dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2008-08-07 14:45:14: The Hang Up Act, a piece of legislation that would permanently ban the use of cell phones on airline flights is on its way to being passed. This has caused media inquiries into how people really feel about cell phones on flights. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next

canesfan2001

join:2003-02-04
Hialeah, FL

1 edit

1 recommendation

Shouldn't be a law

Let's forget that this is a definite waste of time to be working on right now with all the other issues we are facing, this law just shouldn't exist.
If cell phones are no threat to the computer/electrical systems of the plane, then the government should step out. This type of law should be reserved for places like China a Singapore where it's citizens don't have rights and etiquette is law.
I hate the idea of people talking loudly on their phones and annoying the hell out of everyone around them, but that can be solved by airline rules.
--
OASAASLLS
expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY

Re: Shouldn't be a law

"If cell phones are no threat to the computer/electrical systems of the plane"

That's just it....IF..

There's STILL alot of concerns about this, its simply not proven to be inconsequential RF interference, and until it is, they can't approve it.

Tsume
Premium
join:2004-02-23
Johnson City, TN
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: Shouldn't be a law

Going to agree with the majority here and state that cell phones do not interfere with properly shielded equipment (and I'm pretty damned sure most airline equipment has to be properly shielded from all the non-cell-phone interference it already gets) which includes airline instruments and gauges.

This should not be a law nor an FAA regulation. Too much regulation = bad. Let the individual airlines decide how to handle it. It could be a selling point, boosting profits for an ailing industy (airline A offers in-flight cell use - people can talk all they want as long as they can deal with others talking, airline B offers no cell use - people who want a quiet flight can have one, or even better airline C offers text messaging only but no conversations unless emergency).
expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY

Re: Shouldn't be a law

tsume....you're right.....to a point.

Shielding is the most important element to eliminating RF interference. Unfortunately, in an aircraft of 5+ years (or 20-25) the integrity of shielding runs from so-so to downright poor.

Cat IIIB landing, no visibility, RVR at a minimum, are you damned sure you're ok with cell phone usage on an aircraft? You don't even need to know what that stuff means, but understand that there are VALID technical concerns.

And no, I'm not wearing a tinfoil hat.

greendragon
Premium
join:2003-09-20
Stewartville, MN

Re: Shouldn't be a law

In that case the pilot could but on the "No Phones" sign and not have to worry about it anymore..
--
Folding for our future!!

Airplane

@k12.ca.us

Re: Shouldn't be a law

They can finally repurpose those No-Smoking lights and chime!

insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
There are not valid technical concerns. How many people leave their cellphone on during flights? I sat next to a guy once who was sending messages on his blackberry the whole time. The fact is if cell phones caused any interference we would have seen it by now. The real world evidence points to there being no effect on an airplane by cellphones.
expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY

Re: Shouldn't be a law

I'm sorry, but you have faulty logic.

"Because people haven't died of it yet, it's not a problem" just doesn't make sense. If you knew anything about aircraft design and engineering, you'd understand that everything is built to avoid a single point of failure. Since you're not privy to avionics anomaly reports, its somewhat obnoxious to claim that you know better than everyone else...particularly insiders.

You're just plain wrong, but trying to make you understand that is fruitless. Therefore I'll stop.
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3

Re: Shouldn't be a law

How about this, we just take the easy road... it's already been shown that they do not cause interference on planes.

Personally, however, if something as little as a cell phone can take down a plane, I'd rather not be on one to begin with.

insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
said by expert007:

I'm sorry, but you have faulty logic.

"Because people haven't died of it yet, it's not a problem" just doesn't make sense. If you knew anything about aircraft design and engineering, you'd understand that everything is built to avoid a single point of failure. Since you're not privy to avionics anomaly reports, its somewhat obnoxious to claim that you know better than everyone else...particularly insiders.

You're just plain wrong, but trying to make you understand that is fruitless. Therefore I'll stop.
Well until you can point out a real world case or a serious test that shows cellphones are a danger to planes, I am going to rely on real world observation and confidently say cellphones are not a danger. And guess what, the industry/insiders side with me. If cellphones had any chance of causing problems you would have to separate the battery from your cellphone and place it in checked luggage. You definitely would not be allowed to take a cellphone onto a plane.

