What's the Mobile Phone rules????
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: home
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the Mobile Phone rules????
Returning to LHR on a flight with Air Malta last week, we were taxying after touch-down and had to halt to allow 5 or 6 other aircraft to take off (we were taxying across their runway). During this halt, 4 gentlemen (in the seats next to me)powered up their mobile phones and started 'phoning home'... When we had safely stopped at the sky steps, I informed the gentleman beside me that it was NOT permitted to use mobiles until safely stopped and the engines (aircraft) turned off. Am I correct? What surprised me was, this gentleman said that they HAD asked a crew member whether they could use their mobiles and he told them to go ahead!!! I must say, I'm pretty certain that the announcement at the start of the flight (safety) not to use during take off or landing was not made. Can someone advise on this one? I'm not flight crew, so please excuse the terminology I've used if incorrect.
Thanks
Happyone (but not on this flight)!!!!!
Thanks
Happyone (but not on this flight)!!!!!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 56
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent question - as a pax would love to hear the reply. Personally hate the damn things ! Job dictates that I carry one but it gets powered off before boarding and not powered back up until off the plane - but I'm just a good guy !!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the airline i work for, we do not let pax use mobile phones at all. Despite announcements being made to tell them this, some people still break the rules. Many a time when boarding or disembarking pax turn on the phones and try to use their phones on the ramp, this is not allowed either. It even tells you in your mobile phone handbook that your phone must be switched off prior to boarding an aircraft.
Hope this clears this matter up for you.
Hope this clears this matter up for you.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: home
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankx browneyes,...
this is as I thought. Should someone make Air Malta aware then, that this is possibly a safety hazzard? Should their crew members know of the dangers using mobiles on an 'active' aircraft? Any Air Malta crew members want to comment?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a lot of variation here between airlines... some examples, as I understand them:
Cathay - OK to use phones until the cabin doors are closed and after they are opened
Qantas - not allowed to be switched on even on the airbridge (as I was told by a QF FA this is because of a risk of fuel explosions - is Aussie fuel more volatile or something?
)
Dragonair - I think this is "no phones on while the engines are running"
BA - I think that they have the same as Cathay, but I'm not sure
China Eastern - you can have them on anytime you want as far as I can tell from the crew reactions
All in all it is hugely confusing for pax - and then once of twice I have felt very guilty when the phone has switched itself on because it is in the top of my bag and other people stuff bags against it tightly, thereby pressing the switch. This then flattens my phone battery over the next 12 hours as the phone constantly hunts for networks and does some very high-speed handovers all the way from HKG to LHR
The only way to ensure phones are off and stay off is to physically separate the battery.
Cathay - OK to use phones until the cabin doors are closed and after they are opened
Qantas - not allowed to be switched on even on the airbridge (as I was told by a QF FA this is because of a risk of fuel explosions - is Aussie fuel more volatile or something?
)Dragonair - I think this is "no phones on while the engines are running"
BA - I think that they have the same as Cathay, but I'm not sure
China Eastern - you can have them on anytime you want as far as I can tell from the crew reactions
All in all it is hugely confusing for pax - and then once of twice I have felt very guilty when the phone has switched itself on because it is in the top of my bag and other people stuff bags against it tightly, thereby pressing the switch. This then flattens my phone battery over the next 12 hours as the phone constantly hunts for networks and does some very high-speed handovers all the way from HKG to LHR
The only way to ensure phones are off and stay off is to physically separate the battery.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least one aircraft accident has been attributed to use of a mobile on landing. Also all petrol garages in UK do not permit use of mobile phones on forecourts because radio signals can cause sparking, this would probably why good not to use them on ramp?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Qantas Confusion
I flew with QF on the 5am ish flight outta BNE to SYD on 737-800 a while back. There certainly seemed to be a fair bit of confusion as to when they could be used amongst the FAs. When the boarding had been completed, one of the FAs announced that new policy allowed passengers to continue the use of mobile phones until the aircraft was ready for take off, and the signal for the FAs to take their seats had been given. Also that as soon as the aircraft lands, they can be used.
