up involved the heinous crime of a BN-2 Islander not conducting day VFR approaches and departures at Torres Straight island strips, "according to regulation". The evidence, from an ABC series, the aeroplane apparently not climbing straight ahead to 500' before turning on track, and something similar on landing ---- turns below 500'.

Tootle pip!!

ExSp33db1rd
5th May 2012, 08:59
Is it really that hard for people to obey a simple rule?

Rules Are For The Obedience Of Fools And The Guidance Of Wise Men.
D.Bader.

So if you were using an old fashioned film camera with no electronics in it?

You'd never see the picture, Kodak have stopped processing Kodachrome (not sure about Agfa, tho' ? )

Aren't all cameras now electronic devices?

But are they as dangerous to flight as mobile phones are supposed to be ? I was under the impression that only transmitting devices were dodgy, and receiving devices OK, not sure what a camera does when it is focussing and releasing the shutter ? Still, they presumably come under the umbrella of electronic devices, and when in doubt ban everything, don't bother to do any research. Presumably a portable GPS is a receiver, not a transmitter, so should be OK ?

Anyway - the only trouble I ever had was on a 707 pre- Bill Gates and his digital disaster, Captains compass card spinning around, so difficult for the Auto Pilot to maintain heading, and crossing the Atlantic hand flying and using the Boy Scouts type compass mounted between the two halves of the windscreen would have been a bit tiresome. We had a clue, and I was sent back to investigate, a F/Class passenger had placed one of the old style 7" reel to reel tape recorders, about the size of a Remington desk typewriter in the hat rack, between two clearly defined marks stating that no electric devices must be stowed here. The permanent magnet in the loudspeaker was playing havoc with the heading sensors ( can't remember the correct name - fluxgate ? ) that were built into the fuselage at that point.

I confiscated it for the duration of the flight.

Nothing new under the sun.

compressor stall
5th May 2012, 10:02
Rules Are For The Obedience Of Fools And The Guidance Of Wise Men.


Nice sentiment and one I've used in the past. But in this context turn around and look down the aisle of your average public transport jet. Do you see fools or wise men?

MadsDad
5th May 2012, 10:07
I was under the impression that only transmitting devices were dodgy, and receiving devices OKI'm sure you're correct there and the majority of digital cameras don't have wifi links in them - you can get it but it's currently relatively rare. A lot of mobile phones and netbooks used to have a 'flight' option which disabled the wifi side of the phone so you could use it on an aircraft (organiser for instance). I recall reading about some arguments between cabin staff and SLF alog the "switch it off" "no, it's safe" lines.

And Rules Are For The Obedience Of Fools And The Guidance Of Wise Men. D.Bader.. This would be the Bader who disobeyed the safety limits (i.e. rules) at an airshow and lost his legs?

radeng
5th May 2012, 10:38
Hopefully, receivers don't radiate - at least, not very much. Broadcast receivers are allowed pretty massive European limits, and the local oscillator of a standard FM B/C receiver tunes from roughly 98 to 118 MHz. You don't want one of those being on if it happens to hit the VOR frequency!

CAA are of the opinion that the power levels used in radios in hearing aids are too low to worry about in the frequency range used (863 - 865MHz in Europe and 915 - 928 MHz in the US for at least two manufacturers).

Depending on the GPS, it may well radiate enough signal to be a problem - it depends on the particular receiver architecture and which manufacturer made it.

If your pacemaker radio decided to transmit on its own, you have problems, because it is undergoing an implant device event, meaning something is badly wrong and urgent medical help is required!

Lon More
5th May 2012, 11:44
In a "documentary" on UK tv a few days ago a segment on an aircraft making a landing with unsafe gear. Pax were instucted to assume the crash position which did not stop one fool filming what was going on. Had the worst come to the worst his relatives would probably not have lost any time in suing the CC and the airline for allowing him to do it.

ExSp33db1rd
5th May 2012, 20:27
If your pacemaker radio decided to transmit on its own, you have problems, because it is undergoing an implant device event, meaning something is badly wrong and urgent medical help is required!

Useful to know at 35,000' mid-atlantic, I guess that'll be the time to test that BA ad..... " Let me through, I'm a BA stewardess ?" Fortunately I still have to make the acquaintance of one ( pacemaker, that is )

This would be the Bader who disobeyed the safety limits (i.e. rules) at an airshow and lost his legs?

Yes. ( was going to make the same remark, but thought someone else might!)

Lon More
5th May 2012, 20:43
the Bader who disobeyed the safety limits (i.e. rules) at an airshow and lost his legs? and also insisted that his Batsman, who was suffering from TB, carried him to Appel each morning and refused to allow him to be considered for re-patriation to UK? Also the same bullying Shell aviation exec who tried to make life hell for fledgling ATCAs in EGLL Briefing?