And to make it even worse you dispel my claim based on some kind of flawed logic, while using much worse logic in your claim. You are basically saying, "Airplanes are complicated and although no proof that cellphones can harm planes exist, logically there must still be a chance it could happen and if I had to guess I would say the data to back me up may exist, it's just not public data" Well there is a chance that when you touch an object you will pass right through it, but that doesn't mean it will happen. Oh and UFOs exist, but of course that data isn't public either.
expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY

1 recommendation

Re: Shouldn't be a law

This is quoted from a well respected avionics engineer. Are you qualified to dispel this? Of course this is stuff that doesn't appear on the front page of USA Today, but its not top secret either. Or are you of the belief that because Mythbusters proclaimed that RF is simply not an issue....it isn't?? Its kind of stupid for us to be in a pissing match, but I'm not making stuff up.

"I'm sorry but there have been numerous reports of electronic interference on too many flights to count.
The first authoritative study done was conducted by British authorities in concert with the FAA and six airlines who allowed their aircraft to be used in various stages of flight.

Very few disruptions were encountered, but; on one MD83 and a 727 the aircraft were caused to be lined up 7 degrees off centerline when a laptop was booted up in the area of the aft end of the passenger cabin. That would be where the feed-throughs are located on the 80 and 1183 on the 27.

On one 757 the center panel displays went somewhat berserk when a PDA or laptop were turned on in the wing to body disconnect area of the passenger cabin.

Interestingly enough, during the entire six weeks of the study, conducted at Heathrow, Frankfurt, and Cincinnati, no compass malfunctions were recorded. There were, however, in the over 300 tests performed more than 50 attributable malfunctions demonstrated.

All of the malfunctions were correctable by reterminating the shielding on the affected coax or simply reseating what was probably an improperly installed connector.

How do I happen to have this information? I was in CVG during the tests and got to "help" on twenty or so of the flights.

With the level of disassembly and reassembly done on a normal C check faults and weak spots will always exist and be caused by the frequent handling of the wiring of an increasingly old fleet.

There are literally hundreds of logbook discrepancies every week that get signed off as NFF or CND that may just as easily be attributed to some selfish immature jerk sitting in the back who can't be inconvenienced to turn off his "I'm more important than you" phone or PED."
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD

Re: Shouldn't be a law

Proof enough for me.

Face it, we never see all the near misses or close calls in the aviation world until they become collisions and disasters.

insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
said by expert007:

Interestingly enough, during the entire six weeks of the study, conducted at Heathrow, Frankfurt, and Cincinnati, no compass malfunctions were recorded. There were, however, in the over 300 tests performed more than 50 attributable malfunctions demonstrated.

All of the malfunctions were correctable by reterminating the shielding on the affected coax or simply reseating what was probably an improperly installed connector.
All problems were from a bad cable connection. So normally, electronics will not have any effect. And in a 6 week study no one reported any problems. That's a pretty long time to see not one issue.
And they were testing electronic devices and not cellphones that gave off cell signals. So this doesn't even apply to cellphones.
And they just say a laptop caused interference. What kind of laptop? Did other brands cause the same thing? What kind of signal was given off? How strong was the signal? etc. So many unasked questions.
Considering lots of electronic devices are used on planes every day and many cellphones are probably left on in people's pockets, it is supported by the data that planes just are not effect enough by electronic devices to worry about it.

