Any PROOF of Mobile Phone "interference"?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: "THAT" place??!!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any PROOF of Mobile Phone "interference"?
Originally Posted by Flip Flop Flyer
...a fire warning triggered by a mobile phone left on in the aft hold....
Think about it. How many countless flights operate - daily - where the passengers stuff their transmitting phones innocently into the overheads, and on short finals there is an orchestra of beeps, bleeps, dingles and dongles as they all acquire their signals and receive incoming text messages, calls, etc? YOU'VE heard them! And this happens DAILY, ALL OVER the world. Yet nothing has fallen out of the sky.
The most annoyances I have ever encountered with mobiles is when someone, ATC, crew, whoever, leaves their phones near the hand-mics and when an incoming signal just happens to coincide with them transmitting, we all hear an annoying "buza-dah-dah-dahzzz" (OK you make the sound look doable in text...). Oh, and same thing goes when wearing headsets when someone beside you gets a call. That also makes faint buzza-dah"...etc etc.
But aircraft systems? Hardly.
Any "real life" - FIRST HAND ACCOUNT - stories out there?? Discount the ones from "friends of co-workers aunts that watched a special on the Beeb a few years back who then wrote a letter-to-the-editor on Roger Bacon's page in Flight Int'l" (bless their souls, just the same). ...and skip the "famous" 747 "depressurizing" story from a few years back, unless that was PROVEN caused by a mobile. Other stories, if they are first-hand accounts, would be entertained, though!
By the way...the background on banning mobile phones goes back to the early days when analogue phones would automatically boost their signals when the towers reception was fading. Being airborne, these phones locked on to many cell-towers at the same time, and caused headaches (signal loss / outages) for users...and the mobile phone companies got rather annoyed at this, so they asked the FCC in the US (where these issues were in the majority, since the cellular-phone system was primarily US-based back then). The FCC approached the FAA, and the FAA placed a blanket "thall shalt not useth thy mobile phone whilst in thy air!"...and the "rule" caught on world-wide.
Some carriers tell you to shut your phones off when boarding right through to engine shut-down on the other end. Others allow the use on the ground - even encourage the use after landing - whilst taxiing - in the case of one US carrier. It's not a consistent situation, and it's brought on by out-of-date "rules".
ALSO - IF CELLULAR PHONES WERE UNSAFE, WHY IS THERE A PUSH TO EQUIP AIRCRAFT WITH CELL-TRANSMITTERS TO ALLOW PASSENGERS TO USE THEIR EXACT SAME "UNSAFE" PHONES AT ALTITUDE?! (yes, I know with a transmitter / receiver on-board, the phone output is very low...but still.)
So, you know my views. Is there any first-hand accounts of mobile-phones GENUINELY causing anomalies, anyone?
...And PLEASE skip the debate of phone usage on aircraft as being a no-no from the view of everyone having to put up with the "YADA YADA YADA" factor. Lets keep this strictly on the debate regarding phone/system interference. Thanks.
Interference?? ...a load of bunk, methinks.
Cheers,
Ray Darr
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post, Ray...
Although not flying for decades, I have yet to experience or hear/read about an incident caused by mobile phones. All nonsens, me thinks...
BTW: I like that "buza-dah-dah-dahzzz"... pretty close!
Although not flying for decades, I have yet to experience or hear/read about an incident caused by mobile phones. All nonsens, me thinks...
BTW: I like that "buza-dah-dah-dahzzz"... pretty close!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of years ago, I witnessed one of our MX guys use his ordinary Nextel phone to repeatedly trigger a BSCU fault from the nosewheel area of an A320. It was discovered by accident during troubleshooting an unrelated system fault and was believed to be the result of the mobiles EMF entering VIA a position sensor connection where poor lead dress had existed.
Try this at home:
Have your FO take a walk outside (preferably while the AC is on the ground) and use his/her mobile below the port-side wingtip (flux valve) while watching the Compass SYN light on a 737 Classic - works every time with the Honeywell-gate equipped AC.
I have also seen an Omega Nav CDU go wacky from an o-l-d Motorola brick phone. (ok, I'm dating myself).
Aside from the correctable BSCU system defect, all my examples are from pre-1990s aircraft. Newer systems are supposed to have more robust spurious signal rejection. None of the above resulted from passenger cabin phone use.
I think the most dangerous issue with mobile use while aboard must surely be the cacophony of passenger’s blah-blah-blah during a flight.
Try this at home:
Have your FO take a walk outside (preferably while the AC is on the ground) and use his/her mobile below the port-side wingtip (flux valve) while watching the Compass SYN light on a 737 Classic - works every time with the Honeywell-gate equipped AC.
I have also seen an Omega Nav CDU go wacky from an o-l-d Motorola brick phone. (ok, I'm dating myself).
Aside from the correctable BSCU system defect, all my examples are from pre-1990s aircraft. Newer systems are supposed to have more robust spurious signal rejection. None of the above resulted from passenger cabin phone use.
I think the most dangerous issue with mobile use while aboard must surely be the cacophony of passenger’s blah-blah-blah during a flight.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did not early service days in the dash8/Q400, especially with SAS, not have multiple false baggage fire warnings that were blamed on/traced to cellphone interference from phones in packed baggage?
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few years back we had an enconter that might have been caused by a mobilephone. While holding at pretty low altitude (3000GND or something) we noticed the vibration indication on one engine moving up to 5 without any actual vibration noticed from anyone of the crew. Captain made an announcement about checking for mobiles, one was found from a pax and switched off, after that the indication returned to normal (a tad below 1). All that on a 733. Never had that after or before although i am sure many more mobilephones had been on on other flights (including some on the flightdeck).
