'Newlywed jailed for using mobile on flight'

[paulo]

From Ananova News

Newlywed jailed for using mobile on flight (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_667768.html)

"A newlywed who played a game on his mobile phone during the flight back from his honeymoon has been jailed for four months.

After sentencing Faiz Chopdat, 23, of Blackburn, Lancashire, the judge called for all mobiles to be confiscated as passengers board an aircraft.

Judge Timothy Mort, sitting at Manchester's Minshull Street Crown Court, said the switching on of a mobile during a flight could prove fatal.

It could cause the autopilot to malfunction and affect the communications system, said the judge.

Passing sentence, Judge Mort said he had the power to jail the 23-year-old for a maximum of two years.

Chopdat was returning from Luxor in Egypt to Manchester Airport on September 10 last year when he was seen with his mobile switched on.

It is believed he was playing a game on his mobile called Tetris while sitting next to his wife, the court heard.

He had been warned twice by cabin staff and once by a passenger, which caused an argument during the Air 2000 flight on which there was 206 other holidaymakers and six cabin crew.

Chopdat was found guilty by a jury last month of endangering the safety of an aircraft.

Roger Hedgeland, for Chopdat, said his client was a young man with no previous convictions who was acting with "some sort of bravado" on his return from honeymoon.

[Nightrider]

this sentence will cool him down now.., also it is sad that these measurements have to be used, they are the only way to stop all this crap from happening.

[18-Wheeler]

"... (anyone) ... jailed for using mobile on flight"

Good.

[Globaliser]

Quite right too.

[DamienB]

Do mobiles actually transmit at all with no nodes nearby, and no call attempt actually being made (bearing in mind he was just playing a game on it, not making a call)? Fair enough jailing him for not complying with cabin crew requests, but it'd be nice to know if the mobile actually presents are real danger whatsoever in such circumstances.

[Algy]

...and people wonder why there is a shortage of prison places for real criminals. Ye Gods! :rolleyes:

[Eboy]

I don't think jailing is fair, because some other crew orders can be disobeyed without penalty, at least in the U.S.

The seat belt sign goes on, folks are told to fasten their seat belt, but are free to roam the cabin and use the lavatory. What's worse, a passenger floating during turbulence or a cell phone turned on?

Passengers are told two carry-on bags, but allowed to carry on 3 or 4. What's worse? Screwing up the weight and balance and additionally burdening the crew, or a cell phone going on?

Passengers are told to watch the safety video and read the safety cards, but allowed not to, even in the exit rows.

Then passengers are told "Safety is our first priority." Is it? Passenger convenience and safety seem to be about equal priorities these days. So, when passengers are told to turn off cell phones, they say. "Oh, that's nice. Let's turn on the phone and play Tetris."

The airlines should decide what rules are going to be enforced, enforce them, and get rid of the others. The present selective enforcement breeds a lax attitude in passengers. The message the airlines are sending to passengers is, "Safety rules and crew orders can be followed at your discretion."

[Hand Solo]

some other crew orders can be disobeyed without penalty, at least in the U.S.

Errr, I don't think so. I think you'll find all crew orders have to be obeyed, its just that they don't have the time to stop every idiot who thinks only some orders need to be obeyed. I can drive my car over the speed limit, but it doesn't make it legal does it? Do you think "Well everbody esle does it" would be a good defence in court?

The rules in the UK are clear - cellphones are to be switched off. Not cellphones are to be switched off if you like, or unless you want to play a game, or if the man next to you has too many bags. If you're told to turn it off then do it and don't argue. That is the law. If you choose to flout the law and ignore the lawful instructions of the crew then you go to jail. Just like people do in the US.

[SLF]

Not knowing the exact circumstances, I can't imagine he would have continued using the phone if he thought he'd end up in court, let alone jail. I wonder how well the likely consequences were explained to him?

Nice to see that the judiciary are as well in touch as ever. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Elliot Moose]

The seat belt sign goes on, folks are told to fasten their seat belt, but are free to roam the cabin and use the lavatory. What's worse, a passenger floating during turbulence or a cell phone turned on?

Good point! It never fails to amaze me on American flights how little regard is paid to pax signs, and carry-ons (even in the past year). The cabin crew just seem to let these things float on through, as do the gate agents w.r.t. carry-ons. It's no wonder they have problems when they do try to enforce something like cell phone use.

