Mobile phone signal interference... all lies??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobile phone signal interference... all lies??
I read here some time ago, from a number of posters, that the concerns about mobile phones being used in-flight were all justified - and that they could interfere with flight controls. However, I was subsequently told, by the pilot on a private jet (737), that was rubbish and we were allowed to use our mobile phones until they cut out. He suggested the ban related merely to agreements between airlines and mobile operators/carriers and regulatory bodies and that safety was just the most compelling excuse.
Now airlines are planning to allow in-flight mobile phone use it seems to further contradict claims that mobiles can interfere with important flight controls.
What are the real issues around this? I'd be very interested to hear from pilots and understand what controls will be in place.
Also, isn't there a risk that antisocial mobile use is going to further raise the tensions on-board and increase risk of passengers disagreements?
Please post your replies or feel free to email [email protected].
Best regards and keep up the good work!
Now airlines are planning to allow in-flight mobile phone use it seems to further contradict claims that mobiles can interfere with important flight controls.
What are the real issues around this? I'd be very interested to hear from pilots and understand what controls will be in place.
Also, isn't there a risk that antisocial mobile use is going to further raise the tensions on-board and increase risk of passengers disagreements?
Please post your replies or feel free to email [email protected].
Best regards and keep up the good work!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turn your mobile phOne on and stick it near to your PC. Then listen to the speakers as the phone signal inbound/oubound makes seriously annoying noises as it interferes with bits on your PC.
When phones are used on aircraft, quite often - admittedly not always - that same dreaded noise comes through the radio.
Now my aircraft is not a 737 and has a lot of computers on it. So forgive me if I totally support the non-use of something that interferes with computers.
It's a phone.......learn to live without it for a short while now and then.
When phones are used on aircraft, quite often - admittedly not always - that same dreaded noise comes through the radio.
Now my aircraft is not a 737 and has a lot of computers on it. So forgive me if I totally support the non-use of something that interferes with computers.
It's a phone.......learn to live without it for a short while now and then.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think of the worst scenario.
550 people (or whatever no of pax it carries) on board the A380 using mobiles at the same time.
Forget for the moment the interference to equipment, think about the radiation bouncing around it that tin can.
Turn the thing off and get a life.
The last thing I want to hear sitting on an a/c is someone beside me on a phone.
550 people (or whatever no of pax it carries) on board the A380 using mobiles at the same time.
Forget for the moment the interference to equipment, think about the radiation bouncing around it that tin can.
Turn the thing off and get a life.
The last thing I want to hear sitting on an a/c is someone beside me on a phone.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: still in bed
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mobile phone interference
AIrbuss clearly wrote to pilots that there is not a proved relation on microwawes interferece on computers flyght control wahtsoever (done by mobile phones), however the use is cautelatively requested to be restricted. Personally I will be very bother (more than that computers) if someone use a cell phone on board.
Is not a restaurant, is not a club, is not a bar IS A PLANE! Enjoy the flight!
Is not a restaurant, is not a club, is not a bar IS A PLANE! Enjoy the flight!
Rotate on this!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 64
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by worldwidewolly
Turn the thing off and get a life.
There is more journo bashing about misinformation on this site than you can poke a stick at...here is someone asking a civil question and providing you with a chance to say your piece...be nice.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scotland
Age: 38
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a look at this thread, some very good references and articles:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ad.main/93818/
http://www.airliners.net/discussions...ad.main/93818/
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Has the theory about EMP from a phone searching for a network at max power possibly contributing to fuel-tank sparking (TW800, TG 737 on the ground at Bangkok) been fully debunked?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLFGuy - I may be wrong but I don't think the "Get a life" quote was aimed at the poster. I read it as being aimed at mobile phone users in general when they refuse to be separated from it for more than a minute.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no offence taken...
I think you're absolutely right about an increase in air rage... there was an incident on a flight I was on last week (SFO to LHR). 11 hours drinking, little sleep, cramped conditions... and then throw somebody talking loudly on their mobile phone into the equation and it's a recipe for trouble.