After touchdown in SYD, as the FA was giving his 'welcome to sydney, stay in your seat, watch the overhead bins if you dont want a concussion' speech, he added that he had been told by the captain that the policy was actually only until the doors were closed, and then after they were opened, and not from takeoff to landing.
Virgin blue, and QF Dash8 services instruct passengers to have them off as they board, before passing the gate.
I remember jumpseating on an Ansett A320 outta TSV, and the Captain got one of the Ground crew to pounce on a fella walking towards the aircraft, still half in the terminal, talking on his mobile phone.
Is there a right and wrong procedure. Certainly seems to be better to be safer than sorry??
After touchdown in SYD, as the FA was giving his 'welcome to sydney, stay in your seat, watch the overhead bins if you dont want a concussion' speech, he added that he had been told by the captain that the policy was actually only until the doors were closed, and then after they were opened, and not from takeoff to landing.
Virgin blue, and QF Dash8 services instruct passengers to have them off as they board, before passing the gate.
I remember jumpseating on an Ansett A320 outta TSV, and the Captain got one of the Ground crew to pounce on a fella walking towards the aircraft, still half in the terminal, talking on his mobile phone.
Is there a right and wrong procedure. Certainly seems to be better to be safer than sorry??
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England, UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
The airline I work for will not allow mobile phones to be used on board the aircraft at any time.
Despite the fact that we annouce that mobiles must remain switched off after landing we still have to tell at least 2 people on every flight to turn their phones off.
As for the ramp area, I think that under ther health and safety rules airports do not allow mobiles to be used because of the amount of aviation fuel fumes around
One day the something will happen and then, just maybe the pax will listen to us!
happy flying all
The airline I work for will not allow mobile phones to be used on board the aircraft at any time.
Despite the fact that we annouce that mobiles must remain switched off after landing we still have to tell at least 2 people on every flight to turn their phones off.
As for the ramp area, I think that under ther health and safety rules airports do not allow mobiles to be used because of the amount of aviation fuel fumes around
One day the something will happen and then, just maybe the pax will listen to us!
happy flying all
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to be dumb about this, but can someone tell me what is the significant difference (frequency, power, ...) in terms of liability to ignite fuel fumes between the two-way radios that many of the ground crew carry and a mobile phone?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Willfly, rule is phone use until door closes on 737-800. All other aircraft off at all times. Try wrestling phones out of peoples hands though, as far as most flight crew are concern policy should never have changed. Look at the confusion that has resulted.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
christep
Trying to move discussion about mobile phones from folk law on to a scientific basis! - Are you mad?
However when the medical devices agency, an arm of the British National Health Service, tested to see if medical equipment was affected by radio sources. It placed the radio source one metre from the equipment and determined if the equipment was affected by the transmissions. From memory the results were that 12% of medical equipment was affected by mobile phones, but 26% was affected by the radios used by hospital administrators and porters. While a staggering 44% was affected by the sort of radios used by the emergency services (police, ambulance etc).
Also the source of largest radio transmission of filling station forecourts is the ignition system of petrol engines. Yet they aren't banned. Are there any restriction on the use of petrol engined vehicles near re-fueling aircraft?
From a pax point of view the two announcement I hear most offen are "...during the entire stay on board" and "...whilst the engines are running". But who cares about that its easier just to turn off the ringer rather powering off the phone.
Trying to move discussion about mobile phones from folk law on to a scientific basis! - Are you mad?
However when the medical devices agency, an arm of the British National Health Service, tested to see if medical equipment was affected by radio sources. It placed the radio source one metre from the equipment and determined if the equipment was affected by the transmissions. From memory the results were that 12% of medical equipment was affected by mobile phones, but 26% was affected by the radios used by hospital administrators and porters. While a staggering 44% was affected by the sort of radios used by the emergency services (police, ambulance etc).
Also the source of largest radio transmission of filling station forecourts is the ignition system of petrol engines. Yet they aren't banned. Are there any restriction on the use of petrol engined vehicles near re-fueling aircraft?
From a pax point of view the two announcement I hear most offen are "...during the entire stay on board" and "...whilst the engines are running". But who cares about that its easier just to turn off the ringer rather powering off the phone.
