Take-off, Landing, and Your Ereader -- A Poll

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Yes, I did read your post. My point was that although you may (very rightly) be confident that your device will not endanger an aircraft, can you be confident that the same applies to every device a passenger may decide to bring on the aircraft? If the answer is "no", what practical alternative is there other than to prohibit the use of ALL devices? That's a serious question - how can the cabin crew possibly know what is or is not safe?

If I were king it would be:

1) Commercial devices that do not have a specific transmitting capability may be used at any time.

2) Commercial devices that have a transmission protocol must have that capability turned off, i.e. turn off the wifi or put the device in airplane mode.

3) DIY or home-made electronics go into baggage below the passenger compartment.

I don't trust the cabin crew to know what is safe. But I also don't think it's fair to make them enforce a rule that they can't possibly be expected to understand the nuances of. Checks for intentionally malicious devices should happen before boarding the plane.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

If you abandon the physical danger line, then there's no reason for the rule in the first place. If there's no reason for the rule to be there, then insisting upon compliance because of delays becomes a moot point.

I didn't abandon it, but regardless of whether it ultimately proves be a valid concern or not, the disregard of the rules can bring on the other negative consequence, all so you can read for 10 more minutes.

Oh the horrors of thinking for yourself! You should be ashamed!

It's the not the thinking that's shameful, it the judgement made in and the conclusions reach through that thinking that can indeed be shameful.

Similarly, I don't praise serial killers because of their independent attitude toward those pesky murder laws that The Man tries to keep 'em down with.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

If I were king it would be:

1) Commercial devices that do not have a specific transmitting capability may be used at any time.

2) Commercial devices that have a transmission protocol must have that capability turned off, i.e. turn off the wifi or put the device in airplane mode.

Fine, in theory, but...

How many people with a 3G Kindle realise that it contains a cellular radio, or know that it's a transmitting device that needs to be turned off? We all know (I hope), but I'm damned sure that there are an awful lot of people out there who don't know.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

If I were king it would be:

1) Commercial devices that do not have a specific transmitting capability may be used at any time.

2) Commercial devices that have a transmission protocol must have that capability turned off, i.e. turn off the wifi or put the device in airplane mode.

3) DIY or home-made electronics go into baggage below the passenger compartment.

I don't trust the cabin crew to know what is safe. But I also don't think it's fair to make them enforce a rule that they can't possibly be expected to understand the nuances of. Checks for intentionally malicious devices should happen before boarding the plane.

So in your Kingdom, the flight attendants have to be EE's and recognize the capabilities and origin of every device, and we'll all sit an wait while they check compliance to be sure there's not some independent thinker with a home-made maser who thinks your rules are stupid?

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Fine, in theory, but...

How many people with a 3G Kindle realise that it contains a cellular radio, or know that it's a transmitting device that needs to be turned off? We all know (I hope), but I'm damned sure that there are an awful lot of people out there who don't know.

I think that educating the masses would be the solution here.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Fine, in theory, but...

How many people with a 3G Kindle realise that it contains a cellular radio, or know that it's a transmitting device that needs to be turned off? We all know (I hope), but I'm damned sure that there are an awful lot of people out there who don't know.

I thought a major selling point of the Kindle was that it can communicate to the mothership over 3G?

I guess I just have a higher opinion of humanity where I would expect them to apply common sense to a major marketing point.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by ApK

So in your Kingdom, the flight attendants have to be EE's and recognize the capabilities and origin of every device, and we'll all sit an wait while they check compliance to be sure there's not some independent thinker with a home-made maser who thinks your rules are stupid?

actually he said that the checking would be done before boarding.

[MovieBird]

Originally Posted by ApK

So in your Kingdom, the flight attendants have to be EE's and recognize the capabilities and origin of every device, and we'll all sit an wait while they check compliance to be sure there's not some independent thinker with a home-made maser who thinks your rules are stupid?

Nah, the EEs are in the airport. More jobs for engineers!

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Absolutely not. But, I thought that's what security checkpoints were for. What a passenger may carry on a plane is not left up to them. Electronic or otherwise. We're talking about devices that are allowed to be carried on... and as far as I'm concerned, any electronic device that is allowed to be carried by a passenger on the plane, should be allowed to be used on a plane at anytime. If not, then then passenger shouldn't be allowed to carry them on the plane at all. Problem solved.

Exactly!

[ApK]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

I thought a major selling point of the Kindle was that it can communicate to the mothership over 3G?

The method by which Whispernet makes books appear on the Kindle might as well be magic to a large section of the market.

There is huge segment of the cell phone market that doesn't know that their phones are radios.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

Nah, the EEs are in the airport. More jobs for engineers!

Ok, Karma for that idea.

[HappyMartin]

This has been discussed over and over.

It remains my firm belief that if the authorities believed that there was any real risk they would not allow these devices on an aircraft at all. The chance that there is no device turned on either purposefully or accidentally on any given take off or landing is negligible. Given the number of aircraft taking off and landing every day common sense tells me there is no risk. This has been real world tested thousands of times. I am quite sure that every flight has dozens of devices that remain on despite the rules.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Exactly!

Security checkpoints are not really concerned with airline operations. The TSA and the FAA are (correctly) different worlds, and they are not really involved in each other's business.

TSA has certain things that they must stop from going through the checkpoint, but they let plenty of stuff through that the flight crew may not allow on the plane.
Beyond FAA regulations, which might require that all airlines carry certain things (smoke detectors, life jackets) it's ultimately up to the flight crew what actually is allowed to be brought on the plane, and it can be different from airline to airline or even crew to crew.

ApK

[HappyMartin]

This has been discussed over and over.

It remains my firm belief that if the authorities believed that there was any real risk they would not allow these devices on an aircraft at all. The chance that there is no device turned on either purposefully or accidentally on any given take off or landing is negligible. Given the number of aircraft taking off and landing every day common sense tells me there is no risk. This has been real world tested thousands of times. I am quite sure that every flight has dozens of devices that remain on despite the rules.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HappyMartin

. This has been real world tested thousands of times. I am quite sure that every flight has dozens of devices that remain on despite the rules.

Your logic is flawed.
Without the rule they may have hundreds, not dozens, and the results might be different. Like drug testing on pregnant women, it's not been worth the costs and risks to find out for sure, when the solution of simply saying 'No' is cheaper and easier and is no significant burden to anyone.