You can throw out all the studies you want, but until a story makes the news where an electronic device or a cellphone caused a problem, there is no point in pretending the world will end if you make a call while in flight.
expert007

join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY

Re: Shouldn't be a law

First of all, you misinterpreted what he said. Reterminating the shielding or reseating the connector solved the issue. Since you're obviously not involved in the day to day maintenance of aircraft, you fail to understand that that is NOT a permanent fix, ergo that shielding issue is a potential ongoing problem.
Secondly, you're cherry picking words. What he said was that "no COMPASS malfunctions were recorded". There were however more than 50 attributable malfunctions NOT related to the compass. FYI, the compass is ONE of MANY systems.
I'm glad that aircraft design engineers don't make airplanes using your logic..."It's all good as long as I don't see that anyone died on CNN"
BTW, no one (including me) is insinuating that the world will end if you make a call while in flight. What we try to avoid in this aviation industry is avoid creating the potential for the *perfect storm* of events that could create a catastrophe. Not that you're going to listen to what I'm saying but WE look at what could potentially occur, such as "passenger makes cell phone call at critical phase of flight/shielding on flight management computer is compromised due to improper modification/flight crew, who is overtired misinterprets conflicting data on captains & F/O's source/windshear goes unreported, etc etc". That's reality, again, I'm not making this up, but please, don't let the facts get in the way of your opinions.

insomniac84

join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN

Re: Shouldn't be a law

You are just spreading FUD. Since people use electronic devices on probably every flight of the thousands going on at any one time and none of them are having problems significant enough to force the industry to ban electronics, your claims are 100% baseless. Cell phones were originally banned because they feared cell phones switching towers really fast would cause problems. And electronics were never banned.

Creee

@ntl.com

Re: Shouldn't be a law

Well, you haven't provided ANY facts, ANY evidence and nothing but belligerence, whereas the other guy sounds like he's actually involved in the day-to-day workings of the airline industry. You're a backseat expert - he clearly knows.

You need to take a long look at yourself - admit you're wrong for fuck sake.
Expand your moderator at work

S_engineer
Premium
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL

1 recommendation

Re: Shouldn't be a law

I disagree. Etiquette is out the window with just about everybody. This is a small inconvenience for Tiffany that wants to talk smack on Brittani (yes, spelled with an I)who's now dating Justin. Now I know that paints a broad picture, but I think a pause for civilities purposes isn't necessarily a bad thing.
--
The "Lifetime" channel is responsible for 83% of all divorces...Robert Ginty

Boogeyman
Drive it like you stole it
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Seward, AK

Re: Shouldn't be a law

But what about Grandma who is stuck on the tarmac for 2 hours for some stupid reason or another, who's plane is now going to be 2 hours late and has someone waiting to pick her up when she lands?

My mom has called me so many times I cant count them all from the plane while it was waiting for something, to tell me that she'll just get a taxi when she gets here so I dont have to wait at the airport for 2hrs and possibly be late for work, etc.
--
Im Your Boogeyman, Thats What I Am

MyDomainName

@charter.com

Re: Shouldn't be a law

Oh noes!

So what about Grandma stuck on the tarmac or people on late planes? That kind of information is provided by the airport. People can call ahead or find out when they get there and life will go on either way just like always. Seemed to work well enough before the cellphone was glued to everyone's ear.
yabos

join:2003-02-16
London, ON
You are already allowed to use phones when you are on the ground. That's not going to change.

Boogeyman
Drive it like you stole it
Premium
join:2002-12-17
Seward, AK

Re: Shouldn't be a law

Yeah, I guess I misunderstood the topic, hehe. I guess I would have to agree with the ban then, as long as you can still use your phone on the ground.
--
Im Your Boogeyman, Thats What I Am
moonpuppy

join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
said by Boogeyman:

But what about Grandma who is stuck on the tarmac for 2 hours for some stupid reason or another, who's plane is now going to be 2 hours late and has someone waiting to pick her up when she lands?

My mom has called me so many times I cant count them all from the plane while it was waiting for something, to tell me that she'll just get a taxi when she gets here so I dont have to wait at the airport for 2hrs and possibly be late for work, etc.
Nearly every major airport in this country has an arrival and departure board to show when flights are early, late or on-time. That same information is online. I just flew from BWO to ATL to SRQ (Sarasota, Fl) and all the data that was at the airport was also online. It used to be you could call the airport for that same information. I can even check on flights at EZE.

old_dawg
"I Know Noting..."

join:2001-09-22
Westminster, MD
said by S_engineer:

I disagree. Etiquette is out the window with just about everybody. This is a small inconvenience for Tiffany that wants to talk smack on Brittani (yes, spelled with an I)who's now dating Justin. Now I know that paints a broad picture, but I think a pause for civilities purposes isn't necessarily a bad thing.
+++++ 1 !!!!, Where's the big thumbs up icon to put here.
--
"Our network engineers are aware of the problem..."

