New Study, Cell Phones cause problems in cockpit.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06060/662669.stm

In addition to the cell phones issue the study says...

<QUOTE>
Airlines typically allow the use of portable electronic devices, like game
players and DVDs, above 10,000 feet, but not during takeoff or landing.
Laptops also can be used, but not for communications purposes, such as
sending or receiving e-mail.

In the past, the FAA has found nothing to indicate that the use of passive
devices like laptops or game-playing electronics poses a threat to the
aircraft.

However, the CMU study concluded otherwise. While the researchers looked
primarily at cell phone use, they also discovered that emissions from other
portable devices proved "problematic."

"We found that the risk posed by these portable devices is higher than
previously believed," researcher Bill Strauss said in a release announcing
the findings.

</QUOTE>

I also liked this little tidbit...

<QUOTE>

And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from every
commercial flight in the northeast United States.

Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb after
takeoff or the final approach.

</QUOTE>

[Jose]

> During that period, the researchers monitored radio emissions from cell phones and other electronic devices on commercial flights throughout the Northeast. The equipment used to take the measurements, including a laptop computer, had been modified for safe in-flight use and fit in a nondescript carry-on bag.

They did not say (at least in the newspaper article) that they studied
the =effect= of those emissions on cockpit instrumentation... just that
the emissions existed. One may infer from the paper's conclusion that
it was studied, but that would be an inference by the reader. The
conclusion may in fact be unjustified.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Steve Foley]

The IEEE article is available on-line at

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/mar06/3069

It says they searched the ASRS database and found some interesing entries.
One in particular:

"In one telling incident, a flight crew stated that a 30-degree navigation
error was immediately corrected after a passenger turned off a DVD player
and that the error reoccurred when the curious crew asked the passenger to
switch the player on again. Game electronics and laptops were the culprits
in other reports in which the crew verified in the same way that a
particular PED caused erratic navigation indications."



(PED = portable electronic device)

Even better is the GA contribution to the cause: (from the same atricle)

"In March 2004, acting on a number of reports from general aviation pilots
that Samsung SPH-N300 cellphones had caused their GPS receivers to lose
satellite lock..."




"Jose" > wrote in message
et...
> > During that period, the researchers monitored radio emissions from cell
phones and other electronic devices on commercial flights throughout the
Northeast. The equipment used to take the measurements, including a laptop
computer, had been modified for safe in-flight use and fit in a nondescript
carry-on bag.
>
> They did not say (at least in the newspaper article) that they studied
> the =effect= of those emissions on cockpit instrumentation... just that
> the emissions existed. One may infer from the paper's conclusion that
> it was studied, but that would be an inference by the reader. The
> conclusion may in fact be unjustified.
>
> Jose
> --
> Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose]

> "In one telling incident, a flight crew stated that a 30-degree navigation
> error was immediately corrected after a passenger turned off a DVD player
> and that the error reoccurred when the curious crew asked the passenger to
> switch the player on again."

I wonder if cockpit electronics could be adequately shielded against
this kind of interference, or perhaps it comes through the antenna and
more processing could alleviate the problem.

Or not.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[John Doe]

Oh my god, you mean the pilots might actually have to stay awake up there
and pay attention to what the autopilot is doing?

How can we expect them to do that?

They'll probably get the union to try and get them a raise if we start
expecting that out of them.

(my brother is an airline captain on a 717 so I'm allowed to rip on them)

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:03:00 -0600, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in
>::

>
>And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
>discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from every
>commercial flight in the northeast United States.
>
>Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb after
>takeoff or the final approach.

http://tinyurl.com/j83f3
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0312863551/ref=sib_vae_pg_350/103-0355446-2940660?%5Fencoding=UTF8&keywords=ground%20zero&p=S09T&twc=4&checkSum=lOaxA8UdVziiH%2B2geYJeKkcfE4JBHtXoW8mUSS% 2B4arw%3D#reader-page
This potentially self-destructive passenger behavior is reminiscent of
Robert A. Heinlein's SF novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress in which
people on Earth flock to the very site the people of Luna indicated
would be the target location where their catapult-asteroids would hit.
Some folks don't have good sense.

[Darkwing]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
>
> http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06060/662669.stm
>
> In addition to the cell phones issue the study says...
>


I asked a commercial pilot about this once and he said they did have some
navigation issues on a flight once and asked everyone to double check their
cell phones and make sure they were off and after a minute or two they said
they stopped having problems. I doubt the guy was BS'ing me.

