mobile phones
 

Opinions or advice, either are fine. I was on an Air Canada flight last night out of YEG, it was a Dash 8 and full all but 2 seats, all the usual pre flight briefs were done and mobile phone use etc were covered. However this :mad: 1 seat forward and diagonal to me persisted to send and recieve emails right the way through take off and landing. Yes i did challenge him but by then we were airborne. I told the stewardess who said, "what can i do, i told them twice" and just left it. My blood was boiling at the ignorance of the guy who cared not a jot for anybody, i could clearly see his phone and it was fully on and not in a FS mode.......what do you or can you actually do when crap likethat happens :=

Walk up, take it off him. Break it.

Annoying it is, but you should try some of the Russian flights, they ignore everything when it comes to mobiles, seat belts or remaining seated. You do wonder at times.

Likewise in China. I don't care if some numpty jumps up the second the wheels hit the tarmac, I don't care if they open the overhead bin, a heavy case lands on their daft head & they are thrown forward at high velocity and smash into a bulkhead.

I do care if their nobber actions hurt me or anyone else.

I suggest an action group is formed (with meetings to raise awareness in airline lounges):

'Oi! We Paid for Our Tickets Too!'

Why should fair minded passengers suffer because numpties can't be ordered tio follow the rules....?

Or hit him with your iPad, oh ... that has to be stored too. :*

Hit him with your Steve Jobs biography (2.1 lbs, 0.95kg) that's OK to have out. :ok:

Or don't worry about it. Regulations on cell phone use are there because of the interference they cause with ground stations (cells).

Wireless Devices on Airplanes | FCC.gov

In theory he should be reported to the police for not following crew instructions. He is breaking the law, but so will be the guy hitting the G&Ts with the intention of driving later. :hmm:

If flight safety was involved I'd be more concerned, but there is no compelling evidence to suggest there is. The US FAA is re-re-re-reviewing it

And so the Hamster-Wheel revolves once more...

Please ensure that you contact the FAA immediately: They await your learned opinion.

For everyone else - Please ensure that this doesn't become yet another thread on "Why can't I use my iPhone/iPad/Kindle/Laptop/Bluetooth where and when I want to when I know that the evil airlines are preventing me from doing so for no valid reason at all?"

I'm quite surprised by the attitude of the Cabin Crew. Surely what she could do is threaten to have the police waiting for him on arrival for failure to obey her/the pilot's lawful orders?

I have no idea whether using a mobile in flight is actually dangerous. But people who have thought longer and harder about it than me consider it may be. That's quite enough for me. Even if the chance is absolutely remote, why should one d!ckhead decide he knows better?

IMHO it was the flight attendant's job to enforce this rule - I wouldn't be impressed if they simply didn't bother (in the absence of other extenuating circumstances, eg. drunk, aggressive passenger who might constitute a more immediate threat if told to turn the phone off, then it may be a question of balancing one risk against another).

If CC don't 'bother' about the turning off of a phone where is the line to be drawn about 'bothering'?

That's just the thing - the line seems to be steadily evaporating. Thanks for starting this thread Dry Wretched Thunder, it is timely. I've noticed more and more follow SLF using their mobiles, often quite openly, during taxi and takeoff, and sometimes in flight, and fewer and fewer CC picking them up on it. Sometimes it seems as if the CC are deliberately trying not to notice. I used to regularly challenge passengers and/or alert CC, but there are so many transgressors now, I no longer bother. I think we may have reached a point of no return, and in due course the rules will be amended to accommodate a fait accompli.

With the avdnet of G4 and G5 and what is called 'LTE' (Long Term Evolution), the potential for a problem is increasing. Especially as what are known as 'Out of Band' emissions for devices using the 'white spaces' are likely to be even more of a problem.

Let's not forget that the FAA is reviewing the policy on emitting devices. We now have, approved, use of some devices in cockpits and I understand someone today thinking there's a rule for them and a different rule for us. However let's see what they decide for us plebs in the back of the plane.

I even understand that Emirates is going to use Windows 8 enabled devices in the cockpit (even though W8 was only released into the wild a few weeks ago) - but I suppose they do know what they are doing.

