Actually, it was this one. I guess they were worried about endangering the cease fire.
Even if the plane were half-way, the quicker route depends on the wind. If you’re flying into a headwind, then turning around and going back will be much quicker than going on forwards.
If there is a hazard, it has never been properly demonstrated. Everyone assumes that the cell phone prohibition is an FAA regulation when it comes to US flights but it isn’t. It is simply the policy of the airlines encouraged by the phone companies (the high speed confuses the tower jumping). Airlines could allow cell phones if they wanted to although the reception may be spotty and I would hate to be pinned between 2 people yakking away for three hours. The actual risk to the flight is negligible at best.
Out of curiosity, how would they do that?
I know that it’s possible to check phone records, and to see what incoming and outgoing calls a particular phone has made.
I know that it’s also possible, at least with some phones, to locate a cellphone that is in use, often down to a fairly small area.
But how would you determine which cellphone received a call while sitting in an overhead luggage compartment 24 hours ago? Wouldn’t that require looking at the cellphone records of everyone on the plane?
It could be that my ignorance of the technology is at fault here, but i’d be interested to know how easy it would actually be to determine whose cellphone was ringing on the plane.
Halfway between London and New York, the closest airfield capable of landing a large jet is probably St John’s in Newfoundland, so if you really are half way that might be the best place to go to.
If I were the airline, since no-one owned up to the cell…
It should be fairly easy to localize the phone, if indeed it was in an overhead bin. Before anyone is allowed to deplane, all luggage from that area is confiscated and searched completely. All phones found are then checked for the call. There can’t be that many of them. For that matter, just search everybody’s luggage for a phone that is still turned on. Odds are, the owner is the guy who should get the fuel bill.
and
-
As I read the FOX article, the cabin crew found the phone after it rang and were in possession of it. If it’s anything like mine (which, admittedly, it may not be) there is a menu item allowing one to read the number linked to that phone, on its own display. The number found thus could have been relayed back to the UK by radio and the number’s owner looked up. If the owner was on the passenger manifest, voila.
-
As the flight originated in the UK, chances are there WAS no luggage in the cabin. I was under the impression that the ban on carry-on luggage for flights originating in the UK remains in effect.
The article, I must say, wasn’t all that clear so I may have some of the details wrong.
I see. Your solution requires implementation before the passengers leave the plane.
The way you made your original statement, i assumed that you meant that it would be easy to discover the culprit now, hours after the fact.
Also, i think your plan to confiscate all hand luggage would require more than just the airline. They would have to get the police or other security authorities involved, i would think. And searching through everyone’s phone would also present problems of privacy and legality that the airline, acting alone, could probably not circumvent legally.
This London Times article is interesting. Apparently the phone started ringing just after take-off, and it took the pilot and crew another 90 minutes to decide to turn around and return to London.
It also seems that the passengers themselves were the ones making the most noise about wanting to turn around:
Of the 217 people on the flight, 65 decided not to make the journey at all, getting off the plane in London.
Pussies.
Considering the global frenzy over cell phones, and that most people, seemingly, cannot tolerate an hour of life without one, an unclaimed cell phone is a huge deal and worthy of maximum caution.
Well, hell yeah. It might have been a really important call.
Gander, in Labrador, actually. At one time it was a stop on virtually every transatlantic flight. On 9-11 it played host to a couple dozen flights, I believe, but it no longer has anything like the capacity to deal with that many people, so the passengers were put up by local residents and such.
IANAL. At the moment, on planes from UK to USA, nothing is allowed beyond the short list of items discussed in other threads on these topics. No phones are allowed. Whatever one things of this, it’s still the policy that no phones are allowed. Therefore, a ringing phone indicates that someone broke the rule, and under the present circumstances, violated the security cordon. I assume that given that phones are considered a threat at present, the ringing of a phone signifies a security breach. I assume that somewhere on our ticket/contractsw in tiny print, there is something that says that the cabin crew can tear the place apart if there’s evidence of a contraband item/weapon. If the screeners did their jobs at the airport, passengers embarked with one plastic baggie with a few essential travel documents and some tampons. However, whether a screener fluffed this or someone deliberately brought a phone on, it makes sense to me to respond as if a threat has occurred, *if * bringing on a phone has been identified as a risk, which it has.
With no reading material, laptops, iPods, etc. I would assume that many pasengers would at worst have their boredom alleviated by a game of “find the contraband phone.”
Also, on the flight path mentioned, don’t we have Lockerbie on one end and the WTC on the other? It’s not a flight without reminders of successfully executed terrorist actions.
If there’s the potential for the situation to escalate, you’d probably not want to be heading to some remote Canadian airstrip (no offence intended to anyone! 
) If the plane was genuinely halfway between Britain and the eastern Canadian options, heading back for Glasgow Prestwick, designated as one of two UK airports fully equipped to deal with hijackings etc., would be the better option.
On the other hand, wouldn’t Iceland often actually be the nearest option?
All depends on where they were in the flight, though I think Iceland is going to be significantly north of the Great Circle route between London and New York. Someplace in Greenland might be on the list, too, but I’m not sure whether any places there have big strips. Gander I know has a big enough strip to land anything. The advantage of landing at Gander if you’ve been hijacked is that the hijackers are stranded in the middle of nowhere too. 
Well what the heck? Why did I think Gander is in Labrador? It’s in Newfoundland proper.
Good call - looks like they’d have to be routed a long way north for Iceland to come into the question. On the other hand, dopers who know can tell us how far north would be normal for a flight path?
Well, I’m no pilot, but airlines are going to take the shortest possible route unless there’s a damn good reason not to (like big storms). Your link there is going to be really close to the path they actually fly.
I was under the impression that westbound transatlantic flights were routed further north than eastbound ones…something to do with jetstreams, perhaps. Not to mention the congestion of the airspace over north-west Europe.
Phones on a plane!