------------------------------------------
DW

[Rob]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> <QUOTE>
> "We found that the risk posed by these portable devices is higher than
> previously believed," researcher Bill Strauss said in a release announcing
> the findings.
> </QUOTE>

There are some interesting stories in this collection of "PED" related
ASRS reports:

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report_sets/ped.pdf

-R

[Judah]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in
:

>
> I also liked this little tidbit...
>
> <QUOTE>
>
> And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
> discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from
> every commercial flight in the northeast United States.
>
> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb
> after takeoff or the final approach.
>
> </QUOTE>
>

The latter quote is most interesting because I've never had or heard of a
cell phone that even worked above about 3000'AGL... And we all know that
these devices (especially laptops which sometimes ARE the GPS system) don't
really interfere.

I guess they are just trying to stop competition because they heard how
productive guys like me are when using laptops on airplanes, since no one
can reach us on the cell and disturb us...

[Doug]

It seems to be enough of a problem that I think the airlines have it
right. No electronic device usage on takeoff and landing and only
permitted in cruise when captain says its ok. (He may not want it on if
in IMC).

I wouldn't use one in my airplane in IMC. Otherwise, since I keep the
airplane upright by visual, I would think it would be ok.

Although I'm not surprised that electronic devices can interfere, I am
a little suprised they can interfere when the cockpit door is closed
and the devices are some distance (several rows), away.

I don't think anyone knows for sure.....

[Skywise]

Judah > wrote in
:

> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> I also liked this little tidbit...
>>
>> <QUOTE>
>>
>> And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
>> discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from
>> every commercial flight in the northeast United States.
>>
>> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb
>> after takeoff or the final approach.
>>
>> </QUOTE>
>>
>
> The latter quote is most interesting because I've never had or heard of
> a cell phone that even worked above about 3000'AGL...

You may not be able to _use_ the cell phone to make a call, but when
it is on, it is still transmitting in an attempt to connect to a cell.
It's those transmissions that would be causing the interference.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[nooneimportant]

> Although I'm not surprised that electronic devices can interfere, I am
> a little suprised they can interfere when the cockpit door is closed
> and the devices are some distance (several rows), away.
>

Ah... the aviionics displays may be in the cockpit, and the computes may be
in an avionics bay behind or below the cockpit, but there is wiring all over
the airplane carrying data do and from sensors and antannae located
throughout the aircraft. Remember one case on the ASRS reports stating that
simply having a pax trade seats with the person next ot him solved an
issue... could likely be that a data line ran right below the first seat,
but not the second. In one scenario i think it was tracked down to a
specific brand of laptop, with a specific hard disk in it... nothing related
to wifi, or any other radio signals for that matter.

I am surprised tho at the number of idjuts that continue to use their
hellphones after they are told to turn them off, and yes I have seen people
use them in flight, and get quite vocal when told by an FA to turn it off.
Gotta love all the oblivious chattle out there that have to have everything
their way all of the time... the real world isn't Burger King folks......

[Thomas Borchert]

Gig,

Well, this:

> And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
> discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from every
> commercial flight in the northeast United States.
>
> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb after
> takeoff or the final approach.

kind of contradicts this, doesn't it?

> However, the CMU study concluded otherwise. While the researchers looked
> primarily at cell phone use, they also discovered that emissions from other
> portable devices proved "problematic."
>
> "We found that the risk posed by these portable devices is higher than
> previously believed," researcher Bill Strauss said in a release announcing
> the findings.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-03-01, Gig 601XL Builder <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote:
> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb after
> takeoff or the final approach.

I've had personal experience of someone's phone going off.

It was just the two of us in a Grumman Cheetah. My friend was doing his
first for-real ILS in IMC. It wasn't a particularly low IFR night, bases
were probably around 800 ft or so.

He had forgotten to switch off his phone. Just as we were intercepting
the localizer, his wife calls him. Immediately, all audio is replaced by
a loud 'bip b b bip b b bip b b bip brbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbbrbr'
noise. (If you have a GSM phone and have ever had it near a radio
receiver, you'll be familiar with this noise).

I was monitoring the approach, and didn't notice any disturbance to the
loc or gs indications - merely an extremely loud and distracting sound
in the headset. I took the controls while he found the phone and shut it
off.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

[Thomas Borchert]

Steve,

> "In one telling incident, a flight crew stated that a 30-degree navigation
> error was immediately corrected after a passenger turned off a DVD player
> and that the error reoccurred when the curious crew asked the passenger to
> switch the player on again. Game electronics and laptops were the culprits
> in other reports in which the crew verified in the same way that a
> particular PED caused erratic navigation indications."
>

The word for that is "anecdotal evidence".

