View Single Post
Old 03-27-2013, 12:41 PM   #22
JoeD
Guru
JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.JoeD ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey View Post
Again; if these devices truly posed a threat, they'd be confiscated, turned off, and placed inside checked baggage.
There's levels of threat and risk from unlikely to certainty and each is handled in different ways as appropriate.

If turning on a cellphone always caused a problem and could be shown to bring planes down, then it'd be treated as a similar threat level as trying to take a bomb on board a plane. Nobody would be allowed to take one onboard whether it was turned off or not.

In reality, they fall into the, most likely not going to cause a problem even if someone has deliberately modified it or leaves one on. So risk wise there's no need to totally ban them, but we're not 100% sure that even unmodified devices are going to be totally safe, so for now lets try to get them all turned off during flights (or at least the parts we're worried about).

As more research is done, the risk levels will be re-evaluated and change much as we're seeing with the usage of electronic (non-transmitting) during take-off/landing.

IOW until we know enough to be confident in any decision, err on the side of caution.
JoeD is offline   Reply With Quote