Until then, the rule is turn it off until you are told otherwise, and that rule should be followed.

They need to be very careful. There are now mobile 'phone services in the band above 2.5GHz, and they are known to cause severe interference to certain types of S band air surveillance radar.

On an easyJet flight into Luton (don't ask!) I was in the window seat and there was a random between me and the rather important fat Indian business man on the aisle. You know the type, likes to be seen, make a point of asking the crew slightly annoying questions. "Why do I have to put my tray table up?"

Phone comes out on finals, I, thumping headache after a bad day at the office asked him politely to put it off. He immediately launched into why he thought it was perfectly safe but I pointed out I would simply take it off him, switch it off and hold onto it until the Police were summoned at the gate. I was in no hurry by this point... That seemed to work. I apologised later to the poor chap between us who looked benignly ahead the whole time.

Just turn it off for five minutes for the love of God.....

I wonder how many lives lie at the foot of the ludicrously irrational assumption, "It hasn't done us any harm yet so it must be safe"?

Low bulkheads on merchant ships
Insufficient lifeboats ditto
Hydrogen in Airships
Boxcutters on aeroplanes
DDT
Thalidomide
Launching Shuttles in freezing conditions
Living on volcanoes - dozens of times
Building nuc plants on the San Andreas fault
Or on a coast subject to Tsunami
Putting oxygen generators in the hold
Letting Iran get the Bomb

Need I go on?

I was delighted to see an obnoxious self-important Frenchman removed by the Bundesgrenzschutz Polizei from a Lufthansa flight at FRA. He was told twice by crew to stop using his 'phone after the doors were closed as we were taxiing to the runway. He refused.

His parting words as he was 'gently' removed from the aircraft were : "I will never fly wiz ze Lufthansa again."

The cabin director's response, to cheers, was : "That is korrect, Sir. You will be banned."

Tableview That is one of the MOST encouraging stories I have ever heard. makes me want to use Lufty all the time.

SOE :ok:

Hi, I had a related situation a few months ago.

I had suspicions the passenger beside me had his phone still switched on as we taxied down the run-way. He had appeared to be sleeping during the safety briefing, so I politely asked him had he remembered to turn his phone off. He snapped at me that he had. Mid-flight he took his phone out and started surfing. (I wasn't deliberately looking but the distinctive BBC news website came on and that is the truth, how he picked up a signal I do not know.)

I went down the aisle to the flight attendants who were serving refreshments and explained the situation. They said they would talk to the gentleman. As it happened, as they came by the 'ten minutes' to land bell sounded, so they asked him simply to turn off his device because we would be landing shortly.

Two minutes later he got out of his seat and went to speak to the flight attendants. He complained that he felt he had been singled out!!

I found this out after we landed when the flight attendant came to speak to me and told me what had happened.

Unfortunately, this isn't just an issue about following 'house safety rules', but it is also about basic courtesy and respect and unfortunately, there are a few folk around who don't have these simple qualities.

Usually if I see somebody whose phone I suspect is switched up I simply explain that I am a nervous flyer(the truth) and that I'm sure they don't want to make me even more nervous. Most folk are very polite and re-assure me that their phone is off, but there is always the exception...

My 'solution, is that where crew find somebody with their phone switched that they should confiscate the phone. The phone should be passed to ground staff on arrival and the passenger in question should be asked to follow the ground staff to the terminal, where details of the 'incident' are recorded on the customer's notes (in the event that there is a return flight pending and/or they are a frequent flyer). The passenger should then be given a written caution and told that if this situation arises again, they shall be banned from flying with the airline in question

Mobile phones on planes. The bane of my life! :{

But anyway, radeng raised something I also have been wondering about. What about the new G4 enabled devices? I'm the first to admit, I know nothing about the science behind it but from what I've seen and from the recent publicity there has been regarding the signals used, this has the potential to be a pretty serious issue. Let's face it, many of those that switch on their phones, declaring "Well nothing has ever happened in the past" know about as much as me. They are doing it because everyone else does. And because they've never crashed so "it must be safe". What happens when they switch on their new upgrade?