AlexNYC

join:2001-06-02
Edwards, CO

2 edits
said by expert007:

"If cell phones are no threat to the computer/electrical systems of the plane"

That's just it....IF..

There's STILL alot of concerns about this, its simply not proven to be inconsequential RF interference, and until it is, they can't approve it.
No, not really. Modern cell phones do not interfere. This myth was born from old analog "cell" phones which had a chance of interfering with some older equipment. Now this myth is perpetuated by the airlines for a variety of social and political reasons. Have you watched Myth Busters?
»kwc.org/mythbusters/2006/04/epis···ane.html
Expand your moderator at work

james1

join:2001-02-26

All it takes is ONE inconsiderate person...

"However, international testing of in-flight cell phone use indicates that a certain on-board etiquette naturally develops when people use cell phones in the air. People speak in low tones and keep their phones on vibrate so they don’t disturb others on the flight."

Perhaps their testing is flawed because their observations are that the MAJORITY of people are considerate, but all it takes is one person in 200 to be inconsiderate and you'll have one on your plane. Considering I've been in more than one movie theatre where people have not only been trying to talk over the movie, but have actually answered their cellphones and tried to have a conversation over the movie, I think inconsiderate people are alot more common than 1/200.

All it takes is one fight in mid-air to be averted for the ban to be worth it. I'm just glad plane tickets are so expensive, since it keeps the majority of Gangsta Bling Bling Teens (of any race) from getting on the plane, and they're the ones who seem to talk loud during movies.
ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

2 edits

Re: All it takes is ONE inconsiderate person...

It won't be teens doing it. It'll be the "executive" who thinks he's more important than everyone else on the plane.

But you're right. All it will take is one inconsiderate lout to ruin it for everyone else, and I guarantee that there will be at least one on every flight. They're the ones who stay on their phones even after the announcement has been made to turn them off. They're the ones who berate the flight attendant because the flight is running late when she has absolutely no control over it. Just let one of these jerks get their hands on a cell phone in midair, and I guarantee they won't care one bit how inconsiderate they are to the people around them. And if they've had a few drinks before a fellow passenger tells them to get off the phone, things could turn ugly.

And in response to those who wonder why cell phone use aggravates people when normal conversations don't, it's because people talking on them usually do so at a low yell, and they often aren't aware of or don't care about the comfort level of those around them.

Cjaiceman
Premium,MVM
join:2004-10-12
Parker, CO
kudos:2

Re: All it takes is ONE inconsiderate person...

said by ISurfTooMuch:

It won't be teens doing it. It'll be the "executive" who thinks he's more important than everyone else on the plane.

And if they've had a few drinks before a fellow passenger tells them to get off the phone, things could turn ugly.
I will be the one telling them to get off the phone. If they want to make it ugly, bring it I will tell him/her off, and if they don't like it, screw them, they are @$$holes anyways.

I am not against cell phones on planes, I am against people talking on them in planes. I would love to be able to text people while on the plane, other people don't have to listen to me and I can talk to people.

Personally, I would much rather them focus on broadband in-flight. Cell phones don't even work at that altitude, so the airlines would have to put in some repeater system in the plane, but I think they should keep that out and get a move on for the in-flight broadband. I would much rather pay for that, than some in-flight phone. Also, the inside of an airplane is not quiet, so people on the other end will have a hard time hearing you, even if you are yelling and making everyone else on the plane mad.

but hey, what do I know?

meh37

@verizon.net

Can you hear me now?

If you're annoyed by people around you talking (but not to you--how dare they?!), then you should carry earplugs with you... everywhere.

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Comcast
·CenturyLink

Another way to rip off the traveler.