On the technical side, is the distinctive sound of the EM interference an annoyance or could it pose a risk?
On the technical side, is the distinctive sound of the EM interference an annoyance or could it pose a risk?
Considerably Bemused Wannabe
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get this, I once had my phone next to my hi-fi controller. The hi-fi was off, somebody rang me, and my hi-fi turned on. On another occasion it affected my PS2 whilst it was close to the controller and somebody sent me a text.
So in a nutshell, I think phones should be switched off. Or at least, in flight mode which is an offering on some of the later phones.
So in a nutshell, I think phones should be switched off. Or at least, in flight mode which is an offering on some of the later phones.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See here for more info.
http://www.house.gov/transportation/...20-00memo.html
Essentially nothing has been proven. However, aircraft are built to exacting standards, particulalry with regard to electrical interference. This considerably increases the cost of building - all for the safety of the people on board. The mobile 'phones are not built to anywhere near the same standard, and potentially reduce safety, at no cost at all!
I believe it is also an offence to operate an airborne radio transmitter without a licence.
Finally, an airborne mobile phone can reach several transmitters (line of sight transmission). Apparently, this is not a good thing for the 'phone providers.
GB
http://www.house.gov/transportation/...20-00memo.html
Essentially nothing has been proven. However, aircraft are built to exacting standards, particulalry with regard to electrical interference. This considerably increases the cost of building - all for the safety of the people on board. The mobile 'phones are not built to anywhere near the same standard, and potentially reduce safety, at no cost at all!
I believe it is also an offence to operate an airborne radio transmitter without a licence.
Finally, an airborne mobile phone can reach several transmitters (line of sight transmission). Apparently, this is not a good thing for the 'phone providers.
GB
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 'tween posts
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as mentioned in earlier replies, radio frequencies do interfere with one another..decades ago ....radios needed to be sheilded from the spark plug in a car(pardon my analogy...for want of a better one at the moment).
by radio frequency I mean all sorts of radiations...
my point....even though nothing conclusive against its use,I suppose the industry prefers to err on the positive side
by radio frequency I mean all sorts of radiations...
my point....even though nothing conclusive against its use,I suppose the industry prefers to err on the positive side
Originally Posted by FlapsOne
Turn your mobile phOne on and stick it near to your PC. Then listen to the speakers as the phone signal inbound/oubound makes seriously annoying noises as it interferes with bits on your PC.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Summer
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GroundBound
...
Finally, an airborne mobile phone can reach several transmitters (line of sight transmission). Apparently, this is not a good thing for the 'phone providers.
Finally, an airborne mobile phone can reach several transmitters (line of sight transmission). Apparently, this is not a good thing for the 'phone providers.
Originally Posted by bookwork
That demonstrates that it interferes with audio signals...
Originally Posted by Taildragger67
Has the theory about EMP from a phone searching for a network at max power possibly contributing to fuel-tank sparking (TW800, TG 737 on the ground at Bangkok) been fully debunked?
Has the theory about EMP from a phone searching for a network at max power possibly contributing to fuel-tank sparking (TW800, TG 737 on the ground at Bangkok) been fully debunked?
http://www.motorola.com/mot/doc/0/203_MotDoc.pdf
http://www.ericsson.com/ericsson/cor...olStations.pdf
http://www.ctia.org/content/index.cfm/AID/1040
http://www.ou.edu/engineering/emc/projects/AV1_X.html
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There have been numerous threads on this topic, so I apologise for boring some of you who may have read this before!
My guess is that if there are more than (say) 20 pax on board there's a better than evens chance that at least one phone is active throughout the flight (whether by accident or design). More than 100 pax and it's practically a certainty. Since we do not observe any serious problems that have arisen as a result, this would indicate that such problems are very rare, if not impossible.
