Do you turn off phone on a flight because you are told to?

[BigBen]

manracer said:

parabolica said:

Plus, if anyone thinks they will get a mobile phone signal at 38,000ft they're going to be disappointed.

Perhaps not 38,000ft, but certainly at 33,000 feet passing over Portugal a few months ago I received a "Welcome to Portugal" text from the local network.

I've also been able to receive the odd WhatsApp message now and again even at crusing altitude, although admittedly this has only happened twice.

you woud think being named after a type of antenna Parabolica would have more idea about radio propogation in free space

[shtu]

captain_cynic said:

I turn mine off because I understand the technology involved and am not a selfish tt.
...
Help the pilots, help other passengers, help yourself, don't be a selfish tt and switch off those radios.

This guy gets it.

One thing that a lot of people forget is just how sodding old many aircraft are. When mobile phones first came on the scene in meaningful numbers, it was indroducing possibly dozens of randomly-placed small portable radio transmitters into the cabin, and the kit onboard had never been tested for it's ability to cope.

Safest answer - turn the phones off.

As time passes, testing standards are defined, more modern kit arrives and is tested and certified as safe, the rules have been gradually relaxed.


Or, you can be a selfish tt, refuse and loudly proclaim it's a breach of your civll liberties to be without whatsapp for a few hours.

[Countdown]

Mabbs9 said:

It's not bks. Just turn it off when asked to. 5G the bigger issue, particularly in the US where it uses a higher power. We even have a 5g brief for each airport to state if we need to take any action. It can affect the radio altimeter on our aircraft and its not an old one. It's the very latest.

The risk is low but if it did go wrong it could be quite hazardous.

You're only the pilot, what do you know?

[Saweep]

Countdown said:

Mabbs9 said:

It's not bks. Just turn it off when asked to. 5G the bigger issue, particularly in the US where it uses a higher power. We even have a 5g brief for each airport to state if we need to take any action. It can affect the radio altimeter on our aircraft and its not an old one. It's the very latest.

The risk is low but if it did go wrong it could be quite hazardous.

You're only the pilot, what do you know?

Trust the science!

[Amateurish]

Countdown said:

Mabbs9 said:

It's not bks. Just turn it off when asked to. 5G the bigger issue, particularly in the US where it uses a higher power. We even have a 5g brief for each airport to state if we need to take any action. It can affect the radio altimeter on our aircraft and its not an old one. It's the very latest.

The risk is low but if it did go wrong it could be quite hazardous.

You're only the pilot, what do you know?

I am surprised that turning off my phone is part of the start up checklist for my little Cessna, even though I need to have it turned on to use SkyDemon. The phone would also be very useful if I had a radio failure.

[the-norseman]

I used to, havent bothered last few times.

[Louis Balfour]

the-norseman said:

I used to, havent bothered last few times.

Read a book not so long ago that might have been called “the truth about airlines” which said that something like 90% of people don’t bother and neither do the pilots.

[HTP99]

Seems like this is along the similar lines of "don't use your phone at the petrol pumps due to the risk of explosion" bks!!

[snuffy]

HTP99 said:

Seems like this is along the similar lines of "don't use your phone at the petrol pumps due to the risk of explosion" bks!!

Yep, that tiny little low powered phone battery might spark and cause an explosion, but that 300Amp whopper in your car that's capable of turning your engine over, nope, that one is fine.

[caiss4]

snuffy said:

HTP99 said:

Seems like this is along the similar lines of "don't use your phone at the petrol pumps due to the risk of explosion" bks!!

Yep, that tiny little low powered phone battery might spark and cause an explosion, but that 300Amp whopper in your car that's capable of turning your engine over, nope, that one is fine.

Nothing to do with the battery in the phone. It's the risk of an RF discharge. Ever put something metallic in a microwave?

[Trustmeimadoctor]

caiss4 said:

snuffy said:

HTP99 said:

Seems like this is along the similar lines of "don't use your phone at the petrol pumps due to the risk of explosion" bks!!

Yep, that tiny little low powered phone battery might spark and cause an explosion, but that 300Amp whopper in your car that's capable of turning your engine over, nope, that one is fine.

Nothing to do with the battery in the phone. It's the risk of an RF discharge. Ever put something metallic in a microwave?

