Turning Electronic Devices Off On Take Off And Landing. Why?

[Shurup]

Just read another thread about pilot playing with his mobile during landing. That brought me back to a question that always pops up in my head when flying, but it never gets answered as, as soon as I'm out of the plane, I'm preoccupied with other things and then just forget about it till I fly again.

The part about switching the electronic devices off doesn't make any sense to me. I agree with shutting the receiving and transmitting (R/T) functions off as they *may* interfere with aircraft systems, but to shut everything off... What's wrong with just leaving people alone?

There are so many devices that are never being turned off, like the electronic watches, certain medical devices, even pushing a power down button on your mobile doesn't really turn it off unless you pull the battery out. They must be doing it for one of two reasons:

1) Some technologically retarded people may not know how to turn off the receiving or transmitting functions so everyone is being treated as those retards and asked to shut everything off.

2) They want you to pay attention to the pre-flight safety demonstration, BUT!!! It's OK to sleep during the take off, I've never seen anyone being woken up, and it's OK to read a newspaper of magazine but not a eBook reader.

Then the part about R/T functions that "may" interfere with the craft system... Wouldn't there still be a lot of interference from outside of the craft until it's high up in the air?

Hot do any of these rules make any sense?

I should note however that I hardly ever get bothered by Thai, Singapore, AirAsia or Nok airlines, they must have revised their regulations or just being too shy. Air Canada is being no less then paranoid about these regulations. I'm a priority check in and boarding, I remember one time I went in, got to my seat, made myself comfortable and just sat and watched people coming in. The cabin was still empty when the flight attendant came to me and asked me to shut my iPod and take my headphones off. I told her I will do that when I hear the announcement, she insisted saying that's the regulations are... I interrupted, pointing out that we are nowhere ready to take off, that people still boarding, I repeated that I will do that when I hear the announcement, put on my headphones and ignored her. She gave me an evil look and didn't bother me again.

Air Canada also is the most annoying airline I fly with. To start with, their safety video is the longest as they repeat everything in 2 official Canadian languages, English and French, plus there are a lot of UN-informative announcements in 3(!!!) languages: Eng, Fr. and Chineese (as I usually fly through Hong-Kong).

[NewlyMintedThai]

I think the only answer to this question that really matters and is all you need to know is "because they told you to".

[robblok]

I think the only answer to this question that really matters and is all you need to know is "because they told you to".

Actually you will have to obey, but its not wrong to question the reason behind it. That is what differentiates the thinkers from the followers.

[NewlyMintedThai]

I think the only answer to this question that really matters and is all you need to know is "because they told you to".

Actually you will have to obey, but its not wrong to question the reason behind it. That is what differentiates the thinkers from the followers.

OK, Rodin...here ya go:

The reason they don't want you using personal electronics during takeoff and landing is that most personal electronics, even though they're shielded and not supposed to emit much, emit certain amounts of RFI (Radio Frequency Interference). While one or two devices might not interfere, a lot of them could interfere with aircraft pilot-ground communications, which is critical during takeoff and landing, when the aircraft is most vulnerable. If there is an emergency, the pilot needs to have clear communication with the Air Traffic Controller for emergency instructions and other necessary coms.

Cell Phones and Notebooks are the biggest RFI and EMI (electromagnetic interference) offenders - even though they're shielded, they still emit quite a bit of interference, and cell phones by their nature could theoretically directly overlap an emergency com frequency that the pilot is using. If you've ever noticed the bulge cylinder on the end of some computer and AC adapter cables, that's a device specifically designed for RFI reduction. But not all cables have those.

On another note, any fuel leak vapors during takeoff and landing could also be set off by the use of personal electronic devices if the plane were forced to abort the takeoff and a tank ruptured, though RFI is the primary concern. Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

[robblok]

Now that is an answer, if its correct i don't know. But at least its something that people who are really interested in it can check and find out about.

I will follow regulations, its crazy to question them and making a scene in plane (or BTS). Once you use their services you have to obey their rules. But to start a discussion about those rules and justification of them while not using their services is quite ok to do. I like to know why things are the way they are.

