Nonsense ! :evil:
MEL_Traveller, you are very good at throwing hand grenades from a zero or low knowledge base. Do you really have knowledge of this subject or are you stating what seems obvious on the surface :?:
The JQ pilot should not have been texting near the ground as it would be in breach of procedures and at a time when his attention should have been elsewhere. Nobody is going to argue against that.
Do you know however if the airline has a list of intrinsically safe mobile phones :?: Is it possible that they might even issue to their crews for use if needed :?:
I don't know either BUT it is possible. Just as using mobile phones in a hospital is not allowed yet hospital staff carry and use mobiles all the time. How and why :?: The hospital staff member has an approved mobile phone and has the knowledge to of where and when they may use the phones. You and I do not have that knowledge.
Hi straitman - my post was clearly partly tongue-in-cheek - finally providing some 'real' evidence that mobile phones can be dangerous in flight... if used by the flightdeck crew just prior to landing.
My posts are not so much about 'lobbing grenades' but more about challenging preconveived ideas.
On mobile phones we know that probably every flight takes off with a mobilee phone (or several) left on... accidentally of course but probably still highly likely.
We also know that by and large that doesn't seem to affect aircraft operations.
Then there is the argument that there could be noise interference (like leaving a phone near a radio at home) - and that interference could be, possibly, heard through flightdeck headphones. Well now it seems that textingand mobil phone use has occured IN the flightdeck.
One possibility is that there is a pre-approved list of phones that do not interfere. But then why not issue that list to passengers?
The answer to that is that there are other reasons why you wouldnn't want people phoning while in close proximity to the ground - including that theuir attention is on safety and not with their phone. Fair enough - then just tell the passengers that rather than something else.
Rules and regulations generally get credibility if people undersstand them.
And then me challening the requirement about crew member instructions. Someone posted that the seatbelt sign was left on while refuelling occured.
Blindly following an instruction like that could have serious impacts. Knowing that I don't have to follow that sign (left on in error) and having the confidence to challenge that sign could lead to me exiting the aircraft alive and someone else not.
Since we had the initial discusion on following crewmember instructions I found other legislation which deals with crew member isntructions in an emergency. Those regulations state, for example, that a crew member may 'request, but NOT require' a passenger to assist in an emergency.
So my point is directly supported by legislation - that you only have to follow lawful crew member instructions. Of course it help to know what is lawful and what is not, and that is why we were exploring some different scenarios... (such as window bllinds during the movie, or moving seats to purely allow a POS more comfort).
Am I likely to comply with a crew memer instruction? Of course I am. But there might just be one day when not doing so saves my life.
