Mobile Phone rules??
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: In the land of blue grass
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw a passenger recently step out of a private turbine, cellphone engaged, brain disengaged and walk across the path of an taxying Brazilia. Don't think he realized what he had done until his crewmember steered him to safety!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: This week Reading, next week Barcelona ... and repeat
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hug - would have been a problem with the old networks, but not with the new networks....
Having said that (places engineer's head on) I'm talking 'in theory' - I would like to see it tried in practice, although preferably when I don't have an important call to make!!
I'm not totally sure of my facts here, even though I'm working for a mobile company right now (switching engineer), but I do know a man who will be able to enlighten me.....
Will post facts/apologies/told you so's after checking with him.....
Having said that (places engineer's head on) I'm talking 'in theory' - I would like to see it tried in practice, although preferably when I don't have an important call to make!!
I'm not totally sure of my facts here, even though I'm working for a mobile company right now (switching engineer), but I do know a man who will be able to enlighten me.....
Will post facts/apologies/told you so's after checking with him.....
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main telephone carrier in Oz does not allow the use of mobile phones in environments like call centres, ie where people are using headsets as they are blamed with causing high pitched tones in the headsets. This has lead to a number of people "losing eardrums" which of course leaves them deaf in one ear.
I stay well away from the things when wearing a headset especially one which covers both ears as when flying.
I stay well away from the things when wearing a headset especially one which covers both ears as when flying.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Dubai
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all, ATC here,
Often working arrivals, we get that TUCK TUCK TUCK TUCK (same as a cell phone next to a car radio) sound on the frequency when some pilots are transmitting, (I think) it is therefore safe to assume that a passenger on that aircraft is using a cell phone...
Do you want ATC to give you a head's up ? can you hear it yourselves ?
SID
Often working arrivals, we get that TUCK TUCK TUCK TUCK (same as a cell phone next to a car radio) sound on the frequency when some pilots are transmitting, (I think) it is therefore safe to assume that a passenger on that aircraft is using a cell phone...
Do you want ATC to give you a head's up ? can you hear it yourselves ?
SID
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We can hear it ourselves. It doesn't mean someone is actually using it - just that someone has left one switched on.
Cue for a PA announcement - "Ladies and Gentlemen, our instruments are telling us blah blah blah..." and cue also for all the crew to doublecheck their phones - often the culprits!
Thanks for the offer!
Cue for a PA announcement - "Ladies and Gentlemen, our instruments are telling us blah blah blah..." and cue also for all the crew to doublecheck their phones - often the culprits!
Thanks for the offer!
foxtrot xray
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US, the FCC prohibits the use of cellphones in AC because this is a terrestrial based system which depends very heavily on frequency re-use. This requires that all communications are over a short distance...a few miles, typically (controlled by low power and low antennas with short line-of-sight distances). If used in an AC a cellphone has line-of-sight to many cells on the same frequency/channel and can really screw-up the cellsystem. So in addition to the obvious airborne interference issues ther are other regulatory reasons fro prohibiting such use.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a similar topic but slightly off the subject, Airbus has recently performed a detailed study on the effects of using mobiles phones while in flight. The brief was to invetstige effects of mobile phones on a new very large aircraft project but installing receivers in the overhead racks and using a satellite link to connect the call (albeit at VERY expensive service, and only likely to be available to business class and above).
Studies were successful but were rumoured to lead to significant weight increases from the additional shielding required and transmitters.
So, theres hope yet for all you compulsive texters out there
Studies were successful but were rumoured to lead to significant weight increases from the additional shielding required and transmitters.
So, theres hope yet for all you compulsive texters out there
Moderator
On another tack ... I can recall paxing some years ago ... the suit next to whom I was seated and I engaged in amiable banter during which I make the fatuous observation that he, no doubt, was looking forward to the day when in-flight calls were a reality.
He turned to me ashen-faced and said words to the effect that the aeroplane was the only place he could get away from rotten telephone calls .....
Perhaps not everyone wants to see the technology offered .... ?
He turned to me ashen-faced and said words to the effect that the aeroplane was the only place he could get away from rotten telephone calls .....
Perhaps not everyone wants to see the technology offered .... ?
