It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational equip

[oz_mark]

It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational equipment, according to a statement from airline equipment manufacturers Honeywell Avionics and Boeing today.

According to a report first published by US aviation site Flightglobal, Honeywell Avionics has confirmed that its Phase 3 Display Units used by pilots in Boeing 737 aircraft are susceptible to "blanking" in the presence of Wi-Fi equipment.

Wi-Fi proven to interfere with aircraft - Business - News

 

[AaronBradford]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Love the picture of the crash they included. :-|

 

[UP4014]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

good news for people who are sick of "must have" devices.:mrgreen:

 

[UP4014]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Love the picture of the crash they included. :-|

Yes it illustrates the point nicely.

 

[AaronBradford]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Yes it illustrates the point nicely.

It's quite sensationalist and it makes me laugh that it's actually an image from the set of Lost.

 

[samh004]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

All this article suggests to me is that the companies that make these screens, in this case Honeywell Avionics, need to better insulate (right/wrong word?) their products for the age we live in, because I doubt banning all wifi devices on board would make the general flying public very happy, especially in the US.

"Boeing and Honeywell have concluded that actual EMI levels experienced during a flight where there is normal operation of a Wi-Fi system will not cause any blanking of a Phase 3 display. This is not a safety issue with currently operating 737s and 777s," a Boeing engineer said.

Interesting point there though… doesn’t say what would actually cause the screens to blank. And if it’s so easy, why aren’t terrorists bringing such devices onboard? Got to be easier than setting your crotch on fire.

 

[anat0l]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

With respect to samh004's suggestion, what kinds of methods are there for such shielding? It wouldn't have to be heavy nor expensive would it?

Now I know that concrete blocks gamma rays but I'm not sure of radio signals. In addition, would you need to shield the entire aircraft (in case communications can get out of the aircraft from within the fuselage)?

 

[docjames]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

What happens when an aircraft flys low over a cbd/housing where there are wifis??

 

[straitman]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

What happens when an aircraft flys low over a cbd/housing where there are wifis??

What is the range of your wifi :?:

Most (all?) have quite a short range and airliners don't travel at 2-300 ft all that often :!:

 

[Moody]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

What a beat-up!

They are testing their own wireless device (probably akin to a router) that they intend to use for on-board internet, and found that it causes interference at abnormal levels of intesity.

"Boeing and Honeywell have concluded that actual EMI levels experienced during a flight where there is normal operation of a Wi-Fi system will not cause any blanking of a Phase 3 display. This is not a safety issue with currently operating 737s and 777s," a Boeing engineer said.

It is good that they are testing the limits of these devices, but the title of the article is as misleading as any I've heard recently.

 

[anat0l]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

What a beat-up!

They are testing their own wireless device (probably akin to a router) that they intend to use for on-board internet, and found that it causes interference at abnormal levels of intesity.

"Boeing and Honeywell have concluded that actual EMI levels experienced during a flight where there is normal operation of a Wi-Fi system will not cause any blanking of a Phase 3 display. This is not a safety issue with currently operating 737s and 777s," a Boeing engineer said.

It is good that they are testing the limits of these devices, but the title of the article is as misleading as any I've heard recently.

Well, perhaps not.

The fact that they are testing a "stretch" scenario and they found interference can happen just proves that with enough intensity it can happen. This at least puts to rest the "myth" that it can never happen, even if the scenario which they are testing is practically unreasonable.

Now what is the "stretch" scenario they are testing I'd like to know. Is it some sort of test where everyone on board has one device on the wireless? Or is it much more intensive than that? Let alone locational effects, sizes of devices, data load in transmission....

 

[medhead]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Interesting following the discussion. I only wanted to state for the record that gamma radiation has absolutely no place in the discussion. It is completely different.

In terms of shielding generally a faraday cage will provide shielding. While it is called a cage and can have holes just like a cage, to be effective the holes have to be smaller than the wavelength of whatever you are trying to block. This means that the windows mean that a fuselage cannot be 100% effective as a faraday cage. Hence why mobile phones work on board.

Wifi range? - my wifi is flat out going 20 m in front of my house. No way I can see wifi being an issue for landing aircraft. Especially if the house has I colourbond roof. No to mention that wifi antennas look like they are optimized to transmit horizontally rather vertically.

Oh I couldn't help myself.

