"... and please switch off all electronic devices."

[astra]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Often you're way ahead of your luggage anyway, so why the rush?

Exactly

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Often you're way ahead of your luggage anyway, so why the rush?

There are some good reasons. You legs are cramped and you want to stand up. And you might be in a hurry to find a restroom. Also if you have put sensitive things like a laptop in the overhead compartment you want to get it out as fast as possible.

[astra]

Originally Posted by tompe

There are some good reasons. You legs are cramped and you want to stand up. And you might be in a hurry to find a restroom. Also if you have put sensitive things like a laptop in the overhead compartment you want to get it out as fast as possible.

All of the reasons you mentioned are valid.
It is funny but apparently it is applicable to the most of the passengers

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Often you're way ahead of your luggage anyway, so why the rush?

It only makes sense when you are in transit to some other destination and risk missing the next flight (with or without luggage).

Once I arrived to Lyon very late, just in time to take the last night bus to some other city, so I wanted to get out of the airport as soon as possible... but I had to wait for the luggage. So I waited... the last bus left... I waited... and my luggage was not there. I had to spend the night in the airport, take the first bus in the morning, and wait a couple of days for my luggage. Had I known my luggage was not there, I could have catched the bus

[EowynCarter]

I do keep everything off the 5-10 from take-off / landing.
But "belts on" light is like 20-30min, that's a long time to wait doing noting.

I'll probably switch off the reader to avoid making a mess of things, but I'll be VERY unhappy about it.

[TimS]

Here's a link to the 2001 study by NASA about personal electronic devices causing problems on planes:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2001108092.pdf

[TimS]

Then there's the article published by the IEEE:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/a...any-airspeed/0

[kovidgoyal]

Originally Posted by TimS

Then there's the article published by the IEEE:

http://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/a...any-airspeed/0

Thanks for that, good to see some actual data from an actual experiment. I really hope there are more such studies before cell phone use is allowed in planes. In particular studies that actually try to measure the effect of cell phones on plane systems rather than just the presence of radiation from cell phones.

[Tamara]

Originally Posted by astra

I have noticed.
The moment belt sign goes off, all over the plane you can hear ringing and people start to talk. As if they cannot live a few hours without talking on the phone

I can understand it if you're being picked up by someone in the cell phone parking lot that a lot of US airports have added so people aren't circling the airport to pick someone up.

[TimS]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Thanks for that, good to see some actual data from an actual experiment. I really hope there are more such studies before cell phone use is allowed in planes. In particular studies that actually try to measure the effect of cell phones on plane systems rather than just the presence of radiation from cell phones.

Here are a couple that were referenced in the IEEE article.

Evaluation of a Mobile Phone for Aircraft GPS Interference:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2004035943.pdf

Portable Wireless LAN Device and Two-Way Radio Threat Assessment for Aircraft Navigation Radios:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2004090621.pdf

[TimS]

Here are some more from that, too.

ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE ASSESSMENT OF CDMA AND
GSM WIRELESS PHONES TO AIRCRAFT NAVIGATION RADIOS:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...2002155076.pdf

Measurements to Determine Potential Interference to GPS Receivers From Ultrawideband Transmission Systems:

http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/pub/ntia-...ndices_ocr.pdf

Assessment of Compatibility Between Ultrawideband (UWB) Systems and Global Positioning System (GPS) Receivers:

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/repo...iasp_01_45.pdf

[TimS]

For a little more pedestrian description about electronics on aircraft, check out this article from Slate.

http://www.slate.com/id/2215050

[kovidgoyal]

Hmm, seems to me that airplane design needs an overhaul for the electronics age.

A few crazy ideas, just for the fun of it (I know absolutely nothing about aircraft design):

1) passenger cabins should really be encased in a Faraday cage, though that will degrade the view from the windows

2) mount GPS and other vulnerable antennae on wingtips, to reduce signal strength

3) Add more GPS satellites, boosting signal strength and allowing for a reduction in the sensitivity of receiver antennae

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Thanks for that, good to see some actual data from an actual experiment. I really hope there are more such studies before cell phone use is allowed in planes.

They are now.

And the entire problem of requiring a very high signal strength can be bypassed by a onboard cell. Or they could simply use it to block calls while in flight, if they could do so legally...

[TimS]

I don't know if it would be easier or safer to enclose the passenger compartments in a Faraday cage or the wiring components in shielding.

According to the FAA, the GPS antenna must be in a non-icing location, but it sounds like there are already multiple GPS antennae on an aircraft.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/8a2ae2491c85226f86256e35004c638b/$FILE/AC20-138A.pdf