Last edited by john_tullamarine; 13th Aug 2002 at 07:10.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Over the hedge... just!
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not just interference to comms and nav systems, the dreaded GSM is a great generator of “Spiney Normans”, a technical term for electrical spikes, which are the kiss of death to any digital system. I’m told that one worry is the false triggering automatic systems such as fire extinguishers etc.
Regarding the interference with the network. I’d be inclined to agree with skeet surfer, most of the cell sites have down tilt and there is little coverage when airborne (I’ve tried it a few times at 1500 ft in a Cub (not known for much in the way of RF shielding) with no service. But I may have a cr@p phone on a cr@p network.
A few years ago there were tales of some guy who got a huge bill because his phone kept a zillion cells busy when he used his mobile when airborne. Not true, the phone only has one transmitter, and will only talk to one cell at a time. It is true that the frequencies are repeated, but there is a method of frequency hopping to try and even out the good, bad and ugly traffic channels.
Even if this tale was from the days of Analogue ETACS had a way of dealing with calls on the same Control Channel frequency.
Anyway the phone should be treated like fags (sorry cigarettes for our US friends). It is possibly hazardous to stand next to someone using one, especially in a metal tube with reasonable RF screening as the mobile will turn up the wick and transmit at max power rather than the usual minimum, when in a good service are.
The jury is still out on the effect of 900/1800MHz of RF in the bonce, but who knows.
The above is only my opinion based on some experience but I'd be pleased to hear any other experiences or theories.
Regards to all
CC
Regarding the interference with the network. I’d be inclined to agree with skeet surfer, most of the cell sites have down tilt and there is little coverage when airborne (I’ve tried it a few times at 1500 ft in a Cub (not known for much in the way of RF shielding) with no service. But I may have a cr@p phone on a cr@p network.
A few years ago there were tales of some guy who got a huge bill because his phone kept a zillion cells busy when he used his mobile when airborne. Not true, the phone only has one transmitter, and will only talk to one cell at a time. It is true that the frequencies are repeated, but there is a method of frequency hopping to try and even out the good, bad and ugly traffic channels.
Even if this tale was from the days of Analogue ETACS had a way of dealing with calls on the same Control Channel frequency.
Anyway the phone should be treated like fags (sorry cigarettes for our US friends). It is possibly hazardous to stand next to someone using one, especially in a metal tube with reasonable RF screening as the mobile will turn up the wick and transmit at max power rather than the usual minimum, when in a good service are.
The jury is still out on the effect of 900/1800MHz of RF in the bonce, but who knows.
The above is only my opinion based on some experience but I'd be pleased to hear any other experiences or theories.
Regards to all
CC
Last edited by Crossedcontrols; 19th Aug 2002 at 10:38.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what can happen if you do!
From the BBC(20/8):
"A passenger who repeatedly refused to switch off his mobile after requests from cabin crew who feared it could interfere with flight frequencies, has been warned he faces jail. Businessman Faiz Chopdat, 23, from Blackburn, has been convicted of recklessly endangering the safety of an aircraft.
At Manchester Crown Court on Monday he was told he faced up to two years in jail for the offence which took place last September. Chopdat, of Rominey Walk, had denied the charge.
The jury was told Chopdat had been seen pressing buttons on the phone on board the Boeing 747 jet flying from Luxor in Egypt to Manchester, on 10 September.
Earlier, passengers had been told to switch off their mobile for the duration of the flight.
Prosecutor Steven Johnson told how, about an hour from Manchester, a passenger and then a flight attendant noticed Chopdat's phone was on and the screen illuminated.
A female member of the cabin crew asked him to turn it off but 15 minutes later it was noticed it was on again.
Chopdat was approached again to switch off the phone, the court heard.
"He waved the phone aggressively and said 'It's off, it's off, get out of my face'," said Mr Johnson.
"He was warned on at least two occasions.
"One passenger thought the phone was on because he heard a beep.
"When he asked the defendant to switch it off Chopdat shouted 'Shut up or you'll get a slap'," Mr Johnson told the court.
Staff on the Air 2000 flight were so concerned they radioed ahead and Chopdat was arrested on touch-down at Manchester.
Judge Timothy Mort told him: "'There is a distinct possibility I will have to pass a custodial sentence - as much as anything as a deterrent element."
