What would you have done?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: East of Runway 21
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Derek, the point is not whether mobiles blow up filling stations.
It's about whether pax obey instructions or not. At the end of the day, a rule is a rule, and the pax should follow it. If they don't like it, they can fly an airline that doesn't have the rule. I doubt they'd find many, and in my opinion, I wouldn't want to be flying on an airline that put passenger convenience ahead of safety!!
It's about whether pax obey instructions or not. At the end of the day, a rule is a rule, and the pax should follow it. If they don't like it, they can fly an airline that doesn't have the rule. I doubt they'd find many, and in my opinion, I wouldn't want to be flying on an airline that put passenger convenience ahead of safety!!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: About 1 mile from WOD ndb
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SkySista:
I completely agree with you. The rules may be misguided, but I always obey them and any instructions given to me by CC on all such matters.
But I was surprised to hear a PA by Virgin CC at LHR las year that we couldn't use cellphones until inside the terminal "for security reasons" (this was after doors open).
This left me scratching my head . . .
I completely agree with you. The rules may be misguided, but I always obey them and any instructions given to me by CC on all such matters.
But I was surprised to hear a PA by Virgin CC at LHR las year that we couldn't use cellphones until inside the terminal "for security reasons" (this was after doors open).
This left me scratching my head . . .
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No documented occurence
Until it has been proven and confirmed that the use of mobile phones, etc are safe whilst engines are running on an aircraft, and that it is fine to use a mobile phone standing directly next to a fuel pump then it is best to keep them off.
After all, there was an original reason or theory behind the restriction of mobile phones in these places. It is doubted that it is safe to use them, and until it is proven otherwise, the rules will remain. Simple as that. Better to be safe than sorry. Under CAA regs in the UK passengers may use mobiles inside the aircraft whilst refuelling, and mobiles and electronic devices must be switched off when engines are running on any British registered aircraft. If an operator wants to tighten those rules, they can, providing it is agreed with the CAA.
a PA by Virgin CC at LHR las year that we couldn't use cellphones until inside the terminal "for security reasons" (this was after doors open).
Last edited by sixmilehighclub; 7th Mar 2006 at 09:59.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: East of Runway 21
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Derek, the only reson i can think of is perhaps it's more being inside a security restricted area... for example, in Customs/Passport Control in Aus airports, you are not allowed to use a mobile phone, camera or other recording device. Perhaps this is what was meant at your particular location as well???
I once saw a guy havng a very loud conversation on his phone right under the sign with a big picture of a phone and a slash mark through it, and the words "$10,000", wish I'd had a camera with me, hahah, or been allowed to use one!!
I once saw a guy havng a very loud conversation on his phone right under the sign with a big picture of a phone and a slash mark through it, and the words "$10,000", wish I'd had a camera with me, hahah, or been allowed to use one!!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South England
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^Yeah they do that in JFK as well - they put out PA's as well if they catch anyone on their phone so everyone turns to look at you.
I know at LHR you're not meant to use your phone in the immigration area but as usual the UK are bit more logical when it comes to rules and regs and don't really mind!
I know at LHR you're not meant to use your phone in the immigration area but as usual the UK are bit more logical when it comes to rules and regs and don't really mind!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: ENGLAND
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't do anything myself, but when the 'charming' little **** had been rather rude to the very pleasant CC and CSD comming back from the mid east late last year erstwhile equally charming colleague from a company called Blackwater working in the cuds asked her where she wanted it surgically inserted before crushing said item (one of those motorola razor things) into little bits and adding it as an ingredient to her diner. Moral of that story is that irritating little brats shoudn't sit next to highly irritable 'asset managers' otherwise they manage.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: About 1 mile from WOD ndb
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sixmilehighclub
In the same way there is no 'documented' evidence to prove it is safe.
Until it has been proven and confirmed that the use of mobile phones, etc are safe whilst engines are running on an aircraft, and that it is fine to use a mobile phone standing directly next to a fuel pump then it is best to keep them off.
Until it has been proven and confirmed that the use of mobile phones, etc are safe whilst engines are running on an aircraft, and that it is fine to use a mobile phone standing directly next to a fuel pump then it is best to keep them off.
Also, how do you prove that something is safe when their is no evidence that it not? The science says it's safe.