For radeng and all those that do understand how it all works, do these new signals have the potential to seriously affect the aircraft? And in what way? And if they have, how the heck do we stop the 'we know better' brigade from hiding their phones and ignoring the rules, particularly when even the FAA and CAA can't seem to agree on the risks during certain phases such as taxiing. And how do we do all that before the possible worst case scenario hits the headlines? Or is that what it is going to take? :(

Keep a tally of news reports on planes falling out of the sky due to mobile/cell phone use. Keep it next to the tally of those who drown because they went swimming within 30 minutes of eating. :=

I find that enforcement is very different when sitting in J or F compared to Economy.

@ Maddie

Just because the BBC news website appeared on this guys phone does not mean he was on line. With Flight Mode selected on, my phone will still show the web site front page, and I can still read the stories which are held in cache on my phone. It just won't update.

Bit of a dilemma.
 

Passengers must follow the instructions of the crew. There is no excuse for not doing so. But today people no longer will follow instructions if they don't see anything in it for them, particularly when they think its a stupid rule. "They use iPads in the cockpit, why can't I use my android here?"

On the other hand FAs are not policemen/women (or class monitors). I don't see their role as including the seizing of passenger's (expensive) property. If you want to cause a disruption this will do it. That individual may be a jerk, but s/he could also be a commercially important customer for that airline. (or a retired bum like me :ok: )

It is almost impossible to tell if a device is in airplane mode even at a short distance. Yes, there's a little icon but every device is different. I bet you can find an app that will toggle that little icon. On my iPad I can save web pages to a reading list intended to allow you to read it when off-line. It looks like I accessed the net, but I didn't.

I think the industry, and the regulators, need to face reality. These devices will be inadvertently, and intentionally, left on and people will attempt to use them in all phases of the flight. Starting from there they need to consider what needs to be done to ensure safety. I'm not going to suggest what that may be. However I will note that the current rule and procedures are not accomplishing the stated goal.

The problem is the proliferation of frequencies that can be used make the environment very difficult to predict. Especially with some of the things appearing which can have second harmonics in the radio altimeter band, and have fundamental signals in the surveillance radar band.

Probably the best answer would be to fit the aircraft with a multi band jammer for all mobile bands......

The situation gets more complex as the aircraft gets older. Cables flex, and the screening gets partially broken and so the immunity is reduced. So a 'good' aircraft can become a 'bad' one over the lifetime. You can get enough problems from the radios fitted to the aircraft, let alone extraneous ones.

Radeng,
What's causing the problem you have identified? Is it devices, unable to contact a cell, are increasing and increasing their power output which in turn causes interference with aircraft equipment?

Rather than jamming (i.e. adding more noise into the spectrum) wouldn't it be better to add pico-cells to the aircraft? Then these devices would have something to connect to at low output.

To be effective during all phases of flight these would need to be always on, which is not the practice today (for those airlines providing the service).

Where do the pico cells connect to? There are other complications too, such as aircraft speed. So you would need to put the pico cells in place for 700MHz (White space), 900 MHz (GSM) 1800 MHz (GSM), 2.3 - 2.4 GHz (G5 downloading), 2.6 - 2.7 (G4) and possibly something at 3GHz or so. Then you need make sure that whatever you relay to, the distances don't exceed the maxima that the systems can handle (GSM has a maximum of 40 to 50km becasue after that the timing runs out)

So now you need a ground station system....... plus a lot more weight in aircraft avionics. Of course, when you charge £1 a minute or whatever, it would pay for itself until consumers caught on - I gather that already, people are wondering about the cost to them of G4. I suspect that there will be some heartache when the bills come through - perhaps even for the corporate 'phone users.

Do you not get this....

We don't care about the technicalities - we don't want to have to hear telephone conversations when we are in forced, close proximity.

You would not believe how unimportant your phone conversations are to us.

Picocell is described here. Existing technology to connect any and all cell phone frequencies, via a satellite, to ground networks. It's like putting a cell tower in the airplane.

Load Toad, who's talking about conversations? You are the first to mention it.

In any case inflight use of cell phones is the reality now. Many non-US airlines have already deployed it. And you know what? Because they charge $2+ a minute, hardly anybody ever uses it. Much higher use of texting and surfing.

