Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel News
Reload this Page >

Half of air passengers leave phones on

Half of air passengers leave phones on

Old Aug 6, 2013, 9:06 am
  #31  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: TPA, FL
Programs: United Gold, Hilton Diamond,Marriott Gold
Posts: 482
duhhhhhhhhhhhhh
PcolaPaul is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2013, 10:16 am
  #32  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: HH Gold, AA Gold
Posts: 10,482
Originally Posted by northtoalaska
its beyond silly and into the stupid why people have the attitude of wanting to leave their electronic devices on when told to turn them off.

if you've ever been on a flight flying a CAT 3 approach in a snowstorm where neither you, or the pilots can see ANYTHING right down to 50 feet above the ground you'd have a different attitude.
We've raised a generation of people who think the rules don't apply to them -- if they don't agree with them.
formeraa is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2013, 11:50 am
  #33  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Hawai'i Nei
Programs: Au: UA, Marriott, Hilton; GE
Posts: 7,244
Originally Posted by MOC991
In the end, they are being somewhat conservative but with good reason because they are trying to prevent crashes and interference with critical landing systems. I like landing safely and I turn my phone off. It especially worries me when I see someone with their phone on when landing in a storm. If the conditions are poor, then it is IFR conditions so they are using ILS. I'm not trying to tell you when to turn off your phone, but it is a real issue. It has been shown in a laboratory, and with my few engineering and science classes, I can tell you there is a scientific basis despite what some random self proclaimed EE might say. Just turn it off. It is not going to function well and it will completely drain the battery life so there is no reason. Your phone made in China which isn't know for the best quality control can cause issues.

Please don't rely on the fact that your phone hasn't caused a crash yet. That would be anecdotal and useless evidence. I've told you exactly when they are worried about phones causing issues and why it can't be shielded. It isn't "safety theater" and your fruit company doesn't make avionics. Actually they don't even make the hardware. That is done in China.
Thank you for your comprehensive comments, only part of which I left above. I hope you don't get too flamed by the masses. People, please turn the friggin things off! Get unconnected for a few hours and get a life.
747FC is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2013, 12:53 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,376
Originally Posted by sr_tipitinas
Emirates allows you to use your cell phone during the flight except on takeoff and landing.
Only on aircraft equipped with the OnAir system which is designed and tested specifically for this purpose.


Personally, I'm quite glad to switch my phone off and forget about it until I'm off the aircraft at my destination.
ft101 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2013, 7:22 pm
  #35  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL DM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing>MVP
Posts: 9,365
Half the pax on how many flights a day times how many days?

And how much serious interference has been experienced?

Seems like there is now enough real world data for the FAA to eliminate the requirement to turn phones off.

Last edited by 5khours; Aug 6, 2013 at 7:59 pm
5khours is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2013, 8:15 pm
  #36  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6
I turn off my company phone and once I get through security at the airport the company ipad's data is turned off. I like using the plane as time to get away from work, sometimes you don't want the office to reach you. I will be honest though I never completely turn off my S3 or the ipad, they just get put in airplane mode. If the radio is shutoff it can't effect the communications of the plane.
dowmace is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2013, 9:38 pm
  #37  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Hyatt Place, Del Taco
Posts: 5,446
Originally Posted by tigerhunt2011
How recent is this? I'm wondering if maybe older phones caused worse interference? 3watt bag phones & DynaTacs anyone?
This was within the last couple years.
evergrn is offline  
Old Aug 7, 2013, 2:48 am
  #38  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL DM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing>MVP
Posts: 9,365
Originally Posted by dowmace
I turn off my company phone and once I get through security at the airport the company ipad's data is turned off. I like using the plane as time to get away from work, sometimes you don't want the office to reach you. I will be honest though I never completely turn off my S3 or the ipad, they just get put in airplane mode. If the radio is shutoff it can't effect the communications of the plane.
Not quite true. Any electronic device emits spurious RF radiation. It's supposed to be shielded to prevent emissions over a certain level. That's different than the intended emissions (WiFi, cellular, GPS, BlueTooth etc.) Same with the avionics on the plane, they receive info from antennas, wired inputs, etc., but they can also be affected by other types of spurious RF radiation from all sorts of things including your phone, iPad, etc. Similarly, the avionics are shielded to protect them from this spurious radiation.

The small theoretical risk could be just as likely whether or not your device has the radio(s) turned on or off.

Bottom line though is that despite gazillions of hours of people flying with their phones turned on, there is no evidence that this has ever had a serious detrimental impact on aircraft communication and avionics.

Sunspots, ham radio, and terrestrial TV are probably much more serious issues.
5khours is offline  
Old Aug 7, 2013, 11:19 pm
  #39  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: COS
Programs: United 1K & 1MM, IHG Plat Elite, Hyatt Gold, Marriott GE, Hertz 5*, National Exec
Posts: 270
Airplane avionics in the Watt range.
Cell phones in the milliWatt range.

