Using ebook readers on aeroplanes?

[jamina1]

I just wanted to come drop this link

http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/04/e..._on_plane.html

As others have stated before, the cell phone rule is purely Security Theatre. There is nothing your cell phone can do to the plane, and ereaders, especially ones WITHOUT transmitting technology are completely harmless. It's a stupid rule to give the flight attendants something to do, and make you feel "safe".

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by jamina1

I just wanted to come drop this link

http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/04/e..._on_plane.html

As others have stated before, the cell phone rule is purely Security Theatre. There is nothing your cell phone can do to the plane, and ereaders, especially ones WITHOUT transmitting technology are completely harmless. It's a stupid rule to give the flight attendants something to do, and make you feel "safe".

The flight attendants don't need something to do but the people who make up these rules do need some way to justify their salary.

[afa]

Originally Posted by jamina1

I just wanted to come drop this link

http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/04/e..._on_plane.html

As others have stated before, the cell phone rule is purely Security Theatre. There is nothing your cell phone can do to the plane, and ereaders, especially ones WITHOUT transmitting technology are completely harmless. It's a stupid rule to give the flight attendants something to do, and make you feel "safe".

Let me start be re-iterating what I said before - I, personally, do not believe that using cellphones/e-readers will cause any problems. It's just a precaution, most probably an unnecessary precaution, but also one that doesn't cause any problem except minor inconvenience. In fact, I would argue it doesn't even cause that.

But I have to say... Mythbusters? Really? That's who we're going to cite as a reliable source of information? Tell me, did they blow up the cockpit at the end, too? I love it when they do that...

I think the question of why the rule exist has been addressed quite well by Shaggy. Enough with this "Security Theatre" nonsense.

[DJHARKAVY]

Originally Posted by afa

Let me start be re-iterating what I said before - I, personally, do not believe that using cellphones/e-readers will cause any problems. It's just a precaution, most probably an unnecessary precaution, but also one that doesn't cause any problem except minor inconvenience. In fact, I would argue it doesn't even cause that.

But I have to say... Mythbusters? Really? That's who we're going to cite as a reliable source of information? Tell me, did they blow up the cockpit at the end, too? I love it when they do that...

I think the question of why the rule exist has been addressed quite well by Shaggy. Enough with this "Security Theatre" nonsense.

If it is not theater, then all a terrorist organization has to do is buy cell phones and turn them on during take-off or landing... Eventually they will bring a plane down...

It is the rules that we are required to follow, and for the main part, we follow them.

But the big problem with rules that go against common sense, especially because something 'might' happen is that people start to think that all the rules are stupid and they are more likely to ignore airline rules in general.

[vxf]

I fly a lot for work, in Europe and US. So far, I have had mixed experiences with a PRS900, even on the same airline.

First of all, I turn the 3g off and I just try to keep reading - if they ask me to turn the device off, I do. Most of the time, they ask. Fairly often (say about 30% of the time) they don't. But I suspect most of the time they don't it's because they don't spot it.... they see you reading and don't quite look at what you are holding. With the leather cover folded backwards, the PRS900 can pass for a book, unless you pay attention.

Only once did a Delta attendant see me use it, and started asking questions about it - she was using a kindle and was thinking about buying the SONY PRS900 and wanted to know what I thought about it. When it came to take-off, she didn't ask me to turn the device off, although she clearly knew I was using it.

One Alitalia idiot - yes, I swear, this guy really pissed me off - had me turn it off FOR THE ENTIRE 9 HOUR FLIGHT. I swear... I argued, asked for another attendant to talk to him, but nothing. Funny thing is, they ended up getting into a fight with a family sitting next to me because they wouldn't let the kid play with his Nintendo DS (is that what the little portable one is called?), again, for the entire flight. They kept bringing up some list of approved electronics (like laptops) that you could use, but no ebook reader or gaming devices.

In Alitalia's defense (I hate them, don't get me wrong, but I have to be objective...) I have flown with them many times, and this was a one-time kind of deal. But 9 hours without being able to read stuck between a fat lady and a crying kid who is stomping his feet because they won't let him play with his DS led me to cheer when they went bankrupt.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by jamina1

As others have stated before, the cell phone rule is purely Security Theatre.

The cell phone rule has nothing to do with security.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by DJHARKAVY

If it is not theater, then all a terrorist organization has to do is buy cell phones and turn them on during take-off or landing...

The cell phone rule has nothing to do with terrorism.

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by DJHARKAVY

But the big problem with rules that go against common sense, especially because something 'might' happen is that people start to think that all the rules are stupid and they are more likely to ignore airline rules in general.

The point is that common sense isn't relevant here. It's a technical subject that requires expertise to evaluate.

/JB

[ThomasMc]

Originally Posted by HarryT

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

A Faraday cage works because it is grounded, the energy is diverted because it follows the cage to the ground. An airplane isn't grounded.

[GeoffC]

Originally Posted by ThomasMc

A Faraday cage works because it is grounded, the energy is diverted because it follows the cage to the ground. An airplane isn't grounded.

Except, possibly, by rain - especially the closer the 'plane is to take-off/landing conditions....

[jbjb]

Originally Posted by ThomasMc

A Faraday cage works because it is grounded, the energy is diverted because it follows the cage to the ground. An airplane isn't grounded.

I'm afraid that's not right. A Faraday cage works because the charge on a hollow conductor distributes itself around the outside of that conductor in such a way as to result in no net electric field within the conductor. No ground connection is required for this.

/JB

[ThomasMc]

Originally Posted by jbjb

Agreed - this does seem to bring out the worst in people.

All too many seem to feel that a complete absence of technical understanding of the technologies involved, coupled with a skewed sense of their own statistical relevance ("I left my cellphone on once, and the plane didn't crash, so it must be OK") allows them to ignore, for their own convenience, a rule created by people with at least some level of understanding.

/JB

There is a large segment of the population that just refuses to believe that any rules could apply to THEM.

I live one house away from an intersection, in residential suburbia. I'd estimate that at least 1/3 of the drivers on any given day do not even so much as slow down before going through that stop sign, even though it was there before most of them were even born. The cops just love to park on the lesser traveled street, at the end of the month, to quickly get their quota of traffic tickets.

[Shaggy]

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.

Lightening strikes are generally on the outside of the plane, hopefully cell phones are on the inside. If either of those are the other way around, then you've got bigger problems than whether or not you're allowed to turn your phone on.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by jbjb

I'm afraid that's not right. A Faraday cage works because the charge on a hollow conductor distributes itself around the outside of that conductor in such a way as to result in no net electric field within the conductor. No ground connection is required for this.

/JB

Absolutely right. As Wiki succinctly expresses it:

A Faraday cage's operation depends on the fact that an external static electrical field will cause the electrical charges within the cage's conducting material to redistribute themselves so as to cancel the field's effects in the cage's interior. This phenomenon is used, for example, to protect electronic equipment from lightning strikes and other electrostatic discharges.

It has nothing at all to do with grounding.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by jbjb

The point is that common sense isn't relevant here. It's a technical subject that requires expertise to evaluate.

How many people on here are an avionics expert, have any experience designing/engineering/testing avionics, or for that matter have any background related to the aviation industry?

It's easy to be mislead by "common sense" when it's backed up by ignorance.