"... and please switch off all electronic devices." - Page 3

Jellby · 04-23-2010, 12:56 PM

When I watch TV in the kitchen, everytime the washing-machine or the fridge engine starts, I see an interference in the TV. It's just a fraction of a second, but it's noticeable. Neither my washing-machine nor my fridge have wifi or 3g connection

I don't think it's too far-fetched assuming that every electronic device could cause some interference in a plane's instruments, and it's a risk not worth facing. Of course, an ebook reader (at least one without wireless connection) is probably one of the less "dangerous" devices, but when setting safety rules for arbitrary groups of people, it's often better to just set clear-cut strict rules and not deal with possible case-by-case exceptions, if everyone starts saying "but look, my device's user guide says..." it would be chaos.

On the other hand, I'm not sure there has been enough serious testing of what devices actually do or don't cause interferences with the plane's instruments, and these should be designed to work properly in an environment full of electronic devices (even if you ask all passengers to turn their phones off, I'm sure at least one phone in every flight remains turned on).

HarryT · 04-23-2010, 01:02 PM

It's entirely irrelevant whether or not a particular device is safe. The fact is that the regulations require them to be switched off. If you choose to travel by air, those are the regulations you agree to abide by. If you don't like them, then don't fly!

ChrisC333 · 04-23-2010, 01:03 PM

To sum it up so far:

a) There's a genuine chance that you - or somebody else with a similar attitude - may individually or cumulatively unwittingly contribute to a problem.

b) By ignoring the request, your example may also be encouraging others whose device(s) may have a much higher chance of causing trouble. If they do cause a crash they take you with them. It won't be much consolation to be still insisting it's not your fault as you go down.

c) Refusing to comply is likely to make you look like a jerk to other passengers and to the cabin staff. This may well bring down some kind of public hassle or argument on yourself. This is after all how this thread started. A fellow passenger got cheesed off with the OP.

Here's a link to an aviation blog with some examples that show why these rules are put in place.

Incident examples

As Harry says, if you fly then it's smart to abide by the rules, even if you honestly believe your device is totally harmless. If you get into an argument with the flight crew and piss them off enough you may find that they can apply a range of sanctions including declining to take you on the next leg of your journey and up to getting the cops to meet you on landing.

Does anybody really think a few minutes e-reading is worth that? Isn't it just more polite and reasonable (as many have said here) to just switch the darned thing off when they ask?

kindlekitten · 04-23-2010, 01:51 PM

I just close my e-reader cover and put in the pocket in front of me. these "turn off" regulations are left overs from when the technology was not completely understood. there is one airline, I can't remember which that has allowed cell phone usage for quite awhile and another one that is ramping up the ability to have in flight wi-fi. military flying on commercial birds for years have had all of their bells and whistles on and functioning

Hellmark · 04-23-2010, 02:42 PM

The ones with wifi and cellphone usage shut them down during landings and take off.

As far as the military goes, their equipment is designed under strict requirements as to not mess with the avionics. Your iPods and eBook readers are not.

Sweetpea · 04-23-2010, 02:45 PM

I didn't "turn off" my Mini. I've never turned it off since I got it. Not that I took it out of my bag (I just love to look outside, even if it's very cloudy!)...

kindlekitten · 04-23-2010, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hellmark

The ones with wifi and cellphone usage shut them down during landings and take off.

As far as the military goes, their equipment is designed under strict requirements as to not mess with the avionics. Your iPods and eBook readers are not.

I really love it when disinformation gets disbursed... the ban was a reslt of analog phones, now they are digital and no longer cause the interference. cell phones and ereaders for that matter are of such low power that they do NOT cause the interference. at this point it is mostly a matter of streamlining regulations

jbjb · 04-23-2010, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Do you ?

In what way is that relevant? My point is that most passengers don't, so the rules should be followed.

As it happens, I have a better understanding than most in this area, but I certainly wouldn't feel able to overrule the authorities. Do you?

/JB

jbjb · 04-23-2010, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I really love it when disinformation gets disbursed... the ban was a reslt of analog phones, now they are digital and no longer cause the interference. cell phones and ereaders for that matter are of such low power that they do NOT cause the interference. at this point it is mostly a matter of streamlining regulations

That, I'm afraid, is simply wrong.

Digital cellphones most certainly cause interference. Anyone who has been near a speaker and heard the dit-dit-dit when they poll for the base station cannot doubt this.

/JB

tompe · 04-23-2010, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

What do you do with electronic devices which cannot be turned off? Do you take the battery out of your digital watch?