Airlines (now that they can make additional revenue from it) are offering the ability to use your mobile in flight. This is done by siting a 'pico-cell' on board, allowing the phones to operate at their lowest power setting. Someday this pico-cell will fail, at which point all the active phones will automatically boost their signal to the max in a futile attempt to contact the nearest base station 10 kms below them. This will be an excellent test of the aircraft's susceptibility to EM interference. My guess is that nothing will happen (see above) - what's your guess (and would you want to be on board when this 'experiment' takes place)?
My guess is that if there are more than (say) 20 pax on board there's a better than evens chance that at least one phone is active throughout the flight (whether by accident or design). More than 100 pax and it's practically a certainty. Since we do not observe any serious problems that have arisen as a result, this would indicate that such problems are very rare, if not impossible.
Airlines (now that they can make additional revenue from it) are offering the ability to use your mobile in flight. This is done by siting a 'pico-cell' on board, allowing the phones to operate at their lowest power setting. Someday this pico-cell will fail, at which point all the active phones will automatically boost their signal to the max in a futile attempt to contact the nearest base station 10 kms below them. This will be an excellent test of the aircraft's susceptibility to EM interference. My guess is that nothing will happen (see above) - what's your guess (and would you want to be on board when this 'experiment' takes place)?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NY
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
folks look crazy talking to themselves on cells, I believe they should not be used, simply because of POSSIBLE RF interference. we don't know the frequencies emited by the huge variety, of phones and how they correalate with avionics/sytems freq's... due to anectdoatal reports I think they should be TURNED OFF...I trust when airline pilots say they've experienced RF interference. by the time we prove the point i think there'll be a smoking hole in the ground and people will say why did they allow cell phones aboard. Next time a pax just HAS to talk to his or her friend/ girlfriend/ boyfriend/mom aunt think of that baby in coach who can't uses a cell phone....ending up in that burning hole...I'm a pilot not an airline pilot... and I as a occasional pax I don't like it... playing statistics... that is, but i've learned although individuals are smart, people are stupid and selfish...keep the 
ing phone OFF plz
ing phone OFF plz
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: South East UK
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Journo123:
To cut to the chase, and to point you (hopefully) in the right direction, without swaying you one way or the other, there's a couple of things you should know:
(i) Mobile phones being allowed on aircraft isn't a contradiction of the safety regulations. That's because of the advances in 'picocell' technology which effectively allows the phone to operate in the cabin on reduced power - thereby cutting the risk of interference. I have no idea what would happen if the picocell malfunctions, however.
(ii) The truth is that the jury is still out on the level of risk to flights. While there's no record (as far as I know) of an accident attributed to passenger electronic devices, it's certainly true that mobile phones create interference - which at the very least is irritating. And studies (by the UK CAA for example) on the effects phones have on avionics have demonstrated that there is enough doubt to warrant erring on the safe side - ergo, you can't use your phone.
Perhaps the most interesting evidence I've come across is the anecdotal stuff reported to NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (you can download a whole batch of the most recent electronic device interference incidents from the website - asrs.arc.nasa.gov). Some of these reports are certainly food for thought for anyone who wonders whether there's any real reason for concern.
To cut to the chase, and to point you (hopefully) in the right direction, without swaying you one way or the other, there's a couple of things you should know:
(i) Mobile phones being allowed on aircraft isn't a contradiction of the safety regulations. That's because of the advances in 'picocell' technology which effectively allows the phone to operate in the cabin on reduced power - thereby cutting the risk of interference. I have no idea what would happen if the picocell malfunctions, however.
(ii) The truth is that the jury is still out on the level of risk to flights. While there's no record (as far as I know) of an accident attributed to passenger electronic devices, it's certainly true that mobile phones create interference - which at the very least is irritating. And studies (by the UK CAA for example) on the effects phones have on avionics have demonstrated that there is enough doubt to warrant erring on the safe side - ergo, you can't use your phone.
Perhaps the most interesting evidence I've come across is the anecdotal stuff reported to NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (you can download a whole batch of the most recent electronic device interference incidents from the website - asrs.arc.nasa.gov). Some of these reports are certainly food for thought for anyone who wonders whether there's any real reason for concern.