FAA to permit electronic devices during all flight phases
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough, but the article wasn't about the possible introduction of Wi-Fi. Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of people who seem to spend every available moment on their phones and tablets (and this is a dyed-in-the-wool techie talking!).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a question that has always eluded me, the safety aspect of devices like e readers and music players in a flight safe mode not being allowed to stay on because of "safety issues" yet we just put the EFB to flight safe mode? Having said that I understand the point that if we make people turn them off its one less distraction, added that people with headphones in could also miss important safety announcements or CC instructions.
Must admit it is very annoying though when someone has their phone on and I can hear the interference over the radio. Even more embarrassing though when it's one of the FD, right after cursing out the person defying the blanket ban.
Must admit it is very annoying though when someone has their phone on and I can hear the interference over the radio. Even more embarrassing though when it's one of the FD, right after cursing out the person defying the blanket ban.
Everyone is so focused on possible effects of EM emissions that we seem to be forgetting what is quickly becoming the real elephant in the room when it comes to PEDs on board aircraft.
Camcorder battery causes fire aboard jet flight headed to St. Louis : Stltoday
The increasing demand for after-market batteries bought on line from questionable sources is a disaster waiting to happen (unless you fly cargo, where it's already happening with frightening frequency).
Camcorder battery causes fire aboard jet flight headed to St. Louis : Stltoday
The increasing demand for after-market batteries bought on line from questionable sources is a disaster waiting to happen (unless you fly cargo, where it's already happening with frightening frequency).
You make a very good point J.O. , I remember reading an incident report in work a year or 2 ago about a passenger 777 of a certain high profile middle east carrier having a fire in the hold shortly after take off in China, caused by a baggage handler dropping a suitcase with a laptop in it.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: gashbag
Age: 53
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A friend of mine likes to use his own phone to do a bluetooth search just before push back. Then makes a nice p.a. announcing the names of those who have "forgotten" to switch off
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Earth
Age: 50
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At issue was their insistence that the devices interfered with avionics. They lied. Repeatedly. Insistested on it. Provided false statistics and evidence.
Why am I not suprised that this moral transgression hasn't been noticed on a forum of airline pilots?
Why am I not suprised that this moral transgression hasn't been noticed on a forum of airline pilots?
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's never really been about the devices themselves. It's about getting the end user to look up and pay attention to the safety demo. To see what happens when people ignore the safety demo then go into YouTube and see the "Hudson" evacuation. Count how many life jackets were inflated before the idiot left the cabin for a start. Then count the idiots jumping off a perfectly good floating wing into the icy waters only to get a brainwave and clamber back on.
One minute taken to listen to the safety brief and look around for your nearest exit shouldn't be that hard.
One minute taken to listen to the safety brief and look around for your nearest exit shouldn't be that hard.
1. I've never heard a safety briefing say anything about when or when not to jump into the water
2. I'm glad that the safety rule, since it is more about passengers paying attention/flying objects/any other irrational reason usually cited also applies to books, newspapers, etc.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bohol, Philippines
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's never really been about the devices themselves. It's about getting the end user to look up and pay attention to the safety demo. To see what happens when people ignore the safety demo then go into YouTube and see the "Hudson" evacuation. Count how many life jackets were inflated before the idiot left the cabin for a start. Then count the idiots jumping off a perfectly good floating wing into the icy waters only to get a brainwave and clamber back on.
One minute taken to listen to the safety brief and look around for your nearest exit shouldn't be that hard.
One minute taken to listen to the safety brief and look around for your nearest exit shouldn't be that hard.
As far as I'm concerned, and something that has been omitted from this discussion, is the anti-social aspect of this matter, the way electronic devices affect others around the user in close quarters enviroment of an airliner. Can you imagine sitting next/behind/infront to someone who won't stop yakking on the telephone throughout the flight ???????? You'd want to rip out of his/her hand and ram it down his/her throat. Imagine more than one person around you doing that, then imagine them doing that during a night flight when you are trying to sleep ! Or the moron thats hogging the toilets because he's busy having a telephone converstion while on the john. Or someone who insists on listening to their own phone provided music aloud without earphones. No, these devises should remain banned if not for the safety aspect, then for this very important social aspect.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I'm concerned, and something that has been omitted from this discussion, is the anti-social aspect of this matter, the way electronic devices affect others around the user in close quarters enviroment of an airliner. Can you imagine sitting next/behind/infront to someone who won't stop yakking on the telephone throughout the flight ???????? You'd want to rip out of his/her hand and ram it down his/her throat. Imagine more than one person around you doing that, then imagine them doing that during a night flight when you are trying to sleep ! Or the moron thats hogging the toilets because he's busy having a telephone converstion while on the john. Or someone who insists on listening to their own phone provided music aloud without earphones. No, these devises should remain banned if not for the safety aspect, then for this very important social aspect.
And, it's possible to use electronic devices without being a jerk, so blanket "you can't use something that looks like a phone or makes voice calls" ban isn't fair to everyone else, especially since these days anything with internet connectivity can make a voice call.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hotels
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you imagine sitting next/behind/infront to someone who won't stop yakking on the telephone throughout the flight ???????? You'd want to rip out of his/her hand and ram it down his/her throat. Imagine more than one person around you doing that, then imagine them doing that during a night flight when you are trying to sleep !
