FAA to allow electronics to remain on during take-off and landing??

[polly]

Originally Posted by vxf

I have had now two instances of not being allowed to use an eink AT ALL during a flight. Both with Alitalia. They claim they have a list of 'approved devices'. Everything else has to be off. The iPad is on it, the kindle and sony readers are not.

Especially annoying since e-ink devices have a reach of about a millimeter, minus the WiFi. My 650 couldn't have any effect from my seat. I just hold it on my lap and start reading again when the flight attendants are seated for takeoff. There's a tone that indicates that the cabin is secure and I choose a seat that they can't see when seated. It tells you how often I fly, that I know the tones and sequence for take off.

[markbot]

The annoyance is negligible in the grand scheme of things. They shouldn't feel pressured to change the rules.

Although, they are allowing pilots to use ipads now, so maybe they should make an exception for ipads. lol.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by polly

I just hold it on my lap and start reading again when the flight attendants are seated for takeoff.

That is exactly what I do. Studies have shown that there really is no danger at all. It is just a case of bureaucratic inertia that they haven't revised the rules yet.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I would be much more in favor of the rule if it were actually limited to actual takeoffs, not just to time spent sitting on the runway.

I can't tell you how many planes have exploded because someone turned on their iPad while the plane was sitting on the runway.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I can't tell you how many planes have exploded because someone turned on their iPad while the plane was sitting on the runway.

They now have those new apps from Airbus and Boeing, that let you control the plane you're sitting on...

[Pinecone]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Shrug.
If something goes badly wrong on takeoff or landing, chances are I'm dead.
And if I'm not, there really isn't anything I can go in the next 10 seconds to help the situation.

Not really. Go look at the accidents, many people survive.

But more importantly, take off and landing, especially landing, is when you don't want ANY interference with electronics, such as those used to guide the aircraft to the runway when the visibility is low.

Take off is more in case they have to return immediately for landing due to a problem.

[Pinecone]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

That is exactly what I do. Studies have shown that there really is no danger at all. It is just a case of bureaucratic inertia that they haven't revised the rules yet.

So you are willing to bet your life and your family's lives on the fact that NO combination of devices in NO combination of positions will cause a problem?

And how do you know how far your device radiates? All microprocessors radiate, that is why for truely secure computing, there are Tempest certfied machines. People have stolen information from non-networked compuer from outside the building.

And there are also studies that show devices CAN interfere with aircraft systems. So you want to put your life on the line to prove which one to believe?

[DiapDealer]

So you want to put your life on the line to prove which one to believe?

Your life is put on the line every time you fly... because there's always passenger devices that haven't been turned off on every flight. And because you're flying.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by Barty

There are very good reasons to ban electronics during takeoff and landing. That is when during the flight something is most likely to go wrong. You need people to pay a little attention, not playing with their damn phones. And turbulence. I don't want to get hit by my neighbors' flying iThings.

Stop being so damn spoiled, people. If it were up to me, I'd make everybody fit their carry on in a shoe box, with exception for babies and medical needs. Boarding and deboarding would take 5 mins.

Did anyone ever get believable science that electronic devices can affect cockpit instrumentation, though? From what I remember- and its been a very long time since I read anything about it- the whole ban on electronics was based on flat-out junk science on par with a most arson investigations.

And yes, I do have a source on arson investigations being based on junk science.

[whitearrow]

Originally Posted by vxf

I have had now two instances of not being allowed to use an eink AT ALL during a flight. Both with Alitalia. They claim they have a list of 'approved devices'. Everything else has to be off. The iPad is on it, the kindle and sony readers are not.

I would make Kindle CS aware of this. Amazon is in a better position to address this with Alitalia than any of us.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by teh603

Did anyone ever get believable science that electronic devices can affect cockpit instrumentation, though? From what I remember- and its been a very long time since I read anything about it- the whole ban on electronics was based on flat-out junk science on par with a most arson investigations.

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

It may not be dispositive, of course.

[HappyMartin]

I can just imagine bands of terrorists boarding with IPads and kindles turned on and in the overhead luggage compartments in an attempt to bring down an aircraft! Get real. If there was any real danger they would not allow the things on the aircraft. For goodness sakes they confiscate nail clippers and just how many times has a terrorist hacked down the door to the flight deck and then killed the flight crew with a set of nail clippers?

It's just a way to make people know that is I'd some serious stuff going down. Sort of a quasi scientific equivalent to crossing yourself. Ok people we are going to fly. Turn off stuff, that will help.

Sorry it makes no logical sense to me

[Daithi]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

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

It may not be dispositive, of course.

Damn! That was one long freaking article that implied over and over again that cellphone emissions could interfere with an airplane's navigation equipment. However, after reading the entire article I seemed to miss the part where the authors backed up this implication. The only thing they actually showed was that people bring cellphones aboard planes and don't turn them off, and that the cellphones have RF emissions. Absolutely worthless article.

BTW, I never actually turn off my Kindle when we take off and land. I put it in the pouch on the seat back in front of me, but it is still on. Some people might put their Kindle into sleep mode, but I doubt anyone actually turns the thing off.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Daithi

Some people might put their Kindle into sleep mode, but I doubt anyone actually turns the thing off.

That's because there's only a miniscule difference between sleep mode and "a tiny bit deeper sleep" mode on the Kindle. There is no real "off."

[din155]

There is no smoking gun to this story: there is no definitive instance of an air accident known to have been caused by a passenger's use of an electronic device. Nonetheless, although it is impossible to say that such use has contributed to air accidents in the past, the data also make it impossible to rule it out completely. More important, the data support a conclusion that continued use of portable RF-emitting devices such as cellphones will, in all likelihood, someday cause an accident by interfering with critical cockpit instruments such as GPS receivers. This much is certain: there exists a greater potential for problems than was previously believed.

Wow..So, how did they decide to ban using cellphones while take off or landing in the first place? Finger in air I guess..

din