by Mike Masnick

FAA Commissions Safety Study Of In-Air Cell Phones

from the it's-about-time dept

A couple months ago, there was some debate around here over whether or not using mobile phones in airplanes was really that dangerous. For years, no one has adequately explained what the danger was - because no one really knew for sure. There were anecdotal stories, and plenty of people think they know whether or not it causes damage. However, there was nothing that clearly stated what the problem was. Now, the FAA has decided to change that. They're going to conduct a study of what kind of interference wireless devices actually cause - with an eye towards using that information to let those who create wireless technologies fix the problem. In other words, no matter what the problem is now (assuming there really is one), they want to change it so that you'll be able to talk away from the friendly skies. So, now, the real question is how do you feel about the idea of having to sit for hours on end, squeezed next to someone yelling into their mobile phone the whole time?

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. identicon
    dave, Jun 20th, 2003 @ 10:41am

    No Subject Given

    strange, whenever I'm onboard an airplane, and say forgot to turn off my cellphone before being reminded or turned it on right after landing (still in the plane) I never got a signal till I left the plane, I had always thought the cabins were shielded, you know like puting a radio in a chickenwire (conductive) cage, i mean if thats not the case, why not just start doing that, being just the passenger cabin, wouldn't the flight instruments be left uneffected?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Tom, Jun 20th, 2003 @ 12:29pm

    Re: Wireless on planes

    I certainly HOPE the industry & FCC don't figure out a way to make cell phones OK on planes. I don't want to listen to a cacophony of callers yakking all the way across the U.S. of A. Why do they need a technological reason to ban cell phones on flights? Why not just ban them outright because they're obnoxious, like cigarettes?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Tom, Jun 20th, 2003 @ 12:31pm

    Re: Wireless on planes

    Sorry, that's FAA, not FCC.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Glenn, Jun 20th, 2003 @ 2:41pm

    No Subject Given

    Seems to me that what you all want, and therefore perhaps the masses, is two way text messaging capabilities in the air. People are usually fairly influenced by popular opinion, so if cell phone usage was officially allowed (via text only, per FAA rules we'll say), and part of the flight attendant speech said please do not disturb others by talking on your cell phone in the air, there shouldn't be a huge problem.

    Over and out.


    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Tweak, Jul 15th, 2003 @ 10:40pm


    Just remember that, as an aspect of the effort to prove that 9/11 was a frikken obvious hoax by the CIA and Israel, et al, a similar study was conducted. It seems the reason cell phones are not allowed on planes has nothing to do with "safety" but rather with the phone companies' requests. See, when the client phone is on a jet moving a few hundred miles an hour, and more than 50 feet off the ground, it can connect to multiple cell towers on the ground. Moreover, it can enter and exit a tower's area in less time than it takes to establish the "handshake" for the connection, thus producing a "cascade" effect, and screwing the server. Go check it out. Now, doesn't it seem duplicitous for the FAA to come out and say, AFTER the whole cellphones and terrorists BS has been blown wide open, that they're considering reviewing the "safety" of using cells on planes? No? Still asleep, America?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Marintha, Aug 8th, 2004 @ 11:48am

    Re: Well..

    "Go check it out"--where? Can you provide any evidence for this that comes from unbiased, reputable sources? Sources that *don't* mention the Sept. 11th controversy might be convincing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.