Pilot on 104.1FM
Thread Starter
Pilot on 104.1FM
Did anybody happen to recognise the pilot who rang in on the radio this morning on the breakfast show in Sydney on 104.1FM?
He only said his name was John, but didn't identify what airline he worked for (if any?!).
Any info would be interesting.
He only said his name was John, but didn't identify what airline he worked for (if any?!).
Any info would be interesting.
Thread Starter
Well, I believe it originally started when a flight attendant who called in was questioned as to why the window shades need to be open for take off and why they couldn't use mobile phones on the aircraft. I didn't hear the reply of the flight attendant as I was not listening at the time, but to quote one of them they said he didn't have a clue as to why these things were, so anyway enter John the pilot. Fortunately he didn't make too bigger d!ck of himself and sounded reasonably intelligent thank goodness! Just curious as to who he was or where he was from...
and yes he did kind of answer why mobiles are not allowed to be left on at all times on the aircraft, he just forgot to mention the bit about refueling...
and yes he did kind of answer why mobiles are not allowed to be left on at all times on the aircraft, he just forgot to mention the bit about refueling...
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he did kind of answer why mobiles are not allowed to be left on at all times on the aircraft, he just forgot to mention the bit about refueling...
Mind you, I don't want anyone wandering about a busy tarmac yabbering into and totally distracted by the phone stuck to their ear. However, when it's patently obvious that they don't make fuel trucks and parked aircraft explode, it'd also be nice to not have to tell porkies to enforce a quite reasonable rule.
No myth V1OOPS - a guy was killed in Perth at a Service station with some sort of weird short!! whilst refuelling his vehicle hence there they ask for mobiles not be used during refuelling, but I don't think that this is the reason in Aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Myth Busters
Anyone seen the show myth busters. The looked at this particular issue and tried the best they good to blow up petrol etc., and came to the conclusion it's a myth.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobile phones are not a fire or explosion hazard to petrol stations or aircraft refueling.
No “guy in Perth” was killed while using a mobile at a service station. Show me the proof. I’ll show you mine.
This is an URBAN LEGEND propagated by numerous emails over the years.
Shell Oil has even stated that they have NEVER heard of such an incident being directly related to a mobile phone.
Yes, spontaneous combustion of fuel vapours have occurred at petrol stations around the world, with some documented cases in North America.
The reason for the ignition of fuel vapours is not due to the "massive" amounts of energy emitted by mobile phones but rather by the discharge of static electricity. This coupled with very dry conditions and low humidity as found in some parts of the US at certain times of the year creates a perfect environment for a static spark to be produced.
Urban Legend
Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association
As for mobiles posing a hazard to "Aircraft navigation systems" -don't get me started.
No “guy in Perth” was killed while using a mobile at a service station. Show me the proof. I’ll show you mine.
This is an URBAN LEGEND propagated by numerous emails over the years.
Shell Oil has even stated that they have NEVER heard of such an incident being directly related to a mobile phone.
Yes, spontaneous combustion of fuel vapours have occurred at petrol stations around the world, with some documented cases in North America.
The reason for the ignition of fuel vapours is not due to the "massive" amounts of energy emitted by mobile phones but rather by the discharge of static electricity. This coupled with very dry conditions and low humidity as found in some parts of the US at certain times of the year creates a perfect environment for a static spark to be produced.
Urban Legend
Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association
As for mobiles posing a hazard to "Aircraft navigation systems" -don't get me started.
Ibex,
You're a party pooper. And wrong. Last time I rang to give a departure report on my mobile (I couldn't get thru on HF or VHF despite being less than 200km from a major captial city: thanks Dick) the aeroplane did a gentle 90° turn. When I hung up, it immediately did a derry turn in the opposite direction (applying full power on the bottom motors, thank god) causing the cart tart who was standing in the doorway about to give me me cuppa to say "could I have one of those please!". So there.
You're a party pooper. And wrong. Last time I rang to give a departure report on my mobile (I couldn't get thru on HF or VHF despite being less than 200km from a major captial city: thanks Dick) the aeroplane did a gentle 90° turn. When I hung up, it immediately did a derry turn in the opposite direction (applying full power on the bottom motors, thank god) causing the cart tart who was standing in the doorway about to give me me cuppa to say "could I have one of those please!". So there.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which bit about refueling? If it's the myth about cellphones triggering explosions, then I'd have to ask why tarmac radios at several more watts and considerably less distance don't get pinged. Besides, in my experience most tarmac fuel trucks seem to come equipped with a very handy cellphone and a radio ... and there's nothing special about the phone, just a regular old Nokia.