The instruction is to turn off all devices with an off switch.

Hellmark · 04-23-2010, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I really love it when disinformation gets disbursed... the ban was a reslt of analog phones, now they are digital and no longer cause the interference. cell phones and ereaders for that matter are of such low power that they do NOT cause the interference. at this point it is mostly a matter of streamlining regulations

Yes, it was put into place when analog phones were widely used, however digital devices can still cause interference. I routinely have my completely digital cellphone messing up some of my other sensitive devices. I also have some of my other things causing issues that are lower power. Regardless of how the data is encoded, if it is going at a spectrum that the equipment is sensitive to, it'll have interference. The device cares not that it is digital or analog, since it isn't able to understand either. The real difference between the two? The switch to digital allowed things to get cheaper for the telecoms, since it requires less equipment to handle more calls. No need to convert it to a digital signal so the computer knows how to handle it, if it is already in a format it knows. Much of the hard work is already done. A digital trunk card looks barren compared to an analog one, not because of chips handling the work, but because it just has less work to do.

But hey, what do I know, I only design electronics and work with commercial phone systems for a living.

wodin · 04-23-2010, 03:58 PM

In the US, the rule comes from the FAA, and it says all electronic devices during landing and takeoff while the plane is below 10,000 feet. And it predates cell phones, Bluetooth and WiFi.

In the olden days, before those things were invented, it was thought that a battery powered FM radio could emit radio waves that could interfere with the planes navigation and controls. And who knows what else might!

The rules have been updated somewhat due to pressure from business travelers who wanted to use their laptops to do useful work instead of just wasting all those hours sitting in an airplane, but the FAA being what they are were VERY conservative, and banned all electronics during takeoff and landing, and anything that has an active transmitter for the duration of the flight.

I think there are dispensations for medical equipment (heart pace makers and the like), but I’m not sure about watches, I think they just ignore those.

Perhaps PilotBob could enlighten us further.

EowynCarter · 04-23-2010, 04:21 PM

Quote:

As it happens, I have a better understanding than most in this area, but I certainly wouldn't feel able to overrule the authorities.

Well, i'm all ears if you can explain.

jbjb · 04-23-2010, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Well, i'm all ears if you can explain.

I've been trying my best to explain - what bits have I missed out?

The rules are a sensible set of precautions, given how amazingly difficult it is to calculate the cumulative effect of many small sources of EM radiation on sensitive equipment. What more needs to be said?

/JB

Hamlet53 · 04-23-2010, 04:36 PM

Getting herded around like cattle. Standing for an hour or more at a security check point with your shoes off because one idiot tried once to set of a “shoe bomb.” Maybe getting charged extra to go pee in flight? Seats jammed so close together that your knees are bruised by flight end. BYOL (bring your own lunch).

Having to turn of all electronic devices during takeoff and landing are the least of reasons to dread contemporary air travel.

http://blog.troubletown.com/2009_12_01_archive.html

04-23-2010, 01:03 PM	#33
ChrisC333 Groupie Posts: 194 Karma: 2031 Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: West Australia Device: Acer eM250 Netbook, iTouch, iRiver Story, HP TM2 Tablet	To sum it up so far: a) There's a genuine chance that you - or somebody else with a similar attitude - may individually or cumulatively unwittingly contribute to a problem. b) By ignoring the request, your example may also be encouraging others whose device(s) may have a much higher chance of causing trouble. If they do cause a crash they take you with them. It won't be much consolation to be still insisting it's not your fault as you go down. c) Refusing to comply is likely to make you look like a jerk to other passengers and to the cabin staff. This may well bring down some kind of public hassle or argument on yourself. This is after all how this thread started. A fellow passenger got cheesed off with the OP. Here's a link to an aviation blog with some examples that show why these rules are put in place. Incident examples As Harry says, if you fly then it's smart to abide by the rules, even if you honestly believe your device is totally harmless. If you get into an argument with the flight crew and piss them off enough you may find that they can apply a range of sanctions including declining to take you on the next leg of your journey and up to getting the cops to meet you on landing. Does anybody really think a few minutes e-reading is worth that? Isn't it just more polite and reasonable (as many have said here) to just switch the darned thing off when they ask? Last edited by ChrisC333; 04-23-2010 at 01:22 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
BBC News - "Traditional books 'may not survive electronic age'"	seagull	News	13	07-18-2010 05:12 PM
New "E-Book Devices" "Bookeen Opus" forum desired	ericch	Bookeen	3	08-06-2009 06:31 PM
Using Chrome and "Switch Editor Mode" button	Wetdogeared	Feedback	0	06-01-2009 01:05 PM
"Liquid" / "Fixed" - how to switch layouts	Alexander Turcic	Announcements	0	06-05-2007 09:29 AM
Sony Connect "Bait and Switch" Advertising?	TheMooch	Sony Reader	5	02-21-2007 01:43 AM

