Takeoff and Landing - Regulation / Etiquette

[markis10]

Another glib answer. I'm not criticising I'm looking for a genuine understanding here. The problem is that answers like this mask what might be serious issues.

I know my answers are glib and silly, but I admit to being fundamentally incompetent.

Again not a glib answer, I don't work for the airline nor do I specialize in the area with an indepth knowledge of their fleet, just like I cannot say the ban by DJ or QF makes 100% sense. I have had a lot to do with RF and aviation in the past and believe the Research that proves mobiles interfere with aircraft operations to some extent, some airlines believe a risk of 0.00001% warrants action as an example, others may not. Why one airline believes a risk is acceptable is up to them to explain, just as its up to CASA to explain why they don't regulate mobile operation while other statuatory bodies around the world do.

 

[TonyHancock]

Again not a glib answer.

Again we'll agree to differ.

 

[nlagalle]

Again we'll agree to differ.

Tony, I have read many reports about Mobile phones and transmitting devices (i've posted several here in the past). And while there is no direct science to prove x phone triggers a said reaction, there have been documented cases where it was proved said phone was the cause of the incident. Unfortunately there is no way to replicate the conditions etc.

Now I am only a PPL, so i don't fly big planes, but have left my phone on before in the flight bag and it was a huge mistake. GSM (which many phone drop back to outside of 3G) made a distinct sound when either about to make or receive a call or tracking in on a base station. The noise was unbearable.

Aircraft fitted with pico cells to re-transmit phone signals also have additional shielding to. As has been pointed out they re-transmit the signal and also reduce the transmitting power from the phone.

Personally I like the ban on planes simply because I like the quiet.. but that is IMO. the other thing is that a phone tracking for a tower will dramatically reduce the battery life too.

 

[TonyHancock]

Tony, I have read many reports about Mobile phones and transmitting devices (i've posted several here in the past). And while there is no direct science to prove x phone triggers a said reaction, there have been documented cases where it was proved said phone was the cause of the incident. Unfortunately there is no way to replicate the conditions etc.

Now I am only a PPL, so i don't fly big planes, but have left my phone on before in the flight bag and it was a huge mistake. GSM (which many phone drop back to outside of 3G) made a distinct sound when either about to make or receive a call or tracking in on a base station. The noise was unbearable.

Aircraft fitted with pico cells to re-transmit phone signals also have additional shielding to. As has been pointed out they re-transmit the signal and also reduce the transmitting power from the phone.

Personally I like the ban on planes simply because I like the quiet.. but that is IMO. the other thing is that a phone tracking for a tower will dramatically reduce the battery life too.

Nick, thanks for the response. I religiously turn my phones off on a plane. I really don't know enough, in fact I'm pretty much technically stupid, so my argument really is against the glib arguments.

I agree on the quiet onboard!

 

[Oneworldplus2]

And then you read posts of pilots who leave their mobiles on and couldn't give a stuff.....

(For the record, l follow crew instructions)

 

[AVC]

Next time you fly have a look at where the antennas are on an aircraft, shielding the coughpit would not do much, it's quite possible a passengers pocket is very close to an internal wire run and the signal induction could be significant, from memory there is 100-200 miles of wires on a plane as a rough guesstimate.

Shield the cabling too then. Or run it twisted in such a way it ignores the particular wavelengths in question. But technically they already are shielded if the floor is all metal. Attic cabling is a different story, but it could be run in a metal duct.
In actual fact it's the cabling which is susceptible, as it acts like an antenna. That's why wired alarm systems have filters on the inputs to stop the panel receiving RF interference.

A typical handheld mobile phone only punches out a watt maximum. An aircraft transponder? About 175W, and they're not trailing that thing behind the tail on a long wire.

Smart Meters don't send out radiation either BTW (if you've been following that BS on TV)

ON TOPIC though, should you put it away during take off and landing? Yes. It's about the regulations, and the etiquette to the crew in not being a pratt and ignoring them (the regs).

I wouldn't be too comfortable with the glass either. IMO the FA should of enforced the rules.

 

[markis10]

A typical handheld mobile phone only punches out a watt maximum. An aircraft transponder? About 175W, and they're not trailing that thing behind the tail on a long wire.

Of course a mode C transponder has its active components outside the aircraft aft of the wing, shielded in terms of EMI by the aircrafts faraday cage. As for putting more shielding on the wiring, good luck, there are enough issues with the existing shielding as it stands that degrades over time, as the poor folks of TWA800 found out.

I wonder what is cheaper, rewiring a 10 year old aircraft to ensure it can handle emissions that did not exist when it was designed or trying to eliminate those emissions?

 

[Austman]

GSM (which many phone drop back to outside of 3G)

Technical note: 2G, 3G and even 4G are all GSM.

 

[CWM]

Electromagnetic radiation follows the inverse square law.

Exactly, that was my point. If electronic gear and phones right next to the nav instruments cause no problem for most pilots it is laughable that phones (which typically output well less than 1watt) several metres away would cause any navigational problem.

The only folk that believe this stuff would be the same ones claiming their electricity 'smart meters' are giving them nightmares and cancer.

