01-09-2013, 10:46 AM | #61 | |||
Somewhat clueless
Posts: 739
Karma: 7747724
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis, iPhone 6 Plus
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
/JB |
|||
01-10-2013, 06:58 AM | #62 |
Tea Enthusiast
Posts: 8,554
Karma: 75384937
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere in the USA
Device: Kindle1, Kindle DX Graphite, K3 3G, IPad 3, PW2
|
Is it that expensive to take a couple of each model of plane, put a cell phone, e-reader, iPad, and laptop in each seat. Turn all the devices on and go for a flight. Have someone call the cellphones during the flight so that they are all active at the same time.
Or am I way over simplifying the testing procedure. I guess I just don't see why this is all that complicated to test. Use the same devices on the different planes being tested. |
Advert | |
|
01-10-2013, 09:00 AM | #63 | |
Interested Bystander
Posts: 3,725
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
|
Quote:
Would you want to be the person who ultimately signs the bit of paper that says it is ok for people to use devices on planes? How much liability insurance do you think you would need to carry to cover the inevitable lawsuit when a plane crashes and someone claims it is because a phone was being used? You could spend the rest of your life tied up in lawsuits. |
|
01-10-2013, 09:55 AM | #64 | |
Nameless Being
|
Quote:
A far simpler approach would be to decide what limits airplanes must work within, then design airplanes around that. Then decide on what limits electronic devices must operate within, then design around that. Thing is, there are regulations around that but they aren't always followed. Or the electrical characteristics of a device changes over time, so what was true at the time of manufacturing isn't true anymore. Engineering ain't simple. If it were, anybody could build a house in their back yard. But they can't do that, never mind design sophisticated aircraft or whiz-bang gadgets. |
|
01-10-2013, 09:59 AM | #65 |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
I think you're probably underestimating the amount of time/effort that would be needed to say with a reasonable degree of certainty that there will not be any problem caused to the aircraft.
It's not a case of turning on a load of devices and seeing if something goes wrong. That only works when your goal is to prove something can happen, not that it can't E.g proving that devices DO interfere with the aircraft, could be as simple as doing flight after flight until you get that one time when interference occurs and could have been a problem if not for the controlled test conditions. After that you're done, it's proven* Proving the lack of interference is I would imagine much harder. Just because the last ten flights did not cause any interference hasn't proven that no interference can or will occur. The testing process to prove that will likely be much more involved/time consuming and thus costly. Cost in the end is likely the real reason for not allowing it. * well, not quite that simple as you'd have to show it was the device and not some outside influence that caused it. However, I hope it illustrates the point? |
Advert | |
|
01-10-2013, 12:43 PM | #66 |
Zennist
Posts: 1,022
Karma: 47809468
Join Date: Jul 2010
Device: iPod Touch, Sony PRS-350, Nook HD+ & HD
|
The older I get, the less I enjoy flying. Dying in a plane crash seems to me one of the worst ways to go, and takeoffs and landings are particularly nervous times. Therefore, anything they can do to keep the trip as safe as possible is OK with me, even if some of the steps have negligible or questionable benefit.
In the case of electronic devices, as I said, the rules appear to be mainly preemptive and precautionary. And it's not feasible to test every electronic device that comes to market. I also agree with those who mention the need to pay attention during takeoff and landing and to minimize the potential for flying projectiles. Regardless, how hard is it for people to turn off their phones, tablets and other devices for just 15 minutes or so at the start and end of flights? Why is it such an inconvenience? Because it interrupts a word game? I actually hope they keep the rule in. --Pat |
01-10-2013, 12:55 PM | #67 |
monkey on the fringe
Posts: 45,477
Karma: 158151390
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Seattle Metro
Device: Moto E6, Echo Show
|
I quit flying after 9/11 because of the idiotic security rules they put in place. Ever since then, my vacations have been local.
