View Single Post
Old 10-20-2010, 05:24 PM   #262
mldavis2
Coffee Nut
mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mldavis2 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
mldavis2's Avatar
 
Posts: 410
Karma: 298350
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Missouri
Device: Kindle 3; K4PC; Calibre
LakeLoon's point is well taken, however, as I stated in an earlier post, with the plethora of new RF-emitting devices coming out every day or two, it is impossible if not economically unsound to attempt to create a list of every 'approved' device tested and found safe. Each individual device would have to be tested on each of dozens of commercial aircraft from dozens of different cabin locations at each of hundreds of IFR frequencies used by the various airports. Multiply all the safe devices together, all running simultaneously on one aircraft with 120 passengers, and you have the potential for a nasty stew. The brain-dead simple solution is to simply have them turned off during critical stages of the flight.

However the point is moot, since it is an FAA regulation in the U.S.; and to challenge the rule by ignoring it is to risk a conference with the air marshals who know nothing about RF interference potential, and everything about the FAA rules.
mldavis2 is offline   Reply With Quote