Is this report accurate..or is it bogus?

Bogus or not the main interference caused by cell phones on aircraft is to the revenue stream from the seat phones.

From what I've heard (from a pilot friend) regarding the use of mobiles on the ground is that they can cause static in the plane to tower communications. So the pilot may hear, "Flight *static* please turn right on taxiway *static* thank you." The next thing he hears are screams followed by a loud crunching sounds etc.

It would be nice if cellphones fed people's voices back through the ear-piece so that they would not feel the need to speak at five times normal volume. I think the 'loud voices' issue is a design problem, not a social one.

Edited by author 06-10-2003 11:51 PM
While I detest these folks I also find the "don't turn on cell phones until we reach the gate" and other BS even more revolting. The plane has landed. What difference does it make?

Let me guess, you're one of those people that stands up, retrieves your luggage from the overhead bin, and sprints for the exit the second the plane touches down. YOU DESERVE TO BE SHOT IN THE THROAT, RIGHT THERE IN THE GOD DAMNED AISLE.

Sorry, I don't know what made me write that.

seems that if interference can cause harm - especailly mechanical or instrument failure - then would-be terrorists would be well advised to develop EMF disturbing devices into allowable carry-on electronic gear. if a cell phone can really do anything to airplane systems, then how about a boombox sized wad of microwaves? perhaps the potential hypocrisy is not when/where a person can use their phones/electronic gear, but maybe more in the "if they're that dangerous, then why allow them at all?" zone...

Third hand info, so take it for what it's worth. Supposedly, the "real" reason airborne cell calls are a problem has less to do with the aircraft than with the cell architecture. Not all cell systems can deal with radios moving at 600+ mph through their coverage area. Doppler effects, rapidly changing angles, and very short times in the cell making for a challenge for the system to hand the phone from cell to cell as the plane flies overhead. Don't know if this comment is valid for today's systems.

Not that people really *need* to be yakking away in flight anyway....

I have to go with Bob G.

The seat phones are wireless too are they not? Wouldn't that cause interference too?

That last few minutes of waiting to park at the gate is just a few more minutes of seat-phone revenue opportunity.

I'm not a signals engineer, but it seems to me that if aircraft avionics were vulnerable to interferance from cell phones. No aircraft would be able to even take off. If you think about it, an aircraft on the tarmac or on the runway is constantly being drenched in cellular transmissions from the airport and from the surrounding metropolitain area. Air traffic controllers constantly use cell phones in the control tower! Having a dozen signal sources inside the cabin should make little or no difference.

It seems to me that this "study" consisted of little more than asking a few people if they agree with something that everybody already assumes to be true.

When this played on slashdot, a really informative post was made here : http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=67086&cid=6160277

Two things really

1) The tests were made using really pumped up waves, like, if you had dipped your cellphone in gamma radiation (mmmm banner..) and then tried to use it

2) Even though regular phones can't produce that kind of output, the fact is that in-flight travel presents a situation where the phone is always going to be pumping out the most juice it can trying to lock on to cell tower signals as they fly by at 30,000ft, 600mph. The electronics in the aircraft were built in the 60s, mainly. All the wires, controls, etc, don't have the proper insulation. Most any kind of material gets affected *Somehow* by waves... Soo, maybe one phone won't nose-dive the plane, but the idea of interference definitely needs to be looked at.

In response to hating people who seem like they are "wheeling and dealing 24/7", I'll grant you that they do not need to be so load. As a traveling business person, however, let me familiarize you with a few of the realities of the road warrior:
-traveling for business means you are "down" during your travel time. You can't take calls while on a plane, so you have lost that time for getting, making and responding to calls. If your travel involves connections, you have just decreased your available time yet again. Customers don't like to wait; account managers don't like to wait; direct reports don't like to wait. So, if you can squeeze in a round of calls between flights, you can keep things moving.
- often travel requires you to leave one meeting, catch a flight and prepare for the next. This puts you way behind with v and e mail. Again, if you can knock off a few calls on the run, you lessen your burden when you arrive.
-Finally, remember time zones. Someone, somewhere is always doing the 9-5. We are a seamless, timeless, virtual workforce.
All this may be a nuisance for those who have to listen in on the calls; and there is some common courtesy that ought to be considered by the offenders, but next time you are gonna give the evil eye to the business hack on the cell phone, stop and think that he/she is just trying to free up their schedule so one day they me able to jsut chill and read in the airport like everyone else.

1. It's CAA - Civil Aviation Authority
2. The report is real. It's here.

The most recent flight I've taken (on American), the seat phones had a sticker on them saying they were taken out of service in March 2002. I've no idea why. But clearly American, at least, is not interested in banning cell phones to increase revenue on their seat phones.

Oh, sure, Kelvin is right, some people are actually conducting business on their phones. And some are just making quick calls to let their loved ones know the plane has landed. (Me, I find it possible to wait long enough to use a pay phone in the terminal for this purpose, but if I -had- a cell phone I might not bother waiting.)

But much of the time, less in airports than elsewhere, I find that the conversations I'm forced to overhear on cell phones consist of long-running monologues about Exactly What The Speaker Is Doing At That Very Moment ("I'm waiting in line for a hamburger" ... "I just got out of the bathroom"), and I'm just glad my friends don't feel obliged to telephone -me- with burning news like that.