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Doug,

> It seems to be enough of a problem that I think the airlines have it
> right.
>

Does it? The report says there are cell phones on regularly during
take-off and landing. And that has done what to the accident numbers?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Gig,
>
> Well, this:
>
>> And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
>> discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from
>> every
>> commercial flight in the northeast United States.
>>
>> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb after
>> takeoff or the final approach.
>
> kind of contradicts this, doesn't it?
>
>> However, the CMU study concluded otherwise. While the researchers looked
>> primarily at cell phone use, they also discovered that emissions from
>> other
>> portable devices proved "problematic."
>>
>> "We found that the risk posed by these portable devices is higher than
>> previously believed," researcher Bill Strauss said in a release
>> announcing
>> the findings.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

I'm neither a supporter or detractor of the study but I don't see how those
two statements in any way contradict each other. They are barely related.

[Allen]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
>
> http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06060/662669.stm
>
> In addition to the cell phones issue the study says...
>
> <QUOTE>
> Airlines typically allow the use of portable electronic devices, like game
> players and DVDs, above 10,000 feet, but not during takeoff or landing.
> Laptops also can be used, but not for communications purposes, such as
> sending or receiving e-mail.
>
> In the past, the FAA has found nothing to indicate that the use of passive
> devices like laptops or game-playing electronics poses a threat to the
> aircraft.
>
> However, the CMU study concluded otherwise. While the researchers looked
> primarily at cell phone use, they also discovered that emissions from
> other portable devices proved "problematic."
>
> "We found that the risk posed by these portable devices is higher than
> previously believed," researcher Bill Strauss said in a release announcing
> the findings.
>
> </QUOTE>
>
> I also liked this little tidbit...
>
> <QUOTE>
>
> And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the researchers
> discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls are made from
> every commercial flight in the northeast United States.
>
> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb after
> takeoff or the final approach.
>
> </QUOTE>

I don't know about interference in airliners but I do know they can
interfere in GA. I was flying a Cessna 182 with Stec autopilot on altitude
hold when my pocket buzzed and the airplane pitched down hard for a couple
seconds. My cell phone (which I had forgotten to turn off) rang twice
before I hit the disconnect button, the airplane pitched down both times.

My cell phone is sitting on my desk by my computer speakers, each time it
rings the speakers buzz loudly. There is certainly enough output to affect
close-by avionics.

Allen

[Thomas Borchert]

Gig,

> I'm neither a supporter or detractor of the study but I don't see how those
> two statements in any way contradict each other. They are barely related.
>

Let me explain: If "on average one to four cell phone calls are made from
every commercial flight in the northeast United States" and "We found that the
risk posed by these portable devices is higher than previously believed" both
are true, then the incidents/accidents should show this in an obvious way -
unless even the "higher than previously believed" risk is still really small.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Judah]

Skywise > wrote in
:

> Judah > wrote in
> :
>
>> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> I also liked this little tidbit...
>>>
>>> <QUOTE>
>>>
>>> And despite the ban on cell phone use during flights, the
>>> researchers discovered that on average one to four cell phone calls
>>> are made from every commercial flight in the northeast United
>>> States.
>>>
>>> Some are even made during critical flight times, such as the climb
>>> after takeoff or the final approach.
>>>
>>> </QUOTE>
>>>
>>
>> The latter quote is most interesting because I've never had or heard
>> of a cell phone that even worked above about 3000'AGL...
>
> You may not be able to _use_ the cell phone to make a call, but when
> it is on, it is still transmitting in an attempt to connect to a
cell.
> It's those transmissions that would be causing the interference.
>
> Brian

That's assuming that they really do interfere. I've forgotten to turn
my phone off plenty of times while fying, and I have a Motorola Nextel
phone which interferes with everything (it sets speakers off in
doctor's offices). Yet it doesn't seem to interfere with the Century
2000 or CNX80 in the planes I fly when left on my hip at a max distance
of maybe 3' from the electronics or the antennas...

Maybe I'm just a skeptic....

[Skywise]

Judah > wrote in news:Xns977AC893B4531Judahnospamnet@
69.28.186.158:

> Skywise > wrote in
> :

<Snipola>
>> You may not be able to _use_ the cell phone to make a call, but when
>> it is on, it is still transmitting in an attempt to connect to a
> cell.
>> It's those transmissions that would be causing the interference.
>>
>> Brian
>
> That's assuming that they really do interfere. I've forgotten to turn
> my phone off plenty of times while fying, and I have a Motorola Nextel
> phone which interferes with everything (it sets speakers off in
> doctor's offices). Yet it doesn't seem to interfere with the Century
> 2000 or CNX80 in the planes I fly when left on my hip at a max distance
> of maybe 3' from the electronics or the antennas...

Not all devices interfere with all other devices.


> Maybe I'm just a skeptic....

Nothing wrong with that. :) >------------------------------+
|
Brian |
-- \|/
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?