Mobile phones are not a fire or explosion hazard to petrol stations or aircraft refueling.
Anyone seen the show myth busters. The looked at this particular issue and tried the best they good to blow up petrol etc., and came to the conclusion it's a myth.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, spontaneous combustion of fuel vapours have occurred at petrol stations around the world, with some documented cases in North America.
For anyone who missed an explanation - typically the victim is female and responds by pulling the nozzle out of the tank thus turning it into a flame thrower. The cellphone is involved since women generally leave them in a bag and head back into the car to get it.
So having rubbed against the upholstery in the car and failed to touch any metalwork on leaving, the phone user now returns to touch something metal ... the nozzle right at the vapour enshrouded fuel cap.
Whomph!
While you can't leave a fuel nozzle running in Oz anymore, the latches are removed for this reason, you still can elsewhere.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't there a risk if a mobile in use is dropped, that the phone-battery connectors could spark?
People juggling hand baggage, phone or petrol bowsers are more likely to drop the phone.
The batteries on some mobiles become detached when dropped. If detachment occurs while the phone is on (even on standby) a spark could occur. Same is true with any hand-held battery operated device.
Best reason for phones being off when boarding is that some people have obnoxious loud conversations disturbing to other passengers and make them unable to hear any announcements.
Kids get run over by trams when crossing roads due to phone/Walkman in ears. People need to focus properly on what they are doing, when they are doing it, to reduce risk.
Just like the axiom of Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
People juggling hand baggage, phone or petrol bowsers are more likely to drop the phone.
The batteries on some mobiles become detached when dropped. If detachment occurs while the phone is on (even on standby) a spark could occur. Same is true with any hand-held battery operated device.
Best reason for phones being off when boarding is that some people have obnoxious loud conversations disturbing to other passengers and make them unable to hear any announcements.
Kids get run over by trams when crossing roads due to phone/Walkman in ears. People need to focus properly on what they are doing, when they are doing it, to reduce risk.
Just like the axiom of Aviate, Navigate, Communicate.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: aus
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those who say that mobiles are not a problem are correct. To date there has been no confirmed report that a mobile telephone has ever effected an aircraft system beyond some audio noise. Often reports of mobile telephones effecting systems are coincidental with other faults.
Mobiles CANNOT cause a spark to ignite fuel during refueling. Their EIRP (radiated power) is way way way too low. Even if a spark was caused, the chance of THAT particular spark causing an ignition are miniscule. I have seen sparks jumping around the pipe network of fuel trucks and fuel rigs during pumping with no effect.
Mobile batteries are unlikely to cause a spark as they are typicallo low voltage batteries
Hand held radios on the tarmac radiate tens of times more power
Diesel tugs on the tarmac with 12 volt electrical systems and pieces of metal that dangle on the ground pose a far higher risk.
The reality is that because airlines and wowsers who don't understand radio think mobile telephones must be bad they use all the above excuses to ban them rather than the truth - people are scaired of what they don't understand.
FACT: It is perfectly legal to install a mobile telephone in an australian registered aircraft.
Mobiles CANNOT cause a spark to ignite fuel during refueling. Their EIRP (radiated power) is way way way too low. Even if a spark was caused, the chance of THAT particular spark causing an ignition are miniscule. I have seen sparks jumping around the pipe network of fuel trucks and fuel rigs during pumping with no effect.
Mobile batteries are unlikely to cause a spark as they are typicallo low voltage batteries
Hand held radios on the tarmac radiate tens of times more power
Diesel tugs on the tarmac with 12 volt electrical systems and pieces of metal that dangle on the ground pose a far higher risk.
The reality is that because airlines and wowsers who don't understand radio think mobile telephones must be bad they use all the above excuses to ban them rather than the truth - people are scaired of what they don't understand.
FACT: It is perfectly legal to install a mobile telephone in an australian registered aircraft.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Correct, and caught on camera.
I remember seeing a story about this subject on the ABC sometime last year. In the story they contacted all the world's major oil companies and many newspapers. To that date there had been NO RECORDED cases of mobile phones causing spontaneous combustion at service stations. Most stories are exagerated by newspapers (hard to believe I know) and in 100% of cases, turned out to be caused by other factors.
Cheers, HH.