How do you think the airplane communicates with ATC? Radio -- and far, far more powerful than a bunch of cellphones. And those folks do it with the engines running. There's nothing special about the aircraft's own radio equipment that renders it any less dangerous than a cellphone.
During the testing and certification of Airbus, for example, the back of the plane was stuffed with electronics and the engineers were forever using their cellular phones -- in flight. It may have upset Vodafone, but it didn't trouble the Airbus.
I understand the rules, and I obey them religiously -- but then that's what it is, religion, not science.
With respect,
derekl
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berks, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ground regs at my airline specifically state that SLF are not allowed to use mobiles on the tarmac (coaching operations etc..), for their own safety.
As a dispatcher I am given dispensation to use my company mobile for operational calls only - I, however, spend 8 hours a day walking around aircraft and aprons, and I'm therefore (hopefully..) less likely to walk into the prop of the Fokker 27 on the next stand through not paying enough attention to it.
As for technical issues on board the aircraft, as an ex-aircraft engineer I know that it IS possible that the phone signal can interfere with radio nav systems - this was adequately demostrated on a B737-200 some years ago, when corrosion in an aerial connector led to some very strange ILS responses in sympathy with mobile phone use. This was proven after an extensive engineering investigation, so, although PERHAPS, NORMALLY it is not really an issue, when combined with another hidden defect , it had very real safety implications. In this case, the ILS indication and F/D bars gave erroneous deviations with NO failure flags - the fault was only noticed during a visual approach when the VASI's were wildly out of kilter with the GS deviation.
The ruling refers to engine running not because there is a difference in effect of mobile phones, but because the aircraft is deemed to be able to move under it's own power at the point at which the engines are started. It doesn't really matter if the RDDMI needles are spinning in circles whilst the aircraft is connected to a tug, but it obviously does once it starts to operate the flight.
As a dispatcher I am given dispensation to use my company mobile for operational calls only - I, however, spend 8 hours a day walking around aircraft and aprons, and I'm therefore (hopefully..) less likely to walk into the prop of the Fokker 27 on the next stand through not paying enough attention to it.
As for technical issues on board the aircraft, as an ex-aircraft engineer I know that it IS possible that the phone signal can interfere with radio nav systems - this was adequately demostrated on a B737-200 some years ago, when corrosion in an aerial connector led to some very strange ILS responses in sympathy with mobile phone use. This was proven after an extensive engineering investigation, so, although PERHAPS, NORMALLY it is not really an issue, when combined with another hidden defect , it had very real safety implications. In this case, the ILS indication and F/D bars gave erroneous deviations with NO failure flags - the fault was only noticed during a visual approach when the VASI's were wildly out of kilter with the GS deviation.
The ruling refers to engine running not because there is a difference in effect of mobile phones, but because the aircraft is deemed to be able to move under it's own power at the point at which the engines are started. It doesn't really matter if the RDDMI needles are spinning in circles whilst the aircraft is connected to a tug, but it obviously does once it starts to operate the flight.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In t'sky
Posts: 575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by humberside_go
The reason why those signs tell you to switch your phone off are nothing to do with it transmitting a signal, it is because there is a very very small chance of a spark being generated by the contact between the battery of the phone and the phone itself and thus 'blow up the filling station'. Think about it phone is usually in trouser pocket of person operating pump and very close to all those highly flammable petrol fumes even a tiny spark in that area could be enough for the place to explode. Try having that on your conscious assuming you survive that is.
I always turn mine off to comply, but I'm not worried about it, I don't think i'll explode on the forecourt!
Horgy
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing that makes me laugh is that we are all complaining about this rule which says that we cant use mobile phones on a plane, but in a few years time when the technology has been installed which will allow us to actually make roaming calls onboard with our mobile....WE WILL ALL BE COMPLAINING THAT WE ALLOW THEM TO BE ON!!!!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: About 1 mile from WOD ndb
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a Doctor, trust me . . .
I'm an engineer with a bit of experience of this sort of stuff.
Your cellular phone cannot blow up a filling station. Filling stations are designed not to blow up, for a start. Try your hardest, you won't be able to do it. It really is an urban myth. Soak your phone in petrol, set light to it, throw it in your open petrol tank, and you're in with a chance of making a nasty mess of your car. That's it.
