Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times

Neil Williams

On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 22:41:01 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:

>How do you forget to turn it off once the flight crew have told you to do
>so before takeoff..?

Because I normally put all my electrical gubbins in the side of my
carry-on bag in order to speed passage through security[1], and
because the seats are so damn narrow it tends to stay there for the
flight rather than going back in my pocket.

Before putting it in said bag, I turn off said electrical gubbins.
However, on one occasion I forgot. The bag is shoved up in the
overhead by the time the above announcement is made, so a quick check
isn't practical if I'm in a window seat (which is my usual choice), so
I would rely on my turn-off-before-putting-in-bag ritual, which worked
every time but one.

I am by no means the only one who's forgotten, though. My guess is
that at least one on any given 737-sized flight is on.

[1] I'm thinking here specifically of Schiphol, where security is at
the gate, and thus I'm not likely to want or need use of said
electrical gubbins between security and the plane as this is normally
a period of no more than about 5-10 minutes.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

tony sayer

In article <475b0e54.633337741@news.individual.net>, Neil Williams
<wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk> scribeth thus
>On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:30:39 +0000, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>No give them their due the aircraft environment is a very sensitive one
>>and is very safety conscious. If there was the slightest risk then they
>>should not be allowed but its taken some time to get that far.
>
>Given that just about every flight these days has one or two mobiles
>that their owner has forgotten to turn off (I've done it), and that we
>haven't heard of any accident relating to one, I think you can be
>reasonably sure they aren't a big risk.
>

No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..

Aviation has an excellent safety record, lets keep it that way)
>Neil
>

--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer

In article <475b0e54.633337741@news.individual.net>, Neil Williams
<wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk> scribeth thus
>On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:30:39 +0000, tony sayer <tony@bancom.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>No give them their due the aircraft environment is a very sensitive one
>>and is very safety conscious. If there was the slightest risk then they
>>should not be allowed but its taken some time to get that far.
>
>Given that just about every flight these days has one or two mobiles
>that their owner has forgotten to turn off (I've done it), and that we
>haven't heard of any accident relating to one, I think you can be
>reasonably sure they aren't a big risk.
>

No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..

Aviation has an excellent safety record, lets keep it that way)
>Neil
>

--
Tony Sayer

Neil Williams

On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 13:21:26 +0000, tony sayer <.uk>
wrote:

>No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
>their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..

If they don't have a signal, they attempt to find one using full power
tranmsission a lot more often than they "ping" the network if they do
see one.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Neil Williams

On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 13:21:26 +0000, tony sayer <.uk>
wrote:

>No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
>their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..

If they don't have a signal, they attempt to find one using full power
tranmsission a lot more often than they "ping" the network if they do
see one.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Rev Adrian Kennard

Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 13:21:26 +0000, tony sayer <.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
>> their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..
>
> If they don't have a signal, they attempt to find one using full power
> tranmsission a lot more often than they "ping" the network if they do
> see one.

You do not "find" a network by transmitting you find one by receiving -
scanning several channels. Only when you have found one do you transmit.

--
Adrian Kennard, on his Mac...
Andrews & Arnold Ltd. Communications spe******ts.
New UK Wide 03 phone numbers available now.

Rev Adrian Kennard

Neil Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 13:21:26 +0000, tony sayer <.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
>> their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..
>
> If they don't have a signal, they attempt to find one using full power
> tranmsission a lot more often than they "ping" the network if they do
> see one.

You do not "find" a network by transmitting you find one by receiving -
scanning several channels. Only when you have found one do you transmit.

--
Adrian Kennard, on his Mac...
Andrews & Arnold Ltd. Communications spe******ts.
New UK Wide 03 phone numbers available now.

826

On Dec 9, 1:21 pm, tony sayer <t...@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <475b0e54.633337...@news.individual.net>, Neil Williams
> <wensleyd...@pacersplace.org.uk> scribeth thus
>
> >On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:30:39 +0000, tony sayer <t...@bancom.co.uk>
> >wrote:
>
> >>No give them their due the aircraft environment is a very sensitive one
> >>and is very safety conscious. If there was the slightest risk then they
> >>should not be allowed but its taken some time to get that far.
>
> >Given that just about every flight these days has one or two mobiles
> >that their owner has forgotten to turn off (I've done it), and that we
> >haven't heard of any accident relating to one, I think you can be
> >reasonably sure they aren't a big risk.
>
> No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
> their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..
>
> Aviation has an excellent safety record, lets keep it that way)
>
> >Neil
>
> --
> Tony Sayer

Aircraft systems are well shielded but I have personally witnessed the
effect a mobile phone can have when used within 30 feet of a live
cockpit.
1. Radio signals between the controller and the crew are subjected to
a constant rythmic bleeping accompanied by a steady buzz.
2. On a Jersey European BAE 146 in 2000 (now Flybe) with old style
cockpit using dials. Instrument lights flickered and some dials had
indicators moving rapidly from side to side. Not by a great deal but
it was described as distracting.
3. On a much newer CRJ 50 seater using a modern "glass" cockpit the
effect was not noticeable but the radio interference remained.

The basic fact is nobody can guarantee that every type of mobile phone
electronic signature will not in some way affect the many different
types of system on an aircraft. With hundreds of different types of
phone and more appearing almost weekly, who will take responsibility
for EMC testing them against every type of passenger carrying
aircraft? Easier not to take the risk.

826

On Dec 9, 1:21 pm, tony sayer <t...@bancom.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <475b0e54.633337...@news.individual.net>, Neil Williams
> <wensleyd...@pacersplace.org.uk> scribeth thus
>
> >On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 11:30:39 +0000, tony sayer <t...@bancom.co.uk>
> >wrote:
>
> >>No give them their due the aircraft environment is a very sensitive one
> >>and is very safety conscious. If there was the slightest risk then they
> >>should not be allowed but its taken some time to get that far.
>
> >Given that just about every flight these days has one or two mobiles
> >that their owner has forgotten to turn off (I've done it), and that we
> >haven't heard of any accident relating to one, I think you can be
> >reasonably sure they aren't a big risk.
>
> No not if their not being used. Yes they do have the odd exchange with
> their net from time to time but a few short duration bursts?..
>
> Aviation has an excellent safety record, lets keep it that way)
>
> >Neil
>
> --
> Tony Sayer

Aircraft systems are well shielded but I have personally witnessed the
effect a mobile phone can have when used within 30 feet of a live
cockpit.
1. Radio signals between the controller and the crew are subjected to
a constant rythmic bleeping accompanied by a steady buzz.
2. On a Jersey European BAE 146 in 2000 (now Flybe) with old style
cockpit using dials. Instrument lights flickered and some dials had
indicators moving rapidly from side to side. Not by a great deal but
it was described as distracting.
3. On a much newer CRJ 50 seater using a modern "glass" cockpit the
effect was not noticeable but the radio interference remained.

The basic fact is nobody can guarantee that every type of mobile phone
electronic signature will not in some way affect the many different
types of system on an aircraft. With hundreds of different types of
phone and more appearing almost weekly, who will take responsibility
for EMC testing them against every type of passenger carrying
aircraft? Easier not to take the risk.