The air lines have proposed another way to rip off the traveler. Phoners have made the following suggestion. "This has led some to suggest that domestic airlines would create “no phone” zones in the planes and charge people more to sit in these areas." Actually it should be the other way around. Charge people extra to sit in phone zones and provide them with a cone of silence. Anyone using their cell phone outside the phony zone would have their cell phone confiscated until the end of the flight and be fined a nominal amount.

•••••••••

HardwareGeek

join:2003-11-15
Brooklyn, NY

1 edit

delta banned inflight voip

delta says they will ban inflight voip on their wi-fi.

i say ban cell phone use and voip services.

Younger Fliers will feel differently when they become frequent fliers.

Plus who would want to pay the roaming fee for in flight cell servce. Probably be just as expensive if not more expensive than a cruise ship.

••••••••

baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI

Caps

Do you think Airlines will impose a VOIP data cap, and charge people that go over?

Gbcue
Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: Caps

said by baineschile:

Do you think Airlines will impose a VOIP data cap, and charge people that go over?
They'll probably institute a data cap like many ISPs...

baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI

Re: Caps

That was more a long-running blog joke more than anything.

It wouldnt surprise me though if they limited minutes, and has automatic decibal checks to make sure people dont talk for too long or too loud.

takenocrap

@comcast.net

All cellphone use should be banned except for 911 emergency

No one should be subjected to cellphone abuse by socially challenged, self-centered, inconsiderate cellphone addicts who need to get in touch with reality. Everyday we see countless people inflict pain on other people through misuse of cellphones. And in many cases these same clueless cellphone junkies are endangering themselves and other people due to their cellphone addiction and negligence.

There is no God given right to have cellphones and they should be banned in all public places except for the express use in 911 type life threatening emergencies.

••••

MarkyD
Premium
join:2002-08-20
Oklahoma City, OK

I'm young

I'm only 25, and I give talking on cell phones in the sky a big HELL NO.

I don't want to listen to someone jabbing on what should be a peaceful flight.
--
MCSE, ACSA, and a lot more

••••••
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
Reviews:
·Comcast

my point of view

I don't want people around me to be talking on their cell phones on a plane. This is because it's too crowded in coach. Text messaging would not bother me at all.

I'm not sure if it's a good law though, it seems like a law that is restricting speech. An airplane is like a bus or metro, it's a semi-public place. I think people like this kind of law because it helps them avoid confrontation with their chatty neighbor.
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·KCH Cable

Re: my point of view

Texts, sure. Agree, even though I don't do it much...
Wouldn't want cell phones in 1st class either... I'd expect that to be even more quiet.

I disagree, however, that it's anything like a bus or metro - you're in the sky

Plenty of people have conversations on planes, amongst themselves, usually at a respectably quiet level. There is generally no restriction on speech unless there's somebody saying some obviously stupid/evil things...

As for avoiding confrontation - good point on that, overall it does seem more like a rather silly thing to make a law for. Seems it'd be better accepted if it were simply an FAA regulation... not quite a law, just a general rule.

Vchat20
Landing is the REAL challenge
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Columbus, OH

1 recommendation

Couple things coming from an educated standpoint...

First off, I want to see you even attempt to get service at >15,000ft THROUGH the hull of the aircraft. Also, even IF you can get service, I want to see how your phone would act if it would work at all at any decent altitude seeing a number of cell towers all at once.

Secondly, I don't care HOW many tests have been done that proves cellphones cause no interference to flight equipment. All it takes is one malfunctioning cellphone, a new wireless band, new wireless based short-range services (ala wifi/BT), or any other number of completely possible factors to interfere. God forbid this, albeit rare, situation happens on a CATIII approach in bad weather.

I'd rather have the comfort of knowing that my flight will safely remain in the air rather than giving one or two passenger their god-given right to cellphone use in an airplane.

If you absolutely MUST make a call, use in-flight phones (if applicable). Otherwise, PLAN AHEAD so you don't need to use a phone DURING the flight.
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz

•••••••••••••••

TheLindberghBaby

@comcast.net

Law:no - Rule:yes

The general principal in science is that the defacto state is non-existence.