I'm with apaddyinuk: within 2-3 years, there will be local GSM cells on civil aircraft that will let you use your own mobile on the plane and we'll all get the "I'm on the plane, dear" bore next to us. The only satisfaction we'll get is knowing that the silly sod is paying the airline through the nose for it, just as he does if he uses an airphone now (that magically doesn't interfere with aircraft systems). Could money be an issue in all of this?
I challenge anyone to produce scientifically valid evidence of exploding filling stations or screwed up avionics (NOT anecdotal) caused by cellular phones.
Buzzing in speakers excluded
Your cellular phone cannot blow up a filling station. Filling stations are designed not to blow up, for a start. Try your hardest, you won't be able to do it. It really is an urban myth. Soak your phone in petrol, set light to it, throw it in your open petrol tank, and you're in with a chance of making a nasty mess of your car. That's it.
I'm with apaddyinuk: within 2-3 years, there will be local GSM cells on civil aircraft that will let you use your own mobile on the plane and we'll all get the "I'm on the plane, dear" bore next to us. The only satisfaction we'll get is knowing that the silly sod is paying the airline through the nose for it, just as he does if he uses an airphone now (that magically doesn't interfere with aircraft systems). Could money be an issue in all of this?
I challenge anyone to produce scientifically valid evidence of exploding filling stations or screwed up avionics (NOT anecdotal) caused by cellular phones.
Buzzing in speakers excluded
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berks, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Derekl, you say you have technical expertise in this matter, but can I be so bold as to ask in which field? (Aircraft, RF or filling station?)
As an ex-aircraft engineer with 11 years experience, I know that it is possible that the phone signal can interfere with radio nav systems - this was demostrated on a B737-200 some years ago, when corrosion in an aerial connector led to some very strange ILS responses in sympathy with mobile phone use. This was proven after an extensive engineering investigation, so, although PERHAPS, NORMALLY it is not really an issue, when combined with another hidden defect , it had very real safety implications. In this case, the ILS indication and F/D bars gave erroneous deviations with no failure flags - the fault was only noticed during a visual approach when the VASI's were wildly out of kilter with the GS deviation. Three factors were required to even see the fault - Bad connector, visual approach, phone call being made, all at the same time. Luckily the crew were visual, had they been operating under CAT III conditions it would have been a lot harder to identify they even had a problem.
I was involved with the investigation, so this is first hand, not anecdotal..
I tend to agree that in 99.99% of flights it is a non-issue (and it is certainly not an explosion / fire risk), but in commercial aviation 99.99% is not good enough - especially if it is easy to achieve 100% simply by having phones off.
As for future phone usage on aircraft, Boeing and Airbus etc are working hard to provide this functionality, but by virtue of the time it is taking them to certify phone usage, you can see how seriously they take the issue.
As an ex-aircraft engineer with 11 years experience, I know that it is possible that the phone signal can interfere with radio nav systems - this was demostrated on a B737-200 some years ago, when corrosion in an aerial connector led to some very strange ILS responses in sympathy with mobile phone use. This was proven after an extensive engineering investigation, so, although PERHAPS, NORMALLY it is not really an issue, when combined with another hidden defect , it had very real safety implications. In this case, the ILS indication and F/D bars gave erroneous deviations with no failure flags - the fault was only noticed during a visual approach when the VASI's were wildly out of kilter with the GS deviation. Three factors were required to even see the fault - Bad connector, visual approach, phone call being made, all at the same time. Luckily the crew were visual, had they been operating under CAT III conditions it would have been a lot harder to identify they even had a problem.
I was involved with the investigation, so this is first hand, not anecdotal..
I tend to agree that in 99.99% of flights it is a non-issue (and it is certainly not an explosion / fire risk), but in commercial aviation 99.99% is not good enough - especially if it is easy to achieve 100% simply by having phones off.
As for future phone usage on aircraft, Boeing and Airbus etc are working hard to provide this functionality, but by virtue of the time it is taking them to certify phone usage, you can see how seriously they take the issue.
Last edited by ANOTHER ton?; 9th Mar 2006 at 10:12.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by derekl
I challenge anyone to produce scientifically valid evidence of exploding filling stations or screwed up avionics (NOT anecdotal) caused by cellular phones.
Regardless of why the phones have to be off, regardless of what the airlines tell passengers about why the phones have to be off, the fact of the matter remains that if an airline has a rule about mobile phone use onboard, it must be adhered to.