Personally, I don't care what rules they implement. They don't affect me, so it's not my problem. |
01-10-2013, 01:20 PM | #68 |
Wizard
Posts: 2,230
Karma: 7145404
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern California
Device: Kindle Voyage & iPhone 7+
|
The simpler approach would be to start designing planes with better control isolation. Why isn't the entire passenger cabin a Faraday cage with opto-couplings for any circuitry allowed out of it? I do understand that retrofits might be too difficult though expensive retrofits are big business for seat-back entertainment companies (e.g. Thales).
|
01-10-2013, 02:38 PM | #69 | |
Banned
Posts: 1,431
Karma: 5222495
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: Nook Color, Entourage Pocket Edge, iPod Touch 5th Gen
|
Quote:
I always turn off my phone (if I remember) and I always wait to fire up my ereader (if I remember). If not, oh well. As far as paying attention to the safety spiel...nothing ever goes as planned. I've only had four major problems flying -- a flat tire on landing in L.A., an emergency landing on the way to Chicago when lightning hit our plane, and two cockpit fires. Different flight crews -- different approaches to handling the emergencies and nothing (in these 4 instances) in the safety blurb made one bit of difference. |
|
01-10-2013, 02:52 PM | #70 | |
Somewhat clueless
Posts: 739
Karma: 7747724
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis, iPhone 6 Plus
|
Quote:
If the former: why? What's idiotic about them? /JB |
|
01-10-2013, 03:30 PM | #71 | |
Zennist
Posts: 1,022
Karma: 47809468
Join Date: Jul 2010
Device: iPod Touch, Sony PRS-350, Nook HD+ & HD
|
Quote:
Maybe the desire for passengers to be alert has as much to do with other announcements and not just the saftey instructions. For example, on landing, they often announce important info on connecting flights or baggage pickup while the plane is taxiing to the gate. If half the passengers had headphones on, then likely some would miss this essential info. --Pat |
|
01-10-2013, 03:44 PM | #72 |
Banned
Posts: 1,431
Karma: 5222495
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: Nook Color, Entourage Pocket Edge, iPod Touch 5th Gen
|
I think it's idiotic the way some of these regulations are enforced. As Tubemonkey said in an earlier post, the potential for disaster is either there or it's not. If it's a serious threat, then ban all electronic devices -- it wouldn't bother the majority of us at all. Leaving it to each individual passenger to decide on compliance is just silly.
|
01-10-2013, 03:58 PM | #73 | ||
Banned
Posts: 1,431
Karma: 5222495
Join Date: Jun 2011
Device: Nook Color, Entourage Pocket Edge, iPod Touch 5th Gen
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
01-10-2013, 04:15 PM | #74 |
Wizard
Posts: 2,895
Karma: 6995721
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Idaho, on the side of a mountain
Device: Kindle Oasis, Fire 3d Gen and 5th Gen and Samsung Tab S
|
I think they do this because they want to pretend you are paying attention in the case of an emergency. Once they reach 30k feet, you can use them again.
I love it when they say "put down your reading materials and stop your conversations and listen to this safety briefing" Then they show you how to buckle a seat belt. I don't mean to disparage people from other countries who can't use a seatbelt, but a flight between Chicago and Boise is probably not their first time using a seatbelt. And I know if the plane crashes, I will forget anything printed in the safety placard or told to me, anyway. |
01-10-2013, 06:36 PM | #75 |
Wizzard
Posts: 1,402
Karma: 2000000
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Device: iPad 2, iPhone 6s, Kindle Voyage & Kindle PaperWhite
|
Well, for a start, any extra weight adds to the 'running costs' of air travel, which is an extremely price-sensitive market.
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
E-reading on planes | FJames | Kobo Reader | 17 | 12-23-2011 06:25 AM |
Reading on planes | SageTracey | Kobo Reader | 25 | 11-23-2010 07:30 AM |
Short Fiction Fitzgerald, F. Scott: Three Hours Between Planes. v1. 06 Jan 09 | Dr. Drib | BBeB/LRF Books | 0 | 01-06-2009 08:28 AM |
Planes and e-books | Sibby | Lounge | 19 | 10-12-2008 11:42 AM |
Gadgets Books and Planes = A bad cocktail | Stuart Young | Lounge | 7 | 08-16-2006 03:30 AM |