When not receiving or sending calls, my phone puts about as much EMI as your fancy watch...or pacemaker...or the coffee machine in the galley.
fastfxr is offline  
Old Aug 8, 2013, 12:02 am
  #40  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SYD
Programs: VA WP, UA 1k, QR G, AZ WP
Posts: 358
Originally Posted by fastfxr
When not receiving or sending calls, my phone puts about as much EMI as your fancy watch...or pacemaker...or the coffee machine in the galley.
or the 'perfectly acceptable during any stage of flight' voice recorder or electric shaver?
quick_dry is offline  
Old Aug 9, 2013, 12:55 am
  #41  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,439
Originally Posted by northtoalaska
its beyond silly and into the stupid why people have the attitude of wanting to leave their electronic devices on when told to turn them off.

if you've ever been on a flight flying a CAT 3 approach in a snowstorm where neither you, or the pilots can see ANYTHING right down to 50 feet above the ground you'd have a different attitude.
No, I wouldn't.

Originally Posted by puddinhead
Wasn't a cell phone powered on the cause of the Asiana SFO crash?
No, it wasn't.

Originally Posted by evergrn
I was on this flight one time in which the pilot announced over intercom upon starting descent that he could tell that someone's cell phone was on and was interfering with his communication. He asked that everyone comply and shut down the cell phone. Shortly thereafter, he made an announcement that he was now communicating without interference and he gave a thanks for complying. Then short time afterward that, he again came on with a frustrated tone, saying that someone apparently has still not turned off the phone because he was still getting interferences. I wondered how legitimate all of that was, because that was the first and the only time I've heard a pilot come on and say things like that.
Total BS from the pilot.

Originally Posted by 5khours
Half the pax on how many flights a day times how many days?

And how much serious interference has been experienced?

Seems like there is now enough real world data for the FAA to eliminate the requirement to turn phones off.
There is. Said it many times before. 20 million commercial aviation flights around the world every year. That is 600 million commercial flights in the past 30 years, all of them with a variety of personal electronic devices in all manner of conditions that are turned on during all phases of flight. Not one single proven case of negative effect due to that 30 years of experience.

The number of transmitting devices is only going to get worse. When I travel (hell, on any average day) I have a Fitbit using Bluetooth, a smart watch communicating to my smartphone (phones actually) a tablet and two computers with me. The fitbit and watch cannot be turned off, and the Fitbit has no airplane mode (though the watch does). I am not the only one traveling with a ton of electronics, and the only reason I turn something off is if I want to save on battery life. So far all of airplane trips have landed at the correct airport (over 3 million miles of air travel).

This issue needs to be put to bed by changing the rules.
planemechanic is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2013, 4:10 am
  #42  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sydney Australia
Programs: No programs & No Points!!!
Posts: 14,241
I've flown on Qatar Airways with the usual warning about turning everything off. Apparently this is code for "turn every electronic device you have on and also text furiously". None of the passengers even bothered to do what they were told and the flight attendants didn't bother to enforce it. I'm still here so surely things are not as dire as they say??

I figure if phones or electronic devices caused the plane's instruments to malfunction NO electronic devices would be allowed in the cabin. If that was the case, then a phone could cause a malfunction and then a crash so shouldn't a phone be considered a dangerous item and be banned?

Last edited by cblaisd; Aug 11, 2013 at 5:17 am Reason: Merged poster's two consecutive posts
Annalisa12 is offline  
Old Aug 12, 2013, 11:00 am
  #43  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Seattle
Programs: AA PLT
Posts: 70
All the answers are here:

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/69...ones-on-planes

Warning, not surprisingly, swearing involved.
richtravels is offline  
Old Aug 12, 2013, 12:55 pm
  #44  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: south of WAS DC
Posts: 10,131
Originally Posted by MOC991
"The laboratory results indicated that the phones not only produce emissions at the operating frequency, but also produce other emissions that fall within airplane communication/navigation frequency bands (automatic direction finder, high frequency, very high frequency [VHF] omni range/locator, and VHF communications and instrument landing system [ILS])."
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aer..._textonly.html

.
is this article not 20 years old? back in the days of superhetrodine receivers?
slawecki is offline  
Old Aug 12, 2013, 6:35 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Programs: AA Platinum, UA Gold, Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 179
Originally Posted by slawecki
is this article not 20 years old? back in the days of superhetrodine receivers?
The article is old, but that was on the edge of the introduction of what is now called 2G technology which is still used as Analog, TDMA, and CDMA. I thought it made the point more concisely that it is RF interference that is a concern with equipment that cannot be shielded because it is a function of the avionics to emit and receive RF. Here is a more recent article(2006) from IEEE(Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) which says the same thing in a more convoluted way:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/a...t-any-airspeed

The point I keep seeing resurface is that the planes are made wrong if cell phones can interfere. Your phone can be interfered with by an RF device, but you probably wouldn't conclude that it was made incorrectly. The avionics use RF and they can interfere with RF frequencies just like your phone or say a walkie-talkie. The most crucial that can be interfered with is the ILS, but the above article says it can even interfere with GPS frequencies.

In the end, the FAA is being slightly conservative because they don't like to gamble with people's lives when they know there is a possibility. In addition to the RF issue, the EMI shielding and safety features that have been implemented may not be on older planes and rely on airlines to maintain the shielding correctly. Now you know why and what the possibility is so provide credible studies that counter the real ones without anecdotes.
MOC991 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.