CER2520@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Curtis E. Reid) (03/03/91)
A thought struck me as I was reading the thread on Airphones mentioned in several Digests ago. Someone mentioned that you can't use cellular phone or radio while airborne, right? What about use of other electronic equipment like a laptop, GameBoy (Yes, I do play it!), or a TDD? I will be flying transcontinental soon ... I am curious whether the TDD would work if I make a call from the Airphone? I don't know about the sound quality (static)? Before I do this, I need to know if any electronic equipment is prohibited on an airplane while airborne? Could someone tell me excatly what are the rules for operating such equipment on an airplane? Thanks!! Curtis E. Reid CER2520@RITVAX.Bitnet (Bitnet) CER2520@RITVAX.isc.rit.edu (Internet)
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (03/08/91)
In article <telecom11.170.13@eecs.nwu.edu>, CER2520@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Curtis E. Reid) writes: > Before I do this, I need to know if any electronic equipment is > prohibited on an airplane while airborne? Could someone tell me > excatly what are the rules for operating such equipment on an > airplane? Thanks!! The operation of most electronic equipment is prohibited aboard any aircraft in flight under instrument flight rules (this includes virtually all airline flights, and many general aviation flights). It is up to the airline to enforce this rule, and to grant exceptions for equipment which has been verified by the airline (or by the pilot, for general aviation operations) not to cause interference with the navigation or communications systems in use. You should ask the airline about your own specific equipment on their flights, and you should probably expect a NO answer if it radiates any RF or if they don't know what it does. If you're riding the airliner into a fogged-in airport, you wouldn't want your lap-top interfering with the ILS receiver and directing you into the ground, would you? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
sbrack@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Steven S. Brack) (03/10/91)
In article <telecom11.186.4@eecs.nwu.edu> dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: => In article <telecom11.170.13@eecs.nwu.edu>, CER2520@ritvax.isc.rit.edu => (Curtis E. Reid) writes: =>> Before I do this, I need to know if any electronic equipment is =>> prohibited on an airplane while airborne? Could someone tell me =>> excatly what are the rules for operating such equipment on an =>> airplane? Thanks!! => The operation of most electronic equipment is prohibited aboard any => aircraft in flight under instrument flight rules (this includes => virtually all airline flights, and many general aviation flights). It => is up to the airline to enforce this rule, and to grant exceptions for => equipment which has been verified by the airline (or by the pilot, for => general aviation operations) not to cause interference with the => navigation or communications systems in use. While FAA regulations do prohibit the operation of devices that interfere with aircraft electronics under Instrument Flight Rules, the rules nearly all airliners must fly under, the FAA also makes it clear that "the pilot in command is solely responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft" (Federal Aviation Regulation 91.3). => If you're riding the airliner into a fogged-in airport, you wouldn't => want your lap-top interfering with the ILS receiver and directing you => into the ground. (I paraphrase, as the author's last line was lost) The threat posed by electronics to aircraft has been greatly exaggerated. In reality, aircraft electronics are by and large immune from the effects of EMR put out by personal electronics, such as laptops or TDDs. In fact, most airliner galleys, being all-electric, produce far greater EM fields than any personal electronic device. More specifically, the ILS system is designed so that even if the RF signal becomes unusable at the worst possible moment, the aircraft may still safely abort the landing. Steven S. Brack sbrack@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu sbrack@ewf.eng.ohio-state.edu (Avoid sending here, if possible)
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (03/12/91)
In article <telecom11.195.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, sbrack@hpuxa.ircc. ohio-state.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: [ in a comment on my followup to a previous article ] > While FAA regulations do prohibit the operation of devices that > interfere with aircraft electronics under Instrument Flight Rules, the > rules nearly all airliners must fly under, the FAA also makes it clear > that "the pilot in command is solely responsible for the safe > operation of the aircraft" (Federal Aviation Regulation 91.3). FAR 91.19 Portable Electronic Devices: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S. registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by an air carrier or commercial operator; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to: (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by an air carrier or commercial operator, the determination required by paragraph (b) (5) of this section shall be made by the air carrier or commercial operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft. > The threat posed by electronics to aircraft has been greatly > exaggerated. But why take chances? > More specifically, the ILS system is designed so that even if the RF > signal becomes unusable at the worst possible moment, the aircraft may > still safely abort the landing. If the aircraft may still safely abort, then by definition, it is not the worst possible moment, no? ---just nitpiking, I suppose--- Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857