[Shurup]

OK, Rodin...here ya go:

The reason they don't want you using personal electronics during takeoff and landing is that most personal electronics, even though they're shielded and not supposed to emit much, emit certain amounts of RFI (Radio Frequency Interference). While one or two devices might not interfere, a lot of them could interfere with aircraft pilot-ground communications, which is critical during takeoff and landing, when the aircraft is most vulnerable. If there is an emergency, the pilot needs to have clear communication with the Air Traffic Controller for emergency instructions and other necessary coms.

Cell Phones and Notebooks are the biggest RFI and EMI (electromagnetic interference) offenders - even though they're shielded, they still emit quite a bit of interference, and cell phones by their nature could theoretically directly overlap an emergency com frequency that the pilot is using. If you've ever noticed the bulge cylinder on the end of some computer and AC adapter cables, that's a device specifically designed for RFI reduction. But not all cables have those.

On another note, any fuel leak vapors during takeoff and landing could also be set off by the use of personal electronic devices if the plane were forced to abort the takeoff and a tank ruptured, though RFI is the primary concern. Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

I partially agree with you, R/T functions must be switched off, but, as I pointed out, there are many devices that are never being truly off unless you pull the battery out. Why not just announce to switch off R/T func?

[bangkockney]

Well, simply put, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (F.A.A.) always likes to err on the side of caution. In 2006 the FAA request the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics to test the effects of cellphones, Wi-fi and other devices on planes. They found no evidence to support the idea that such devices cannot interfere with the function of airplanes, and they found no evidence that they can affect flight safety. So there we have it. The problem.

[tolsti]

It seems that the restriction doesn't apply to flight deck crew though...... as this bogan ilustrates http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/jetstar-pilots-forgot-to-lower-wheels-due-to-mobile-phone-20120419-1x9ed.html

[Eff1n2ret]

Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

I'm sure I once saw a Mythbusters programme which showed there is no risk of a cellphone causing an explosion at a fuel pump.

[Farma]

Having watched a pilot and nav nearly come to fisticuffs on landing I can't totally agree with the "they found no evidence that they can affect flight safety" comment.

The aircraft albeit military in question suffered severe uncommanded movements on approach. The pilot discovered the backseater was making a call on his cell phone at the time the movements occured.

[wana]

Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

I'm sure I once saw a Mythbusters programme which showed there is no risk of a cellphone causing an explosion at a fuel pump.

i saw it also

if cell phones could bow up gas stations ,there would not be any gas stations left

i always wondered ,why everyone has to get out to refuel the minibus ? is refueling it when its switched off more likey to explode than when its full of passenegers 2 minutes later ?

[h90]

It is so you can't send a SMS to the pilot

[baboon]

Is a Kindle or Nook classed as an electronic device in this case?

[Shurup]

Is a Kindle or Nook classed as an electronic device in this case?

I would think so, wouldn't electronic mean a device using electric power to function, to power it's semiconductors?

[bendix]

I spoke to someone who worked at an airline on about this and other seemingly draconian safety measures. They said that whatever rulings they make, there is always slippage; people not quite obeying, just to be difficult. So they 'over-safety', in the expectation that people will slip, but they will still be very safe.

Case in point. If you let people keep electronic devices on, but say it's ok to have transmission or wifi switched on, do you really think people will obey that. Ergo, they tell them to turn the whole things off.

[NewlyMintedThai]

Is a Kindle or Nook classed as an electronic device in this case?

I would think so, wouldn't electronic mean a device using electric power to function, to power it's semiconductors?

See, this is part of the problem. Rather than have to field a hundred questions every flight about "does this count" or "can I use this", not to mention people who just don't ask, a blanket ban on all devices is both much simpler and much safer.

[GarryP]

Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

I'm sure I once saw a Mythbusters programme which showed there is no risk of a cellphone causing an explosion at a fuel pump.

They also did one about cellphone interference with aircraft navigation and control equipment. The result was MYTH BUSTED!!!!!! No effect on aircraft navigation and communications equipment.