04-23-2010, 12:56 PM	#31
Jellby frumious Bandersnatch Posts: 7,515 Karma: 18512745 Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Spaniard in Sweden Device: Cybook Orizon, Kobo Aura	When I watch TV in the kitchen, everytime the washing-machine or the fridge engine starts, I see an interference in the TV. It's just a fraction of a second, but it's noticeable. Neither my washing-machine nor my fridge have wifi or 3g connection I don't think it's too far-fetched assuming that every electronic device could cause some interference in a plane's instruments, and it's a risk not worth facing. Of course, an ebook reader (at least one without wireless connection) is probably one of the less "dangerous" devices, but when setting safety rules for arbitrary groups of people, it's often better to just set clear-cut strict rules and not deal with possible case-by-case exceptions, if everyone starts saying "but look, my device's user guide says..." it would be chaos. On the other hand, I'm not sure there has been enough serious testing of what devices actually do or don't cause interferences with the plane's instruments, and these should be designed to work properly in an environment full of electronic devices (even if you ask all passengers to turn their phones off, I'm sure at least one phone in every flight remains turned on).

04-23-2010, 01:02 PM	#32
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383043 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	It's entirely irrelevant whether or not a particular device is safe. The fact is that the regulations require them to be switched off. If you choose to travel by air, those are the regulations you agree to abide by. If you don't like them, then don't fly!

04-23-2010, 01:51 PM	#34
kindlekitten Professional Adventuress Posts: 13,368 Karma: 50260224 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: The Olympic Peninsula on the OTHER Washington! (the big green clean one on the west coast!) Device: Kindle, the original! Times Two! and gifting an International Kindle	I just close my e-reader cover and put in the pocket in front of me. these "turn off" regulations are left overs from when the technology was not completely understood. there is one airline, I can't remember which that has allowed cell phone usage for quite awhile and another one that is ramping up the ability to have in flight wi-fi. military flying on commercial birds for years have had all of their bells and whistles on and functioning

04-23-2010, 02:42 PM	#35
Hellmark Wizard Posts: 2,549 Karma: 3799999 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: O'Fallon, Missouri, USA Device: Nokia N800, PRS-505, Nook STR Glowlight, Kindle 3	The ones with wifi and cellphone usage shut them down during landings and take off. As far as the military goes, their equipment is designed under strict requirements as to not mess with the avionics. Your iPods and eBook readers are not.

04-23-2010, 02:45 PM	#36
Sweetpea Grand Sorcerer Posts: 9,707 Karma: 32763414 Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Krewerd Device: Pocketbook Inkpad 4 Color; Samsung Galaxy Tab S6	I didn't "turn off" my Mini. I've never turned it off since I got it. Not that I took it out of my bag (I just love to look outside, even if it's very cloudy!)...

04-23-2010, 03:58 PM	#42
wodin Illiterate Posts: 10,279 Karma: 37848716 Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: The Sandwich Isles Device: Samsung Galaxy S10+, Microsoft Surface Pro	In the US, the rule comes from the FAA, and it says all electronic devices during landing and takeoff while the plane is below 10,000 feet. And it predates cell phones, Bluetooth and WiFi. In the olden days, before those things were invented, it was thought that a battery powered FM radio could emit radio waves that could interfere with the planes navigation and controls. And who knows what else might! The rules have been updated somewhat due to pressure from business travelers who wanted to use their laptops to do useful work instead of just wasting all those hours sitting in an airplane, but the FAA being what they are were VERY conservative, and banned all electronics during takeoff and landing, and anything that has an active transmitter for the duration of the flight. I think there are dispensations for medical equipment (heart pace makers and the like), but I’m not sure about watches, I think they just ignore those. Perhaps PilotBob could enlighten us further.

04-23-2010, 04:36 PM	#45
Hamlet53 Nameless Being	Getting herded around like cattle. Standing for an hour or more at a security check point with your shoes off because one idiot tried once to set of a “shoe bomb.” Maybe getting charged extra to go pee in flight? Seats jammed so close together that your knees are bruised by flight end. BYOL (bring your own lunch). Having to turn of all electronic devices during takeoff and landing are the least of reasons to dread contemporary air travel. http://blog.troubletown.com/2009_12_01_archive.html

Advert

Advert