08-22-2002, 08:40 AM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,350
|
|
FAA on PDA use on planes
http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2002-08-19-pdas_x.htm
It seems like only yesterday that we were discussing the use of Pocket PC Phone Editions on board an airplane. It also seems that the FAA is not up-to-date with the latest technology when it comes to the use of electronic devices on planes.
I'll quote the linked USAToday article (source: PocketNow): "On a recent flight from Newark, N.J., to Orlando, Mike Corbo decided to check his e-mail. Instead of plugging into a $3.99-a-minute in-flight phone, he powered up his Palm VII and downloaded the messages wirelessly, at 35,000 feet. "I found that as long as we were flying over a major city, I would easily connect and send or receive e-mail without a problem," says the Lyndhurst, N.J., information systems manager. No one tried to stop Corbo because what he did is legal. The Federal Aviation Administration doesn't ban the onboard use of a personal digital assistant � even one that can connect to the Internet through a cellular network � according to FAA spokesman Paul Takemoto. "He isn't violating any rule," he says."
"Terry Wiseman, an expert on in-flight communications systems and editor of the newsletter Airfax.com, says people may bicker over where a PDA ends and a cell phone begins, but in some respects, both devices do the same thing. "A personal digital assistant may use less bandwidth to check e-mail, but basically you're using the same frequency as a cellular phone, and in much the same way," he says. He suggests that the government's policy on PDAs may be outdated, given the convergence of phones and computing devices."
New rules given the current convergence of devices might be a good thing. Because now this might lead to strange situations. I've heard quite the opposite stories from people using their Pocket PC Phone Edition that they were not allowed to use their PDA at all, not even with the phone switched off. The arial antenna of the T-Mobile / XDA betrays its powers to the flight attendants, and they are probably not aware of all the other possibilities of such a PDA / phone combination.
It is exactly for these situations that Microsoft has implemented a very easy way to switch off the phone (tapping the radio icon in the title bar, or holding the red button for a few seconds). If the phone is off, it remains off until you manually enable it again. Even a soft reset will not switch the phone back on. Although it's a Pocket PC / Phone combination, the unit can function as a standalone Pocket PC as well. Not only developers but also the FAA and flight attendants got to learn, and learn fast.
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 09:41 AM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 110
|
|
I took a flight on a small plane in South Africa last year. It was so small almost everyone's luggage had to go into the hold. Somebody left their phone on in their bag. The crew told us this - so presumably there was some interference - or what ever.
I'm not a flight systems engineer - I have no idea if this really matters. But the fact that you can "see" a phone via some sort of interference would worry me more than a little. I can't see any distinction between voice calls and data calls. If voice is dangerous then data must be too.
There was a case a year or so back when a guy got done for sms'ing his girlfriend. The crew asked to stop and he refused. He got done for endangering the aircraft!
I wish there was a CLEAR (consistent) message on this. Like if using your phone in a Petrol (Gas) Station is so dangerous why do they let some many people do it!
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 11:52 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 140
|
|
The person who used his Palm for e-mail should be reprimanded. I work in a world class centre for heavy maintenance on 747 and 777 aircraft. Whenever I go into the hangars, the first rule is 'Phones Off'.
The Nokia 9210 long ago implemented a 'flight' profile which allowed PDA use and totally restricted any form of transmission, but I think we need to respect the concerns of the airlines who say "switch it off".
We cannot afford to take any risks with aircraft, no matter how stone-age the policy may be. If a member of cabin crew ask us to turn off a device, whether it is connected or not, we should turn it off (I've even seen clauses in the user manual for a Gameboy saying that it should not be used during landing or takeoff). But they (cabin crew) also need to be able to recognise other forms of transmission.
What really galls me is that the Palm user in question said that as long as he was over a city, he could connect. Great! Just the place for an aircraft to come down! Not!
Safety first! Safety second! Safety third! Safety always!
I can't tell you the atmosphere in work whenever we hear of an aircraft coming down. We dread the day that an aircraft may come down after being maintained by us and Quality is the 100%, absolute, total, top dog! The thoughts of a behemoth like that, full of living, thinking people, coming down on a city, town or village should sober the most geeky mind into switching it off.
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 12:07 PM
|
|
Contributing Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,350
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PlayAgain?
