Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

bits.blogs.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 301 posts

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#161

Post by andrewescott »

CamperBob wrote: post #90
aceofspades19 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Not all devices with a computer chip have radios, my TI-84 calculator has a Z-80 processor but there is no radio in it 2. Aircraft radios operate on a very different frequency then consumer electronics, and I'm pretty sure the FCC wouldn't allow consumer electronics to operate on the same frequency as the radios in a cockpit regardless

Technically, yes, there is a "radio" in your TI-84. The Z-80 is clocked by a crystal oscillator, which runs at a few MHz. Some of that energy will escape in the form of electromagnetic radiation. Sensitive instruments (including an ordinary AM radio) can pick up this radiation from distances ranging from a few inches to several yards. This is true of essentially all modern electronics, although the frequencies have o…

If all electronic devices were dangerous, airlines would be asking passengers to remove the batteries from their wristwatches for the duration of the flight.

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#162

Post by kamechan »

nickbilton wrote: post #19
Bud wrote: post #8

There is actually a very logical, sensible reason to have everyone power off and stow their devices during takeoff and landing, and this story disappointingly failed to cover it: By far the most likely time for any accidents or incidents to occur is during takeoffs and landings. If everyone has 15 objects out and is busily typing away, it's going to be tht much more difficult for flight attendants to get everyone's a…

As the author of the piece, I have to disagree with you. First, the F.A.A. never used this as a reason when I spoke with them for my story. Second, if that were the case, then why are people allowed to read books, magazines, and play crossword puzzles on paper? Reading a book on a Kindle will not cause more distraction during an emergency than reading one on paper. Thanks, Nick Bilton.

there was a mythbusters on this. if i recall correctly, though they couldn't find any way to make the plane's instrumentation fail by bombarding it with a myriad of frequencies, even the mythbusters guys (possibly for legal reasons, or because they succumbed to pressure from their network) concluded that because the FAA can't rigorously test every device that comes out, that this is somewhat of a blanket policy to ensure that some new device that nobody has tested will be on during takeoff and cause the plane to crash.

this said, i never power off my devices...just put them in airplane mode if they have them, or to sleep. i fly a lot, both domestically and internationally.

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#164

Post by raldi »

tlrobinson wrote: post #152

I was on a flight a few months ago where we stopped on the runway for a few minutes and the flight attendants told us we couldn't take off because "too many" devices were still powered on. They also told us they had to "reboot Windows". I'm pretty sure they were full of shit.

What airline?

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#165

Post by duck »

16BitTons wrote: post #143
AshleysBrain wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If 1 billion people take a 20 minute nap every day... that's equal to 38,000 years wasted time every day... which is about 20 lifetimes every HOUR! OMFG nobody should nap!

Except without sleep, we all die. The question before us is this: without TSA, do we all die?

They said nap, not sleep. Dying from a 20 minute nap is pretty unlikely.

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#166

Post by dev_jim »

BonesLF wrote: post #156
dev_jim wrote: post #116

I haven't turned off a cell phone while flying for almost ten years now. I refuse to be part of any safety or security charade.

Almost there with you. Charade is useful if it prevents a confrontation with someone who does not understand the security theater. Thus, I turn the screen off for the 3 seconds it takes the flight attendant to walk by. I've been doing this for years. A fair compromise? Silly, but effective perhaps.

I find that 90% of flight attendants could care less as long as you're not showing the phone in plain sight. Turning it off briefly (event with it still in your hands) or cupping it with your hands and turning sideways so they can't see the screen is enough for them to check the boxes.

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#167

Post by _ea1k »

look_lookatme wrote: post #78
noonespecial wrote: post #25

The last time I flew, most of the people around me didn't know the difference between "airplane mode", "standby", and "off". I'd bet that at least 80% of the phones on that flight were full on despite the efforts of the crew and the device's owners. Everyone turning off everything successfully before takeoff is pure fiction.

Reminds me of a Southwest flight attendent on a recent flight: "The definition of 'turn off all electronic devices' is to 'turn off any device that is electronic'.