Now, I have never read about an autopilot being affected by a cell phone, but it has been proven that they can affect things like localizers and GPS. Will playing tetris cause problems? Don't know, but what if a call comes in whilst playing (since the phone is on). This can (and has) had some serious repurcussions to flights. In an older model of the CRJ this could (and on several occasions did) cause a false "smoke cargo" message, which in turn necessitates an immediate landing and death by halon to any livestock in the hold.:(

"People are stupid" quoth Elliot Moose to anybody who will listen, and you have to treat them like mentally challenged 4 year olds as soon as they park their carcasses inside an aircraft. The rules must be set, set out clearly, set out clearly a second time (with pictures and four part harmony) and enforced at all times to be of any use at all. If you don't want them to go to the potty for the last 30 min of the flight (even if a mentally challenged four year old did invent that rule in a fit of rage over who stole the last cookie) you have to warn and warn again and finally stand up and say "does anybody need to go tinkles because this is your last chance for 30 min?". But you also need to enforce all the other rules with the same gusto, or they just won't take you seriously anyways.

That said, I firmly agree that the dolt in question got what he deserved, and we should all be trying to make sure his sentence is sent out as a warning to the rest of those who are contentedly cud chewing back in cattle class(don't even get me started on first class) :mad:

[Rwy in Sight]

To my mind the guy commited two mistakes (a) he got married (b) he broke a rule that could endanger the entire aircraft.

As far as mistake (a) goes he got life for it!!! As far as (b) is concerned there is a fine line between making a mistake that may cost your life and cost an aircraft malfunction or accident and endanger everybody or almost abroad.

If some one does not wear a seatbelt (if the sign is on) it is his choise and his problem provided he does not hurt me by crashing on me during turbulence!

However if someone operates a mobile or obstruct an exit or the aisle or the gangway, then I want him punished if he insists on doing so.

[Ranger One]

I think 4 months for a (presumably) first-time non-violent offence might be pushing it a bit, although a bit more of a slap on the wrists was definitely called for.

More interesting to me was judges comments about airlines needing to consider confiscating all mobiles on boarding in future... my Pogo has a mode specifically for aircraft use, whereby the TX/RX component is completely powered-down, but the unit is still usable for playing games.

This is something we'll see more often as we get increasingly-sophisticated combined phone/browser/camera/gameboy devices - cabin crew can't be expected to know how to verify each and every device is in 'safe mode', and we need some policy to handle this. Tantrums and tears ahead...

R1

[PAXboy]

DamienB Do mobiles actually transmit at all with no nodes nearby, and no call attempt actually being made?Yes.

A mobile phone will search for a transmitter on all the frequencies that it is capable of and do so at maximum power. It will do this at an interval set by the manufacturer. This might be one minute or two, or even three but it will do so for as long as it is switched on.

In due course, combination units may have separate power switches for PDA type functions and phone but at present, as far as I know, they do not.

If I'm sounding 'preachy', it is due to 23 years in telecommunications and involvement with mobile radio for 19 of them!

[rustle]

You may also like to consider that this delightful scum also threatened ABH to a couple of the crew during his "discussion" about switching the 'phone off.

Still unreasonable to lock him up? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Vortex what...ouch!]

PAXboy
Yes. A mobile phone will search for a transmitter on all the frequencies that it is capable of and do so at maximum power. It will do this at an interval set by the manufacturer. This might be one minute or two, or even three but it will do so for as long as it is switched on.
Wrong. Cell phones do NOT always TX. There is an idle mode, which is when you are not making a call and this does not require the phone to TX. It searches for base stations by listening and measuring the received signal. It only transmits (and not always at full power) when it is first turned on to register itself on the network or when it moves from one LAC (local area code) area to another. This is a problem as you will be sure to pass between several of these while flying causing a transmission to be made for about 6 or 8 seconds each time. There is also a Location update, which is set on a timer specified by the network which can be several hours, this is what you are referring to in your post, which sends the same information every update (again it only last for 6 to 8 seconds). This is the “dit diddle lit dit” type sounds you hear over your radio or TV from time to time when your mobile is close to it.
In due course, combination units may have separate power switches for PDA type functions and phone but at present, as far as I know, they do not.
Wrong again. Increasing numbers of phones and wireless PDAs have aircraft modes, which disable the transmission side of the phone, but still leaves you able to use its other facilities. I own a Siemens S45 with just such an option. Nokia 9000 series communicators have the same option.

