Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 +1 The FAA prohibits in-flight use of wireless devices because of potential interference to the aircraft’s navigation and communication systems. Why take a risk? Another false information - it is the FCC and not FAA which bans the use of cell phones. Also, a lot of flights in Europe, Middle East provide in-flight use of wireless devices. This is one of those pseudo-safety norms.
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 +1 Besides worldwide the airlines put in a lot of effort to announce and enforce it. I bet if it was not necessary...they would be putting the cabin crew to better use. A implies B does not let B imply A. The number/effort argument is essentially a fallacy. Boeing 787 was stamped safe by FAA in August 2011 but the same FAA grounded the 787 in January 2013 due to safety concerns. A good 2 years since it was merrily used by many people. Clearly shows that the FAA were mistaken. The people making these decisions are humans and humans CAN BE wrong. I can give multiple examples in history across multiple disciplines from geography to medicine where wrong scientific arguments were purported only to be changed decades later. Therefore, it is important to look at "what" has been said rather than "who" says it.
PriyankaSR Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Another false information - it is the FCC and not FAA which bans the use of cell phones. Also' date=' a lot of flights in Europe, Middle East provide in-flight use of wireless devices. This is one of those pseudo-safety norms.[/quote'] The FAA and The FCC both ban the use cell phones, I think. :hmmm: FCC banned the use of mobile phones on airborne aircraft in order to prevent disruption to cellular towers on the ground.
Detonator Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 This thread and discussion shld go to "WTF news of the day" thread. :orderorder: +1
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 The FAA and The FCC both ban the use cell phones, I think. :hmmm: FCC banned the use of mobile phones on airborne aircraft in order to prevent disruption to cellular towers on the ground. FCC has banned the use of mobile phones; FAA has some "recommendations" for wireless devices (IIRC this was made around 2000) and it is not illegal (another myth). Btw, for all the hooplah about security you will find pilots regularly using iPads in their cockpits for books, charts etc. I wonder what happens to the security then. :winky:
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Also, the FAA is considering relaxing in-flight wireless devices ban - I hope you don't feel at risk. :--D
Clarke Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 1. The do not ask/request you ; they force you. 2. No the signals DO NOT interfere with communication devices on the plane (hence myth). 3. Devices come with "Airplane Mode" for user convenience and it can not be used as an indicator to believe a non-existent reality. Their sole job is to make money and they provide a feature which user convenience PERIOD. Any electrical/electronics engineer worth his degree would think likewise. There's a ton of the same cellular frequency signals floating around the plane in-spite of the passengers shutting off their devices. You don't shut down the city's mobile network every time a plane lands/takes off.
PriyankaSR Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 FCC has banned the use of mobile phones; FAA has some "recommendations" for wireless devices (IIRC this was made around 2000) and it is not illegal (another myth). Btw' date= for all the hooplah about security you will find pilots regularly using iPads in their cockpits for books, charts etc. I wonder what happens to the security then. :winky: कसे आपल्याला माहिती आहे? :hmmm: Also' date=' the FAA is considering relaxing in-flight wireless devices ban - I hope you don't feel at risk. :--D[/quote'] Maybe I do :nervous:
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 कसे आपल्याला माहिती आहे? :hmmm: Maybe I do :nervous: I assume you wanted to ask me "How did I find about this fact?" I think the correct line would be "Aaplyala hya ghostichi mahiti kutthoon bhetli?" (I am not Marathi and hence I may have formed this sentence wrong). Anyways, you can find that information all over the Internet [0]. This was to save approx. 60 pounds of paper and have quick access to material. The FAA has approved the use of these tablets btw. MAke of with what you want to. Executive Jet Management, for example, had 55 pilots test the iPad on 10 types of aircraft to prove that it was reliable and that it would not interfere with flight instruments. The iPad was also subjected to rapid decompression at a simulated altitude of 51,000 feet. Private and corporate pilots, however, do not have to go through the same approval process. According to F.A.A. regulations, they are responsible for determining what technologies are safe and appropriate for use in the cockpit. As a result, iPads are quickly becoming essential tools in planes ranging from Gulf Stream G650s to Piper Vagabonds. [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/business/05pilots.html
PriyankaSR Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 I assume you wanted to ask me "How did I find about this fact?" I think the correct line would be "Aaplyala hya ghostichi mahiti kutthoon bhetli?" (I am not Marathi and hence I may have formed this sentence wrong). Anyways, you can find that information all over the Internet [0]. This was to save approx. 60 pounds of paper and have quick access to material. The FAA has approved the use of these tablets btw. MAke of with what you want to. [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/business/05pilots.html Airline passengers may be able to use their favorite electronic gadgets from takeoff to landing if new FAA guidelines come to pass The FAA's current guidelines prohibit the use of mobile phones and other devices until planes reach an altitude of 10,000 feet. That prohibition has rested on concerns that certain devices could interfere with ground-based wireless networks, creating trouble for airlines flying at low altitudes. If you say, they may have allowed tablets but use of cell phones is still prohibited. Why use something in the plane if it is a potential threat to all the people travelling in it? I can only say that Unless they are absolutely sure about it, they should not claim its effects. I mean, who guarantees that nothing will happen?
