|
Frequently
Asked Questions
Do Cell Phones Interfere with
the Navigation Systems of
Modern Airliners?
The problem is that
too many political agenda
scaremongers have leapt upon this
subject, to run with it, as they
have with other fear subjects,
because they are promoting their own
political agendas.
Ralph Nader's incessant
promotion of the bogus idea that
airliner cabin
air is unsafe, is one gross
example of what is going on, when
the "consumer activists" claim
things endanger you. I have already
thoroughly refuted that horrible
pack of lies, at:
http://airlinesafety.com/faq/CabinAir.htm
and
http://airlinesafety.com/letters/CabinAirQlty.htm
Same thing has happened in the Cell
Phone controversy.
The hard truth is, that despite
years of studies by both the British
CAA and the United States
NASA, no negative effect on
airliner safety has ever been found
as a result of the use of cell
phones on an airliner, by passengers
in the cabin.
Yet, that has not prevented some
govt bureaucrats, as well as
"consumer activists" from trying to
make you think that the opposite is
true. They make reference to the
British CAA report, as if it was
loaded with evidence that cell
phones are very dangerous to
airliner navigation. But, the truth
is that report doesn't make any case
at all against cell phones, other
than it is probably best that the
pilots do not use them in the
cockpits, during critical modes of
navigation (because the phones would
then be so close to the navigation
equipment).
What the militant "activists" failed
to include in their musings, as they
seek to instill in you the fear that
cell phones will cause crashes:
----They did not use the modern
avionics, which modern airliners
use, to conduct their tests.
Apparently, that would have been too
costly. So, they used the old
avionics equipment, typically found
in General Aviation aircraft, which
is not nearly as protected against
EM interference, as is the modern
(and far more costly) avionics of
Jetliners.
----They used output signal levels,
which comes from cell phones, only
at the highest end of what is
normally observed in cell phone use.
This somewhat comparable to feeding
a bathtub of a chemical, per day to
rats, to prove that substance can
cause cancer.
Even with all that "worst possible
case" rigged-scenario, standard of
testing, they were not able to
produce any instrument errors in the
avionics equipment used in those
tests, unless the cell phones were
within 30 cm from that
avionics equipment. As distance away
from those avionics modules
increases, the strength of the cell
phone signals drops off rapidly.
Since no passenger could ever get
closer than a few meters to any
avionics equipment on an airliner,
it is quite logically concluded that
cell phones do not present any kind
of hazard to the safety of flight.
So, when you hear "activists" saying
things like "cell phones interfere
with aircraft navigation systems,"
they are stating falsehoods. If they
have read summaries of those reports
(honest ones), much less the entire
reports, and still say that, they
are bald-face liars.
When I was still flying, the reason
given for the ban on cell phone use
in flight, was that it was
prohibited by FCC (not FAA)
rules.
The FCC found that if cell phones
are used in flight, they can
illuminate many base ground stations
at the same time. That causes all
kinds of problems, as the system was
designed to do "handoffs," from one
base station to another, as the cell
phone user travels across the
effective boundaries of various base
stations.
We did allow the use of the
cellphones, while the doors were
open at the blocks (a critical time
for pilot navigation programming of
the plane's computers, which will be
guiding the plane along its entire
flight, of up to 14 hours non-stop),
and during taxi-in after landing.
They never caused any problem that
way, and we avoided having the FCC
levy big fines on the airline, had
we failed to enforce that
bureaucracy's rules.
I think just about all pilots, most
flight attendants and most
passengers would agree that allowing
cell phone use in flight would cause
all kinds of problems in the cabins
(it might even provoke instances of
Air Rage!), so we remain opposed to
changing the rules.
But, as to their use being a threat
to the actual navigation safety of
the aircraft, you can deep-six that
one into the historical dust bin,
which is the final fate of most of
the fear-mongering scenarios
perpetrated by those self-appointed
"consumer activists," who have
political axes to grind.
A final point:
The more the general public can be
frightened into avoid traveling on
airliners in the safer areas of the
world, the higher the risk of
transportation deaths goes. That is
because airline transportation is
far safer than transportation on our
highways. If we are really
interested in keeping the
transportation death toll as low as
possible, we will encourage everyone
to fly, instead of driving, if they
have that choice available to them.
Robert J.
Boser
Editor-in-Chief
AirlineSafety.Com
Return
to Unions Page
The
Editor of this Web
Page, now retired, was an airline
pilot
for 33 years and holds 6 specific
Captain's type-ratings on Boeing
Jet
Airliners.
|
|
|
