Electronic equipment on planes|

[Corpulent Tosser]

I have recently bought an iphone and was surprised to hear the flight attendant on both flights yesterday (BMI) that Blackberries, laptops and PDAs could be used in flight safe mode but iphones had to remain switched off.

Anyone know why ?

I was hoping to use mine next week as I have a longish flight (6hrs)

TA
CT

[MiniMan64]

I think you're on your own there chap, I've never heard of I-Phones singled out and I have no idea why they'd be different, set it to flight mode, tuck it away out of sight for take off and landing and then hope your battery lasts 8 hours.

[Flintstone]

MiniMan64 said:

...tuck it away out of sight for take off and landing and then hope your battery lasts 8 hours.

Ummmm, given that they've asked you not you I wouldn't advise this. If they catch you out after you've been specifically told not to (putting aside any risks to the avionics) you risk whatever sanctions they deem fit.



(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

[hugh_]

Flintstone said:

Ummmm, given that they've asked you not you I wouldn't advise this. If they catch you out after you've been specifically told not to (putting aside any risks to the avionics) you risk whatever sanctions they deem fit.



(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

The OP isnt trying to get around it, he's asked why it's the case...

[Simpo Two]

Flintstone said:

(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

Why don't they say what the risks are then?

[MiniMan64]

Simpo Two said:

Flintstone said:

(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

Why don't they say what the risks are then?

I've yet to see a single piece of proper evidence for making people turn off phones when a plane takes off but that's besides the point in regard to the OP's question.

My answer to that was I'd never heard I-Phones specifically mentioned before, I've flown a lot this year and all they ever say is "Please switch electronics like Blueberrys and I-Phones to Flight Mode and those without off until we're in the air".

[anonymous-user]

Simpo Two said:

Flintstone said:

(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

Why don't they say what the risks are then?

Because the majority of passengers:
a) wouldn't understand
b) wouldn't listen
c) wouldn't agree

It's a bit like a surgeon not explaining every little detail before he "does a hip replacement".

[Simpo Two]

Crossflow Kid said:

Because the majority of passengers:
a) wouldn't understand
b) wouldn't listen
c) wouldn't agree

OK, try me. If I understand a rule I'm far more likely to follow it.

[anonymous-user]

Simpo Two said:

Crossflow Kid said:

Because the majority of passengers:
a) wouldn't understand
b) wouldn't listen
c) wouldn't agree

OK, try me. If I understand a rule I'm far more likely to follow it.

They interfere with clever nav stuff. Allegedly.
That funny banjo twanging noise you hear in near-by audio speakers when your phone talks to the net is sometimes also audible over the aircraft radios, and although not catastrophic it can be a real pain.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 17th September 22:16

[MiniMan64]

Crossflow Kid said:

Simpo Two said:

Crossflow Kid said:

Because the majority of passengers:
a) wouldn't understand
b) wouldn't listen
c) wouldn't agree

OK, try me. If I understand a rule I'm far more likely to follow it.

They interfere with clever nav stuff. Allegedly.

Edited by Crossflow Kid on Friday 17th September 22:16

And thats the important word here.

Plus if it's the navigation gear why is it only on take off and landing but you're fine to use it in the air.

[anonymous-user]

MiniMan64 said:

Crossflow Kid said:

Simpo Two said:

Crossflow Kid said:

Because the majority of passengers:
a) wouldn't understand
b) wouldn't listen
c) wouldn't agree

OK, try me. If I understand a rule I'm far more likely to follow it.

They interfere with clever nav stuff. Allegedly.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 17th September 22:16

And thats the important word here.

Plus if it's the navigation gear why is it only on take off and landing but you're fine to use it in the air.

You're right, allegedly is the important word here. It sort of means "We're pretty certain but not absolutely sure but then let's not find out the hard way eh?".

