expert007
join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY
| reply to insomniac84
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 | 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
| reply to expert007
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
| 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 | 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
| reply to expert007
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
| 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
| 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
| 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. |
|
