Electronic devices in planes: 3 questions.
Discussion
Right, here's the answer from the datalink comms manager at a big airline (me.)
1. Many passengers are invariably idiots and don't know what their devices do or how to control them, so we have to cater for everyone.
2. Aircraft systems are affected by Wi-Fi and especially mobile phone signals. We ran some tests a few years ago and got all of the cockpit screens to collapse when we had the equivalent of 5 mobile phone signals generated in the cabin.
3. Wi-Fi and mobile phones can be used if there is a base station on board the aircraft, you need a pico cell to ensure that the mobiles lock onto that and don't start hunting around for cells to connect to. If they don't find a network, they ramp up their power output until they find something, so by having a small cell on board, you are minimising the power output massively and generally keeping it below the dodgy threshold.
4. Mobile signals are bl**dy annoying when you're on the flight deck. Put you phone next to a speaker and you'll hear the "dit diddle dit diddle dit." Imagine that in your headsets when you're trying to talk to ATC or more important trying to have a snooze.
5. It's in the airlines rules and we're perfectly within our rights to boot you off if you don't comply. Cabin Crew have no discretion in this. Oh and we won't refund you for your ticket either.
So please don't whinge about it. We don't like annoying passengers for no good reason and we do test most things to see what might happen, but invariably it's better for everyone to just have a blanket ban at critical stages of flight and then allow the use of certain devices once up in the cruise.
Oh and finally, there is kit out there that can detect all sorts of electronic gear on board. It's not secret squirrel stuff and it's not that expensive either.
1. Many passengers are invariably idiots and don't know what their devices do or how to control them, so we have to cater for everyone.
2. Aircraft systems are affected by Wi-Fi and especially mobile phone signals. We ran some tests a few years ago and got all of the cockpit screens to collapse when we had the equivalent of 5 mobile phone signals generated in the cabin.
3. Wi-Fi and mobile phones can be used if there is a base station on board the aircraft, you need a pico cell to ensure that the mobiles lock onto that and don't start hunting around for cells to connect to. If they don't find a network, they ramp up their power output until they find something, so by having a small cell on board, you are minimising the power output massively and generally keeping it below the dodgy threshold.
4. Mobile signals are bl**dy annoying when you're on the flight deck. Put you phone next to a speaker and you'll hear the "dit diddle dit diddle dit." Imagine that in your headsets when you're trying to talk to ATC or more important trying to have a snooze.
5. It's in the airlines rules and we're perfectly within our rights to boot you off if you don't comply. Cabin Crew have no discretion in this. Oh and we won't refund you for your ticket either.
So please don't whinge about it. We don't like annoying passengers for no good reason and we do test most things to see what might happen, but invariably it's better for everyone to just have a blanket ban at critical stages of flight and then allow the use of certain devices once up in the cruise.
Oh and finally, there is kit out there that can detect all sorts of electronic gear on board. It's not secret squirrel stuff and it's not that expensive either.
No I didn't. In real life mobile devices are a pain and can be a problem for us. We're not in the business of taking risks for no reason, so if there's a hint of a problem, then it ain't allowed.
I can think of many times where mobile use has caused us issues. I've had to jump on the PA a few times myself and ask people to turn stuff off that they'd forgotten because we were getting interference for example.
Will it make the aircraft crash? Probably not, but that's not the issue really.
I can think of many times where mobile use has caused us issues. I've had to jump on the PA a few times myself and ask people to turn stuff off that they'd forgotten because we were getting interference for example.
Will it make the aircraft crash? Probably not, but that's not the issue really.
Edited by IforB on Saturday 10th March 11:11
It's like groundhog day round here sometimes.
To recap: The original CAA research paper on the subject.
Yes, that was ten years ago, but the cabin crew don't have time to find out the vintage of your kit - whether it is the latest power-sipping fondle-slice or some ancient brick that can microwave your brain from 10 feet away. On board pico-cells let you use your phones at minimal power, but they are far from standard fit, and even then they aren't always turned on.
So if they ask you to turn off your gadgets, do so. What's so difficult about that?
To recap: The original CAA research paper on the subject.
Yes, that was ten years ago, but the cabin crew don't have time to find out the vintage of your kit - whether it is the latest power-sipping fondle-slice or some ancient brick that can microwave your brain from 10 feet away. On board pico-cells let you use your phones at minimal power, but they are far from standard fit, and even then they aren't always turned on.
So if they ask you to turn off your gadgets, do so. What's so difficult about that?