Without some sort of tangible evidence that cellular rf causes an unacceptable risk to aircraft safety, the government is *supposed* to stay out of it.

They have no more right to ban cellular use by aircraft passengers than they do banning smoking outdoors.

On the other hand, the airlines do have the right to require passengers refrain from many perfectly legal behaviors that are detrimental to the flight experience of fellow passengers.

If cell phones in flight were allowed by airline X, I would choose airline Y.

Otoh, a federal ban does relieve me of the obligation to answer my phone in flight.

Jim Kirk
Premium
join:2005-12-09

Re: Law:no - Rule:yes

I wondered what happened to the Lindbergh Baby. Good to see you're alive and well.

RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
kudos:1

Look at this thread and the moderated messages

That should give you a clue about how cell phone use would be on an aircraft with a captive audience who often are not able to get up because the seat belt sign is on for safety or "homeland security" reasons (I was on a 2.5 hour flight that had maybe 15 minutes of 'walk-around' time not too long ago). It would be very annoying to sit by some of the people I have sat by who can not and do not remove the phone from their head unless strongly ordered to and have no concept of voice level modulation. I suspect there would be a few violent acts on those people after about an hour.

And yes, as some folks have pointed out, there are those who think rules are meant for others and say "f you" (they do seem to love cussing) if you try to point out the rules while they stealth use their RF devices. Hate to see what they would do if it was legal.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.

xpc2600

join:2004-05-14
San Diego, CA

Re: Look at this thread and the moderated messages

do we ban them during sex too doing the gf thing?

RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
kudos:1

Re: Look at this thread and the moderated messages

said by xpc2600:

do we ban them during sex too doing the gf thing?
Ummm...I think you are in the wrong group. Kinky stuff is over on the x rated channels.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.

cellphoneuser

@vmware.com

No more stupid laws

I can't believe how many people are so quick to have another law jammed down our throats. How about let the airline decide what to do about it. Let them make a democratic decision, the majority of people win. Most people on this board constantly repeat that "it will be one person that doesn't follow etiquette". Well if we keep making laws because of this "one person" you won't have any freedoms left.

Today everyone is so afraid to confront someone about what they are doing that they would rather have the gov't just make a blanket law to end the confrontation. Grow a pair and just ask the person to be more quiet. If they still object, then tell the flight attendant and maybe the airline will have a policy that if you are disrupting others around you so many times that they will ban you from flying with them.

There are many ways of handling this issue that do not require another stupid law to go on the books.

nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA

Re: No more stupid laws

said by cellphoneuser :

I can't believe how many people are so quick to have another law jammed down our throats. How about let the airline decide what to do about it. Let them make a democratic decision, the majority of people win. Most people on this board constantly repeat that "it will be one person that doesn't follow etiquette". Well if we keep making laws because of this "one person" you won't have any freedoms left.

Today everyone is so afraid to confront someone about what they are doing that they would rather have the gov't just make a blanket law to end the confrontation. Grow a pair and just ask the person to be more quiet. If they still object, then tell the flight attendant and maybe the airline will have a policy that if you are disrupting others around you so many times that they will ban you from flying with them.
Again, spoken like someone with no familiarity with the modern flying experience. Sure, you can ask the person to cease and desist. However, if they don't, then what's your recourse? Sure, it's simple to say "call the flight attendant." However, in many cases, the flight attendants simply aren't going to do anything unless things have "devolved".

What is "devolved" you might ask? Let's say you, or one of your fellow passengers, has tried to ask the twit with the phone to curb their usage to more polite levels. If the recipient of that request decides to make a scene about it, then everyone party to that scene (the phone user and those who were asking him to quiet down) can look forward to a several hour chat with federal authorities on the ground.

Sorry, but the laws (and everything else) that already exist make it such that "growing a pair" simply isn't enough to solve the eventual problems that *will* happen - at least not in a manner that's fair to those most negatively impacted by allowing the unfettered in-flight use of voice technologies.
--
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. -- Bertrand Russell

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

Young Punks!