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Airline passengers may be able to use their favorite electronic gadgets from takeoff to landing if new FAA guidelines come to pass The FAA's current guidelines prohibit the use of mobile phones and other devices until planes reach an altitude of 10,000 feet. That prohibition has rested on concerns that certain devices could interfere with ground-based wireless networks, creating trouble for airlines flying at low altitudes. If you say, they may have allowed tablets but use of cell phones is still prohibited. Why use something in the plane if it is a potential threat to all the people travelling in it? I can only say that Unless they are absolutely sure about it, they should not claim its effects. I mean, who guarantees that nothing will happen? Priyanka jee it is actually the FCC which has the mobile phone ban - so FAA can't do anything about it . Here, from FAA website http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6275 Since 1991, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has banned the inflight use of 800 MHz cell phones because of potential interference with ground networks. This ban requires that in addition to the testing the FAA requires to show non-interference to the airplane systems, an airline would also need to apply for an exemption to the FCC rule before it could allow cell phone use inflight. The FCC proposed modifying this ban in 2004, but subsequently withdrew the proposal based on the comments it received. Now, for guarantees - it is all about kaanfidence. The first thing to know is that there is no guarantee about anything. You are more likely to be killed on road, rail than air. That said - on some flights like Emirate Airlines and Qantas you can send/receive text messages, make inflight calls (apart from takeoff/landing of course). I do not have a problem with security measures but it should not be so draconian like we are birds inside a cage. Woh Hindi mein bolte hai na, Ungli maanga Haath Le Liya - same thing applies here. It is important to understand and discuss these things so that such over reaching pseudo safety measures are nipped in the bud as to not provide a false sense of security plus avoiding playing to the gallery. http://www.emirates.com/bh/English/flying/our_fleet/emirates_a380/news_and_events/emirates-offers-first-mobile-phone-service-onboard-a380-aircraft.aspx http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/inflight-communications/global/en
PriyankaSR Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Now, for guarantees - it is all about kaanfidence. The first thing to know is that there is no guarantee about anything. You are more likely to be killed on road, rail than air. That said - on some flights like Emirate Airlines and Qantas you can send/receive text messages, make inflight calls (apart from takeoff/landing of course). I do not have a problem with security measures but it should not be so draconian like we are birds inside a cage. Woh Hindi mein bolte hai na, Ungli maanga Haath Le Liya - same thing applies here. It is important to understand and discuss these things so that such over reaching pseudo safety measures are nipped in the bud as to not provide a false sense of security plus avoiding playing to the gallery. http://www.emirates.com/bh/English/flying/our_fleet/emirates_a380/news_and_events/emirates-offers-first-mobile-phone-service-onboard-a380-aircraft.aspx http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/inflight-communications/global/en Okay..how do I explain my POV? . :cantstop: Let's say that I am warned about something while travelling on road. Supposedly of course. Like I am warned about...not wearing red while on a journey to an area inhabited by bulls otherwise it may attract them and they might topple the car over causing a car accident. Would I wear red even if it is a 'myth'? (The most creative I could come up with, please bear with it :cantstop: ) If I know that there might be an interference which may lead to a crash or even it's possibility, I would not use a gadget even if it is a 'myth'. All I am saying is that Even if there is a 0.1 percent doubt in their minds, they shouldn't allow usage of gadgets. At all.