PS:Well it seems that I must be getting old, the story was from 2003 not last year, anyway here it is.
Last edited by Howard Hughes; 18th Feb 2005 at 01:30.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sinala1
FACT - No where can I see it stated that you should disobey any law or direction given by airline staff.
Maybe one day the law will change?
I really hope it doesn't though. Can you imagine an aircraft full of people screaming into their mobile phones throughout the flight?
FACT - No where can I see it stated that you should disobey any law or direction given by airline staff.
Maybe one day the law will change?
I really hope it doesn't though. Can you imagine an aircraft full of people screaming into their mobile phones throughout the flight?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RF energy certainly can affect aircraft systems. I've flown an aircraft type which when you transmitted over a freq 20000 on HF, the fire light for one of the engines would light up, getting brighter and dimming with the level of the persons voice transmitting 
Nunc est bibendum
For the people that believe that a car phone can cause a petrol pump to turn into a flame flower, try this link.
http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/gasvapor.asp
For info on static electricity and petrol stations, try this link:
http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/static.asp
It's amazing that considering there are all these 'reports', I've never spoken to anyone who has read one directly where either static electricity or a mobile set off a petrol station. Although I did hear that gullible was being removed from the dictionary!
http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/gasvapor.asp
For info on static electricity and petrol stations, try this link:
http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/static.asp
It's amazing that considering there are all these 'reports', I've never spoken to anyone who has read one directly where either static electricity or a mobile set off a petrol station. Although I did hear that gullible was being removed from the dictionary!
Just Binos
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Mackay, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Years ago I was told by somebody with no particular credibility that the reason mobile phones were banned on aircraft had nothing to do with navigation systems at all. Rather (conspiracy theorists should get excited about here) that the speed of a jet aircraft in flight means that the number of, err, repeaters, thingies, mobile receiving stations, whatever, passed over by the aircraft meant that the phone company concerned (there weren't many around then
) couldn't track the call and therefore no bill was able to be sent.
Hey, don't shoot me, OK? I wouldn't have a clue!
(I have to say though that it's nice having at least one refuge from the LOUD mobile user........ "I'M AT THE AIRPORT AND I'LL BE THERE IN TEN MINUTES!"
) couldn't track the call and therefore no bill was able to be sent.Hey, don't shoot me, OK? I wouldn't have a clue!
(I have to say though that it's nice having at least one refuge from the LOUD mobile user........ "I'M AT THE AIRPORT AND I'LL BE THERE IN TEN MINUTES!"
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UAE
Age: 62
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobile phones
Totally apart from mobiles being the bane of modern day existence...
I spoke to a pilot of a heli that in one day had to do 3 emergency landings when the chip detector went off.
Each time the filter was checked out...nothing
It was reported and when the investigation was concluded they found that it was a Nokia mobile (one of the old models) that caused the problem when it "polled" a ground station, it also interfered with the monitoring systems on board the aircraft.
Don't ask me when it was ages ago.
Binos, I heard that the reason was that when the mobiles poll in flight, they are hitting more than one ground based station and causes their system to have a kitten? Dunno if that is true either!
edit for poor spelling
I spoke to a pilot of a heli that in one day had to do 3 emergency landings when the chip detector went off.
Each time the filter was checked out...nothing
It was reported and when the investigation was concluded they found that it was a Nokia mobile (one of the old models) that caused the problem when it "polled" a ground station, it also interfered with the monitoring systems on board the aircraft.
Don't ask me when it was ages ago.
Binos, I heard that the reason was that when the mobiles poll in flight, they are hitting more than one ground based station and causes their system to have a kitten? Dunno if that is true either!
edit for poor spelling
Last edited by divingduck; 18th Feb 2005 at 12:53.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
that the speed of a jet aircraft in flight means that the number of, err, repeaters, thingies, mobile receiving stations, whatever, passed over by the aircraft meant that the phone company concerned (there weren't many around then ) couldn't track the call and therefore no bill was able to be sent.
Binos, I heard that the reason was that when the mobiles poll in flight, they are hitting more than one ground based station and causes their system to have a kitten? Dunno if that is true either!
I understand this issue has been resolved with the introduction of digtal and GSM phones.
Another urban myth perhaps? But does sound very plausible if you like a good conspiracy. I mean since when has government been concerned with our safety? But hit them in the hip pocket and they sure get into action.
Cheers, HH.
PS: The answers out there somewhere...