 

[nlagalle]

Exactly, that was my point. If electronic gear and phones right next to the nav instruments cause no problem for most pilots it is laughable that phones (which typically output well less than 1watt) several metres away would cause any navigational problem.

The only folk that believe this stuff would be the same ones claiming their electricity 'smart meters' are giving them nightmares and cancer.

So are you saying that if you think mobile phones can cause an effect on instruments in a plane you must also think that smart meters cause cancer.. As i believe in the first, but not the second.

 

[mannej]

It is funny how points are left out to suit arguments.

Sitting on the fence with this one, but location from the nav equipment in the coughpit may not be the major factor, but more the wiring. Also I'd prefer a short circuited or malfunctioning smoke alarm in a building, much easier to deal with compared to being up at 40000 feet.

 

[TonyHancock]

The thing that has always interested me is the lack of safety on an aircraft compared to that of the requirements for example for a machine in a factory, hence my somewhat non acceptance of some of the less than informational filled posts by those who are perceived as knowledgeable.

 

[Alanslegal]

Whether mobile phones may or may not affect a plane is irrelevant, anybody who doesn't follow reasonable crew instructions are a tool !

 

[misstam]

Etiquette... of course, don't be a jerk & just turn your phone off (and back on) when instructed.. and don't go unbuckling your seat beat & bolting down the front before the plane stops taxiing either...

I have no idea about the safety implications with phones & aircraft, but I can personally say I've experienced the aural annoyance of mobile phone interference when operating PA systems & radio comms/talkback. As nlagalle mentioned, it can make certain overriding sounds when about to receive/make a call or finding a base station... so perhaps that has something to do with it.

 

[CWM]

What? With the "radios" turned on? Because if not, it really isn't relevant. This thread is about a mobile phone turned on and transmitting. Not an iPad in flight mode being used to display stored information.

Good point - it probably never occurred to the FAA to test iPads in coughpits outside of flight mode right? One day a pilot may forget....

.

On the subject of reminders the issue is any type of electronic device interfering with navigational instruments, not a few background pops on the intercom when the pilot placed his cell phone next to the comms unit. I want to see an AC change heading or enter a descent because a passenger phoned home or checked his email before I believe this one. On the evidence to date it's junk science, quite a lot of it out there these days.

 

[medhead]

on the point of various airlines having different positions on the risks of mobiles, I just wanted to remind everyone about airlines having difference positions on the risk of volcanos.

 

[nlagalle]

On the subject of reminders the issue is any type of electronic device interfering with navigational instruments, not a few background pops on the intercom when the pilot placed his cell phone next to the comms unit. I want to see an AC change heading or enter a descent because a passenger phoned home or checked his email before I believe this one. On the evidence to date it's junk science, quite a lot of it out there these days.

As you said you have a pilot's licence, then you should also receive Flight Safety magazine. There have been several articles in the past that document exactly what you have said above. Perhaps you should go back and read them?

 

[Doug_Westcott]

Get over it! The "requirement" is to turn off mobile phones at certain times on a plane (regardless of the reason) if you can't live without your phone for this length of time catch a bus (and get a life)

 

[midcoast1]

Whether mobile phones may or may not affect a plane is irrelevant, anybody who doesn't follow reasonable crew instructions are a tool !

Exactly.Some rules may or may not be correct but they are there.Best just to follow the rules . I did have one incident on a Delta flight to JFK.Turned my phone off.Put it in my bag in the overhead locker.Somehow some thing in my bag must have been against my on/off switch.Got to JFK and the phone was back on.Pulled the battery out on flights after that to prevent it happening again.

 

[markis10]

.Pulled the battery out on flights after that to prevent it happening again.

Which ironically would mean you are breaking another rule, that of carriage of unpacked lithium batteries not installed in a device, info from QF:

• Spare Lithium ion batteries and cells with a Watt hour rating greater than 160Wh, are not permitted on an aircraft under any circumstances.
• Spare lithium ion batteries and cells with a Watt hour rating of between 100Wh and 160Wh are limited to two batteries per passenger. Batteries must have terminals insulated or protected to prevent short circuit and must be carried in cabin baggage only. – Operator approval is required for these prior to travel.
• Spare Lithium ion batteries and cells with a Watt hour rating or less than 100Wh have no limit to the number that can be carried, batteries must have terminals insulated or protected to prevent short circuit and must be carried in cabin baggage only
• Spare Lithium metal or Lithium alloy batteries with a lithium content of less than 2 grams have no limit to the number that can be carried, however, batteries must have terminals insulated or protected to prevent short circuit and must be carried in cabin baggage only.
• If batteries are installed in equipment such as laptop computers, camera, calculators etc – the above limits still apply, however they can be carried as checked baggage, provided the electronic device is protected from accidental activation.

Note: Conversion from Ah (Amp hours) to Wh is: Ah x Voltage = Wh.

[h=3]Spare Batteries for Consumer Electronic Devices[/h]All spare batteries for consumer electronic devices must be carried in carry-on baggage only. They must be individually protected to prevent short circuit using one of the following:

• In original retail packaging;
• Taping over exposed terminals;
• Placing each battery in a separate plastic bag or protective pouch.

[h=3][/h]