"turn off ALL devices..." ???

[CPT Tripss]

Interesting Blog... http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/beyond-bits-and-bytes/4395932/Mobile-phone-interference-with-plane-instruments--Myth-or-reality-

And hey... Mythbusters did find out older, unshielded planes could have problems... http://mythbustersresults.com/episode49.

But, if use of an electronic device could be so detrimental to flying, why aren't they banned? Shouldn't the TSA force us to check our electronics?

TSA? No! No! No!

The potential for problems can be dealt with effectively by the existing practices. Just follow FA directions.

 

[sam_gordon]

TSA? No! No! No!

The potential for problems can be dealt with effectively by the existing practices. Just follow FA directions.

But would a terrorist follow directions? We outlaw nailclippers, but allow someone to bring a phone on board. If use of a phone was that dangerous, what prevents someone from simply turning it on at a critical juncture?

I do want to point out, I don't get mad about turning off electronics, I simply don't see the point. Although the PP who brought up listening to emergency instructions was a good one.

 

[Allison]

hmmm...ok. I probably never paid attention, but now I have a kindle for reading... It surprised me about the regular camera though<i'd never heard that either. I think what got me thinking about this was another thread with the title" I should have landed 15 minutes ago"....so the person was obviously using a device while circling/waiting....made me wonder if I'd just been missing all this.....
FWIW,I don't think it interferes with plane stuff either...and I don't mind turning stuff off(though I wanted to keep reading lol) it just seemed,really enforced. Last week we had to circle/wait for Airforce 1 to clear,and we had to keep everything shut down for about an hour.....

So you didn't actually read the thread. They weren't using a device while circling/waiting. They weren't even on a plane. Their flight had been cancelled.

And No-not a new thing at all.

 

[CPT Tripss]

But would a terrorist follow directions? We outlaw nailclippers, but allow someone to bring a phone on board. If use of a phone was that dangerous, what prevents someone from simply turning it on at a critical juncture?

I do want to point out, I don't get mad about turning off electronics, I simply don't see the point. Although the PP who brought up listening to emergency instructions was a good one.

Electronics may cause a problem with avionics. So, in an abundance of caution . . .

Jumping all the way to bringing down planes at will . . .

 

[sam_gordon]

Electronics may cause a problem with avionics. So, in an abundance of caution . . .

Jumping all the way to bringing down planes at will . . .

Wait... going back to something you posted on the first page said electronic interference caused (potential) problems with the communication between pilots & ATC. Granted, that's important. But is there a study about RF interference from personal electronics in avionics (ie: flight controls/displays)?

 

[lylone]

I hate the no electronics policy. It means that I have to hear all the noises and such in the cabin when we are climbing. Southwest took XMRadio out of the Airtran planes and so I go to listen to my mp3 player and had a not so nice passenger chew me out for using it........yep.. the barf was going his way if I felt sick!

What is the use of airplane mode anyway if the phone has to be completely off!

Wonder if they would make me shut off my old sony walkman cassette player

 

[sam_gordon]

I hate the no electronics policy. It means that I have to hear all the noises and such in the cabin when we are climbing. Southwest took XMRadio out of the Airtran planes and so I go to listen to my mp3 player and had a not so nice passenger chew me out for using it........yep.. the barf was going his way if I felt sick!

What is the use of airplane mode anyway if the phone has to be completely off!

Wonder if they would make me shut off my old sony walkman cassette player

Airplane mode is for above 10K feet. And yes, anything with an 'on/off' switch needs to be off as long as the boarding door is closed and the plane is below 10K feet.

 

[LisaS]

It's like people being annoyed with people who are on their cellphones in places deemed annoying. WHAT is the difference to someone not in my party if I'm talking to the person standing next to me, or talking to my aunt across the country? I'm interacting with people. Even if I'm texting, HOW is that any different than chatting with someone right near me? I don't understand the annoyance with electronic devices.

Some people feel the need to SPEAK VERY LOUDLY WHEN TALKING ON THEIR CELL PHONE while people sitting near each other talk more softly (all caps used to make reading this text annoying to illustrate my point). I've been in restaurants where I could not hear the conversation at a table half way across the room but then the woman's cell phone rang and when she answered the call I could hear every word she said. I dread the idea of allowing people to talk on their cell phones on the plane unless they install some sort of privacy booth and make people go in there to make a call.

 

[Lewisc]

A few reasons Ive read, not sure how many of them are real facts and how many are "internet facts"

1. They don't want passengers using earphones which might interfere with the passenger hearing instructions (which passengers who fly often can probably recite by heart)
2. So many devices now have bluetooth and WiFii built in. So many people don't know how to turn it off or don't even know the device has those features.
3. The only way to be sure is to test each device with each piece of equipment which might be susceptible to interference. An iPad might not be an issue but a $80 tablet bought in a place like Odd Lots might. Poor quality control. Maybe BT and WiFii are on even if the device is put in airplane mode. Maybe it's not shielded.
4. They can't have one set of rules for intelligent people (who now how to put their device in airplane mode) and who own quality products with a different set of rules for people who don't know how to use their device and/or are using junk.
5. How many people at WDW use their flash, even after being told to turn it off. Distance is such flash doesn't even help. People don't know how to turn their flash off. The analogy suggests making people turn off the device is the only way to ensure a device isn't in a mode which isn't allowed.