The Boeing 707 had a flux-gate compass sensor positioned in the fuselage behind the trim of each of the First Class cabin luggage racks ( port and starboard ) - can't remember why now, but they did. ( I think because electric devices affected them, and although placing them far out on the wing was the optimum position, the flexing of the wing in turbulence was also a problem, so they were brought inboard, but away from the flight deck and the electronics bay. )
On the front lip of the rack was an obvious stripe, about 18" long, with the sign - " Place nothing here ".
One day the Captain was having compass problems and asked me to go back into the cabin and check that nothing was near the compass gadgets in the hatracks.
One First Class pax. had placed one of those large, reel to reel, Grundig tape recorders in the exact position that was prohibited, and it transpired that the permanent magnet in the large, built in, loudspeaker was the culprit.
I asked him what part of "Place nothing here" he didn't understand ? and took it away for the rest of the flight.
Life was easier on freighters, I didn't get paid to be nice to morons.
On the front lip of the rack was an obvious stripe, about 18" long, with the sign - " Place nothing here ".
One day the Captain was having compass problems and asked me to go back into the cabin and check that nothing was near the compass gadgets in the hatracks.
One First Class pax. had placed one of those large, reel to reel, Grundig tape recorders in the exact position that was prohibited, and it transpired that the permanent magnet in the large, built in, loudspeaker was the culprit.
I asked him what part of "Place nothing here" he didn't understand ? and took it away for the rest of the flight.
Life was easier on freighters, I didn't get paid to be nice to morons.
You very well may be the only Cypriot with an anti phone attitude then
How many times have you flown on CY and noticed pax using cellphones during taxi?
Incidents like that, telephones, etc, boil down to one thing. Discipline, and the total lack of it with the travelling public. Flying is a disciplined enviroment, or should be, for the sake of safety, the opposite being chaos, which we do not want in an aircraft. If people cannot discipline themselves to abstain from using the telephone, and obeying crew instructions in those few moments of landing and TO, then it is a very sad state of affairs. If CC have to be rude and abrubt to offending passengers then so be it, because thats what many of them deserve.
I turn around behind me to see a group of about four people ..........., standing in the aisle chatting ,
Can't blame cellphones for stupidity - same syndrome that has most standing toes to the baggage belt ........ !!!
Last edited by ExSp33db1rd; 30th Sep 2013 at 03:17.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it a little disappointing that someone would post incorrect information to support rule breaking.
For what it's worth, I used to routinely see LOC oscillations on an middle-generation of a very common medium twin-jet, as well as hear the "digga-dig" on the radios, which still occurs on the newer generation. I also had a few FMC failures and one auto-pilot malfunction (continued rolling on the first turn and was disconnected at 45deg AOB), all with an accompanying "digga-dig" on the radio. Might be coincidence, but I find that unlikely.
Newer aircraft are certainly shielded, and I haven't observed any malfunctions on them, just the comms interference, but there are still plenty of the older aircraft around, even in Western legacy airlines, and you can't expect pax to differentiate when their devices may or may not cause a problem.
For what it's worth, I used to routinely see LOC oscillations on an middle-generation of a very common medium twin-jet, as well as hear the "digga-dig" on the radios, which still occurs on the newer generation. I also had a few FMC failures and one auto-pilot malfunction (continued rolling on the first turn and was disconnected at 45deg AOB), all with an accompanying "digga-dig" on the radio. Might be coincidence, but I find that unlikely.
Newer aircraft are certainly shielded, and I haven't observed any malfunctions on them, just the comms interference, but there are still plenty of the older aircraft around, even in Western legacy airlines, and you can't expect pax to differentiate when their devices may or may not cause a problem.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, most of the consumer Li-Ion ignition problems have been caused by a combination of after-market batteries (although not always), and mismatched mains chargers. Smaller devices such as e-readers, tablets and smartphones can be charged from USB sockets, which draw a much lower voltage (+5v) and do not require stepdown transformers as with a mains charger.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it a little disappointing that someone would post incorrect information to support rule breaking.
For what it's worth, I used to routinely see LOC oscillations on an middle-generation of a very common medium twin-jet, as well as hear the "digga-dig" on the radios, which still occurs on the newer generation. I also had a few FMC failures and one auto-pilot malfunction (continued rolling on the first turn and was disconnected at 45deg AOB), all with an accompanying "digga-dig" on the radio. Might be coincidence, but I find that unlikely.
Newer aircraft are certainly shielded, and I haven't observed any malfunctions on them, just the comms interference, but there are still plenty of the older aircraft around, even in Western legacy airlines, and you can't expect pax to differentiate when their devices may or may not cause a problem.
For what it's worth, I used to routinely see LOC oscillations on an middle-generation of a very common medium twin-jet, as well as hear the "digga-dig" on the radios, which still occurs on the newer generation. I also had a few FMC failures and one auto-pilot malfunction (continued rolling on the first turn and was disconnected at 45deg AOB), all with an accompanying "digga-dig" on the radio. Might be coincidence, but I find that unlikely.
Newer aircraft are certainly shielded, and I haven't observed any malfunctions on them, just the comms interference, but there are still plenty of the older aircraft around, even in Western legacy airlines, and you can't expect pax to differentiate when their devices may or may not cause a problem.
Just as with the fatigue/hours issues, one of the problems is that the regulators have is no evidence of any problems. Without that evidence what reason have they to create regulations? Currently, the only claimed reason appears to be interference on some older Honeywell displays when run in a test harness - not in the real aircraft.
If problems are such a regular occurrence _and_ they were reported each time then the regulators have a lot more information to use when creating or justifying regulations.