For all that a class 4 cell phone (which is what most modern phones are) have a power output of only 0.2 to 2 watts (haven’t checked this and my memory is not perfect but it is not far out). This is a very small amount of RF energy. That being said there have been cases mentioned earlier, where even this has proven enough to cause problems. The rule stipulating no phones on during the whole flight is a reasonable safety net to prevent accidents. Besides, as was mentioned earlier someone can still call in and it will then carry out a lot of signaling and if accepted then into dedicated mode, which is when it starts transmitting all the time.

For those interested most calls made in a jet would fail anyway, as GSM (or CDMA for the Americans and some Asians) is not designed to work above 300KPH for many many technical reasons. Not least of which it does not have time to hand over the call between cells fast enough.

I think the 4-month custodial sentence is a little OTT but it will send a clear message to people in future.
If I'm sounding 'preachy', it is due to 23 years in telecommunications and involvement with mobile radio for 19 of them!
I am not trying to knock you here but GSM and mobile radio is as different as chalk and cheese. I’m not questioning your ability but in this case you prove the point of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, problems then arise when people quote you as being gospel when clearly it is not. I am a GSM Optimisation and planning engineer working for one of the mobile operators in the UK, as well as having worked for several of the vendors such as Ericsson and Nokia, and do really know what I am talking about.

On a slightly different note why are you not allowed to use CD players on flights?

[nick24]

I guess it's back to the "some airlines do, some airlines don't" debate now, as I've been able to use my mini disc player on some services, but not others. Not sure why they are banned, but it's probably something to do with pulling the machine apart and using the laser to blind the pilot, or set it to stun to momentarily freeze pax using mobiles.

Talking of mobiles, I flew into JFK a few years back and was absolutely horrified to see a guy a few seats next to me checking his voice mail, while we were still on the glide path! It seems that people tend to think that once the plane is on the ground, it's perfectly acceptable to turn on their phone, get up and start walking and talking and grabbing their "carry on" luggage (read industrial size trolley) from the overhead bins. This is despite the (imho too few repeated) warnings of not doing so. What distresses me most is the attitude of some crew who appear to do nothing, despite seeing what's going on.

[Ranger One]

rustle sayeth:

You may also like to consider that this delightful scum also threatened ABH to a couple of the crew during his "discussion" about switching the 'phone off.

OK I hadn't heard that part of the story... four months is a bit nearer the mark then, if it was 'only' verbal.

R1

[Pax Vobiscum]

As I've said before on this topic - I'm sure that the majority of flights carrying more than a dozen pax are travelling with at least one active mobile. People are forgetful - even I've done it once and I'm as near perfect as I ever want to be. :D

PS You can add Handsping Treo to the list of PDAs that allow you to switch off the mobile functionality.

[Aircraft_Nut9]

The incident at the link below will demonstrate that mobile phones can cause difficulties even when switched off !

The mobile in this case managed to jam the yaw controls on an EC-120 helicopter. The outcome wasn't too bad thought . . . no injuries or damage.

Vortex will be able to relate to this.



http://www.irlgov.ie/tec/aaiu/2001Reports/2001-007/aaiu_report_no%202001-007.htm

[Tim_Q]

So if something goes screwy with your aircraft, how is the tracked down to a Nokia 8210 in First? I'm always a bit scheptical about these things...how about laptops and CD players, what's the issue there? All I can assume is it's down to potential RF interference from their internal components. Could this really be a problem? I would think that aircraft avionics and systems should be designed more than well enough to cope with such problems. If they weren't your TCAS black box may potentially interfere with your FMS black box!?:confused:

[brockenspectre]

In this era of the emancipated free-ranging ego I have to say that I am glad this wiseass is jailed. Why? Because I am sick and fed up with "customers" challenging the rules of whatever service it is they have bought when the rules are there (a) for safety and (b) are a reasonable part of the bargain.

When you buy an airline ticket you are signing up to many things, Chicago Convention etc, weight of baggage, size of carryon, no active cellphone, promptness for delivery of service, and since 9/11/01 restricted in-cabin items. Dats it! No "you are on honeymoon so do as you like", No "you earn a lot so do as you like" ....

Somehow, these days, more and more people believe that they are exempt from the rules... duh??!!! your mommy/daddy and wife/husband/partner may think you special but in fact... you are just like the rest of us!!!

:)

[golfyankeesierra]

vortex,
I always wondered and you may know the answer: a few years back I flew in a hot air balloon once and I was greatly surprised I couldn't use my GSM (old Sony cdm-1000) a few hundred feet over a friend's house in a small town with good GSM-coverage. According to the pilot this is (was?) normal from a balloon, yet exactly one year ago several calls were made from a jet whose fate we all know.
Can you enlighten me?

