Ari

No; they know it applies to them, they just ignore it cause they don't want to follow it.

magiciansampras

Exactly. Thanks for making my point. Arrogance at its finest with these passengers.

goalie

bolding mine: ^^ and as much as it pi$$es me off when i see it, i think a few "nice words" about the "nice passenger" and then let it go.

Ari

Since when does practicality = arrogance?

magiciansampras

"I think it is impractical to turn off the cell phone. I know better than the airline. Airline rules are stupid." Arrogance.

clrankin

I would agree that TSA's rules are stupid and made-up, but breaking them hardly carries no consequence... unless you're a TSO with a desire to bring handguns beyond the checkpoint.

Respect is given when it is earned.

Which airline activity has earned my respect-- price gouging, cramming people into small seats, charging for checked luggage, or having an asinine flight attendant tell people how to fasten seat belts like we're all two years old?

And the airline obviously doesn't care that people are ignoring the rule... otherwise they would more strictly enforce it. It's hard to say that it's important that the rules be followed when flight attendants sit there and text during taxi and take-off as well, now isn't it? Or is it always OK for government and companies to adopt "Do as I say, but not as I do" as a philosophy?

magiciansampras

And yet, amazingly, you continue to fly them. Is keeping your iphone on your way of revenge?

The latter does not follow from the former. Just because some FAs are lax about checking phones doesn't mean that they airline 'doesn't care.' Some FAs are lax about telling people to go back to their seats when the seatbet sign is on. Does that imply to you that the airline obviously doesn't care whether or not you're in your seat and buckled during turbulence?

Again, is it your philosophy that because someone breaks a rule it's ok for you to do it as well?

CargoHoldFlyer

I respect rules - I truly do... but some rules are just so ridiculous - actually following them is probably worse... Such as - remember when "the wireless radio on your laptop MUST be off throughout the flight - it interferes with aircraft function" <and could crash the plane>.... until of course they figured out how to do it "safely" (and charge you for it) - now it's perfectly safe.

Several airlines allow use of cell phones in the air (not US airlines true but still) - since they fly Boeing and Airbus planes - and I'm pretty sure 1 777 is the same as another 777 when it comes to the "protection" and "fail safes" - I'd have to say ignoring this rule is the best answer.....

@magiciansampras - it's not arrogance. It's nonviolent civil disobedience for asinine rules.

magiciansampras

All of this assumes that 1) the rule is asinine and 2) it is best not to follow it. Ergo, you know better than the airline. Right? How is that not arrogant?

And why does everyone seem to think that this is about safety. The airline has a rule, why does it matter what their motivation is?

jbcarioca

This subject is really funny. The phones may be obnoxious, as may be the computers, but they don't interfere with navigation. There are other threads that discuss the long-ago early mobile phone era conflicts caused with mobile telephone tower interference, at which time the FCC was upset, not the FAA. That was also way back when pilots had to have "restricted radiotelephone licences" to operate aircraft radios in international airspace etc. If these devices harmed the aircraft in any way we'd have airlines crashing like Windows 95 computers.

clrankin

I believe in what I see happening all around me. I'd place even odds that there's not a single flight that goes out without someone leaving a cell phone on-- either intentionally or accidentally. And yet, through some apparent miracle , not a single plane is dropping out of the sky and killing hundreds of people due to an activated iPhone.

Hence, reality now shows us that said rule is asinine.

Because some rules are so stupid and unnecessary that they deserve to be broken by all-- especially if there are no consequences to doing so.

If the airlines had a rule saying that everyone needed to disrobe and fly naked, but didn't enforce it, would you still obey? If the airlines made up a rule saying that people couldn't bring any outside food and beverage onto the aircraft "for safety reasons", would you still obey? What would have to happen to make you move from an apparent thought process of "unquestioningly obey all rules" to "think for one's self before blindly walking off the cliff"?

Flyingfox

Why? To avoid confrontation.
Would tell an FA discretely if possible.

clrankin

What would be the motivation for ratting out a fellow passenger to the FA?

magiciansampras

Utterly irrelevant and bad evidence to boot. Just because planes don't fall out of the sky doesn't necessarily mean that electronics don't have a negative effect on airplane equipment.

Further, one of the reasons airlines have this rule has nothing to do with iPhones. The FAA and airlines can't test the effect of every gizmo that gets developed and therefore they adopt a more precautionary principle.

Again, the arrogance.

Who said I am for unquestionably obeying all rules? Some rules infringe upon our civil rights and liberties.

Flyingfox

Come on, you must be joking?
Who is the expert in these situations, to determine which rules are "unneccessary"?
The general public? Ha ha ha!
I'd go with an electrical engineer's opinion over that. We've got a whole lot of uneducated "experts" with opinions in this world today, and that's not neccessarily a good thing.
Some people don't know what they don't know.