Turning phone off on flight

Deatr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122191834#Comment_122191834

it’s the same in my company for a low visibility take off and landing all PEDS must be off. I no longer fly the ATR. However, I have had interference in my headset from a phone on the approach into a number of airports and while it didn’t affect the navigation it was very off putting to hear the noise in the headset especially when it was a windy day.

If people can’t follow a simple instruction to put their phone in flight mode how are they gonna react during an emergency evacuation? Pretty much as you’ve seen over the past few years people reaching up into the overhead bins to get their carry ons. People don’t care anymore as they’re too used to flying think that it’ll never happen to them.

2zefirki

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122192095#Comment_122192095

Pax don't care about onboard safety. Its all about their comfort!! The struggle to put a phone away for 5 minutes it's real

I so agree with everything you mentioned!

eeepaulo

Happened on relatives flight last night. They all had the phones in the overhead lockers. Not really much point the pilot telling people to turn off there phone when he has started the descent and the seatbelt sign lit

smurfjed

Actually the worst issue these days is 5G communication bands in the USA, they are impacting aircraft instruments especially radar altimeters. So I’m not surprised that they want them turned off in the USA.

Europe operates on different 5G frequencies.

LambshankRedemption

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122191275#Comment_122191275

Yes I know that and have even used them. However, what stops a person yakking away endlessly? The exorbitant price that was charged. When I used one on JetBlue around 2011, it was if memory serves me $4 a minute.

Tenger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122191841#Comment_122191841

Air Phones operate differently to mobile phone

Henry Ford III

There's no mobile signal nor data once airborne for a few minutes. Above maybe 10,000 feet?

The only thing that does work is your GPS on Google maps.

tohaltuwi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122192095#Comment_122192095

An rapid 80 degree yaw in an ATR in opposing winds coming in Cardiff once was enough to put manners on all ashen faced pax beside me 🤣

tohaltuwi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122192166#Comment_122192166

Ah but pax are EXPERTS don’t you know.

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122194854#Comment_122194854

Pax shouldn't have to care about airborne safety, and it's stupid to expect them to.

Manufacturers are well capable of designing systems that aren't affected by EM emissions in known frequencies. Not the fault of passengers that airlines are using outdated equipment.

tohaltuwi

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122194826#Comment_122194826

I turn my mobile cell/data off always, and experiment to see how far aircraft can be tracked on Google Maps. Of course with WIfI off there’s no more than a blurred map display after about 7000ft. Last flight I tracked was recently on board a Loganair Embraer 145 from Benbecula to Glasgow, max altitude 17000ft. As soon as we cleared Uist map was blurred, and around cruise nothing displayed, some clarity returning on descent.

In the article I posted earlier in the thread it described how cell masts have minimal vertical reach as they are not designed for that, but low level flight can catch the signal, albeit in a way that could potentially disturb the functioning of the radio masts with the fast flyover.

As an airline pilot poster said above the interference in noise coming through the headset can be very undesirable. It could also be dangerous.

When I was in my twenties and flying light aircraft as a hobby, it was the era of many pirate stations setting up. I remember one time tuning into one of the Dublin frequencies to call in my simple flight plan, next thing that blasted out was “Radio Sunshine 🎶🎶” This happened occasionally back then. There was important info for Dublin to relay, a low flying eastbound 737 was to be in my vicinity at 4000ft afaicr, and I was to keep below him at maximum 3000ft.

Tenger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122195025#Comment_122195025

"outdated equipment" is usually more robust and reliable.

Hence the ISS using old PCs for years after newer hardware and software was availible.

Vestiapx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122191834#Comment_122191834

I was going to post this.

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196092#Comment_122196092

Eh, no it's not. I'm sure they're still using older gear because their requirements have not changed

How many 5G enabled phones are on the ISS?

Victor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196092#Comment_122196092

No. For something like the ISS, if it isn't mission-critical, it generally isn't getting onboard.

If they want to introduce newer hardware and software it has to be tested against everything on board, before it leaves the ground.

NewbridgeIR

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122195025#Comment_122195025

"Padre Pio"

"Pax"

Takes me back to being an altar boy.

Tenger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196472#Comment_122196472

"Pax" is a standard industry term.

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196472#Comment_122196472

Still got that PTSD?

MarkN

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122191834#Comment_122191834

couldn’t tell you the amount of times I’ve flown Ryanair and this has never happened. Ever.

Tenger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122291894#Comment_122291894

Using autoland isnt that common, so understandable that you never experienced it.

MarkN

Extremely rare I would’ve said.

