Mobile Phones & Electronic Items on planes

[Natt]

Just came back from a trip and yet again observed a few passengers blatantly ignoring the "safety" rules:

ipods on all the way through take off/ascent
mobiles on when landing

Should I actually be worried about this. It seems negligent of airline carriers to trust passengers to do the right thing, if it really was a safety risk I mean. There are always people who think it is incredibly important for them to do something and they are an exception to the rule.

Is it even a risky activity?

My understanding is that its impossible to check every type of electrical equipment, and so they ask you to turn everything off.

Should I be worried when I see this happening. Or just bite my tongue

 

[wallacej]

I am not sure about the safety aspect, but from the perspective of fellow travellers and speed at getting passengers off a flight, I beleive DJ have got it right.

Whether it be for safety, or operational reasons, it drives me nuts when I fly QANTAS, they announce the phones can be turned on, so immediately you hear the little beeps, then the talking begins, loud enough to be annoying. Not only that, passengers are texting or talking and trying to deplane, meanwhile not caring about who they are holding up. Or walking off the aerobridge while texting and slowing down the trail that is trying to get by them as they wander aimlessly from side to side....

(sorry - rant over, but this happened this morning) At least with DJ no phones on until you are inside, at least you can get off quickly..
Sorry - maybe a little OT, but there's my two bobs worth

 

[Natt]

Actually thats a good point

I never thought about it from the point of view of holding others up when disembarking

I am just bambozzled by the airlines saying turn equipment off because it can interfere with the planes systems, and some passengers just ignore it. Either they know its a myth, or they think its true and still don't care.

Which to me is just horrid!

 

[simongr]

Not only that, passengers are texting or talking and trying to deplane, meanwhile not caring about who they are holding up. Or walking off the aerobridge while texting and slowing down the trail that is trying to get by them as they wander aimlessly from side to side....

(sorry - rant over, but this happened this morning) At least with DJ no phones on until you are inside, at least you can get off quickly..
Sorry - maybe a little OT, but there's my two bobs worth

Its not just the phone people that slow you down - I can walk at the same pace whether I am on my phone or not (some times I am even able to chew gum whilst walking :shock. As with everything when travelling it is about being considerate of other travellers - people may think that phones are annoying but I don't jump on here and rant about slow people at security all the time...

 

[Oneworldplus2]

Yeah, but you still have to wait for the baggage.

 

[Natt]

Actually a lot of people just have carry on. So this would slow them down.

Having said that, I think thats all part of the normal catching an airplane. It might get a tad fustrating, but where lots of people move around its bound to get snarled. No biggie


The issue of phones/electronic equipment always leaves me wondering but. If its so important why leave people to do the right thing.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

NATT Actually a lot of people just have carry on. So this would slow them down.

I guess it depends on which route and what time of year.

SYD-MEL, cityflyer, Tuesday morning compared to Syd - Cairns, during school holidays.

Seriously, does 1 or 2 minutes really make that much of a difference? If it does, get an earlier flight if one can.

 

[wallacej]

.... As with everything when travelling it is about being considerate of other travellers...

Yes, that is the point, some (few) are not...

The OP was about electical gear and interference with the plane - I have seen an episode of Mythbusters (for WIW) and they tested a range of phones. Whilst most did nothing to interfere with the navigation equipment, there were a few older models that did.

I think you were right in your first comment, that because they can't be 100% sure, err on the side of caution and ban them all.

I think DJ also require phones to be left off as some passengers use the rear entry/exit doors and have to walk over the tarmac, so I am sure that is as much to do with safety as it is for operational requirements.

 

[Happy Dude]

...Should I actually be worried about this.

Is it even a risky activity?

Should I be worried when I see this happening. Or just bite my tongue

At the risk of sounding glib, why not ask the cabin crew? "Excuse me Miss/Mr Flight Attendent, I've noticed people using ipods, etc, even though the safety message has instructed users to turn off all electronic devices. I'm concerned about the implications of ignoring safety warnings, and I'm sure that you are too, or why else would you bother to tell people to turn off the devices in the first place?"

 

[Alanslegal]

I believe airlines err on the side of caution with electronic items wanting them to be turned off esp. for take off/landing. When it costs $200million to buy a jet plane, I'm sure lots of research and development would have gone into to minimise any risk from a $200 phone.

 

[JohnK]

A couple of months ago the person sitting opposite me in the aisle seat was using his pda, blackberry, blueberry, whatever, throughout the flight and the cabin crew announced we are about to start descent turn off all electronic devices he continued to use it. So it remained on, and continuing to be used, all through descent, landing and taxiing to the terminal. What was worse is that he was a Platinum.

So on exiting the aircraft I quietly had a conversation to the cabin crew and mentioned that the person in seat xD continued to use his phone throughout the flight. They took a note of the seat number and I expect he got a letter from Qantas.

Personally I like the idea of being able to switch the mobile on when arriving at the gate. A quick call home, "Dad we have landed", and he is on his way. It is no big deal if I had to wait until in the terminal. I will probably have to wait an extra 5 minutes to be picked up.

Is it safe to use a mobile in flight? We are not that far away from having mobiles able to be used in flight. So, if it is not safe now what is going to make it safe soon?

 

[medhead]

Is it safe to use a mobile in flight? We are not that far away from having mobiles able to be used in flight. So, if it is not safe now what is going to make it safe soon?

My understanding is that the flight crew get that classic mobile phone noise in their headsets from mobile phones, which can be annoying and possibly painful. This can is worse in an aircraft because the mobile can't connect to a base station for any significant period of time, if at all, and is always search. In fact, it would be just about impossbile to actually use a phone while in the air, without an on board micro base station (the technology that is often talked about being introduced) so there is little point to having it on.