[luoto]

Have any airlines made policys/.given training to staff over the new range of phones?

if they say no mobiles, does that mean, or should it include the "flight mode" in things like nokia 9210 phones? Else why make the feature?

[Vortex what...ouch!]

golfyankeesierra
I couldn't use my GSM (old Sony cdm-1000) a few hundred feet over a friend's house in a small town with good GSM-coverage.
There could be several reasons why your phone would not work. The most likely was interference. Each network has to reuse frequencies to cover the whole country. This is planned in some detail (in most companies anyway :)) taking into account, distance, terrain, buildings and so on. This site explains some of the basics of frequency planning if you are that interested (its very dull really ;))http://www.privateline.com/PCS/HowPCSworks.htm#anchor201958.
The problem arises in the air when you can “see” all the sites for many miles around and that brings in a lot of competing signals on the same frequency. If the phone cannot identify an individual site through the noise it will not be able to set up a call to start with or it may drop the call once it is set-up.

It is still possible to make a call while flying. You will just have an increased likelihood of a dropped call or having to make several attempts to set the call up. There are so many variables in how your phone sets up a call then maintains it and if any of them goes wrong it can fail.

I have made calls from 2,000 feet at about 120 knots and it has worked fine. On another occasion it simply would not set up the call at all. As I mentioned before although the GSM specs never envisioned it being used from the air and faster than 300KPH it is, in the right circumstances, possible. In the case you mention they were probably over a well designed and maintained part of the network.

Stringfellow Hawk
I asked the same question some time ago. After much discussion it was explained that while one phone is not really a big problem 150 being used in an aircraft can create a very big Electro magnetic field that is difficult, not to mention expensive, to protect against. So just get people to turn their phones off. Problem solved very simply, and cheaply ;)

Aircraft_Nut9
I remember that case very well. Made me always check the location of my phone before I lift.

[Lowtimer]

Stringfellow,

you asked: "how about laptops and CD players, what's the issue there? All I can assume is it's down to potential RF interference from their internal components. Could this really be a problem? "

Most laptops emit a surprising amount of RF, but few people think about it because it's not obvious as with a phone, so it's never become a media issue. However, I remember Peter Cochrane, former r&d guy at BT, saying that if anyone who felt they were at risk from holding a GSM phone near their head would logically never let a laptop anywhere near their, er, lap !

[DX Wombat]

Whilst not the case in this instance, there appears to be a large number of people who do not understand the difference between "Standby" and "Off". We encounter this problem on a regular basis in our hospital. We have a mobile phone detector which informs us when someone has entered our unit with one switched on. The number of times this happens because people do not understand that "Swtiched off" means exactly that - OFF is unbelievable, they believe that "standby" means the phone is off and can take quite some convincing otherwise. We have large, clear notices on our doors and in spite of this some people simply just forget or ignore the notices.

[nick24]

DX Wombat wrote
"We have large, clear notices on our doors and in spite of this some people simply just forget or ignore the notices"

No - some people think that these notices do not apply to them as they know better. Just like those who also ignore flight crew notices to sit down, buckle up, remain seated etc.

[Eboy]

I think DX Wombat has a good point on some cell phone users not distinguishing between standby and off.

Just as an aside, it is my understanding that the aircraft manufacturers are planning to go to wireless for passenger entertainment and communications in the cabin. Eliminate the weight of that wiring, and just run power to the seats. And that's fine, because it will be engineered from the start.

If we want the convenience of wireless we have to be responsible for its use. Even with the concerns in a hospital, there are more uses of wireless that make information access easier and improve the experience of the patient (such as for medical telemetry, increasing patient mobility).

Maybe we need those RF detectors in the cabin.

[Techchick]

I know absoluteley nothing about the way in which mobile phones can affect any part of the aircraft system, but there are rules...and the rules are in place for the safety of the passengers and crew.

If someone chooses to disregard the rules, thus causing concern to the other passengers, then he should be punished. As far as I'm concerned, he should have been given the maximum sentence possible. :mad:

[Santaclaus]

My Nokia 9210 has a flight mode, wich disables the phone part.
On long flights I often play Chess or Tetris.
In flight mode it works just as a computer.

[PAXboy]

Hi, Vortex thanks for clearing up this point for us all.