2zefirki

I do average 40 flights per month on Ryanair aircraft(its my job after all.maybe 1 out of 40 would be autoland ) .last time was probably 6 weeks ago

vswr

a lot of people don't understand even basic RF, so it's understandable the flippant "I've flown 600 times with my phone on and I'm still alive" remarks….

While it is less relevant than in years gone by, it's all about risk reduction in a safety critical environment..

Why it's less relevant than years gone by is because you have better quality made electronic devices which interfere with each other less than years gone by… plane avionics are more immune to interference, and devices tend to not spurt out interference….

But as I said, more immune, not totally….

Some examples:

-Multiple handsets trying to handshake on an array of frequencies, which will induce currents in wiring looms in what is basically an aluminium faraday cage… With how 3/4/5G work, you are very likely to have multiple handsets attempting connections on similar frequencies, which will enter some of the flight system sensors…. Great care has been taken to design systems immune to 2.4GHz and 5 Ghz (Bluetooth and Wifi) but again more immune, not totally immune

-the above case doesn't take into account unknown faulty equipment which may work fine from a functional sense, but in RF land, is spewing out broadband interference

-Reciprocal interference is a thing, while it may not supress a wanted signal, it "desensitizes" a receiver to a wanted signal (making a receiver deaf) and similar to a medical setting at crucial treatment points, at crucial stages in flight, you will be ask to turn off any non essential equipment (like the autoland example above, it makes extensive use of radio altimeter. Desensitizing that can throw an aircraft off a few feet, not exactly what you want when landing something in the blind at a few hundred mile an hour)

-good oul GSM still crops up with the "dah dacka dah dacka dah" on both audio and signal lines

-also mentioned previously, some 5G base stations in the US work very close to the radio altimeter frequencies, so if you have the aircraft receiving base stations signals, along with equipment on board, signals can get into the avionics suite, start causing intermodulation and you get some funky results from that

as already mentioned, most people have a normal flight, the pilot takes off, navigates and lands the plane with the help of an array of systems, one could have interreference, that's OK, there are others, or even on a fine clear day,a pilot can just do some regular hands on flying…

It's in those safety critical or emergency situations you will need as quiet an RF spectrum as possible for all those avionics systems to be working at their peak.

Unfortunately, as we can generally not predict those situations, that's why you're asked to turn your phones off in general.

LambshankRedemption

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122300754#Comment_122300754

If you havn't already, I recommend watching the Blackberry movie. Its quite eye opening, in that they show the prototypes which were practically stuck together with sticky tape, but then instead of lots of engineering and Quality Assessments, they basically put them in a case and sold them.

As you said, its less of an issue now because most peoples phones adhere to well established standards, but ~25 years ago, especially before the advent of digital cellular phones, not everyone but a few people were wandering around with portable radio transmitters in their pocket.

A video clip from one of my favourite shows, which is apt for this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHwriLZJdB0

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122301504#Comment_122301504

makes sense from an RF perspective…even changing a board layout slightly can give you completely different RF propagation situation (although the misnomer with mobile phone design is the person effectively becomes part of the antenna,rubbishing any "phone only" RF models and measurements, especially in earlier mobile phone designs).

Slightly Kwackers

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122187032#Comment_122187032

No, it's for the same reason you cannot use a lot of other electronic equipment. Everything on an aircraft is tested on the ground, in the air, tested for fail modes and tested when interacting with other electronic items in the area.

The designers will not test and approve every single mobile phone, laptop or piece of equipment using a switch mode power supply or inverter to see if it interacts with other items and affects the planes comms, external or internal.

A phone or high frequency current isn't visible to the user, but the signal has a physical wavelength in space and can induce a significant Voltage in surrounding cables. In addition to this if you get a few phones in use along with other items, you can get mixing of the signals. Your old pre DAB superhetrodyne made use of the fact that for two signals F1 and F2 you get F1, F2, F1 plus F2 and F1 minus F2 when they hit a semiconductor.

Now imagine all that mixing in a plane full of passengers chatting away or using laptops.

Like phones on garage forecourts, it would not exactly be a terrorists first choice of weapon to provide him with headline events, it's just that for the unlucky punters, the results are none reversible, so better to play safe and simply do as the pilot asks.

General Disarray

It's all pointless. The airline I work for has full mobile connectivity throughout the flight. No phones are ever turned off, and no requirement to do so.

vswr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122316434#Comment_122316434

..............

They have pico-cells installed on board the aircraft, along with additional screening in the aircraft to prevent handsets trying to handshake with ground terminals. Backhaul is via satellite (with the option of ground back haul also).

.................

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122196472#Comment_122196472

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122197374#Comment_122197374

Saint Padre Pio could bi-locate, so wouldn't have needed air travel.

Pax Vobiscum !

Tenger

MOD POST

2 dick measuring posts removed.

MOD POST