[NewlyMintedThai]

Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

I'm sure I once saw a Mythbusters programme which showed there is no risk of a cellphone causing an explosion at a fuel pump.

They also did one about cellphone interference with aircraft navigation and control equipment. The result was MYTH BUSTED!!!!!! No effect on aircraft navigation and communications equipment.

Did they turn on a couple hundred devices at the same time as part of their experiment? And try it on all types of aircraft, both new and old?

[GarryP]

They did it with a Sopwith Camel

Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

I'm sure I once saw a Mythbusters programme which showed there is no risk of a cellphone causing an explosion at a fuel pump.

They also did one about cellphone interference with aircraft navigation and control equipment. The result was MYTH BUSTED!!!!!! No effect on aircraft navigation and communications equipment.

Did they turn on a couple hundred devices at the same time as part of their experiment? And try it on all types of aircraft, both new and old?

Sopwith Camel.

[Shurup]

Is a Kindle or Nook classed as an electronic device in this case?

I would think so, wouldn't electronic mean a device using electric power to function, to power it's semiconductors?

See, this is part of the problem. Rather than have to field a hundred questions every flight about "does this count" or "can I use this", not to mention people who just don't ask, a blanket ban on all devices is both much simpler and much safer.

I spoke to someone who worked at an airline on about this and other seemingly draconian safety measures. They said that whatever rulings they make, there is always slippage; people not quite obeying, just to be difficult. So they 'over-safety', in the expectation that people will slip, but they will still be very safe.

Case in point. If you let people keep electronic devices on, but say it's ok to have transmission or wifi switched on, do you really think people will obey that. Ergo, they tell them to turn the whole things off.

These seem to be the reasons, they don't want to go around telling everyone that is OK to keep on but not that, and there would be more passengers who would disobey if the rules were more relaxed. Still think they go way over the top with this.

Is it only me that noticed that Asian airlines bother people less than North Americans'? Not sure of EU airlines as I don't fly there. Do asians have smarter approach to these regulations or they're just being too shy to insist if someone keep using their devices?

[NewlyMintedThai]

I think they have a laxer view of safety -- which doesn't necessarily maje them unsafe if US airlines are way over the top.

[thaimite]

This topic has this quote

Somewhere between 2500 feet and 2000 feet, the captain's mobile phone started beeping with incoming text messages, and the captain twice did not respond to the co-pilot's requests.

The co-pilot l the captain cannot turn off his phone why should we?

ooked over and saw the captain "preoccupied with his mobile phone", investigators said

If the captain can not turn off his phone why should we?

Personally I believe there is no risk otherwise they would not let you on the plane with a phone I am also sure it would be possible and cheap to put RF sensors above each seat to show if any devices are radiating.

The only good reason for turning off phones during take off and landing is so that people are listening to the safety instructions they have heard 100 times beofre and not chattting on the phone.

[Hostile17]

if you had a little Fuse on your tray with air canada, they would start ass raming you with forks and spoon untill you broke it in two and then threw it in the garbage. Those people are crazy.

But then again, most people are complete retards. Rather have tight rules and not die because of an idiot who managed to make his e-reader explode somehow.

[Soutpeel]

Everyone has missed the real reason why they dont want you to use a cell phone in the air....they want you to use their phones and charge $ 5/minute...LOL.

[Tywais]

OK, Rodin...here ya go:

The reason they don't want you using personal electronics during takeoff and landing is that most personal electronics, even though they're shielded and not supposed to emit much, emit certain amounts of RFI (Radio Frequency Interference).

<snip>

On another note, any fuel leak vapors during takeoff and landing could also be set off by the use of personal electronic devices if the plane were forced to abort the takeoff and a tank ruptured, though RFI is the primary concern. Same if the plane had a hard landing that resulted in a wing tank rupture and subsequent fuel leak. It's the same reason you're asked to turn your cell phones off while fueling your car.

Source here

[Tywais]

No effect you say? Read more here USAToday.

USA TODAY's analsyis of NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System, which lets airline employees report incidents confidentially, reveals that pilots and an air traffic controller reported 32 incidents of electronic device interference with aircraft systems from January 2001 through Dec. 2, 2011.