 

[markis10]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Wifi range? - my wifi is flat out going 20 m in front of my house. No way I can see wifi being an issue for landing aircraft. Especially if the house has I colourbond roof. No to mention that wifi antennas look like they are optimized to transmit horizontally rather vertically.

WiFi is of course a generic name and in fact a marketing term, the standards are 802.11a/b/g/n etc, while the average home WiFI may only go meters in distance, I actually sell product that goes kilometers, and keep in mind the Apple location service (skyhook) uses WiFi signals that have been recorded by a drive by and referenced back to a location (ironically what Google tried to do and failed), for that service to work it needs to see those home signals on the street.

Most home WiFI devices do not operate at the maximum allowed level of power simply because their intended use will not require it and if you have a 802.11n router your transmission will more than likely be both vertically and horizontally polarized. Firing up a spectrum analyzer in the 2.4GHz range certainly shows just how much RF energy is being emitted, but the spectrum licensing behind WIFI is based on low power low interference potential, so terrain based emissions are very unlikely to interfere with aircraft.

 

[Justchecking]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

While the risk may be low, there is a risk nonetheless. It's like the people who insist on walking around the cabin while the seat belt sign is on. Sure the perceived risk is low but do they really need to be injured before they will recognize that a risk is present? It's human nature to place convenience before safety unfortunately. I rather hope that the disasters of yesteryear have taught us to assess risk and treat it with the attention it deserves.

Of course I expect the usual barrage of naysayers to this comment, but it is my perspective.

 

[straitman]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

The fact that they are testing a "stretch" scenario and they found interference can happen just proves that with enough intensity it can happen. This at least puts to rest the "myth" that it can never happen, even if the scenario which they are testing is practically unreasonable.

Many will not accept that there have been many 'coincidences' over the years when it comes to electromagnetic interference and operating aircraft which is why the 'experts' say that there is most probably a link but are unable to prove it.

While the risk may be low, there is a risk nonetheless.

To me this is a typical risk management scenario. The probability of causing an issue is extremely low but the consequences are extremely high.

What a beat-up!

They are testing their own wireless device (probably akin to a router) that they intend to use for on-board internet, and found that it causes interference at abnormal levels of intesity.

"Boeing and Honeywell have concluded that actual EMI levels experienced during a flight where there is normal operation of a Wi-Fi system will not cause any blanking of a Phase 3 display. This is not a safety issue with currently operating 737s and 777s," a Boeing engineer said.

It is good that they are testing the limits of these devices, but the title of the article is as misleading as any I've heard recently.

I do not agree.

I have personally experienced situations where electronics have had abnormal levels of intensity and which have then upset other systems including having the EFIS displays flashing.

 

[medhead]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

I should have also mentioned (again) that mobile phones (yes not "wifi") have been shown to interfer with hospital cardiac equipment. I'm sure many people perceive that they don't need to turn off their phones in certain areas of hospitals, but that is wrong. The same could apply to aircraft, be it mobiles or wifi devices.

if you have a 802.11n router your transmission will more than likely be both vertically and horizontally polarized.

Good to know, thanks. I had heard reports of poor vertical reception in multi-storey houses, so I just assumed...

 

[Kendall Roy]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Nothing is official until mythbusters has given it the once over! :mrgreen:

 

[straitman]

Nothing is official until mythbusters has given it the once over! :mrgreen:

.... and have they :?:


Sent from my iPhone using AFF Mobile

 

[mannej]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

Nothing is official until mythbusters has given it the once over! :mrgreen:

Or it is on Wikipedia

 

[Moody]

Re: It's official: using Wi-Fi on a plane can interfere with a pilot's navigational e

I do not agree.

I have personally experienced situations where electronics have had abnormal levels of intensity and which have then upset other systems including having the EFIS displays flashing.

How is this relevant? What were the circumstances? What sort of plane were you flying?

Radio emitting devices (like mobile phones) have the potential to interfere with any other electrical device (like EFIS displays on an aircraft). So what?

The story is a beat up with a misleading headline to drag the punters in. It's like saying "It's official : fat people cause airplanes to crash" and then going on to say that loading 1000 contestants from The Biggest Loser onto a 737 will prevent it from ever reaching V1 and therefore it will flop into Botany Bay.

But why write a balanced story when sensationalism will do, eh?