FAA to Finally Lift In-Flight Device Restrictions

I could picture cell reliability on the ground being reduced while the networks adjust to compensate for tens of thousands of cells registering on a new tower every few seconds in addition to current loads.

Because people don't understand that you can't make phone calls up in the air. There will ALWAYS some knitwit thinking you can.

actually, I have confirmed that you can send/receive texts and calls at anything below about 5000 feet. Past that, its just not happening. Cell towers do not like being hit and dropped at those speeds.

There's an easy fix for that.

Each airliner could carry a few microcells pretending to be cell sites for the big national carriers but actually not connected to any network. Phones aboard the aircraft will see these fake sites and happily connect to them instead of trying to register on the more distant sites below.

They dont connect to the cell sites on the ground anyway. There is too much distance between the handset and the cell site.

Not only that, but cell sites broadcast their signal horizontally, not vertically, with antennas that are specifically designed to achieve this kind of signal distribution. Typically these antennas have a vertical beam width of only a couple of degrees (and at that with some added down tilt), and a horizontal beam width of some other dimension depending on what the operator is trying to achieve. Typical horizontal beam width is 120 degrees.

True, there are things called "side lobes" which basically means there will be some signal leakage from the antenna in directions that are not planned as part of the coverage area, but these lobes are typically very weak in comparison to the main lobe, so are not likely to be of much use unless you were perched on top of the cell tower.

Any kind of in-flight mobile communications would likely have to be done with some kind of on-board "base station", with probably something like satellite backhaul. Though, I have heard of terrestrial based backhaul using antennas that point up in to the sky and down from the belly of the aircraft, but I have never actually seen anything like this before - only antennas under domes on top of the aircraft.

Happy to be proven wrong, this is just based on my understanding of it all.

You don't get signal up there anyways. Antennas aren't pointing up at the clouds, and there's little reason for the cellular companies to change that. 3gpp networks (GSM, HSPA, LTE) are designed to work for users moving up to the speed of european high speed trains. So above 200mph, they won't typically operate anyways. In essence, if you're in a commercial airliner, by the time you pull through about 3,000 feet you'll already be too high and too fast to register (and certainly too fast for any reliable throughput).

If you're flying a cessna this might matter since they fly lower and at a similar speed as most high speed trains. But the only practical change for most travelers will be the ability to still have cellular access between the door of the plane closing and when the plane takes off.

I have sent and received texts at 5000 feet. it was great up to about 3000, then it was spotty. The cell towers broadcast in more of a sphere pattern like your phone does, but past 5000 feet, it didnt work.

I dont know anyone that actually turns their phone off. As soon as I land my phone starts buzzing. You cant get a signal on your phone until you are like 10 seconds from landing.

BTW this happens anyways when everyone turns on their phone at the same time right after they land.

I do not think there is anything really so important that anybody would want a voice call on a plane. Many business people see the airplane as that small bit of time away from ringing phones and nagging emails.

Really? You have got to be kidding! You are only trying to fool yourself...

... the main reasons are
A} You should PAY Attention to the flight crew for that first few minutes of flight as that's a time when things can go bad VERY quickly
B} loose object are a BIG problem during aborted takeoffs, return to terminal and hit the slides type issues which are much more common in this days of aging air fleets/crowded skies.

it's not that the airlines care about YOU, it's the careful attentive VALUBLE passenger near you, that you might injure/kill/drive away by your greedy self serving can't live 10 minutes without a toy attitude.

If something goes wrong during takeoff, the passengers will know it before a flight attendant can unbuckle, check in with the pilot, and grab the intercom to tell them.All loose objects are a risk, not just powered-on electronics.So letting people use an ereader, versus having it powered off in their lap, makes no difference.

A better point to make is that they don't stop people from reading books during take off or landing and I am sure there are many books that can cause more damage than a cell phone or tablet.

hhhmmm, a few ounces from an ereader, or a few pounds from a hardcover book? I think we know which one I would rather have fly at me.

Both of your points are moot because books and magazines are still allowed to be outside of storage during takeoff and landing.