I remember when almost every airplane had a phone in the seat back. Airfone or something like that. Also expensive to use, so they rarely were. I did once when my SR flight was diverted from LHR to LGW, due to the T1 Burger King fire. Airlines pulled them out due lack of use.

I've turned back to stand twice after cabin crew gave a passenger several warnings (incl formal written warning) to stop using it. On one occasion I stopped on the taxiway, picked up the mic for a PA and stated quite clearly that 'we had stopped on the taxiway due to a passenger refusing to get of his mobile phone when asked several times by the cabin crew. Because this passenger seating in row x was still refusing we were about to return back to stand with a subsequent delay for us all.' As quick as lightning he backed down and switched it off within seconds and we left again. It showed a clear signal to all about who's in charge... (c/c) We got an applause from lots of pax...

That was in the UK. Now in the Middle East and you can just as well forget all rules...:ugh: It's a different mentality here.

Same-same, but different.

I was giving a SMS course in JFK a couple of years ago, attended by some fairly senior managers. One lady found it very, very hard to focus on the training and not on her sodding Blackberry. I politely asked her to put it away once, then twice. Third time I told her "last warning". Fourth time she was stabbing the screen with her index finger I went to the table she was sat, took it off her hands, removed the back cover and took the battery out, then handed the phone (sans battery) back. Told her she'd be getting the battery back, not at the end of this session (this was just after lunch), but at the end of the day.

She went ballistic, claiming the company (a company of 100K people it should be noted) would more or less cease to function if she was not permanently on her phone. Told her she could get the battery back, but then she'd have to excuse herself from the course. As the course was mandatory for managers, that wasn't really an option for her. So she went to the SVP and cried her heart out. That lasted around 30 seconds, then she was handed her pink slip and escorted off the premises.

I got an "attaboy" from the SVP; he'd been looking for an excuse to get rid of her obnoxious arse for a while.

Serves the b1tch right.

First, a couple people have replied to you with FAA regulations in mind. While close, the Transport Canada Canadian Aviation Regulations (CAR) are in use here in Canada. There are three main regulations pertaining to this situation that the Flight Attendant would have been well aware of:

and

Additionally, from CAR 705.40:

Now, I cannot speak directly to the Air Canada Company Operations Manual, however, not many Canadian airlines have gone through to identify which cell phones do not interfere with the aircraft functions. There are, of course, pace makers, hearing aids, et cetera, which do not interefere, and they state that in their briefing. At my airline, we blanket all cell phones just in case.

Do they do anything? I'll leave the scholarly research to others, but I know if I forget to turn my cell phone off, I can hear it trying to connect to the network through my headset - a distracting sound that has me looking through the cockpit to try and turn the damned thing off! I fly Dash 8 aircraft, similar to the one you would have been on. I also remember hearing of an Air New Zealand 767 that was given false glideslope information into Fiji or Rarotonga once, until they found a passenger with a cell phone turned on; they turned it off, and like magic, no more false glideslope.

So, to answer your question, what could this Flight Attendant have done?

Well, if he or she wanted, they could have notified the PIC through the "Interference with Crew Members" program that all CAR 705 airlines have had to adopt. A passenger failing to heed the instructions of a crew member twice would be a level two incident which, depending on Air Canada procedures, may require notification to the company (mine does). Now, all air operators are required to report incidents to Transport Canada on a bi-annual basis, and on the occurence of all level three and four incidents. It is possible, however, that Transport would take enforcement action on a level two incident just to prove a point. What is the enforcement for failing to heed crew member instructions with a portable electronic device, you may ask? Well, CAD$3,000 for using the device, and another CAD$3,000 for failing to listen to a crew member - plus some potential jail time if you've done this before (CAR 103, Schedule II). Not to mention, if you're still at the gate, they could throw you off the flight.

So, for the travelling public, yes - there is something your crew can do. For updating your Facebook status to say "Im on a plane!" you may be removed from the aircraft, obtain a $6,000 fine, or face some jail time! Not to mention, evil looks from other passengers! ;)

mobile phones
 

Thanks +TSRA very informative and reassuring indeed, truth is I have read all of the posts and its a real disappointment that this occurrence which clearly has potential is so common, in my case there was nothing unknown or misunderstood or possibilities of per loaded data, the guy was a prize ass that knew exactly what he was doing and didn't give a hoot, it's sad but clear also that there can be a contagious knock on effect too where people see somebody 'getting away with it' and think they can do it too, very disappointing indeed, thanks so much for the very informative a positive feedback folks

... and there are one or two of us that have forgotten about turning off their phones. I admit that this has happened to me a couple of times. Yes I should know better.