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Beijing
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You may (or may not) have seen this report / study by the UK CAA titled:
Interference Levels In Aircraft at Radio Frequencies used by Portable Telephones, found here:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/389/srg_ac...-01-030303.pdf
A 1 page summary of that study (amongst other things) is found here:
http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2003/sep/33.pdf
The short answer is, yes, mobile phone emissions cause intereference / anomalies.
Interference Levels In Aircraft at Radio Frequencies used by Portable Telephones, found here:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/389/srg_ac...-01-030303.pdf
A 1 page summary of that study (amongst other things) is found here:
http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2003/sep/33.pdf
The short answer is, yes, mobile phone emissions cause intereference / anomalies.
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RD, you are convincing yourself that mobile phones are not a problem because nobody can prove to you that they can cause a problem. You are aproaching this the wrong way. Until you can prove mobile phones are NOT a problem, you should accept that the possibility is there. Until it can be shown that a mobile phone can be anywhere in a cabin and not cause a problem, we should not be pushing to relax the rules. I do not want to be the statistic that may show they can be a problem while we try and sort this problem out!
I also do not want to be subjected to a cacophany of telephone conversations on aeroplanes that go on all through the night when people can't sleep, and stop those around them. this whole thing could be a social disaster, and I'm afraid unless aeroplanes can fit phone booths, I certainly don't want to be an unwilling listener to multiple "I'M ON THE PLANE!......somewhere over Sudan!......landing in about 5 hours......WHAT? SHE DIDN'T!......" Spare us please.
I also do not want to be subjected to a cacophany of telephone conversations on aeroplanes that go on all through the night when people can't sleep, and stop those around them. this whole thing could be a social disaster, and I'm afraid unless aeroplanes can fit phone booths, I certainly don't want to be an unwilling listener to multiple "I'M ON THE PLANE!......somewhere over Sudan!......landing in about 5 hours......WHAT? SHE DIDN'T!......" Spare us please.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Motorola 1000 old type GSM, 8 Watt power. A few years ago: Rhein lost our Transponder signal when we passed thru FL 280 in the desend. We had the phone shortly on and then immidiatly off again. It caused a MD11 climbing as well. So trust it, a mobile has an affect. If we would know exactly what effect then the mobile phone company´s would love to eliminate that. Can you immagine how many roaming charges they could make in the air? Keep it off and there is a good reason for it. Accept the fact and don´t debate.
Fly safe and land happy
NG
Fly safe and land happy
NG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: "THAT" place??!!
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope this is informative for everyone. It is for me.
If you can cite specific documented reports (like some of you already have) it would be great for those in Flight Safety, etc, to then use those reports to change or re-enforece procedures, etc.
Keep them coming, guys. It's appreciated.
~ Ray Darr
If you can cite specific documented reports (like some of you already have) it would be great for those in Flight Safety, etc, to then use those reports to change or re-enforece procedures, etc.
Keep them coming, guys. It's appreciated.
~ Ray Darr
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: in the western part of the United State of Europe
Age: 47
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recently "we" had the autopilots disconnecting multiple times and all other flight director related "funny things" during flight in a 737 NG.
Announcement made; peeps in the cabin checked their phones; one had his "popular scandinavian brand" phone in Flight Mode.
Thing switched off; everything back to normal.
Currently under investigation.
Its better to be safe than sorry.
And anyway; if you leave on your mobile in flight you can disrupt the networks since you would connect to multiple cells.
Just put the bloody things on and give yourself some time off.
Announcement made; peeps in the cabin checked their phones; one had his "popular scandinavian brand" phone in Flight Mode.
Thing switched off; everything back to normal.
Currently under investigation.
Its better to be safe than sorry.
And anyway; if you leave on your mobile in flight you can disrupt the networks since you would connect to multiple cells.
Just put the bloody things on and give yourself some time off.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Near LOACH intersection
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so, if they do affect the planes instruments, why do some carriers say that phones should be switched off at different times...some say when doors are closed, others when engines are running, others when in the terminal...
not very consistant.
not very consistant.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: in the western part of the United State of Europe
Age: 47
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...because they give in to what the customer demands.
They want to be nice and let you do your important stff as long as possible, without risking an immediate danger.
They want to be nice and let you do your important stff as long as possible, without risking an immediate danger.
Report in UK GASIL 04/2003.
A 'recently manufactured' aircraft fitted with a KAP 140 autopilot was collected from maintenance, and when the pilot dialled in a left turn, he found the bank angle and rate of turn were much less than expected; he then tried a right turn, and found the aircraft rolled rapidly to the right, well past the usual angle of bank.
A mobile phone in the baggage hold was found to be switched on, and when it was switched off, the A/P response became normal.
Not conclusive, but it's not the sort of thing you want to discover if departing in IMC and engaging A/P soon after takeoff.
A 'recently manufactured' aircraft fitted with a KAP 140 autopilot was collected from maintenance, and when the pilot dialled in a left turn, he found the bank angle and rate of turn were much less than expected; he then tried a right turn, and found the aircraft rolled rapidly to the right, well past the usual angle of bank.
A mobile phone in the baggage hold was found to be switched on, and when it was switched off, the A/P response became normal.
Not conclusive, but it's not the sort of thing you want to discover if departing in IMC and engaging A/P soon after takeoff.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Office
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a look at this link and download the complete report from here:
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...200402797.aspx
While this document is not about interference from mobile phones, it mentions cases of Trimble GPS and mobile phone interference.
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...200402797.aspx
While this document is not about interference from mobile phones, it mentions cases of Trimble GPS and mobile phone interference.