Back when I used to fly we had to travel uphill in a snowstorm, arriving and departing.
sam64

join:2006-07-31
Newtown, PA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 recommendation

Cell phones on planes - bad idea

Reading all the back and forth going on - I have to make a few comments. Before anyone jumps up and down, let me assure all of you that I am a frequent traveller - almost every week.

We do not need cell phones on a plane. The 3-4-5 hours of flight time is the real quiet time I value where I can nap, read a book, listen to music or generally dream without being distrubed by the phone. I do not want to sit on the plane and hear the life story or woes of the guy/gal next to me.

Regaring all the noise about 2 -3 hour delays ...well let me tell you air travel has been around for a lot longer than cellphones. We managed with this well before the advent of the cellphone and we can continue to do so in the future. If there is a real emergency, the Airphones are available (not behind every seat mind you but at least one per plane) at the horribly expensive rate.

Vchat20
Landing is the REAL challenge
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Columbus, OH

Re: Cell phones on planes - bad idea

Exactly. Thank you. Regardless of the technicalities behind it, I'd rather keep what remaining restrictions we do have to keep airlines from turning into the next greyhound of the skies.

If you absolutely MUST need to make a call, use the airphone and deal with the exorbitant prices. Otherwise, enjoy the peace and quiet you can get during your flight. You can always wait and make your call the split second you are off the plane.
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

1 recommendation

Don't Hate, Participate!

When folks decide to use their cell phone in a way that involves me, why I just join the conversation! Stare at them and participate! React to what they're saying. Share your OWN opinions on what Skank A did with Boyfriend B ("Oh no she di'int! Oh no she di'int!!"). If they get uncomfortable, well, that's their problem; THEY'RE the ones being rude, not you. You're just being sociable!

My experience has been conversation over and phone turned off in less than three minutes. Even better, the person fears the Psycho They Perceive To Be Next To Them (you). And what are they gonna do? Complain to the flight attendant? "Um, Stewardess? This guy is annoying me. What did he do? I was trying to talk with my girl Brittani and he--he FORMED AND SHARED OPINIONS!"

••••
nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:8

Stupid law that has no place in the US.

The government should keep out of my cellphone, yo.

Don't get me wrong- I don't like the idea of someone yapping away while I'm trying to sleep - but this is something the airlines should be dealing with by offering "talking" and "non-talking" cabins or even flights.

Hell, go as far as requiring them to offer different cabins for talkers and sleepers - but banning phone use completely is not something our government should be concerning itself with.

As far as survey "results" go - who cares what the majority of people think? what matters is what the majority of frequent fliers (read: majority of airline customers) think. i.e. a person making 20 trips a year should count a lot more than Joe from Alabama who goes to visit his Aunt in Michigan once every 3 years.

And if you ask the frequent fliers, I bet the majority will tell you they would LOVE to be able to make a few calls here and there on a plane.

goalieskates
Premium
join:2004-09-12
land of big

younger fliers have no clue about cell etiquette

If they did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

This is very much an entitlement mindset that puts their own needs above others'. Not that there aren't older folks who do the same, because there are. I have yet to overhear a cell conversation that was so important it couldn't wait.

And I honestly don't blame the younger folks, because their parents obviously didn't include consideration in their upbringing.

I'd be open to allowing text messaging, but I truly don't want to be trapped in a plane listening to someone else's mindless conversation. Flying stinks enough as it is these days.
jgNJ

join:2008-05-20
Hightstown, NJ

Just be reasonable

Ok, how about this for a compromise; Normally cell phones are not permitted during the flight, but if the flight is behind schedule, then the crew can provide a 15 minute period were phones will be allowed. That way travelers can inform whom they need to that they are going to be late.

This allows you to lets say change an 11:00 meeting to 1:00 because of the flight delay or to inform someone meeting you at the airport to get there later so that they don't have to wait around for you.

These types of calls are reasonable but still allow most of the flight to be quiet for those whom prefer to read, sleep, etc.

I know it is difficult to regulate common courtesy, but allowing people to make a quick call is also reasonable.
brianiscool

join:2000-08-16
Tampa, FL
kudos:1

oh noo

A cell phone might cause a EMP pulse to cause the plane to go out of control.