Can any airline guard against idiots like me? :{

Bottom line is if C/C asks the man to turn it off and he does not, 2nd step is for CC to advise the captain. It should be the captains responsibility to resolve the issue on the ground, in the worst case scenario return to the gate and eject the passenger. This is the only proper course of action. If anything happened as a result of the passenger operating a mobile phone (not at all ever likely), the Airline would be completely liable.

You would be a fool to take any action upon yourself other than persistent notification to the dizzy blond F/A who just wants to get home (or the hotel) as soon as possible. If you really wanted to be persistent you could threaten to report the C/C to the CAA and airline. If she had notified the captain and the flight continued, the airline and CAA would place the blame on the captain. If you really wanted to be persistent you could probably march down to your local CAA office and ask to complete a flight safety report or equivalent.

re ME Post
 

I agree, that the local view to enforcement of the aviation rules and regulations is at best tinted.

It does not matter just how serious the infringement, there is a local view that it does not really matter, this view is reflected on the road in the air or even in the shopping mall.

glf

One of the many reasons I refused to go to Egypt to do some work for Egyptair was that I was not willing to fly on them, having experienced the discipline of some of their management during meetings and presentations, including constant use of mobiles even when instructed to turn them off, I felt discipline and standards on board were likely to be the same or lower.

I recently had an incident on Cebu Pacific.

A loud brash American was told as leaving Butuan to turn off his phone. He waved the attendant away as his call was important. She returned to the front as we were on pushback. Once taxying along the runway she returned and asked him a second time. Again his reply was to wave her away as it was an important contract.

As the aircraft turned around on the runway she returned, took the phone from his hand, threw it to the floor (5 pieces of mobile) and told him to continue the call when we landed in Manila as the safety of the flight was more important than any call.

Result!

So the pico cell has to re-format the data so the delay through the satellite link doesn't screw up the GSM timing?

Makes me remember what the acronym ISDN really meant - I Smell Dollars Now!

But there's no reason if you spend enough money on the aircraft equipment, you can't fix the problem. You can then CHARGE - how much before the use dropped off too much would be interesting, but something between €1 to €1.5 a minute would probably fairly rapidly recoup costs. However, when you use a satellite, latency is a problem, which is why overseas telephone calls use fibre optic undersea cables. That's why you want a direct connection to a ground network.

When I was flying US domestic in the 90s, quite a few airlines (Northwest was definitely one) had handsets in the armrests. You could swipe your plastic through them and they charged $1/min - I assume they used a satellite link from the plane. I rarely saw them used, except for the occasional 30 sec "guess where I'm calling from".

You're unlikely to be able to conduct a mobile phone conversation in flight, because even if you could get a signal from the nearest cell (their aerials are angled to keep their reception focused on the ground, not at 30,000') you'd be travelling too quickly for a successful hand-off to the next cell as you moved out of range. I hate the idea of on-board picocells, as I spend quite enough time on trains listening to self-absorbed bozos broadcasting their business to the world.

But I don't have any safety concerns, since I'm sure that every flight with more than 100 people on board will have at least one (probably several) mobile that has been left on inadvertently, and ill effects are extremely rare (to say the least). None of which is an argument for disobeying the lawful instructions of the crew, of course.

The US domestic system in the '90s used ground stations, not satellites: the frequency was around 900 MHz, and used single sideband with a low level carrier for dealing with fading, frequency error and doppler. I can't remem ber too much about it, but they were using some integrated circuits from my employer, and I was the applications engineer helping them out with one or two problems.

Satellites have the problem of the delay...

We ask politely passengers to stop using their phones, iPads etc. They will comply. No discussions or negotiation.

PM

Thanks radeng. You've piqued my interest, I will have to find out more about this system. I wonder how many ground stations were needed to cover the continental US ...