A medium sized hardcover book will do just as much damage, if not more than a kindle, nook, portable DVD player, and tablet.

People have not been paying attention to flight attendants far longer than electronics have been around.

Aborted takeoffs are much more common these days? Source?

.... I could also care less as to pay attention to flight crews on the ground.. what have they said to me today that I haven't heard a million times, or several times a month? ... that I can't smoke in the lavatory? .. how the FAA requires you stay in your seat? .. or is it that the seat cushon, or fat guy sitting next to you that they charged for two seats and STILL spills into yours, can be use as a flotation device in case of a water landing?

Yea.. can't we drop these silly arguments? ... I have always wondered WHY it's not ok to use the stuff when the door closes before takeoff, BUT, as soon as wheel touch down on landing it's okay to use cell phones again... I guess they assume everyone is an idiot.

YOU should read a paper sometime, or maybe because a live near a major manufacture, that I actually PAY ATTENTION to aviation news.
At least a couple time a month their a stories about someone getting ejected/remove from a flight for failing to follow "Turn it off and buckle up" instructions while still on the taxiway.
Flight attendants get up at 1500 feet, YOU have to stay seated until 10K.

and several time a week planes to/from Seattle alone do a return to terminal/closest airport for mechanical reasons and maybe one more for passenger health or discipline problems.

Try googling Emergency landing in google news

and hard cover book?!? do they even make those anymore?
not nearly as distracting as a reader/game/ movie on a little screen.

quote:

---

YOU should read a paper sometime, or maybe because a live near a major manufacture, that I actually PAY ATTENTION to aviation news.
At least a couple time a month their a stories about someone getting ejected/remove from a flight for failing to follow "Turn it off and buckle up" instructions while still on the taxiway.

---

quote:

---

and several time a week planes to/from Seattle alone do a return to terminal/closest airport for mechanical reasons and maybe one more for passenger health or discipline problems.

Try googling Emergency landing in google news

---

Which are NOT aborted takeoffs. You just can't switch your statistic mid-discussion. An aborted takeoff is a no-kidding the plane can get up in the air, which can lead stuff flying around the cabin. Emergency landings are fairly commonplace, but they are for a variety of reasons and the crews and passengers know it is coming, so they have time to stow their devices.

quote:

---

and hard cover book?!? do they even make those anymore?

---

Says the guy who tells me to read a newspaper.

You get a hardcover newspaper? really?

see the winky simile face implies humor perhaps sarcasm keep trying you learn about this internet thing someday

I knew perfectly well that you were trying to be cute.

Maybe we should do a test mythbusters style.
You be buster and I'll throw a hard sharp edged tablet with a breakable screen and a semi flexible paper and cardboard book at you at say 120 MPH (assume an aborted takeoff or hardlanding that ends against an embankment or building) and see how long that delays you and the other people trying to exit the plane around you.

We can guess there aren't bookcases full of hard cover books out on a typical plane , but given this permission there could be hundreds of phones and tablets and kindles etc flying around.

There are already hundreds of phones and tablets and kindles sitting in laps waiting to fly around, they just have to be turned off right now. As a flying object, they are no less dangerous when powered off, and not requiring them to be turned off is the only thing this rule would change.

Not if YOU actually listened AND obeyed the safety instructions.
ALL loose items MUST be stowed in the overhead bin, under the seat in front or in the seat pocket.

and no you don't have time to get up a put your shit away in an abort or a quick go round when the FA will be TRYING to explain the brace position and evacuation (not your bowels) procedures to everyone.
apparently you haven't spent all that much time around runways OR airplanes.
emergencies happen every day and the crew manages MOST of them without injuries, I seems like you shuld be reasonable ready in those that don't go well.
In an Evacuation the life and death difference is literally seconds.

This always bothered me. Its under the seat. If there was an emergency, its going to fly around at our feet now, instead of our faces? that isnt any better. Also, having been on a trip where there was lots of turbulence and a shitty hard landing, those overhead storage bins like to open up and puke their contents all over. They do not stay shut very well. The seat in front of you, maybe, so you can ram your knees into it and immobilize yourself, sure. I would rather have it in my hands where I can stop if from flying around altogether.

