^

I wish I could say that to passengers...!

Admittedly, I do not have many issues with phones, maybe it is the way I ask, but most people happily switch them off... the occasional grunt or "but it's in flight safe mode" retort... to which I say that all electronic equipment is to be switched off for take off and landing, as per the video... oh yes, that would be the video that you did not watch, as you were playing with your phone... funny that! :D (Kidding... I don't really say that...!)

I'm afraid that day is already here and some airlines are already allowing it. BA are resisting the urge at the moment due to customer pressure against the use of mobiles in flight, but how long that will hold against the financial appeal of allowing use?

My understanding was that all electronic devices had to be off for both take-off and landing.

However, on approach to an airport, an aircraft will be (usually) landing using the ILS - Instrument Landing System. It's effectively following a (radar?) beam from the airport, which tells the aircraft where it is in relation to the airport - how far out, what heading, what altitude. This is used to guide the aircraft into the airport and ensure it is lined up correctly on the runway. ILS are quite sensitive things - they are safeguarded fiercly, and even within the airport, there is a clear area maintained around the ILS to ensure that nothing interferes with the beam - having been working on an airport where we accidentally set fire to the grass within the ILS zone, and had permission refused from ATC to enter it to put it out as they had aircraft on approach and so couldn't risk either turning the ILS off or scatter to the beam, then I'm aware of how fiercely these are guarded! (the fire went out by itself, much to our relief, that we didn't need to alert the fire service to what we had been up to as we'd never have been able to live it down :o :D). So anything which could interfere with reception of the ILS on board would also be a huge no-no!

Hopefully the pilots will be along to correct anything wrong I've said - while I had to consider the effects ILS had on the airfield, I only had the whole system explained to me one drunken evening in a bar somewhere. And although Ive watched RAF Precision Approach with awe (and jealousy, it is exactly like a game!), I've never seen civilian ATC in action...

Well now you have. Not my video and thus I disclaim the lame music at the outset.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rft5lh2LWLY

They need to be placed into flight-safe mode and then turned off for take off, so that when turning them on, they go straight into flight-safe mode, and do not try and connect before you have a chance to turn it off.

Well I think the FA's maybe should have given the passenger a cookie (B cubed is that allowed?) :) just a thought

Interesting... I think that is far from clear from the briefing, whether done over the PAS, through the video, or both....

Excuse me I may have misunderstood but she had turned off the phone and was inquiring about his details BEFORE the FA ENTERED the cockpit and had her thrown out:eek:!!! Right??

1) If they were still at the gate the FA should have had no trouble with her since she turned it off BEFORE going to taxi

2) if they were already on the taxiway - then what the H*** was the FA doing opening the door to the cockpit anyway! Post 9/11 regulations require those doors to be secured BEFORE leaving the gate!

OK now what did I miss???

Anecdotal evidence is not scientific evidence. It may only be a specific phone type, or a broken phone which is the problem - or maybe it is multiple phones. I don't pretend to know whether cell phones could ever possibly have any effect on the electronics aboard an aircraft, but I do know that solely relying on the fact that it hasn't happened up to this point is unwise. I also wouldn't rely on the lack of confiscation as being an indicator that 200 people should all power up their cell phones at once and try to place a call.

I agree, but it wouldn't surprise me if >200 people did leave their phones on on an Emirates A380, and they would all start ringing/receiving texts as soon as they got in range of a signal after a long flight :eek:.

Before I get flamed, I'm not advocating leaving them on, but I'm sure that many do and on a full B747 or A380 there could easily be 50 or so ringing away and receiving texts during takeoff and landing. If there really is a danger I'd rather they were all off!

What I find just as infuriating as PAX using their phones when they have been instructed not to are those who jabber on throughout the pre-flight safety demo.

Surely these extremely rude people have just proved they are incapable of following simple crew instructions, so for safety reasons should be slung-off post-haste! ^

I don't think there's a significant risk that a cellphone or computer can in itself bring down a modern airliner, and I'd go so far as to suggest that the more modern the design, the less likely this is to happen.

I think the real issue is it takes maybe 3 or 4 simultaneous failures to cause an accident. If you think about the Turkish 737 that ploughed into the polder outside Schipol recently, it had a faulty radio altimeter, but it took at least a combination of this with a high initial approach, some unforgiving design of the auto power retardation system and (probably) some distraction of the crew before they got into a catastrophic condition. The point with shutting off sources of EMI is you're aiming to remove the risk of, for example, adding the straw that breaks the camels back by minimising interference with ILS, altimeter or SatNav systems - the aircraft can and often is flown with faults but the more problems that line up, the greater the risk of striking terrafirma.

Well... no... If a Senior Crew member, or member of crew has enough reason to, they can request access to the flight deck. Primary communication would be via inter-phone, but if required, I could access the flight deck during taxi if required. Especially if something relating to safety.

The "FA" can not just open the flight deck door, well, at least not on Main Line BA, I appreciate this is Comair, but we have to request access. So it is not a case of just opening the door... I would imagine it would be similar in other airlines.

Indeed...

I had a rather prolonged discussion with a lady in 2J on the 767 (Short Haul variant, obviously...) I asked her to put her hand bag into the overhead locker for take off. She was rather rude about it, and decided to stuff it backwards, under her own seat, thus, pushing her life jacket back out of reach, with the handles to her hand bag sticking out.

I told her that it was not really acceptable to do that... when she asked why, I told her...

"Well, unfortunately, if this aircraft has to ditch in the north sea on the way to Stockholm, and I shout the command to "Unfasten your seat belt! Grab your life jacket! Come this way!", grabbing your hand bag, will most certainly not keep you afloat in the water for very long."

Thankfully, she saw sense and had a little grin of admission on her face.

But it does make me wonder how these people will react to instructions when it comes to the nitty gritty. We have all seen, and know, that there has been several BA incidents recently, and passenger reaction is always something that is investigated post incident, so we will see what the feedback is.

Your view is somewhat similar to other views in this thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...ur-flight.html

Bottom line is that there is evidence that phones *can* cause interference (as can some other electronic devices). It's best that they are switched off.