Yeah most of the time it does nothing intact it can be really hard to get it to do something

https://youtu.be/OyTmJX_TC84

[Griffith4ever]

the petrol station thing has been properly mythbusted in the past. I think everyone understands an abundance of caution when new technology and its effects are not well understood, but I think most people have also noticed that out of date/misguided caution / best practices hang around for a very long time and an awful lot of people don't just blindly "do as they are told" when something no longer makes sense.

I'm quite surprised at the couple of hyper agressive rants on this thread when, pretty much every other response has been calm, measured, and honest. The general response seems to be, "sure, I've left it on, don't think about it much" rather than "f-you, I'll leave it on if I want to, Its my right!"

There are some very easily triggered folk on here.

[Baldchap]

I turn mine to aeroplane mode because on the occasions I have forgotten the battery is flat on arrival. Searching for nonexistent signal munches battery.

I don't for a second believe they have any impact on the plane because they would be banned or checked if they did.

[captain_cynic]

caiss4 said:

snuffy said:

HTP99 said:

Seems like this is along the similar lines of "don't use your phone at the petrol pumps due to the risk of explosion" bks!!

Yep, that tiny little low powered phone battery might spark and cause an explosion, but that 300Amp whopper in your car that's capable of turning your engine over, nope, that one is fine.

Nothing to do with the battery in the phone. It's the risk of an RF discharge. Ever put something metallic in a microwave?

More over, they want you to pay attention to what you're doing when handling gallons of flammable liquids.

We've known for ages now that the biggest risk with mobile phones is distraction (not to say there aren't other risks too).

[snuffy]

captain_cynic said:

More over, they want you to pay attention to what you're doing when handling gallons of flammable liquids.

That's a classic example of working backwards from the solution in order to attempt to justify the non-existent problem.

[boyse7en]

Griffith4ever said:

I'm quite surprised at the couple of hyper agressive rants on this thread when, pretty much every other response has been calm, measured, and honest. The general response seems to be, "sure, I've left it on, don't think about it much" rather than "f-you, I'll leave it on if I want to, Its my right!"

There are some very easily triggered folk on here.

The problem is that if you perceive a problem, then the casual "don't think about it much" is just as baffling or annoying as the more vitriolic response.

I don't see a problem with turning my phone off if asked to do so by the cabin crew. It's their plane, they probably know more about it than i do, and the impact to me is minimal so why wouldn't i comply with their request? Seems petty to try and think you are getting one over on the man, or somehow superior to the "sheep", by not turning it off.

[Louis Balfour]

snuffy said:

captain_cynic said:

More over, they want you to pay attention to what you're doing when handling gallons of flammable liquids.

That's a classic example of working backwards from the solution in order to attempt to justify the non-existent problem.

I think there was a problem back in the day, whether real or imagined, with analogue mobile phones interfering with the metering of pumps. I seem to recall that is why they didn't want people using mobiles on forecourts originally.

[ClaphamGT3]

Pitre said:

Always goes off/flight mode.

It would be interesting to know whether it's still an issue, but I thought a large number of phones 'on' may interfere with the plane's communications systems...

If there was even a 0.00000000001% chance of this happening, do you think passengers would be allowed to keep their phones with them on flights?

[captain_cynic]

snuffy said:

captain_cynic said:

More over, they want you to pay attention to what you're doing when handling gallons of flammable liquids.

That's a classic example of working backwards from the solution in order to attempt to justify the non-existent problem.

Not really.

More of an example of things we've learned as we've gone along. As I've mentioned, the biggest danger we've found with mobile phones is distraction. This wasn't even considered 30 years ago before they were commonplace.

[snuffy]

Louis Balfour said:

snuffy said:

captain_cynic said:

More over, they want you to pay attention to what you're doing when handling gallons of flammable liquids.

That's a classic example of working backwards from the solution in order to attempt to justify the non-existent problem.

I think there was a problem back in the day, whether real or imagined, with analogue mobile phones interfering with the metering of pumps. I seem to recall that is why they didn't want people using mobiles on forecourts originally.

What I mean is that the petrol companies banned the use of mobiles on their forecourts, claiming it was because of explosion risk. Then that was then shown to be a load of bks, so instead of admitting they were wrong in the face of the evidence, they instead dreamed up another reason (i.e. being districted) to justify their initial position (and by justify, I mean save face).