Seems highly unlikely to me, where would the FAA propose all the people with carry ons place their cellphones? Would they make people check them in? I doubt it....

Anne: the difference is that the inflight phone system has been tested with the plane's electronics and communications gear and is known not to interfere with them. Your "brand X" cell phone in the back has not.

It really depends on the type of (phone) equipment. Not all cell phones use the exact same technologies. Given, airlines/FAs do tend to trump the problem to a level higher than reality. However cell phone CAN/MAY cause challenges - so as a 3500 minute/month cell phone user, I say turn them off....

"until we a parked at the gate and the pilot has turned off the fasten seat belt sign" http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I think it very unlikely that a plane could crash because of someone using a cell phone after it has landed and while it is taxiing to the gate.

Well, they still can't figure out if cell phones are bad for our brains...

I got interested in the nitty gritty of this subject and did some poking aorund on the web.
This link leads directly to a research report on cellphones and aircraft:

http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publ...ports/EMI.html

i looked some more at that link- lots of great
research on technology an dhow it goes worng on aircraft.

go to http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/

and click on "major documents"

There has never been a proven incident of a cellphone interfering with a navigational incident. Only a suspicion. Aircraft instruments break and malfunction just like anything else. To be safe, airlines have banned their use. The incident on the plane where the pilot was getting an indication probably meant that he suspected that one of his instruments was malfunctioning and wanted to rule out cellphones as a possible cause.

------------------
speedbird001

There has never been a proven incident of a cellphone interfering with a navigational incident. Only a suspicion. Aircraft instruments break and malfunction just like anything else. To be safe, airlines have banned their use. The incident on the plane where the pilot was getting an indication probably meant that he suspected that one of his instruments was malfunctioning and wanted to rule out cellphones as a possible cause.

------------------
speedbird001

Certainly the incident cited does not prove that the instruments indicated that there was a cell phone in use. You could make the same announcement on almost any flight on a jumbo, completely speculatively, and find someone who left their phone on. By the way, the plane avionics are already well-shielded... otherwise the pilots could hardly use the DME and the GPS and the ATC radio and the weather RADAR at the same time, could they? (By the way, RADAR is an acronym; you could look it up.)

Having said all that, the likelihood of interference caused by cell phones to aircraft systems remains neither proven nor unproven. Therefore, and on general principles, adherence to the regulations is strongly encouraged. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

OTOH, and to underline the irony committed by QuietLion above, once the plane has landed your life is not exactly in the hands of the altimiter.

Just as a warning there does exist a general offence in English law of endangering an aircraft. Believe me, blatant and deliberate use of a mobile phone would constitute an offence and a prosecution has been successfully brought in the UK against a PAX who refused to turn off a phone when requested by the crew. Generally when on the ground and faced with a delay BA captains will give permission for MP's to be used on the ground.

If you are interested,


Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs

602.08 Portable Electronic Devices
(1) No operator of an aircraft shall permit the use of a portable electronic device on board an aircraft, where the device may impair the functioning of the aircraft's systems or equipment.

(2) No person shall use a portable electronic device on board an aircraft except with the permission of the operator of the aircraft.

Which means blah, blah, blah.....

Very informative but long at http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/commerc...ry/ac0106e.htm


Also letter to the editor http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/syssafe...glish/101e.htm

Canadian regs are very similar to US but canadian ones disclose more info to public.

and the debate goes on.....

I never had any pilot know mine was on ???

This reminds me of the rumor being bandied about eight or so years ago that the FAA would ban all portable computer use on aircraft because the electronics interfered with instruments. I was a young frequent business traveller and was concerned about the possiblity of a ban at the time. Instead, rules have gotten more lax when it comes to computer use, and the same has been true of cell phones.

Although I agree that cell phones have more potential for interfering with other electronics, I have talked with several friends who are pilots, and I don't believe that they pose a safety risk from an aircraft instrumentation standpoint. In fact, it has been postulated that the cellular service providers have used scare tactics because they don't want all of the passengers to overload their cells (especially those of us who have nationwide no-roam, no-long distance on our phones). I would agree with some of the other posts that the "conspiracy" probably includes those who make exorbitant profit on in-flight calls, although I rarely see people making in-flight calls. I was a frequent flier for about five years, then got a non-travel position for a couple of years and have been travelling extensively again for a year or so, and in all that time, I have used the in-flight phone twice. And once it was just to tell my husband (boyfriend at the time) that I was calling him from a plane. ;-) Ok, I was very young then....

It's likely that the only kind of interference that could wreak the kind of instrument-wrecking havoc Mikey mentioned (in jest)... ... would come from an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) - a sudden, high-intensity burst of broad-band electromagnetic radiation. One possible source of EMP that used to worry us in the cold-war days is the high-altitude airburst of a nuclear weapon, which produces an intense EMP. Theories suggested that planes might fall from the sky in the event of many nuclear bombs detonating in a short period of time. As if that's all we'd have to worry about if such a thing ever happened; perish the thought.

I do believe that there is a strong likelihood that the use of cell-phones on the aircraft can influence the instruments (avionics).

The IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) did an article on this in 1996 (see: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/publica...9609air.html).
This report just covered things like computers, games, etc, which are NOT designed to radiate electrical energy.
A cell-phone, however, is a transmitter, which IS designed to radiate electrical energy.
The IEEE article mentioned incidents where people sitting in a particular seat on the plane using a computer caused avionics irregularities, and when the person was asked to move to a different seat, the avionics returned to normal. This may be due to the person sitting in a seat where the cables were close by (behind the panels), and there may have been a connecter that was no shielded properly, causing the avionics equipment to receive the radiation from the computer, via the cables.
When a new product, like a notebook PC is made, it is designed to have shielding to reduce radiation of radio energy. But when the user upgrades the memory, for example, or it receives a slight crack in the case, this can cause the radio energy to "leak out".
The inflight phone systems differ from the cell-phone in that:
the cell-phone radiates INSIDE the aircraft.
the inflight phone has the antenna OUTSIDE the aircraft. (plus, the airline makes some $$$ out of the inflight phone http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif)

IMHO: cell-phones should be regulated like smoking on the plane: not permitted when announced by the FA. There should be a fine for people who abuse this.


[This message has been edited by Irvine (edited 01-27-2001).]

Mickey,

Please post the specific date, flight nbr
and airline. I would like to research
this matter further.

-doug