|
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?
|