There was an evaluation done 20-30 years ago (after hijackings became a problem) about how to make commercial aviation SUPER SAFE
The conclusion was dimly light windowless planes, facing backward (best energy absorption in an accident) either naked or basic loaned jumpsuit no movie, no bathroom, no food, no personal items, baggage on a separate plane.
Obviously not a good seller with the airlines, who were hoping for a resounding "it's super safe NOW"

Yep. And, as anyone who's ever tried to get the attention of someone using a cell phone knows, they're often off in their own little worlds. There was once a commercial where a group of people at a restaurant were placing their orders, except for one woman, who was so engrossed in her phone call that no one could get her attention. One of the other people at the table was able to finally do it by calling her and asking what she wanted for lunch. A bit of an exaggeration, I know, but not too far from the truth.

The last thing I want in an emergency situation is some bozo ahead of me whose reaction time is slowed down because he's paying more attention to his phone than what's happening around him.

wow.. exaggerate much, always, at every chance? This can be directed towards every one that has a hard on for cell phones... it's always EVERYONE ELSE that does all the things that you bitch about, isn't it? ... you've never been distracted at your own calls.. you always put your phones down in crowds.. you never drive or have read a text behind the wheel.. etc etc etc.. .I can assure that more people than not do all the things they bitch about when it comes to phones,... only in their mind they can do it better because everyone else is an idiot. Problem is that EVERYONE that I've witnessed with this view DOES do all the things they hate at some point.. even me. No one walks on water.

Oh.. and yea.. give it a rest.. if there's an emergency on a plane, I'm SURE "some bozo" in front of you is going to be on their phone.. give it a rest.

I take it you are one of the ones who can't stand those 10 minutes or so without a phone, and ipod, and xbox or a TV blaring away at you?

I take it you assume much... my opinion in this matter reflects a difference of right and wrong... however, YOU have failed to establish how someone else listening to their iPod, or reading their Nook, or taking a photo out the window has ANY impact on YOUR existence.. now does it?

So.. I take you you're wrong.

WHY does anyone with an opinion against someone else's way-out-of-line complaint have to be associated with the very thing YOU don't like? ... narrow minded?

To be honest.. I'm never one that travels in coach.. I could care less what goes on back there. Up in the front of the plane we don't seem to have these petty issues.

FYI... tell the pilots to put their iPads down too at take off.. I"m sure what they're doing is the same as "some bozo getting in your way" in case of an emergency too.

I never said I'm a saint, but I know when a cell phone can be distracting, and I try not to use it at those times. And they can be distracting. Walk across a street where you have to watch for traffic. Now try doing it while talking on a phone. It's not impossible, but it's harder to do. Your reaction time is slowed by a small amount because you have an extra thing you're trying to pay attention to, and the caller on the other end often doesn't realize what you're trying to do, so they keep talking when they should pause to let you concentrate. My policy is, if I'm walking down a sidewalk and need to cross a street, I'll tell the person on the other end to wait while I get across, at which point I'll resume the conversation.

We had a situation here last year where a student on a skateboard was hit by another student driving a car. The guy on the skateboard didn't see the car until the last second because he was texting while he was in the street. He looked up at the last second, realized what was about to happen, and jumped straight up, going through the car's windshield. And, as for the girl driving the car, she never saw the guy on the skateboard because...wait for it...she was also texting.

And I never said that everyone who uses a cell phone would use them irresponsibly, but you know good and well that there are people who do. And, just for the record, I have been in a situation where the plane plunged straight down for quite a bit. It was scary as hell, and there was absolutely no warning. We hit a pocket in a storm cloud, and down we went. Obviously, we didn't crash, and the pilot got the plane under control and got us out of there in a hurry by climbing as fast as he could. I'm just saying that I don't want to be next to someone who has a slowed reaction time because they're paying more attention to what's on their phone than to what's happening on the aircraft.

If you don't agree, that's fine. Just giving my opinion.

