Using ebook readers on aeroplanes?

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Great, now, to be clear you're making a personal commitment to teach every air stewardess how to turn every device off? Remembering that some device don't switch off, and most people don't KNOW how to switch their ereaders fully off.

Security Theatre. They care about not seeing you "misbehaving", nothing else.

You're being an ass for the sake of being an ass as per absolutely flipping usual.

I guess we all just have different ideas about how far we are willing to subordinate our desires to get to our destination. Of course we all feel like it'd be a lot nicer if they would just let us do whatever we want, but we also have to work together to help them continue providing this service. I'm not about making people's lives more difficult who are providing the service I desperately need to use every year.

[jbjb]

Am I the only one who finds it odd that many people seem to think that it's unreasonable to expect people to know the difference between turning a device off and putting it to sleep, yet at the same time they feel that these same people should be allowed to exercise their own judgement in terms of the level of risk involved in leaving it on?

/JB

[RSaunders]

As an engineer who flies every month. When they ask for electronics to be turned off, I mark my page and close the cover. I have a Sony, so there is no pesky radio and I know the eink is not held in place by electric signals.

However, I never point any of this out to the flight attendants. I value my safety, and as a result I do not want any flight attendants thinking or analyzing electronic designs. They are simply not qualified. Just like they don't know my watch is powered by an electric motor. The engineering reasons are not the point. They need simple rules, and they need it to look like you are following them. Some electronics are bad, and problems have the most significance near to the ground. We have a rule to mitigate that risk. The rule can't be "only bad devices must be turned off", because then we'd need someone to test devices, and the airlines would need a 500 page list. That's a bad rule. The current rule is much better.

Please turn off your toys, quickly, so you don't make my plane late.

[Shaggy]

This is what I posted the last time this topic came up...

The FAA takes air safety VERY seriously (which is a good thing). You would not believe the amount of testing that is required to certify a new piece of electronic gear to be installed on an airplane, and this is stuff coming from companies that are specifically designing electronics for flight operations. The FAA's main point of view is that if it has not been thoroughly tested and certified, then they don't want to take the risk. If they don't KNOW that a device is safe, then they say that you have to turn it off. If you look at it case by case, are there some devices where it seems silly to require them being turned off... sure. But the general policy from the FAA is, for the most part, a good one. If they're not positive it's safe, then the answer is no. The only way they are positive is if it goes through their certification.

No company selling consumer electronics (cell phones, ebook readers, etc) that are not specifically being designed/sold for flight operations is going to want to spend the amount of time and especially money it would take to get it certified by the FAA. Such use would only be a tiny part of their market anyway.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Great, now, to be clear you're making a personal commitment to teach every air stewardess how to turn every device off? Remembering that some device don't switch off, and most people don't KNOW how to switch their ereaders fully off.

No. I am expecting people to know what "turn it off" means. Is this really such a terribly difficult concept to understand? Jeez - whatever happened to the concept of "taking personal responsibility"? It certainly isn't the cabin crew's responsibility to know how to turn a device off; it's the owner's.

You're being an ass for the sake of being an ass as per absolutely flipping usual.

Don't be impolite.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by jbjb

Am I the only one who finds it odd that many people seem to think that it's unreasonable to expect people to know the difference between turning a device off and putting it to sleep, yet at the same time they feel that these same people should be allowed to exercise their own judgement in terms of the level of risk involved in leaving it on?

/JB

No. There are two of us, at least . Like you, I find it ironic in the extreme that these people who are deemed to be incapable of knowing how to turn a device off apparently are qualified to make a personal determination of whether the radio emissions from their electronics pose a safely hazard to avionic systems.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am expecting people to know what "turn it off" means. Is this really such a terribly difficult concept to understand? Jeez - whatever happened to the concept of "taking personal responsibility"? It certainly isn't the cabin crew's responsibility to know how to turn a device off; it's the owner's.

Can you tell me how to turn off a DR800?

[HarryT]

The DR800 can't be turned off. You're only required to turn off devices that can be turned off. But when a device can be turned off, you are required to do so. It's not optional; I'm pretty sure that it's a legal requirement.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The DR800 can't be turned off.

So I assume your previous statement "You are told to turn it off. Putting it into "sleep" mode is not turning it off. This is plain English - is it really so difficult for people to understand?"... doesn't apply to everyone then.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

So I assume your previous statement "You are told to turn it off. Putting it into "sleep" mode is not turning it off. This is plain English - is it really so difficult for people to understand?"... doesn't apply to everyone then.

It applies to everyone; it does not apply to everything. You are not required to turn off your digital watch, nor your heart pacemaker. If you can turn it off, you do turn it off.

You're normally pretty hot on legal issues, Shaggy. You tell me; what does the law require?

[HarryT]

Never mind - found it myself:

Code of Federal Regulations Sec. 91.21 Sec. 91.21 Part 91 GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES Subpart A--General Sec. 91.21 Portable electronic devices. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to-- (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; or (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft.

Argue with that .

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Never mind - found it myself:

Argue with that .

Says nothing whatsoever about turning things off.
Says not to operate it. Which putting it in sleep mode satisfies.
How does that petard feel?

[whitearrow]

The section you quoted doesn't say anything about completely shutting down all activity for takeoff and landing. If the device complies with (b)(5) and doesn't interfere with the aircraft, then it doesn't interfere. The rule you're quoting doesn't make a distinction between above and below 10,000 feet. Maybe some other rule does, but this one doesn't.

[HarryT]

It it's not switched off, then it must be switched on, and hence is "operating".

Shaggy, if I read this correctly, it appears to say, relating to your question about the DR800, that unless "the operator of the aircraft has determined [that it] will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used." then you are probably committing a Federal crime in taking it onto the aircraft in the first place?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by whitearrow

The section you quoted doesn't say anything about completely shutting down all activity for takeoff and landing.

I've always rather assumed that the reason for the complete ban on takeoff and landing is so you'll be alert and listening to the instructions of the cabin crew in case of emergency. Evacuations happen at takeoff and landing, not at 30,000 feet.