Edited by eharding on Saturday 10th March 12:42
What makes it look s
t though is when the reason is blatantly commercial, airplane mode or wifi turned off should be good enough shouldn't it? But one holiday airline banned all entertainment equipment and hires out PSPs loaded with a couple of games or films- a pisstake if you have loaded you kindle or ipod with entertainment for the flight and switched everything to airplane mode.
t though is when the reason is blatantly commercial, airplane mode or wifi turned off should be good enough shouldn't it? But one holiday airline banned all entertainment equipment and hires out PSPs loaded with a couple of games or films- a pisstake if you have loaded you kindle or ipod with entertainment for the flight and switched everything to airplane mode.Sitting on a plane is bad enough without having everyone nattering into their phones.
I took a lot of internal flights in Saudi during the late 90s and most of the locals would sit chatting into their phones whilst the captain would keep asking for everyone to turn them off before taking off.
What got me was once everyone had shut up they would then join the cabin crew and captain in prayer before rumbling down the runway. Confidence inspiring stuff it was
I took a lot of internal flights in Saudi during the late 90s and most of the locals would sit chatting into their phones whilst the captain would keep asking for everyone to turn them off before taking off.
What got me was once everyone had shut up they would then join the cabin crew and captain in prayer before rumbling down the runway. Confidence inspiring stuff it was
'We ask people to turn off their mobiles because they can go 'diddit da diddit' on the radio'.
There. That was easy, honest, accurate and realistic. Now that I've been goven an honest reason that makes sense, I am far more likely to observe it. Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
(And before you ask, I haven't flown in an airliner for 7 years and almost never use mobiles, so this is not a personal crusade for freedom, just a desire to sort relevant facts from irrelevant facts and scaremongering)
There. That was easy, honest, accurate and realistic. Now that I've been goven an honest reason that makes sense, I am far more likely to observe it. Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
(And before you ask, I haven't flown in an airliner for 7 years and almost never use mobiles, so this is not a personal crusade for freedom, just a desire to sort relevant facts from irrelevant facts and scaremongering)
Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 10th March 16:42
cerbfan said:
I flew to Norway at New Year on some budget Norwegian airline that we got punted onto by Neilsons. Amazed to find it had free internet via WIFI. Virtually the whole plane were on there phones and I Pads surfing, it was quite quick as well. From what I remember we did have to turn them off for take off and landing though.
Now that's a switched on outfit! Instead of peoples phones ramping up the power to find a mast [at 40,000 ft] there's one 100' away. Result rf emissions kept to a minimum and managed.
A few phones is not going to be a problem.
Trouble is when you've got 300+ phones all in high power search mode in a concentrated space like on a plane. I can well imagine that that much RF would definitely cause problems.
Hence why everyone needs to turn them off or switch them to aeroplane mode.
Trouble is when you've got 300+ phones all in high power search mode in a concentrated space like on a plane. I can well imagine that that much RF would definitely cause problems.
Hence why everyone needs to turn them off or switch them to aeroplane mode.
GPS works when you're on a plane.....
Camera Roll-429 by Martin_Bennett, on Flickr
Seems to be breaking the speed limit.......
Camera Roll-429 by Martin_Bennett, on Flickr
Seems to be breaking the speed limit.......
Simpo Two said:
'We ask people to turn off their mobiles because they can go 'diddit da diddit' on the radio'.
There. That was easy, honest, accurate and realistic. Now that I've been goven an honest reason that makes sense, I am far more likely to observe it. Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
...so you missed the bit about the screens failing from IforB's post. That's some impressive mis-quoting. I haven't heard of that before, but I'm sure it's within the realms of possibility. Sometimes I wonder if you post for Daily Mail type sensationalism or if you're serious. Of course many of the potential risks are unproven, but why take the risk?There. That was easy, honest, accurate and realistic. Now that I've been goven an honest reason that makes sense, I am far more likely to observe it. Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 10th March 16:42
Edited by pushthebutton on Sunday 11th March 21:32
Simpo Two said:
'We ask people to turn off their mobiles because they can go 'diddit da diddit' on the radio'.
There. That was easy, honest, accurate and realistic. Now that I've been goven an honest reason that makes sense, I am far more likely to observe it. Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
(And before you ask, I haven't flown in an airliner for 7 years and almost never use mobiles, so this is not a personal crusade for freedom, just a desire to sort relevant facts from irrelevant facts and scaremongering)
You're just not getting this.There. That was easy, honest, accurate and realistic. Now that I've been goven an honest reason that makes sense, I am far more likely to observe it. Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
(And before you ask, I haven't flown in an airliner for 7 years and almost never use mobiles, so this is not a personal crusade for freedom, just a desire to sort relevant facts from irrelevant facts and scaremongering)
Edited by Simpo Two on Saturday 10th March 16:42
pushthebutton said:
...so you missed the bit about the screens failing from IforB's post. That's some impressive mis-quoting.