Paxing All Over The World
I have been in telecommunicatiosn for 22 years and been through this kind of discussion on many occasions. There are four areas that have been raised: Hospitals, Garage forecourts, the Ramp and the Aircraft.
What follows is my personal conclusions not fact. Not least because fact is very hard to come by in this area. Mainly because the biggest variable is the radiating device itself - how much power it outputs. Also mobile (cell) phones vary the amount of radiated power even during a single call.
Firstly aircraft. According to a pal who is in telecomms and programming and worked on systems development for Airbus 320 family, the greatest risk is NOT from a single cell phone but when you have a large group of them. On an a/c, if 20 pax switch on their phones as the machine taxis to the apron, the combined radio emissions are significantly greater. When a cell phone is turned on, it searches for a base station and uses it's maximum power to do so. If you are arriving in a foreign land, the phone may have to interrogate several base stations until it finds the one that will accept it, due to 'roaming' agreements between networks.
It is this combined effect that carries the maximum risk. But everyone recognises that most men will not listen to instructions! Hence a number of carriers saying, "Only whilst the doors are open." as a compromise.
The ramp and garages: The amount of fuel vapour on the ramp is thought to be lower than on garages as the hoses are all sealed. The moment you disconnect the hose from the a/c both are sealed. Whereas on a petrol forecout, the pump nozzle and the filler tube of the car are both open. BUT the fuel on the ramp is more volatile. Take your pick!
The observation about the spark risk from a car ignition system is valid and I believe that garages have the signs as a legal cover your @rse. Do not forget that, if I am on the forecourt and pay staion for five minutes, my phone may - or may not - transmit during that time. However, if I switch it off and switch it on, then it WILL transmit on both occasions! That is why it should be switched on/off only whilst in the car. However, if it is an open top car in the summer ... ?
Hospitals: In my opinion, this is also cover your @rse time. Once again, interferance CAN be demonstrated but could not be PROVED. If a medial device was affected by a phone, since the phone tranmission was transitory and unrecorded, no one could prove that it was the phone. Hence the ban.
If you want to 'hear' a mobile, place it near a switched on radio (home or car) and then power up the phone.
I have said in both this forum and the SLF on previous occasions, that PAX will not change until an a/c crash (or ramp fire) is PROVED to have been caused by a phone. Loss of life usually needs to take place, before humans learn. Once again, because the phone tx is transitory and unrecorded, we shall have to wait until a CVR notes the flight crew 'hearing' a mobile phone tx on their headphones or similar, seconds before the incident.
What follows is my personal conclusions not fact. Not least because fact is very hard to come by in this area. Mainly because the biggest variable is the radiating device itself - how much power it outputs. Also mobile (cell) phones vary the amount of radiated power even during a single call.
Firstly aircraft. According to a pal who is in telecomms and programming and worked on systems development for Airbus 320 family, the greatest risk is NOT from a single cell phone but when you have a large group of them. On an a/c, if 20 pax switch on their phones as the machine taxis to the apron, the combined radio emissions are significantly greater. When a cell phone is turned on, it searches for a base station and uses it's maximum power to do so. If you are arriving in a foreign land, the phone may have to interrogate several base stations until it finds the one that will accept it, due to 'roaming' agreements between networks.
It is this combined effect that carries the maximum risk. But everyone recognises that most men will not listen to instructions! Hence a number of carriers saying, "Only whilst the doors are open." as a compromise.
The ramp and garages: The amount of fuel vapour on the ramp is thought to be lower than on garages as the hoses are all sealed. The moment you disconnect the hose from the a/c both are sealed. Whereas on a petrol forecout, the pump nozzle and the filler tube of the car are both open. BUT the fuel on the ramp is more volatile. Take your pick!
The observation about the spark risk from a car ignition system is valid and I believe that garages have the signs as a legal cover your @rse. Do not forget that, if I am on the forecourt and pay staion for five minutes, my phone may - or may not - transmit during that time. However, if I switch it off and switch it on, then it WILL transmit on both occasions! That is why it should be switched on/off only whilst in the car. However, if it is an open top car in the summer ... ?
Hospitals: In my opinion, this is also cover your @rse time. Once again, interferance CAN be demonstrated but could not be PROVED. If a medial device was affected by a phone, since the phone tranmission was transitory and unrecorded, no one could prove that it was the phone. Hence the ban.
If you want to 'hear' a mobile, place it near a switched on radio (home or car) and then power up the phone.
I have said in both this forum and the SLF on previous occasions, that PAX will not change until an a/c crash (or ramp fire) is PROVED to have been caused by a phone. Loss of life usually needs to take place, before humans learn. Once again, because the phone tx is transitory and unrecorded, we shall have to wait until a CVR notes the flight crew 'hearing' a mobile phone tx on their headphones or similar, seconds before the incident.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: sydney
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said. As if the general public wern't confused enough? Now on all city flyer qantas flights you can turn your phone on when ther seatbelt sign has been switched off. Why did they change the rules? Can't people just hang on that extra 2 huge minutes of there life? Now it makes the rest of us look like idiots when they say " well I was on a qantas flight the other day and was allowed to have my phone on!". Very silly decision making on qantas's behalf.....
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA and Mobile Phones
I once flew as a pax on a Glasgow-Heathrow BA Shuttle Service, last flight on a Tuesday night. Boeing 757. Only 12 passengers on board.
After take off, we were invited to move around the cabin and sit anywhere. I chose the exit row at L3 for the extra legroom.
Two crew jumpseats port and starboard are located there. However, and NOT in contravention with any regs with such a light load, one of the FA's occupied the jump seat whilst the other selected the passenger seat (window) on the opposite side of the a/c from me.
Not only did the FA not fasten his seat belt for either the take off or landing, but upon landing at LHR and even before we exited the runway, he switched on his mobile phone and made a call.
Bloody idiot saw me watching and tried to hide his phone, but night time flight, dark outside and the illuminated telephone screen reflected on the aircraft window for all to see.
OK, we work in the industry and we are not children and we all know that this was probably a very low risk part of the flight, but we cannot blast the pax for using their phones when we as so called professionals have the audacity to use a mobile phone on a near empty aircraft in full view of pax.
The BA CSD of course refused to give me the name and staff number of the crew member involved, when I complained to her upon disembarkation.
One rule for some and another rule for others, it would seem..........
After take off, we were invited to move around the cabin and sit anywhere. I chose the exit row at L3 for the extra legroom.
Two crew jumpseats port and starboard are located there. However, and NOT in contravention with any regs with such a light load, one of the FA's occupied the jump seat whilst the other selected the passenger seat (window) on the opposite side of the a/c from me.
Not only did the FA not fasten his seat belt for either the take off or landing, but upon landing at LHR and even before we exited the runway, he switched on his mobile phone and made a call.
Bloody idiot saw me watching and tried to hide his phone, but night time flight, dark outside and the illuminated telephone screen reflected on the aircraft window for all to see.
OK, we work in the industry and we are not children and we all know that this was probably a very low risk part of the flight, but we cannot blast the pax for using their phones when we as so called professionals have the audacity to use a mobile phone on a near empty aircraft in full view of pax.
The BA CSD of course refused to give me the name and staff number of the crew member involved, when I complained to her upon disembarkation.
One rule for some and another rule for others, it would seem..........
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the pointy bit.....
Got a call off my mate from the left hand seat of the ATR the other day. He was at FL200 as well! I guess if anyone knew whether it was safe at the time it was him though.
Shlong.
Shlong.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until it can be proven that a phone cant cause the fuel vapours to ignite then in no way should they be used inside a plane.....i think most people would be surprised how close that centre wing tank is to your feet, and how little insulation there is.....
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF Cityflyer Flights
Well the rules for mobile phones have changed... yet again.
The rule is now as cabin doors close, phones must be either switched off or put in flight mode, and mobile phones can be switched on once on the taxiway.
I don't know if this is just for cityflyer flights or all QF flights, but i've worked a 3 day cityflyer trip and that's what we've been told.
The rule is now as cabin doors close, phones must be either switched off or put in flight mode, and mobile phones can be switched on once on the taxiway.
I don't know if this is just for cityflyer flights or all QF flights, but i've worked a 3 day cityflyer trip and that's what we've been told.