Travel annoyance - why can't iPads and Kindles be used during takeoff and landing?

[bradg33]

No, you just hate that the rules apply to even you. Special you, who takes it on yourself to "interpret" rules that affect my survival. I think it's so sad that we have gotten to this place in society, where so many people are in their little cocoon where no rules apply. You see if every day, even walking down the aisle of a supermarket. I challenge anyone to walk every aisle and not be run into by somebody so engrossed in texting that they don't see where they are going. (Oh, and they are obviously THE ONLY PERSON IN THE STORE as they hover in front of the shelf, their cart blocking the way, while they discuss at length just what kind of pasta their spouse sent them for, or their most recent surgery at maximum volume...)

These are the same, unthinking people who are willing to endanger my life for their slightest convenience or even to "make a point". No real harm walking down the supermarket aisle bumping into people, or holding up the checkout line because their phone conversation is more important than answering the checker's question, other than making fools of themselves. But the same people, no doubt, will do the same thing in their car or on an airplane, where my safety is endangered.

(Since California banned holding a cell phone while driving, I contend driving has become MORE DANGEROUS because of the damn fools going into "stealth mode" holding their phones in all sorts of odd ways trying to "duck" and not be spotted... Of course they are even more obvious and have even less control of their vehicles than they would if they'd hold the phone in a more conventional way. Or they could just get a Bluetooth or wired headset or use the speakerphone function. But that's for everybody else, you know.)

The supermarket example is a good way to observe just how many jerks the rapid adoption of personal electronics has produced. It is said that it takes society 50 years to fully adapt to any new technology.

God forbid anybody should comply with these "stupid rules" simply because it would be polite.

You're being overly dramatic. Using an electronic device, especially a low-powered, consumer-level device, on an airplane isn't "endangering" your life. You say this because you don't understand how airplanes and their associated systems actually work, so you've taken the "OMG! Things I don't understand will kill me" approach. While cell-phones can "interfere" with the aircraft radios if things aren't properly shielded, the worst that happens is the pilot will here some clicking over the radios; it doesn't make things go haywire and shut down or make things explode. Even then, in order to have interference the device emitting the interfering signal has to be awfully close to the aircraft radios. When I say "awfully" close I'm talking about a matter of feet. In a commercial aircraft, the actual radios, the boxes that do the transmitting and receiving, are buried in an avionics bay in the belly of the aircraft.

But lets play out your "worst case scenario." Lets say the device does cause interference. Aircraft, especially the commercial variety, have numerous redundant systems. Even if ALL of the electronics go out the aircraft continues to fly just fine. There are mechanical backups for all of the important flight instruments and losing radios doesn't mean crashing.

 

[stealthman1]

You're being overly dramatic.

I think he's spot on.

 

[aethelbert]

Even if ALL of the electronics go out the aircraft continues to fly just fine.

Swissair 111 is just a myth.

 

[Elise]

So what? Take off and landing doesn't take hours does it! It's not that much to ask folks to turn off their devices for a few minutes. Christ on a bike...

 

[McGiord]

Not only on what you can use or not, we need a change for the whole air travel experience.
I only wish there is a new airline that can change the whole air travel business sometime in the near future.
We are still flying like in the previous century. I mean on how we as passengers are forced to 'enjoy' the flight.
The seats are uncomfortable, you have to bother other passengers or they bother you, aisle seat vs middle seat, vs window seat.
Even you have the 'best seat' the passenger in front of you is affected by you, or the one behind you affects your trip. There is not enough space.
They should redesign the whole cabin to make is comfortable, and this should not be restricted to elite first class, or special airplanes.
Why it is still coach class?
Long trips vs short trips are different, and they are handled in a same way.
The flight crew is not always happy to assist you, they are often tired.
The bathroom is very small, even the cleanest ones smell bad.
I can go on and on....

 

[Dr Kevorkian94]

well last year idk if it apples now they let me use my iphone on the plain ride but yes i still had to put every electronic devise off during takeoff and landing

 

[fishmoose]

I resent authority regularly but when it comes to flying I listen like a catholic schoolgirl, the people overseeing these kind of rules spend a lot of money researching, I'm going to take there word for it.

Besides that, taking off and landing are so darn cool, I want to see it

 

[Boblister]

The rules and regulations are there for a purpose, like it or not. If you feel that passionate about it, then do something legally to try and change the law.
Otherwise just abide by the conditions you agreed to by buying the ticket and stop whining. Is it such a problem having to put your toys away for a short percentage of the journey.

 

[bradg33]

Swissair 111 is just a myth.

Swissair 111 caught on fire mid-flight, it has little to do with a pure electrical failure.

 

[aethelbert]

Swissair 111 caught on fire mid-flight, it has little to do with a pure electrical failure.

The fire was caused by failed electrical systems. It also caused a bunch of other electrical systems to fail as the flight progressed.

 

[bradg33]

The fire was caused by failed electrical systems. It also caused a bunch of other electrical systems to fail as the flight progressed.

The failed electrical systems CAUGHT ON FIRE, they didn't just stop working and sit dormant. What I'm saying is if all of the radios, which are what the interference is concerned with, stopped working as well as all of the navigational displays and other radio-dependent electronics stopped the airplane wouldn't fall out of the sky.

 

[aethelbert]

The failed electrical systems CAUGHT ON FIRE, they didn't just stop working and sit dormant.

The systems caught on fire because some were overdrawing power (/failing) from the central unit. The fire wouldn't have happened if the systems were properly functioning. The failure of the instruments both caused and worsened the fire as well as make the aircraft inoperable. Read the reports done by Boeing and SAirGroup before you try to sound intelligent.

And yes, RF communications do control power draw for many onboard units.

 

[stealthman1]

The irony here is in another thread on another board, people are nearly unanimously whining about evil CEOs rushing air traffic back into the air. No risk is acceptable...as long as i'm not the source of the risk!

 

[4DThinker]

The reason you can't use either is because neither can control the plane. Let the pilots use the plane's built-in controls while taking off and landing.

 

[H00513R]

Yes, I always turn my stuff off. What's 5-10 minutes for safety? The worst thing I can see if some idiot with all of their stuff on sitting next to me. I definitely don't trust other people to know what to do as far as WiFi ect...