I here this kind of banter from Southwest FAs rather frequently. Despite this, I would estimate the compliance rate at less than 33%.

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#168

Post by ChuckMcM »

cheald wrote: post #142
marshray wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I looked into the topic years ago, ISTR finding a few FAA incident reports that did involve consumer electronics causing harmful interference with cockpit navigation systems. They didn't result in accidents but seemed well documented. Did you come across anything like that?

I'd be very interested in that data, mostly because a handheld device capable of producing enough EM radiation to interfere with a cockpit from dozens of feet away (at a minimum) through metal bulkheads seems implausible, at the least. Remember that EM fields are subject to inverse-square law. If it was possible, I can't imagine that the TSA would let us carry as much as a 9-volt battery on board. Even if it were pos…

There are three cases that I know of, they were in an NTSB report which is not online sadly. They all involved interference with the ADF [1] and frequencies used in ILS [2]. Basically the local transmitters around airports are relatively low power so as to not interfere and they only need to 'talk' to planes that are landing, the ILS frequencies are in the 108 - 115Mhz range (just above the FM band). For a fairly long time the memory speed on PC based laptops was about 133Mhz and that was synthetically generated by clock chip running at 50 - 60Mhz on the motherboard. Sidebands from these machines, as weak as they were, were closer to the plane's reciever and so the ILS system would be unable to 'lock in' (the ILS receiver uses a phase locked loop to maintain tracking on the signal).

Anywhoo, different airports, different frequencies, and differernt ways they might interfere. Since that time laptops have gotten better (and faster, they are all generally over a gigahertz on their various busses), and radios have gotten better too.

A AT&T friend actually mentioned that AT&T had asked the airlines to ban cellphone use (back in the 900Mhz analog days) because the towers couldn't deal with a cell phone that went by a 500 MPH. However I've never been able to confirm that with any public record so I consider it hearsay at best.

[1] http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/adf.htm

[2] http://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/osmhome/redbook/4d.pdf Redbook see pages 4-172 thru 4-174

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#169

Post by Osiris »

BonesLF wrote: post #156
dev_jim wrote: post #116

I haven't turned off a cell phone while flying for almost ten years now. I refuse to be part of any safety or security charade.

Almost there with you. Charade is useful if it prevents a confrontation with someone who does not understand the security theater. Thus, I turn the screen off for the 3 seconds it takes the flight attendant to walk by. I've been doing this for years. A fair compromise? Silly, but effective perhaps.

I turn off my cell phone simply to save the battery power. You don't get any signal above a few thousand feet, so why not save on battery for the next few hours? Heck, sometimes I even use my laptop's USB to charge the phone in-flight so it's full when I land.

I think the dumbest thing is having to turn off a Kindle. Is that even possible? Pushing the power button just goes to screensaver which uses exactly as much power as when you're actually using it.

Re: Fliers Must Turn Off Devices, but It’s Not Clear Why

#170

Post by beernutz »

BrianLy wrote: post #140
ceejayoz wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If everyone has 15 objects out and is busily typing away, it's going to be tht much more difficult for flight attendants to get everyone's attention to give instructions, and crucially, much much more difficult to evacuate the plane as quickly as possible. I'd imagine the screaming, flailing, flickering lights, smoke, and vibrations would do a decent job of getting people to look up from their iPhones. > It's the s…

> I'd imagine the screaming, flailing, flickering lights, smoke, and vibrations would do a decent job of getting people to look up from their iPhones. That's not the point. The fact that people have items out (and are possibly blocking exit rows etc), and are not fully aware of the events leading up to the situation is likely to have some impact on the eventual outcome. > None of those restrictions are in place to ma…

No, I think it's EXACTLY the point. Events leading up to the "situation" are likely to grab attention no matter WHAT device you are or are not using. Engines falling off planes and such are VERY hard to miss.

And devices really don't affect people blocking exit rows, etc.

Post reply on HN