And some impressive not reading at all from you sir:Simpo Two said:
Saying that five mobiles in the cockpit will make the screens go down is as relevant as telling me that if I eat 3kg of tartrazine I will die of cancer.
It is not a relevant fact!!!
Let me imagine the 'experiment'. Mr Datalink Comms Mgr at Big Airline took a mobile phone into the cockpit and held it up to a screen, hoping something would happen. Nothing happened.
So he called for another mobile phone, held it up to a screen hoping something would happen - but nothing happened.
Repeat three more times. Bear in mind the inverse square law whilst all this is going on.
Eventually he managed to make something happen - with FIVE mobile phones strapped to the screen.
How is that relevant to anything please? It is no better than 'speed kills'. I'm happy to agree that mobiles make 'diddit da diddit' noises on the radio which is annoying and best avoided, but please people, use your brains!
Let me imagine the 'experiment'. Mr Datalink Comms Mgr at Big Airline took a mobile phone into the cockpit and held it up to a screen, hoping something would happen. Nothing happened.
So he called for another mobile phone, held it up to a screen hoping something would happen - but nothing happened.
Repeat three more times. Bear in mind the inverse square law whilst all this is going on.
Eventually he managed to make something happen - with FIVE mobile phones strapped to the screen.
How is that relevant to anything please? It is no better than 'speed kills'. I'm happy to agree that mobiles make 'diddit da diddit' noises on the radio which is annoying and best avoided, but please people, use your brains!
Simpo Two said:
It is not a relevant fact!!!
Let me imagine the 'experiment'. Mr Datalink Comms Mgr at Big Airline took a mobile phone into the cockpit and held it up to a screen, hoping something would happen. Nothing happened.
So he called for another mobile phone, held it up to a screen hoping something would happen - but nothing happened.
Repeat three more times. Bear in mind the inverse square law whilst all this is going on.
Eventually he managed to make something happen - with FIVE mobile phones strapped to the screen.
How is that relevant to anything please? It is no better than 'speed kills'. I'm happy to agree that mobiles make 'diddit da diddit' noises on the radio which is annoying and best avoided, but please people, use your brains!
???Let me imagine the 'experiment'. Mr Datalink Comms Mgr at Big Airline took a mobile phone into the cockpit and held it up to a screen, hoping something would happen. Nothing happened.
So he called for another mobile phone, held it up to a screen hoping something would happen - but nothing happened.
Repeat three more times. Bear in mind the inverse square law whilst all this is going on.
Eventually he managed to make something happen - with FIVE mobile phones strapped to the screen.
How is that relevant to anything please? It is no better than 'speed kills'. I'm happy to agree that mobiles make 'diddit da diddit' noises on the radio which is annoying and best avoided, but please people, use your brains!
Errr. Do you really think we test things in that way? Really? Bearing in mind what we do on a daily basis and the technology involved...
We were testing to see what would happen if we fitted wi-fi and how different devices affected different systems. Not one of us expected the screens to suddenly go blank as we started to ramp the power up. In the cabin by the way, not the cockpit.
I'm telling you that I know a shed load more about this than you do because we've actually tested it and since we take our customers safety pretty seriously, then we don't sod about with guess work.
If the screens in the cockpit go blank, then this is known as a "bad thing." "Bad things" in aviation are best avoided as they often have a high chance of death as an end point.
Imagine flying down an approach in crap conditions into a dodgy runway and then all of the information in front of you disappears because a load of people down the back decide they know better than the professionals charged with keeping them safe and think "stuff it, I'll text the Mrs." This would be a "bad thing."
Now this might sound unlikely, but we saw it happen in front of our eyes under controlled testing conditions using equipment that's likely to be worth more than your house. We repeated it a few times and it didn't always do it, but it was enough to scare the hell out of us. If it scares us, then I promise you, it should terrify you.
So stop being argumentative for the sake of it. Mobiles and other transmitting devices are a pain in the proverbial for airlines and with so many devices having transmitters of various kinds that most of the users don't understand in the least what that means. We can't be bothered to test every single one, so we know that certain types are bad news, so we ban them all for your safety.
Some airlines have different procedures and seem to allow different things, I can't explain why they do things differently. Maybe they have different procedures, or have tested specific devices, or maybe they simply don't consider it to be an issue.
Personally, before those tests, I always considered the ban to be a bit over the top. The second those screens went "phut" that changed.
In regard to kindles, it's not the changing pages that's the problem, it's people leaving the mobile function on. Remember that the 3G version is basically a mobile phone inside an e-reader. My mother has a kindle. Trusting her to know that it is a relatively high power transmitting device rather than just a different way of reading a book is not something I'm comfortable in doing.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff