(AKA I’m tired of these motherfuckin’ iPods on this motherfuckin’ plane!)
I travel relatively frequently (about once a month) by plane. Right before the plane takes off, the passengers are asked to shut off all cell phones for the remainder of the flight, and all other portable electronic devices until the plane reaches its cruising altitude. On some airlines, the “other devices” are listed by name: laptops, Game Boys, iPods and other music players, etc. Then, 20-30 minutes into the flight, one of the attendants coems over the intercom and gives everyone the green light to use their stuff again (except for the phones, of course).
My question is this: what’s the danger? With cell phones, I can kind of see it; they do transmit a signal, after all. Is it likely the average cell phone will interfere with the plane’s communications somehow? Or is their concern about something else? With other devices, it seems even stranger…what is going to happen to the plane if I’m listening to Slayer and making Powerpoint slides during takeoff?
Are these reasonable precautions, or is it just hypercautiousness against a one-in-a-million disaster?
The cell phone restriction is more for the FCC than the FAA. Mythbusters did a thing on it.
As far as the other electronic devices, I’m guessing that some guy came up with a study that said that electronics on airplanes during taxi/takeoff/landing pose a .0000001% chance of a threat to the plane asploding and the airlines are on the better safe than sorry boat.
Just a WAG
There is no danger to the airplane or the airplanes communications due to cell phones or any other electronic device listed.
I think in that case they’re more worried about the tray table being up and the computer not turning into a dangerous projectile in the event of a problem. There may also be an issue because so many computers these days have Wi-Fi and Bluetooth systems that could be broadcasting.
I don’t understand the “turn off your iPods” thing at all. They don’t broadcast anything or receive signals, and they use minuscule amounts of power. We’re not talking about radios, cellphones, walkie talkies, or even computers that have Wi-Fi and/or Bluetooth in them. There are no coils, no speakers. Do we just have to turn off our iPods because the airlines don’t want to check each passenger to make sure it’s not a Zune (which does broadcast and receive) or Walkman (which receives)?
I’ll fight to keep cellphones turned off during the flight because I don’t want to be surrounded by people yelling into their phones the whole time (why, oh why, can’t people speak at normal volumes when using cellphones?), but iPods? Heck, as long as they aren’t cranked up loud enough for me to hear what’s coming out of your headphones, it just keeps you quiet.
A commercial pilot friend of mine said that the real reason is that in case there is an emergency during take off they don’t want passengers listening to anyhing other than the flight attendents. That explanation rings true for me…
That’s what I was thinking on my flights this weekend. The same would seem to hold true during landing, as well. In addition, they don’t want passengers fooling around trying to find their song, playing their game, etc., instead of trying to get off the plane!
It’s hypercautiousness, with a side of saving money in a light pointlessness sauce.
In older planes (with older instruments), it might be conceivable that some cell phones (particularly those that operate in the lower frequency bands, like 800 MHz) might have affected the instrumentation if the shielding on the plane’s wiring wasn’t up to snuff. I consider this an unlikely scenario. Modern instrumentation with proper shielding should not be affected by a cell phone signal (or much of anything else other than the signals it’s intended to receive).
On the other hand, actually certifying every type of phone to be safe on the plane would require lots of testing, and be expensive. Then you’d have to do it again every time the technology changes (which it has done several times in the past decade).
Moreover, it would be of little use, since cell phones can’t be relied on to work on a plane in the first place–you’re a long way from the cell site (even if it’s right below you), you’re moving much faster than a cell system is designed to cope with, and you’re sitting in a metal can. Even if you manage to place a call, it’s unlikely to survive the first handoff attempt (which should occur in less than a minute).
-Balance, speaking as a former designer of cellular networks
As noted, it isn’t an FAA thing. You can buy a private jet and your 100 closest friend can legally use all of your electronics at once if you want to. It is just a way to get people to pay attention in case anything comes goes wrong during the most risky phases of the flight.
I’m sorry, Q.E.D., but I don’t find your cite terribly convincing, particularly not as pertains to refuting my comment.
It covers the period from 1986 to 1999. There was a great deal of change in avionics over that period, and still more since. I made the distinction between older avionics (and older phones) and modern equipment in my post. To the author’s credit, the report points this out and makes some effort to account for it.
It’s a compilation of 86 incident reports over a period of 14 years. Assuming each case is, in fact, a genuine anomaly related to use of a cell phone or other personal electronic device, 86 incidents in 14 years qualifies–in my opinion–as an unlikely scenario.
The information on which the analysis is based is anecdotal. Again, the author points this out and attempts to account for it.
The analysis deals in correlation, with no attempt at establishing causation. In essence, it’s a compilation of cases of anomalies in which someone reported that an electronic device was also in use at the time of the anomaly. Establishing causation would likely be impossible, if only because many of the devices cited do not transmit signals of any kind. (To cherry-pick an example, one of the incidents in 1993 involves a calculator in use at the time the anomaly was noted.)
InvisibleWombat, the OP specifically asked, “Is it likely the average cell phone will interfere with the plane’s communications somehow?” Since cell systems are my field, I answered from that perspective–the short version of which is “Almost certainly not, but it wouldn’t work worth crap (or at all) anyway, so why risk it?”
I don’t know much about iPods, so I didn’t tackle that. I would think they’d be even less likely to cause interference than cell phones. For what it’s worth, I agree that dolphinboy has probably nailed the idea behind that rule. It makes sense.
When I read the OP, Balance, I read “With cell phones, I can kind of see it; they do transmit a signal, after all. Is it likely the average cell phone will interfere with the plane’s communications somehow?” and mentally turned “is it” into “it is.” Sorry.
As a pilot and as a one-time passenger during a take-off emergency on an airliner these are my two theories on the “personal devices” issue
If there’s an emergency you need to be aware of and listen to the flight attendants. If something goes wrong on take-off or landing you may have to react quickly and not be fooling with your iPod or going “Huh? What?”
During an in-flight emergency, if the airplane moves abruptly (and they can!) stuff WILL fly throughout the cabin. Anything you can do to minimize the amount of stuff that can fly through the cabin is good for safety. That means keeping the iPod, Gameboy, etc. tucked safely away for a few minutes. You much less likely to have this sort of thing happen in cruise, so keeping the masses entertained for a teeny increased risk is reasonable.
It hasn’t happened to me on a commercial flight, but on small planes I’ve been whacked in the head often enough with pens, pencils, manuals, clipboards, keys, and other crap they I now have rules about keeping stuff tied down, tucked away, or left on the ground when I’m the one in charge. It freaks people out when you climb out of an airplane with a scalp wound, ya know?
This topic has come up a number of times on SDMB. One of the relevant points is that if personal electronic devices (especially, those that transmit, such as cellphones) were actually accepted to be a meaningful hazard to aircraft, simply announcing they should be turned off would be woefully (indeed, criminally) inadequate. It would be necessary to search and confiscate or electronically scan for these (continuously during every flight) to ensure they are not operating. It should be obvious that a mere announcement generates far less than 100% compliance - some will ignore it, some will defy it, many will forget they left their cellphone on.
Your first point (paying attention) is a good one. I disagree with the one I’ve quoted here.
My iPod is in a case strapped to my arm when I’m flying (normally it would be on my belt, but the seats on the plane are too narrow for that). Sometimes I move it to my pocket. While your books, purses, computers, drinks, and bags of peanuts become projectiles, my iPod will stay safely attached to me. I see a lot more iPods in pockets and cases than laying about loose.
Well, sir (or madam) that is YOU, and bravo to you if you keep your personal stuff under such control during the flight. Other people, however, are not you. I will also point out that computers, drinks, and food are also not supposed to be out and about during take off and landing, and I have been reprimanded at times for having my nose in a book while a commercial passenger. So my second point holds: during take off and landing, which is when you are most likely to get abrupt movements, they don’t want loose objects in the cabin. This may or may not be enforced consistently, and while your iPod may be safely strapped to your arm the one belonging to the guy ten rows away may not. We’ve covered this before in other threads, that the flight attendants don’t really have the time to inspect what each passenger is doing so they ask everyone to do a certain thing for consistency.
On the subject of keeping potential projectiles under control, I’ve noticed the last few times that I’ve flown that passengers are being told not to put their laptops in the magazine holders. It seems to me that the magazine holder would be a safer place for them than on your lap. Does anyone know why we’re being told this? It doesn’t really matter to me, because even when I am traveling with my laptop I don’t use it during the flight.
Sorry for the high jack but . . . Huh?! I’m a frequent flier and I’ve never heard of this. Take-offs make me a bit nervous and I *always * have my nose in a book then. Nary a comment.
It could be that the magazine holders can’t reliably restrain the weight of the average laptop computer. Or that the weight of the laptops is enough that regularly doing this rips the magazine holder, which would be a pain to get fixed, it not being a vital system. Or some other reason.