This isn't new. What's new is the need to individually list items. What's new is the need to tell people everything with an on/off switch must be off.

 

[HelenParr]

There was a story on NPR the other day with aviation experts (don't recall their credentials, but they seemed legit, even to skeptical me) discussing this very issue.

According to the story, the interference issue is probably a legacy from a different age -- but, they said it really is a concern because these items are heavy (for their size), loose, often made of glass and metal making them dangerous for take-off and landing because they could knock about. Hence no rush to change the rules, but the rules are under review for possible overall change.

Yes I realize my book and water bottle they let me hold are loose and dangerous too. Just reporting what I heard.

 

[Greysword]

In the end, the rule seems to be written in the Code of Federal Regulations, so it doesn't matter why, as the flight crew is unable to make a legal exception.

The key is why the rule was codified, since the government is always reactive in these instances. Back in the 1980s, one could use a walkman cassette player without trouble, and recently, the in-flight video/entertainment system can distract as much as an ipod or kindle. Thus, enough somethings have occurred to cause the slow moving government apparatus to take action banning all use of devices, so they made the rule.

Besides even if we knew the reason, we, as humans, would make a tactical decision as to whether our device qualified or not, and many of us do not understand the gadgets we use well enough to make the judgement call.

In the end, I guess it doesn't really matter why, it is just the rules that we, and the flight crew, must follow, and note the greatest exposure to retaliation if an electronic device did cause a problem (or injury, unsafe situation, etc) would be the flight crew for not enforcing the law.

 

[Hedy]

hmmm...ok. I probably never paid attention, but now I have a kindle for reading... It surprised me about the regular camera though<i'd never heard that either. I think what got me thinking about this was another thread with the title" I should have landed 15 minutes ago"....so the person was obviously using a device while circling/waiting....made me wonder if I'd just been missing all this.....
FWIW,I don't think it interferes with plane stuff either...and I don't mind turning stuff off(though I wanted to keep reading lol) it just seemed,really enforced. Last week we had to circle/wait for Airforce 1 to clear,and we had to keep everything shut down for about an hour.....

Yeah, I never cared until I had a Kindle, ha. So now I save a magazine for the takeoff/landing.

 

[Luv2Diz]

Shutting off cameras seems a little odd to me. A man sitting next to me was taking pictures out the window after the "shut off electronic devices" announcement was made. The flight attendant walking by was unnecessarily rude telling him to turn it off.

 

[Brian Noble]

Frankly, I'm surprised that the FAs are as polite about this as they usually are, as it seems like every fourth passenger thinks they are exempt. It may or may not be necessary, but the announcement is always clear: If it has an on/off switch, it has to be off. That would include digital cameras.

I usually grab a paper at the airport lounge for takeoff and landing. It is one of the few times I still read "dead tree" material.

 

[LadyBeBop]

Quite understand electronic devices being turned off when you're below 10,000 feet.

My question is...someone mentioned being stuck in a holding pattern for an hour while waiting for Air Force One. If a plane was stuck not being able to land for an hour, wouldn't the pilot rise the plane aboe 10,000 feet (since there is nowhere to go)? Or would they keep you below 10,000 feet, making your cell phones, iPads and Kindles useless?

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/...e-electronic-devices-on-planes-dangerous/?hpw

 

[Brian Noble]

If a plane was stuck not being able to land for an hour, wouldn't the pilot rise the plane aboe 10,000 feet (since there is nowhere to go)? Or would they keep you below 10,000 feet, making your cell phones, iPads and Kindles useless?

Probably at the discretion of air traffic control, not the pilot. And, there are lots of other factors to consider beyond your kindle---fuel remaining, how busy the airspace is, how much of a buffer around AF1 they want, etc. etc. etc.

 

[hsmamato2]

IDK, but one lady near me tried to use her phone,and got shut down fast... once they told us to shut stuff off, it wasn't allowed back on while we waited. SO I shopped at skymall LOL....have you SEEN some of that stuff?

 

[lylone]

Airplane mode is for above 10K feet. And yes, anything with an 'on/off' switch needs to be off as long as the boarding door is closed and the plane is below 10K feet.

Sorry but you are incorrect. Airplane mode means the wifi is shut off as well. So, you what is gogo for then if you can't turn on wifi? Like I said earlier...airplane mode is useless!

 

[clanmcculloch]

Skymall is exactly what I use to pass my time when I have to have my Nook turned off. I really hadn't paid attention to this rule until I got my Nook. Sigh..... At least Skymall is entertaining.