Sentencing was adjourned until September so the judge can study reports on the dangers of using mobile phones on aircraft."
"A passenger who repeatedly refused to switch off his mobile after requests from cabin crew who feared it could interfere with flight frequencies, has been warned he faces jail. Businessman Faiz Chopdat, 23, from Blackburn, has been convicted of recklessly endangering the safety of an aircraft.
At Manchester Crown Court on Monday he was told he faced up to two years in jail for the offence which took place last September. Chopdat, of Rominey Walk, had denied the charge.
The jury was told Chopdat had been seen pressing buttons on the phone on board the Boeing 747 jet flying from Luxor in Egypt to Manchester, on 10 September.
Earlier, passengers had been told to switch off their mobile for the duration of the flight.
Prosecutor Steven Johnson told how, about an hour from Manchester, a passenger and then a flight attendant noticed Chopdat's phone was on and the screen illuminated.
A female member of the cabin crew asked him to turn it off but 15 minutes later it was noticed it was on again.
Chopdat was approached again to switch off the phone, the court heard.
"He waved the phone aggressively and said 'It's off, it's off, get out of my face'," said Mr Johnson.
"He was warned on at least two occasions.
"One passenger thought the phone was on because he heard a beep.
"When he asked the defendant to switch it off Chopdat shouted 'Shut up or you'll get a slap'," Mr Johnson told the court.
Staff on the Air 2000 flight were so concerned they radioed ahead and Chopdat was arrested on touch-down at Manchester.
Judge Timothy Mort told him: "'There is a distinct possibility I will have to pass a custodial sentence - as much as anything as a deterrent element."
Sentencing was adjourned until September so the judge can study reports on the dangers of using mobile phones on aircraft."
Moderator
My knowledge of matters electronic is less than miniscule .. on a good day ....
However, in Australia, the high flying mobile seems to work very well .... I have had a number of calls over the years from corporate jets travelling hither and thither .....
However, in Australia, the high flying mobile seems to work very well .... I have had a number of calls over the years from corporate jets travelling hither and thither .....
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers Octas 8 and others - I did neglect to mention I was referring to VFR flights.
As Octas 8 and possibly others in NZ would prob. agree mobile phones are often the only way to communicate with each other while travelling in convoy through the southern alps.
Good to see I havnt been doing anything wrong all this time (VFR)
As Octas 8 and possibly others in NZ would prob. agree mobile phones are often the only way to communicate with each other while travelling in convoy through the southern alps.
Good to see I havnt been doing anything wrong all this time (VFR)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Who can say?
Posts: 1,700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiwi (and others) you need to note that it is not simply a question of airlines' rules here.
In the UK (and most of Europe as far as I'm aware) and the USA, and probably elsewhere, it is actually illegal to have a mobile phone switched on whilst airborne.
In the UK (and most of Europe as far as I'm aware) and the USA, and probably elsewhere, it is actually illegal to have a mobile phone switched on whilst airborne.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Over the hedge... just!
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To reply to Liquid Lunch's comment about the phone hunting for another Control Channel, This is perfectly correct, but the phone does not transmit during this time, only when it finds a channel it is happy with will it transmit a burst of info, effectively loggin on.
Regarding the calls made in the past. These were probably on the analogue network AMPS in OZ, ETACS in Europe. You got greater distances for similar power with analogue. Digital (GSM etc) has had to come up with lots of clever DSP tricks to get even close. Also you could get 3 Watt phone for some analogue systems.
CC
Regarding the calls made in the past. These were probably on the analogue network AMPS in OZ, ETACS in Europe. You got greater distances for similar power with analogue. Digital (GSM etc) has had to come up with lots of clever DSP tricks to get even close. Also you could get 3 Watt phone for some analogue systems.
CC
Last edited by Crossedcontrols; 25th Aug 2002 at 17:00.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the speeds > 100kt it is worthwhile mentioning that several trainsets (uk) routinely travel faster than this ....
GNER is one that springs to mind and the network copes quite happily - and if you think about that it could be several hundred people all jumping cell....
GNER is one that springs to mind and the network copes quite happily - and if you think about that it could be several hundred people all jumping cell....