Like so many things, this seems to come down to the type-A personalities versus everyone else. You've got a lot of stress freaks who actually want to work 24x7 versus the rest of who are happy for any down time. When I was on 24x7 pager duty, I used to like getting on the plane because it meant I was "off the clock." It was like being in the shower--you're in a bubble; no one can reach you. I eventually found all the places my cell phone and pager couldn't be used--airplanes, movie theaters, the basement tool department at Sears, the middle of nowhere Texas--and spent as much of my time there as possible.

To all these manic workaholics, did you ever think about slowing down, taking a break, turning off the cell phone and not spending so much time on airplanes and in meetings? You'd live longer.

In the immortal words of William Shatner: "Get a life!"

Blech. Any regs against cell phone users are OK with me. Easily one of the most annoying and self-centered groups out there, they could use "guidance" wherever it comes from. Airports should make glass rooms for them like they do for smokers. Everyone could go blab away as loud as they want in there.

By the way, I passed a guy on a trail hike the other day who was chatting away on a headset phone, totally engrossed, louder than anyone would be talking to a physically-present human. On one hand, the guy has gotten creative--doing business out in the wilderness. On the other hand--the wilderness is a sanctuary for lots of people (not to mention animals), and it's lousy for someone to bring a business meeting in there. Just another indication that people are ill-equipped for respectful cell-phone use.

Will a cell phone even WORK in an aircraft with a metal skin?

It might seem silly to worry about crashing the airplane after it's already landed, but as a pilot I can tell you that at a busy airport, taxiing around is one of the MOST dangerous phases. If a planeload of cell phones managed to interfere with communications or control and your plane inadvertently turned the wrong way and banged into a fueled-up 747, you would quickly see what I'm talking about.

I think they should fix the problem, however, so people can use their phones without worrying. Communicating is important. The passenger who annoys you by appearing to need the phone "24/7" might be waiting to find out whether her mom's biopsy was positive.

The passenger who annoys you by appearing to need the phone "24/7" might be waiting to find out whether her mom's biopsy was positive. Yeah, this happens about 10,000 times a day for people who spend most of their time saying, "Jim, I'm on the plane and I'll be on the plane for two hours, and then the Johnson file should be on my desk, even though I told you about that in email, and let me tell you where else I'll be even though you're fully briefed and I provided that information and not God himself would care since once I get there, I'll immediately call you and tell you where I am."

I travel a fair amount, used to travel much more, and most cell phone abusers are just like most cigarette smokers in an age without ash trays. A study showed that smokers who flick their butts, which is practically all of them now (a little civil disobedience in reaction to their oppressed status, Cory?), actually don't believe they're doing it. That is, when asked, most smokers genuinely believe they always dispose of their butts properly. It's an effect the researchers likened to out of sight, out of mind: the minute the butt left their fingers, they erased the memory of having littered.

Many, many cell phone users can't control their own volume of speaking, so that disrupts the public space. It's an erosion of the public sound space, just like other technology has eroded other parts of the common.

I was on a long train ride with a friend who was complaining about cell phone etiquette -- especially as other train riders ignored the many polite requests from Amtrak's various messages to talk in a vestibule, not in the car. He noted that he can talk in a normal or quieter tone of voice into his phone and be heard, but that his polite and pleasant wife seems to have to scream into her phone despite many remonstrances. As if to prove his point, his wife called, and his phone practically vibrated with her voice!

Maybe it'll eventually be okay, but I'm afraid it'll just be worse, and Type A types will rule the day again.

There is another issue...

I have been reading some articles on lithium-ion and lithium-ion polymer Batteries. It appears that when these batteries age, they can get a buildup of lithium around the electrodes inside the battery. When the battery is stressed or warm, sometimes under heavy use, the battery may "jet flame." While this is rare, if it happens, I would not want to be anywhere near the amount of fuel stored in an airplane.

It's amazing that airlines allow anything on a plane that can create a spark, anything that contains batteries, cigarette lighters, etc.

If there is a "minor" crash, the seats are facing the wrong way. If there is a major crash, the seats will just rip out of the floor.

Look at a wings on MD80 / MD90 ,s If the engines went out, how long do you think they could stay in the air?

I really don't believe that the airlines care about human lives enough. At least fighter-planes have ejection-seats : )




I think that there are so many volitile things in odinary luggage that, that I cannot help thinking about it before boarding.

No spaces (brenda board at brenda make dot com)

Cell phone signals travel "line of sight". Normally, that means that only a handful of cell towers receive the transmission from your phone, and they can easily negotiate which one should handle the call.

If you are at 30,000 feet, you might be line-of-sight to a hundred cell towers. The network is not designed to negotiate that many simultaneous hits, and can get overloaded.

It is the cell phone companies that do not want you using your phone in an airplane.

The guy who "hates" and "detests" cell phone use in airports has a personal problem. His ancestors undoubtedly "hated" all those peasants who were learned to read books and "detested" those damn Wright brothers for inventing a flying that impeded his view of the Martian canals.

Airports are big. If you don't like the sound move somewhere else. Better yet, put a cork in it.