The safe brief talks about interferring with navigation system. So once you are descending, hopefully (given clear weather) the pilot isn't suddenly going to get lost.

 

[huwcar]

A person in the seat in front of me thought he was very clever by using his Sat Nav during the flight - holding it up to the window it was getting plenty of signal and he was viewing the traveling speed, etc.

I have no idea if it's dangerous or not, but he was asked to put it away quick smart when the crew was made aware of it.

 

[medhead]

A person in the seat in front of me thought he was very clever by using his Sat Nav during the flight - holding it up to the window it was getting plenty of signal and he was viewing the traveling speed, etc.

I have no idea if it's dangerous or not, but he was asked to put it away quick smart when the crew was made aware of it.

In general, "SatNav" (or GPS) only receives a signal from satellites. It that way it's just like any other electronic device and there is no reason that the crew should have made him put it away. Edit: except note the next post from NM

 

[NM]

A person in the seat in front of me thought he was very clever by using his Sat Nav during the flight - holding it up to the window it was getting plenty of signal and he was viewing the traveling speed, etc.

I have no idea if it's dangerous or not, but he was asked to put it away quick smart when the crew was made aware of it.

I don't believe there is any safety issue using a GPS receiver during the cruise period of the flight. It would be no different to using a Gameboy, PSP, MPS3 player or laptop computer. However, it should not be used until after the seatbelt sign has been extinguished and should be turned off again when the PA announcement is made to switch off all electronic devices.

However, if an FA instructs a passenger to turn it off, they passenger is required to comply with the request. Even if the request seems unfounded due to it having no more risk than many other electronic devices that are permitted to be used on board.

 

[opusman]

The "no ipods during ascent/descent" rule is silly on the face of it; an ipod is really no more "off" when it's switched off than when it's "on". Ok when "on" it uses a bit more power but other than that, the circuits are still "operating" whether it's playing music or not.

However I can see there's a probably safety aspect to the rule - it would be much easier for the FAs in an emergency if half their passengers weren't esconced in their music and not even aware what was going on.

 

[PaulC83]

Working in the field of EMC (Electromagnetic Compatibility) for a vast majority of my career, I can say that its the unknowns they are concerned about, more so than the knowns. If they are aware something is likely to interfere they would generally fix it (or recognise it in the design phase), and certainly for licenced broadcasting equipment there shouldn't be any problem, as they are designed to work within the framework.

The problem is, its too hard to 1) produce a list of what is ok and whats not, and 2) its too hard to then police who is using an approved device and who is not. So it is easier just to have a blanket ban. The risk factor of somebody causing a failure or malfunction is low, but the outcome could be disaster, so the overall risk is somewhere in the middle, enough to have a policy, but not enough to disarm people of the devices.

Same as no mobile phone signs at service stations. The chance of a spark from a battery falling out of a phone (not being intrinsically safe) or RF causing ignition is extremely low, in the millions to one category, but between Australian standard 1940 and 2430, it is safer just to follow the guidelines. Same goes for the "plane refuelling seatbelt off" rule (if you've ever been on the plane when it has been refuelling).

I think there are a lot of people out there who are very rude and either just don't listen, or just don't care. My 2C anyway.

 

[pblackm]

Working in the field of EMC (Electromagnetic Compatibility) for a vast majority of my career, I can say that its the unknowns they are concerned about, more so than the knowns. If they are aware something is likely to interfere they would generally fix it (or recognise it in the design phase), and certainly for licenced broadcasting equipment there shouldn't be any problem, as they are designed to work within the framework.

Whilst PaulC83 is pretty much right, the main reality is that the nature of mobile phones is that one plane load of users could flood all the cell transceivers over the area that is being flown. The telco industry was happy to lobby the regulators to ban mobile phone use on planes until it has been better understood. Remember, last year Qantas carried out a successful trial on a 767 and as a result, will be introducing a partial service, using a pico-cell transceiver in the plane. You will be able to text, but not talk (thank goodness for that).

 

[medhead]

Whilst PaulC83 is pretty much right, the main reality is that the nature of mobile phones is that one plane load of users could flood all the cell transceivers over the area that is being flown.

Going back to first principles I can't see how that can be at all correct. A plane with a few hundred people flooding multiple cell transceivers that are current handling thousands of ground based users? Noting that due to the height for the aircraft its going to have line of sight access to a much larger number of towers than at ground level.

IMO given the sparse population in most of Australia, I would be very surprised if a mobile phone could even find a ground based transceiver for more than a small fraction of the flight time. Even then at a cruising alitude of about 8 km on a direct line the tower is only going to be in range at about 13 km horizontally. Travelling at about 800 km/h that gives a maximum window of 2 minutes. When driving towards an isolated tower at Woomera from no coverage it has often taken my phone 2 mins to connect.

Anyway, just my thoughts as a total layperson. Glad to receive the real facts...

 

[pblackm]

Going back to first principles I can't see how that can be at all correct. A plane with a few hundred people flooding multiple cell transceivers that are current handling thousands of ground based users? Noting that due to the height for the aircraft its going to have line of sight access to a much larger number of towers than at ground level.

IMO given the sparse population in most of Australia, I would be very surprised if a mobile phone could even find a ground based transceiver for more than a small fraction of the flight time. Even then at a cruising alitude of about 8 km on a direct line the tower is only going to be in range at about 13 km horizontally. Travelling at about 800 km/h that gives a maximum window of 2 minutes. When driving towards an isolated tower at Woomera from no coverage it has often taken my phone 2 mins to connect.

Anyway, just my thoughts as a total layperson. Glad to receive the real facts...

Sure, but a fully loaded plane on ascent or descent into say Sydney, with one plane landing every two minutes? 20 minutes climb time.