Totally disagree with this comment although I think this maybe a cultural thing: in the UK I was taught most sternly to be quiet, polite, queue patiently, don’t eat food in public and generally consider the people around me. One of the agonies for British people of traveling overseas is the noise volume, lack of consideration for others and invasion of personal space that other people think is acceptable.
A pilot friend of ours told us that if you leave your cell phone on while flying, you will drain the battery faster because the phone is constantly looking for a tower and if you make calls while in the air, the roaming charges can be brutal.
He went on to explain that he made a call while flying in the northern part of Minnesota, I think, and ended up with huge charges because he picked up a Canadian cell phone tower.
My cell phone does that.
I go out in areas in the woods where coverage is spotty. If I leave it on out there it DOES drain the battery darn fast. Though I am not sure whether its no coverage, weak coverage, or intermittent coverage thats the problem.
So, if its a remote area I turn it off. And only turn it on if I need it and am hoping it will work.
In general I think cell phones should be allowed anywhere where normal conversations are allowed. Obvious exceptions would include safety risks because of signal interference but if these concerns are resolved I would be fine with cell phones in flights. I think some people have unrealistic expectations about noise levels in public places.
I would do no such thing.
I will be plotting the fast death of those people. Ideally by getting the exit door seat and threatening ejection to offenders.
NONONONO! shut the fuck up and put your damn phone away! I vote absolutely no, ever - I’m in an enclosed space and can’t get away from you.
I already can’t escape from everything else going on in the plane, why add one more annoyance?
Just FYI, I think most people in the United States opposed to permitting phones on planes are ignorant of what the experience is actually like. Emirates (a very customer experience oriented airline) and other airlines do it and it works out fine. For some reason, people don’t feel compelled to speak more loudly into the phones and the background noise drowns out the cellphone conversations.
Airplanes are not necessarily “public places”.
And draining the battery faster? Oh dear god. I can just hear some entitlement mentality jackass screaming that his phone is dead and they’d better find him a charger.
Can you even use most phones on planes most of the time?
In the past, when I’ve played games or listened to music on my phones with no “airplane mode”–or when I’ve been too lazy to turn off the cell radio on my more recent phones–I’ve noticed that there’s just no reception at 35,000 ft. Sure, the occasional stray network registration will happen, but it’s always a fleeting thing.
So what handsets are these that are piercing the RF-blocking, electrostatically-charged aluminum skin of the aircraft and getting good enough cell reception to carry on a conversation? From my experience, you might as well say you should be allowed to use your phone on the moon.
I don’t think that’s a cultural thing; I’d say it’s a generational thing. I was also taught the same things here in the US. Except for that ‘queue patiently’ thing. We were taught to stand in line quietly, with no pushing. 
I know I sound like a cranky old lady, but I’m amazed at the number of people who think they must be accessible (and must be able to access other people) every waking minute.
Actually, at 35,000 it’s mostly your distance from the cell tower that’s causing problems. That, and cell towers are made to pay attention mostly to stuff on the ground, they weren’t designed with expectation of transmission from 7 miles above them.
If the powers that be start allowing cellphone use on airplanes the planes will probably be outfitted with an antennae and some sort of signal booster to enable regular cellphones to access the cell towers.
Which I may have explained badly, not being an engineer, but that’s the gist of it.
The only way I’d be in favor of it would be divided seating - Cell/No Cell. Put the cell talkers in the back of the plane and let me sit in the relative peace of the front.
Beyond that, no. Trust me, the world won’t end if you can’t natter on about every little thing every little second. Texting I can tolerate since it’s quiet. Unless you have an inane tone sound when you receive a message…
OK, I’ll say it. I hate cell phones.
Most likely, they’d use an FAA-approved “femtocell” device that acts as a local cell site inside the airplane. The femtocell “backhauls” the phone traffic back to Earth via some other sort of radio link to a dedicated location, rather than to the nearest cell tower.
The technology is pretty new - AT&T began a test of what they’re calling
“3G MicroCell” in the Charlotte and Raleigh, North Carolina markets last week. The MicroCell device backhauls your cell phone calls, texts and voice mails over your home broadband connection.
I’m hoping it works well - cell phone reception in my home is utterly terrible, and I’d gladly pay a one-time $150 to buy a femtocell device to get usable service.
Please, God, NO!
This is one of the dumbest ideas ever.
“Hey, we have a lot of people packs like sardines in a really small space, so how can we put them more on edge and increase the likelihood that arguments and fights break out?”
“How about we let everyone talk on their cell phones throughout the flight.”
Brilliant.
If people spoke in normal voices, sure. However, people feel this need to scream into a cellphone so that anyone can hear their conversation six blocks away. The last think I would want to do is sit next to some idiot and listen to them scream in a cell phone for hours on end.
I wouldn’t mind if it was txting only.
If they could restrict it to data only, or enforce some sort of quiet area or quite code, then sure. God, yes. I have an eight hour flight next month, and I’ve never had to sit still for that long. I have no idea how I’m going to get through that. I’m a fast reader, and I’m trying to pack as lightly as possible. Having a phone with access to data would be a godsend–at least then I could IM my friends.
And, yeah. I know that, in the old days, you didn’t have to be on the phone all the time. But, then again, in the old days, you weren’t charged for checking baggage, so I could jam my carry-on full of books.
Hell, no. Flight time is one of the few times I’m not connected to the E-ball-n-chain, so any attempt to push airplane internet/cell phone use on me is met with an almost visceral horror.
I was in an airport a couple of weeks ago and saw a particularly horrendous ad stating “Your downtime is now your uptime!”, as if we are supposed to be over-joyed with the idea of sending and receiving emails while flying.
Fvck that!
I’m a little confused here at some of the anecdotes being related.
I have flown domestic flights in the U.S. but that was a little while ago so maybe things are different there.
On all of the international flights I have been on using various major airlines the use of mobile phones is specifically prohibited in the pre flight safety spiel,not brcause it might be a nuisance to other passengers but because it can seriously interfere with "Fly by wire "controlled aircraft.
As I understand it most aircraft nowadays more advanced then a Sopwith Camel fall into this category.
Reputedly there has been at least one air crash as a result of onboard phone interference but to be honest that last bit is anecdotal and I can’t vouch for its authenticity but I wouldn’t like to find out for myself how true it is.
Actually the original justification for non-use of personal electronics was possible RF interference with communications/navigation instruments, as personal electronics began proliferating; radios of any kind in particular were an issue (even receivers generate a signal) so this predates the expansion in use of cell phones.
If you notice, it’s ordained that you use no electronics of any kind during rollout, takeoff and climb, or during final approach and landing. And no communications until taxiing to the arrival gate. Essentially they’re saying “nothing that will cause a stray noise (such as the annoying brreeeeeeppp-beep-beep-beep sound of pinging GSM) in the pilot’s headset or in t he ATC channel at critical points” and “the only communications coming in or out of this plane until we’re safely at the destination airport should be those going through OUR radios”.
I’d expect the lawyers working for Airbus, Boeing, Bombardier and Embraer have clearly told the engineers to make sure the flight control electronics on FBW aircraft are “hardened” and redundant enough to whitstand most unavoidable interference even the ocassional lightning strike. But in turn some of the flight control electronics depend on navigation signals so you want those to be as clean as possible.
Part of the problem is, the makers of personal electronics devices keep coming up with new bands, powers, new protocols, etc. with often minimal or no hardening to avoid signal leak, and it would be a PITA to continually retune/refit your aircraft’s electronics to make them impervious to whatever’s announced in this year’s CES, so the airlines play it safe.