Same as a petrol station.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: About 1 mile from WOD ndb
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ANOTHER ton?
Derekl, you say you have technical expertise in this matter, but can I be so bold as to ask in which field? (Aircraft, RF or filling station?) [etc]
I have significant RF engineering knowledge, some knowledge of aircraft systems and avionics, and, shall we say, derived knowledge of filling stations! (One of my colleagues is a engineer who does the modelling for this sort of disaster scenario at, say, tank farms for insurers and the like -- think Buncefield!)
We have discussed these things at length on the basis of burying the filling station urban myth in particular -- it's quite fascinating.
I most certainly don't dismiss what you say, although I've talked to quite a few technical aircrew about this sort of thing and the cellphone rule doesn't seem to apply to them
)I'm perfectly happy to obey the rules -- like some of the airport absurdities about security -- and I do, it really does not bother me at all.
It's the science and/or the thought processes -- and the sociology -- behind it all that is fascinating.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this thread discusses the avionics: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ht=cell+phones
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CAA has conducted research which provided evidence that a mobile phone transmission on-board an aircraft may interfere with equipment including communications, navigation and flight control systems. There is circumstantial evidence that portable electronic devices such as CD players and computer games can also cause interference. As a result there is a requirement that:
The use of mobile phones on board is prohibited once all of the aircraft doors are closed.
In addition, the use of personal electronic equipment by passengers, such as laptop computers, electronic games, calculators, CD players, cassette players, radios, TVs, video cameras and remote controlled toys, is prohibited during take-off and landing phases, when the passenger seat belt sign is on, and whenever the aircraft commander suspects that their use may be the cause of interference.
The use of mobile phones on board is prohibited once all of the aircraft doors are closed.
In addition, the use of personal electronic equipment by passengers, such as laptop computers, electronic games, calculators, CD players, cassette players, radios, TVs, video cameras and remote controlled toys, is prohibited during take-off and landing phases, when the passenger seat belt sign is on, and whenever the aircraft commander suspects that their use may be the cause of interference.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when the technology has been installed which will allow us to actually make roaming calls onboard with our mobile....
AOCs will have to consider all aspects of the impact of allowing mobile use in cruise before installing the technology. Privacy, volume, cost, benefits, safety and their competitors. It's going to cause one huge marketing nightmare!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jettesen
DUSHAN - What do you think the captain hears in his headset when mobiles are going off all the time???? ATC tell him to go around, and he cannot hear that instruction and then we all suffer. Don't always go on the assumtion of what you can hear in the cabin systems, the flight deck syatems are more important
HAHA!!! I am an oz First Officer on a 100+ seater jet, and I have 2 incidents to share with you (that I found quite amusing) that basically says we don't give a ****e:
1) Quite often on VERY short finals to land and both our mobiles start beeping with messages (because we don't turn them off) because we've never had an issue over 20+ years flying other than a bit of the GSM buzz in your ear. If we were told to go around, and we didn't hear through the buzz, ATC would keep telling us till we heard, and chances are, we can see the potential issue up front (Anyway, can you get reception at 40000'? I can't!)
2) and my favourite, we were approaching to land in the last jet type I was on, the autopilot had been switched off, it was raining and were prob at 2000', anyway Captain's phone rang, whilst flying, he swaps hands and reaches over (quite a stretch) and grabs his phone out of the console, ANSWERS IT, goes "hey babe, what ya doing? yeah, oh ok no worries, hey gonna have to call you back, just about to land hey, ok talk soon..." classic! I was dumbfounded, I PROBABLY would't have done that, I'll wait until I'm a captain!
As for the phone next to the fuel truck SkySista, I have often poked my head out the flight deck window to see if we're being refuelled (cos I need to go get the docket and sign it) and the refueller is on his mobile whilst pumping in 20000 litres) so if he can do it whilst refuelling, I think a pax can).
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh Dear...
Originally Posted by CaptHairDryer
...basically says we don't give a ****e...because we've never had an issue over 20+ years flying...chances are, we can see the potential issue up front...
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Berks, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CaptHairDryer,
Please can you make sure that when you do your pre-departure PA that you use the name CaptHairDryer instead of your real name, then I can get off and fly on another service with a professional crew.
Please can you make sure that when you do your pre-departure PA that you use the name CaptHairDryer instead of your real name, then I can get off and fly on another service with a professional crew.