Using ebook readers on aeroplanes?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

it is almost as if the rules around airports and airplanes are just pulled out of thin air and serve no real purpose.

The reason for the rule is because of the way that mobile (cell) phones work; when they lose contact with a base station they increase their transmitter power in an attempt to reconnect - you've probably notice that if, for example, you're on a ship and out of contact with the network, your phone's battery will run flat very quickly. Imagine a plane with 400 phones on board, all transmitting a maximum power to attempt to contact a base station - that's a considerable amount of electrical interference to deal with.

Many European airlines do now permit mobile phones on board, and the way that they work is to have a base station on the aircraft itself, hence all the phones are working at minimum power, and there isn't the interference problem.

[MaggieScratch]

Yes--they mean turn it all the way off, not to sleep mode.

For my smartphone, I turn it to airplane mode, then turn it off. If I turn it on during the flight to use apps, it will already be in airplane mode.

[m-reader]

Originally Posted by Soph94

Hi, just wondering what people's experiences are using ebook readers on aeroplanes? We're usually told (well in Aus anyway) not to use any MP3 players/electronics during takeoff and landing, and just wondering if ebook readers are generally classed in that category?

Ebook reader qualifies as an electronic device. Therefore more likely than not you'll be asked to turn it off.
I always turn my off. After all, they do ask nicely

[m-reader]

Originally Posted by HarryT

When they say "turn it off", they mean "turn it off". ie, in the case of the Sony, slide and hold the power switch until you see the "Shutdown" question. Again with the Kindle, slide and hold the power switch for 5s.

Then I cheat. I only put my PRS-900 to sleep mode. Mind you Wireless is switched off always.

[TGS]

I've got an IRX 800s. I avoid reading on take-off and landing so as to avoid arguments with the cabin staff, but it sits there my lap ready for the seat-belt light to go off - impossible to switch off.

[darknessangel]

Bah! I don't turn off my mp3 player >_> I just get the earphones off. As for the e-reader, yeah I have to stash it lest I be arrested for trying to bomb a plane with my sony reader. I just don't know why don't they isolate the cockpit against signals comming from the back or just the passenger area... whatever... it just pisses me off!

GJMS

[LCF]

I turn my off. It's a rule after all, even if it's a bit inconvenient. Since the companies actually want you to travel with them, I'm sure they don't make such restrictions up just because. Or at least I hope so. + Landing and take off are about 10 min each - perfect time to look through the plane magazine.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by LCF

I turn my off. It's a rule after all, even if it's a bit inconvenient. Since the companies actually want you to travel with them, I'm sure they don't make such restrictions up just because. Or at least I hope so. + Landing and take off are about 10 min each - perfect time to look through the plane magazine.

Of course no industry would ever be hostile to their customers.

[mike_bike_kite]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The reason for the rule is because of the way that mobile (cell) phones work; when they lose contact with a base station they increase their transmitter power in an attempt to reconnect - you've probably notice that if, for example, you're on a ship and out of contact with the network, your phone's battery will run flat very quickly. Imagine a plane with 400 phones on board, all transmitting a maximum power to attempt to contact a base station - that's a considerable amount of electrical interference to deal with.

Are planes really that sensitive??? I've seen designs for EM pulse weapons to be used against the electronics on planes - they're not small weapons and usually involve super magnets, liquid nitrogen and large lumps of metal fired by explosives. The idea of 400 phones bringing a plane down seems odd to me. Do passenger planes send signals via wires or fibre optics? I'm guessing that fibre optics aren't affected at all. Also aren't planes built to withstand lightening strikes and surely these are a smidgen more powerful than a few phones.

I'm pretty sure the numbers for those forgetting to turn their phones off are much higher than 1:1000 as I've done it myself a few times Perhaps I should thank my lucky stars that the plane stayed in the air.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by mike_bike_kite

Are planes really that sensitive??? I've seen designs for EM pulse weapons to be used against the electronics on planes - they're not small weapons and usually involve super magnets, liquid nitrogen and large lumps of metal fired by explosives.

Distance would matter I imagine.

[SensualPoet]

When travelling earlier this year, I brought my Kindle both times. Current rules seem to be no headphones wearable during take-off/landing (but ear buds are explicitly ok); and no reading allowed (you're asked to put your books and magazines away) -- maybe in the event of a lurch someone might get banged by the latest Jeffrey Archer or a particularly deadly edition of Hello Magazine. Anyway, the Kindle was treated just like a book, so I had no issues. (And what a treat to have several choices to read instead of just the one paperback I used to have handy.)

The Blackberry, that I turn off completely once inside the cabin and back on again once inside the arrival airport terminal (usually while waiting to grab the luggage).

[nashira]

>.> Taking my source of amusement away from me is a bad idea on commercial jets, they give me earaches like no other. Plus I'm scared of heights. Ahem.

I doubt it's going to do anything to the plane to have a reader on there, especially if you have wi-fi/3g/etc turned off... but you should so as the stewardess says, if they really want it off or away until you're in the air. Saves a fuss.

[MaggieScratch]

I know for a while after the Underwear Bomber, they weren't allowing people to have anything in their laps during takeoff or landing, fearing these objects might be hiding another undie-bomb. (I make no comment on the possibilities, I just report facts here.) I think that's stopped, though.

I can see no headphones, because you can't hear the emergency instructions or announcements if there is a problem. But I have noise-cancelling earbuds which pretty much cut out all the announcements as well as the noise of the airplane, so I don't see why earbuds would be allowed.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by mike_bike_kite

Also aren't planes built to withstand lightening strikes and surely these are a smidgen more powerful than a few phones.

Look up "Faraday cage". The charge from a lightening strike flows over the outside skin of the aircraft and doesn't penetrate it.

[A_J_Lath]

Originally Posted by SensualPoet

...maybe in the event of a lurch someone might get banged by the latest Jeffrey Archer or a particularly deadly edition of Hello Magazine...

God, what a way to go, eh? Almost as bad as getting knocked down by a Citroen 2CV being driven by a man who wears socks and open-toes sandals at the same time.