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Okay..how do I explain my POV? . :cantstop: Let's say that I am warned about something while travelling on road. Supposedly of course. Like I am warned about...not wearing red while on a journey to an area inhabited by bulls otherwise it may attract them and they might topple the car over causing a car accident. Would I wear red even if it is a 'myth'? (The most creative I could come up with, please bear with it :cantstop: ) If I know that there might be an interference which may lead to a crash or even it's possibility, I would not use a gadget even if it is a 'myth'. All I am saying is that Even if there is a 0.1 percent doubt in their minds, they shouldn't allow usage of gadgets. At all. Red Riding Hood! :icflove: I now get what you are trying to say. You are right that safety should be opt-in procedures i.e. anything should be done only if it is 100% safe. The problem I have is when people say it is "unsafe" - actually currently it is neither safe or unsafe. Putting your finger on any side is wrong IMO. Also, the reason for safety can not be "interference with aircraft communication" - that is a myth which is clearly busted. There can be other reasons like terrorists detonating a bomb etc. But, in that case I would like to ask how the terrorist got into the plane on the first place! :--D
PriyankaSR Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Red Riding Hood! :icflove: I now get what you are trying to say. You are right that safety should be opt-in procedures i.e. anything should be done only if it is 100% safe. The problem I have is when people say it is "unsafe" - actually currently it is neither safe or unsafe. Putting your finger on any side is wrong IMO. Also, the reason for safety can not be "interference with aircraft communication" - that is a myth which is clearly busted. There can be other reasons like terrorists detonating a bomb etc. But, in that case I would like to ask how the terrorist got into the plane on the first place! :--D :icflove: If there is a doubt or a situation, esp. in this case like 'it being neither safe nor unsafe', I think it should be considered to the negative because, god-forbid, if a plane ever crashes in the future because of the gadgets, tagging it as unsafe will have been right.
beetle Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 Red Riding Hood! :icflove: I now get what you are trying to say. You are right that safety should be opt-in procedures i.e. anything should be done only if it is 100% safe. The problem I have is when people say it is "unsafe" - actually currently it is neither safe or unsafe. Putting your finger on any side is wrong IMO. Also, the reason for safety can not be "interference with aircraft communication" - that is a myth which is clearly busted. There can be other reasons like terrorists detonating a bomb etc. But, in that case I would like to ask how the terrorist got into the plane on the first place! :--D High up in the air I prefer they err on the side of caution....:nervous:
Crookbond Posted June 27, 2013 Posted June 27, 2013 High up in the air I prefer they err on the side of caution....:nervous: The caution should have a better reason than "interference with aircraft communication" because if that is so then the pilots are already using wireless devices in their cockpits. So as of now aap toh Raam Bharose! :phehehe:
beetle Posted June 28, 2013 Posted June 28, 2013 ^ Haan....but there must be a difference between 2 people using it vs 200 people using it. waisay I am all for the ban just for avoiding loud, brash,ill mannered people talking on phones in confined space. Imagine sitting through the whole flight next to a motor mouth with bad phone manners.....:nervous:
Muloghonto Posted June 28, 2013 Posted June 28, 2013 Any electrical/electronics engineer worth his degree would think likewise. There's a ton of the same cellular frequency signals floating around the plane in-spite of the passengers shutting off their devices. You don't shut down the city's mobile network every time a plane lands/takes off. As an electrical engineer, let me comment then: The FAA/FCC regulations were a safety concern (due to bandwidth hoggage) back in the early 2000s. Ever since cell phones moved to 2G network, nevermind 3 & 4G, there is no shared bandwidth issues with the plane's transponder/cockpit comm devices and the tower with users. The rules exist because not every single nation uses greater than 1G network and there are plenty of planes kicking around that are flight worthy but built in the late 80s/early 90s that, in conjunction with less than 2G network *can* cause problems. The FAA/FCC exists to provide the baseline regulation, which means it caters to the lowest common denominator. Ie, if you are flying around in North America, Europe, Japan, the cell phone interferance is not an issue. If you are flying Indian Airlines from Chattisgarh to Assam, it may be a problem. If you are flying kazakh air from Bishkek to Tashkent, you are more than likely to eff over the plane's comm.
Crookbond Posted October 2, 2013 Posted October 2, 2013 FAA recommends passengers should be allowed to use electronic devices on air/ground on flights. Good to see people slowly getting over legacy. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/01/business/faa-panel-would-ease-policy-on-electronic-devices-aloft.html?_r=1&
Recommended Posts