Wrong. Cell phones do NOT always TX. There is an idle mode, which is when you are not making a call and this does not require the phone to TX. It searches for base stations by listening and measuring the received signal. I am glad to learn this. In my work in Telecomms, I rely upon the companies supplying the equipment and service to give me most of the information. In this case, that has been erroneous. :rolleyes:

Wrong again. Increasing numbers of phones and wireless PDAs have aircraft modes, which disable the transmission side of the phone, but still leaves you able to use its other facilities. I own a Siemens S45 with just such an option. Nokia 9000 series communicators have the same option. Well, I'm sorry that you have to denounce me in such tones. I am glad (again) to learn that devices already have this feature. My phone does not and, besides, I don't play games with it. So - even it had it, I would not use it! :D

I am not trying to knock you here but GSM and mobile radio is as different as chalk and cheese. Very true but I was considering the audience that reads this forum and making a differentiation betwen System 4; Portable Mobile Radio; TACS; ETACS; GSM; Radio-Paging (onsite and area wide) etcetera, I thought that 'Mobile Radio' was a little easier?
I’m not questioning your ability but in this case you prove the point of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing Well, in this case, I am wrong and you have been able to state the correct information. This is a good case for the internet and discussion groups. It is great that a GSM Optimisation and Planning Engineer is on hand. All I ask is that you try and point out errors in ... <trying to find the right word> gentler? tones. :p

[Vortex what...ouch!]

PAXboy

Yeah sorry about that ;) it does come across a bit too harsh and certainly more than I really meant it to. Do accept my apologies, hope I did not offend to much? Perhaps a few emoticons in there would have been more appropriate.

Glad to help out with the info. A lot of people sadly have a big misunderstanding of telecommunications (caused by people only being given half the story as you say happened to you), which can cause unfounded scare stories. That was what I was trying to get across in my message. English composition never was my best subject :rolleyes:

After all that has been said on this subject I heard a Nokia SMS received tone (somebody probably switched it on early) from the back of the aircraft on finals to Schiphol on Friday afternoon. Was not impressed :mad:Cabin crew said nothing. I mentioned it on leaving and she said she had not heard it. Fair enough. Doesn’t excuse the prat who did it though.:mad: :mad: :mad:

[PAXboy]

Vortex - Sure. It happens to us all. :)

Some months ago, during taxi to stand at LHR, I heard (from the row behind me) the distinctive 'Tick-Tick-Tick' that an Ericsson makes as it registers (I am a long term Ericsson user).

I turned to look trhough the gap in the seats and glared at the bloke and told him to turn it off. He looked VERY surprised. However, I doubt that he aceeded to my request.

You may be able to comment on another point in this debate. An ex-colleague of mine worked on software developemnt of the Airbus 321. He said that their concern was not the odd phone or two but the problem of numerous phones.

They were concerned that, if multiple phones are turned on durings (say, finals or taxi to stand) they would all be registering at about the same time. The combined transmissions to multiple networks - perhaps greater if foreign mobiles are trying to locate suitable network for the first time - would provide a far greater interferance?

[Vortex what...ouch!]

Yes very true about all the phones trying to update together and causing a big rf energy surge. I alluded to that problem in an earlier post. (what actually happens is explained here: http://www.privateline.com/PCS/callprocessGSM.html). The simple fact is the cost of protecting aircraft systems against this type of radiation is probably very expensive. Simpler to just get everyone to turn their phones off :) A not unreasonable conclusion in my opinion.

[luoto]

one reason for banning phones in air (even though I'd like to be able to use mine, but I'll sacrifice this...) is that the proles have such vile ringing tones and like to hear them... also they already can bellow so loudly when they speak/laugh to their chums, even if separated by several aisles, so imagine the delights with the phone...

`

[radeng]

On May 2, 2000, the CAA published a report entitled 'Interference Levels in Aircraft at Radio Frequencies used by Portable Telephones'. It could be downloaded from www.srg.caa.co.ik/srg/srg_news.asp

It can probably still be found somewhere on the CAA site; its conclusion is that field strengths high enough to exceed the susceptability levels of some aircraft equipment can be found.

One problem is that as an aircraft gets older, you cannot be sure that all the cable screens will maintain their total integrity, so immunity can actually decrease.

[Crepello]

I'd not heard of GSMs with 'aircraft mode', most concerning. It seems tantamount to allowing guns onboard without bullets - though it's easier to check that a gun's in 'safe mode'...