I don't agree.. and you're opinion isn't invalid as you just stated... however, it's not the act of texting that the issue is.. it's act of someone prioritizing their tasks that is the issue. The same could be said that it slows someone down, on their skate board, when they look at their wrist watch to see what time it is as well. I've seen people walking down the sidewalk reading a news paper as they head to work.. for people to tie DISTRACTIONS to electronic devices just tells me they're not making honest and well educated statements.

In Minnesota, aside from texting and driving laws, we have a "distracted driving" law.. and that is that if a police/sheriff officer watches your driving and it's erratic, they see you eating a whopper behind the wheel, or looking in the back seat yelling at your kid, they can pull you over and cite you for "distracted driving".. and while you CAN talk on your cell phone, if they see you finger-f'ing your cell phone, and you're driving is affected, they can also get you for distracted driving.

The point here is to STOP attacking 1) electronics, because it's not exclusive to electronic devices.. 2) stop blanketing assumptions that YOUR life will be impacted because someone else decides to listen to their iPod or talk on the phone, or what ever they're doing.. SOME people are impeccable at multi tasking and prioritizing their attention to what they're doing.. YOU have no idea if they're giving more attention to walking, or what ever action they're doing JUST because they have a phone or mp3 player in their hand. I'm guessing that somehow police officers are super men and women and while WE can't talk on our phones by holding them in our hands, THEY somehow are better at it? ... because THEY have radios, cell phones, computer screens.. etc. all pointed in their faces in their cars.. not to mention they're thinking and processing a ton of stuff AND sometimes driving at a high rate of speed doing what ever they are doing.

Point is... no two people are the same.. no blanket assumption should be made because they're ALWAYS wrong... There ARE people that can't so much as chew gum and walk.. that's an older statement than any "people can't talk on the phone and drive" statements... right? Personally, for me, when I'm driving, 80% of my brain is on the road and the area around me.. and 10% on my passenger talking to me...

But.. I'm curious.. during that plane plummeting example that you gave (which I've also experienced) how many people in their seats, with a tab or phone in their hand, didn't immediately put it down before crapping their pants? ... or did they sit there trying to get that last "words with friends" word out before realizing they may die? In that example, THEIR action, in THEIR seat still didn't impact your life. But, even with your example, we're talking about the moment of door closing to 10,000 feet, which is about 10 minutes of time... and the fact that they've tried to state that electronic devices can bring a plane down... which is doesn't.

edit

You dont sound like you fly much.

According to whom"

" ...return to terminal and hit the slides type issues which are much more common in this days of aging air fleets/crowded skies."

Say what? Much more common? Air travel has been getting safer and safer for decades while the exact incidents you mention have been coming down, all while passenger loads are increasing in double digits year over year. Go educate yourself, please.

Ten to fifteen postings-per-day from "tshirt" ... at this site alone. Need a life much?

Come from a guy who bothered to read that AND reply, has little value.

Years ago they had issues with smoking in lavatories. And an interesting fact is that FAA regulations to this day require that airlines have an ashtray on board even though 99.96 percent of domestic flights are non-smoking. I'm surprised that smoking materials and associated lighters/matches are even allowed past security.

I wonder if there are issues with people using electronic devices in the lavatory. If that becomes an issue, then the days of electronics going past security will be numbered and they'll have to be in checked baggage.

Then pray tell us what happened on September 11, 2001 ?

Cell phones work just fine in the aircraft.

Show me the actual data that they will cause problems with the aircraft and I'll gladly turn the darn thing off...

didn't some passengers place cell phone calls from the plane that crashed in the field? I remember hearing that and thinking it was impossible to do.
Was the plane flying that low?

A whole bunch of things happened that day which defy the laws of physics...

my previous post. I just saw someone else asked the same thing... That's what I get for not reading the whole thread before posting! Will I never learn?!?!

I always put my phone in airplane mode but I found it absurd that I could not listen to music while taking off or landing.

The best way right now to get around this is have a blanket and make it seem like your headphones are connected to the in-flight system. Pretending to be sleepy also helps so they just won't bother you.