We cannot afford to take any risks with aircraft, no matter how stone-age the policy may be. If a member of cabin crew ask us to turn off a device, whether it is connected or not, we should turn it off (I've even seen clauses in the user manual for a Gameboy saying that it should not be used during landing or takeoff). But they (cabin crew) also need to be able to recognise other forms of transmission.
|
I completely agree with your argument for safety first. That's why I feel that the FAA should take a look at their rules if those would allow device A to be used and device B not, if they are similar devices. Safety first, so in case of doubt, deny access to all those devices.
But... I also feel that not only should the cabin crew be aware of other forms of transmission, they should also be aware of non-transmission. They need to learn that there are safe ways to use devices (perhaps not during take off and landing, but during flights). I can't see why a notebook might be used, and a Pocket PC not if its radio is shut off completely. Therefor I think it's good that the cabin crew learns about new devices, and learns how to check for their safety.
Still I agree with you that it's the cabin crew that should have the final say in what is to be used and what not. We're in their domain, and we could possible endanger their lives, as well as the life of others. It's their responsibility to give us a safe ride, and we should respect their decision on what to use, and what not to use, even if we don't agree.
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 01:07 PM
|
|
Editor Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,060
|
|
My fear? That until suitable definitions and rules are created, the prevailing law will be *nothing* in use during flight. Back when fears about notebook interference were just emerging, a few airlines actually banned their use altogether for awhile.
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 01:09 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 248
|
|
FAA, what is it good for?
While I do not disagree that safety comes first. I'd like to point out that the FAA is quite feckless. The FAA is and always has been behind thetimes. Their record for safety is not one to brag about. This is an agancy that has prevented small airports form adopting their own landing systems because they feel all airports should use the same system. It doesn't seem to occur to them that mayube a system designed for a large, multi-billion dollar airport might not fit the bill for an airport for cessna's and other puddle jumpers. so these small airports still use their eyes to land planes. That isn't to mention that completely out of date technology they use to land out large planes. The airlines themselves shouel make it clear what can and can't be done. I am always willing to give people the benefit of the doubt that maybe they hadn't realized that they were interfering with communications before beating them into a pulp in a self-righteous fit of anger. At any rate, I agree with Marlof Bregonje that the cabin crews shoudl determine what can and can't beused. Just as they are the first line of defense in a terrorist situation and should be trained as such.
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 01:36 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 100
|
|
Personally, though I've never used a phone on a plane, and don't intend to in the future, I think that the matter is being exaggerated a little bit. I can't see how a mobile phone on board a plane is any more likely to affect the computer systems than the signals being transmitted from a mobile phone mast... they must be at least as powerful, if not more.
I have to confess that I'm not completely guilt free.... I once forgot to switch off my phone and it rang as the plane was accelerating down the runway for take-off. Fortunately, non of the flight crew heard it.
__________________
David HornPocketGamer.org - For Gamers on the Go...Pocket PC games news (latest releases), reviews (newest), downloads, discussion, giveaways & special offers, and plenty more besides!
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 01:58 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 153
|
|
Coicidentally, I just read yesterday (I can't find the article today, but I think it was on CNet) that Sprint is going to be developing (or buying) phones that have an 'airplane' mode where the radio portion of the phone is shut down. This would allow the user to work with downloaded apps on their phones without causing interference.
With this in mind, I think everybody here has the right attitude: The FAA needs to reassess the reasons why a device can or cannot be used (rather than the type of device), and more importantly, the cockpit crew is in charge, regardless of their knowledge of these convergent devices--and the flight attendants are their deputies. (I just hate it when some blowhard gets all bent out of shape when a flight attendant asks him to turn off his phone, return seat to upright position, etc...)
-Jim
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 06:04 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 17
|
|
Guess this makes the FAA and flight attendants like most Circuit City and Best Buy salepeople...clueless about these devices  , I honestly feel that more than just flight attendants need education on these devices and their capabilities.
Also, I think that the convergence of devices will only lead to more public issues. As it is, many people complain about cellular phones these days because they're everywhere, and no matter where you go people are calling folks or whatever else. I mean, how long until you have to yell at the guy in front of you in the movie theatre because the light from his XDA is distracting you? 
|
| |
|
|
|
08-22-2002, 06:36 PM
|
|
Neophyte
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jerrytroll
Guess this makes the FAA and flight attendants like most Circuit City and Best Buy salepeople...clueless about these devices
|
The FAA will most likely band all PDAs, they will say it's too hard to tell if one has wireless support or not.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