A pilot of a Canadair CRJ-200 regional jet reported compass system malfunctions after takeoff at an altitude of about 9,000 feet on a flight last May. The pilot says a passenger had an iPhone in standby mode; when the phone was turned off, the compass system operated properly.

A pilot of a Boeing 737 jet noticed that navigational radios were not updating after takeoff from San Francisco airport in August 2007. The radios started to update after a passenger shut off a handheld GPS.

On the other hand ....

Over at Scientific American, Larry Greenmeir tries to sift through the official FAA explanation and boils it down to this: Some electronic devices could theoretically interfere with aircraft equipment; it’s not always clear which gadgets are likely to offend; and it’s easier to diagnose any possible interference when the plane is at cruising altitude rather than during takeoff and landing. So it’s simpler to just ask passengers to turn all devices off, even those, like the Kindle, that barely draw a charge while in use. That’s the conventional explanation, at least. But not everyone agrees whether it makes sense.

Washington Post

And a disgruntled reporter's thoughts on it ...

Nick Bilton of the New York Times is leading the cause on this important issue with a series of articles revealing the ridiculousness of these rules. According to his research our devices send out so few microvolts that the amount of interference is infinitesimal and inconsequential. A veteran pilot once told ABC News that an airplane’s electronic systems are, “heavily shielded. Stray signals cannot get into those systems.” That leaves no good reason why cell phones should be turned off during a flight. Except for the perpetuation of the kabuki theater that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) puts on, aka Security Theater. So I’m going to continue my little tradition of civil disobedience, keeping my phone on after they tell me to put it “in the off position,” (language that never fails to grate).

Read more: http://ideas.time.com/2011/12/29/why-i-dont-turn-my-gadgets-off-on-planes/#ixzz1sZkY5nES

[Chivas]

The OP put himself at danger of being offloaded or worse by ignoring the flight crew ??

[draftvader]

I have always thought there is a far more serious reason. The most dangerous moments in flying are as you rotate V1 (pull the front wheels off the ground) and rotate V2 (rear wheels up). At V1 you are traveling at 160mph (roughly, depending on aircraft/wind conditions, etc) and have JUST enough runway to abort the landing in a big aircraft. At V2 you are beyond this point and any emergency needs to be dealt with by flying around and landing. Similarly on landing the moment you go between 10m off the ground and touching down is the most dangerous moment. If you have an emergency at 27,000 feet then you have PLENTY of time to prepare for an emergency landing. If you are on take-off or landing then you have seconds.

Maybe there is an element of focusing people. A good way to focus people in a crowd is to give them a common, achievable, task. Switching devices off will do this and remind people (very gently) that they need to keep their wits about them at this time (best not to say it though).

A theory, but not too far off the mark if you think about most people and flying. I have flown countless flights through my life in numerous different aircraft (even flying myself on 2 occasions....with an instructor) and I still watch the safety briefing and count headrests to my nearest exit. Literally multiple hundreds of flights (my, unfortunate, record is 126 flights in 1 year....European sales travel) and I will carry this on forever. If it takes a little personal inconvenience to focus people then I will be very grateful. What else is there to wait for? Your plastic encased "haute cuisine"?

For my personal two-penneth I am really not looking forward to people being able to use their mobile devices for calls throughout flights. Who wants to be stuck next to some self-important t*t making that "all important" (to them) call whilst you try to sleep? Not for me. Leave me 1 safe haven from this blight!

[Shurup]

The OP put himself at danger of being offloaded or worse by ignoring the flight crew ??

I don't think so, I fly a lot and I know the rules. She shouldn't have asked me to turn it off while most of the passengers weren't even on a plane. If she would have tried that she could have quite possibly ended up loosing her job as I would have taken that matter to a court if I was unloaded.

[transam]

I had a flight, info in Thai and English. Most of the passengers were Indian, sat cross legged in their seats and as we taxied for take off they all got on the phone, flight crew did sod all to tell them to turn off their devices.