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 17th September 22:30

[Flintstone]

hugh_ said:

Flintstone said:

Ummmm, given that they've asked you not you I wouldn't advise this. If they catch you out after you've been specifically told not to (putting aside any risks to the avionics) you risk whatever sanctions they deem fit.
(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

The OP isnt trying to get around it, he's asked why it's the case...

I didn't say the OP was trying to get around it. Miniman's telling him to ignore it yet confesses to not knowing what it might do.

Simpo Two said:

Flintstone said:

(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

Why don't they say what the risks are then?

Some of the reasons have been explained by Crossflow Kid. Others 'might' include not giving the wrong people information on how to interfere with an aircraft's avionics. You know, the sort you can tell there'll be a loud bang if they stick a fork in a power point and they'll do it anyway. The sort who are told that laser pointers can blind people so they aim them at aircraft being flown by pilot type people.

The reason some gadgets are allowed in the cruise and not immediately after take-off or landing is that the latter are considered to be critical phases of flight. If your phone causes a problem at 41,000 feet there's time and room to sort it out. If it does the same at 100 feet during a Cat IIIb approach (ie, cloud on the ground and zero visibility) getting told off for ignoring instructions is going to be the second item on your list of problems right after 'Dying A Firey Death'.

[Simpo Two]

OK, but if the possibility is dying a fiery death, I'd want to search every bag and take the batteries out of every phone. Just saying to people 'please turn them off' doesn't strike me as a very good way of achieving 100% 'offness'. So the airlines know there' a risk, but carry on anyway. That's why I think it's not a real risk

[Flintstone]

Simpo Two said:

I think it's not a real risk

Having seen instruments behave erratically at the same time as I've heard phones 'logging on' on approach I'd disagree. Could be coincidental of course but I'm not a betting man

[GingerWizard]

Flintstone said:

MiniMan64 said:

...tuck it away out of sight for take off and landing and then hope your battery lasts 8 hours.

Ummmm, given that they've asked you not you I wouldn't advise this. If they catch you out after you've been specifically told not to (putting aside any risks to the avionics) you risk whatever sanctions they deem fit.



(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

shut up, you don't know the risks either i know some of them but its all a bag of ste, no significance to not using them at all.

Its a bit like smoking on planes. The air qualitity was actually better when they allowed it. Now you just get stale second hand germ ridden carbon dioxide saturated air......

stick it to the man, if the plane blows up your all dead any how!

[El Capitano]

I have flown BMI loads of times, and don't understand why you cant use flight mode either.
It makes no sense as it was made exactly for that reason. No signal is being emitted from the phone in flight mode, so its no different to any other electrical device.
You find every airline has different rules. Some allow it, some don't.

[FasterFreddy]

GingerWizard said:

Its a bit like smoking on planes. The air qualitity was actually better when they allowed it.

Not when you were sitting in 'no smoking' one row behind the 'smoking' section it wasn't.

[Flintstone]

GingerWizard said:

Flintstone said:

MiniMan64 said:

...tuck it away out of sight for take off and landing and then hope your battery lasts 8 hours.

Ummmm, given that they've asked you not you I wouldn't advise this. If they catch you out after you've been specifically told not to (putting aside any risks to the avionics) you risk whatever sanctions they deem fit.



(Why do people actively seek to get around these things when they don't know the risks?).

shut up, you don't know the risks either...

Shut up? Must have taken you hours to dream that one up. Try re-reading my post(s) then come back and tell me I don't know the risks.

[davepoth]

I've read stories of iPhones in foreign countries, which are set to not send or receive data to avoid racking up huge bills, still sending and receiving data without it being apparent to the user. I imagine that if BMI have read the same thing they have come to the logical conclusion that you can't turn off the data link without turning off the iPhone.

[Simpo Two]

I guess it's an arse-covering exercise. IF the plane crashes and IF it's traced to a mobile phone, then the airline can say 'Well we told the passengeres to turn them off' and thus escape a lawsuit.