QF446 - Take Off

[Paul Waters]

Listening to onboard commands from the PIC is a different story

My point exactly, thank you Radi.

And for the purposes of onboard announcements, while they are made by the cabin crew, the directions are essentially coming from the PIC.

Oliver, Jake, Zac, Lukas, take note.

I'm not overly familiar with the Qantas safety cards, but I understand that even camera's etc. are banned for take off and landing until such time as the seatbelt sign has been switched off.

Cheers

Paul

[Zac M]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/denon/3...n/photostream/

The print is small but:

"Devices not Restricted from use-Devices required for the essential support of human life, such as medical implants and other medical devices that have prior approval by Qantas, Global Positioning recievers (GPS), Electric Shavers, Video and still cameras which are powered electronically, pocket calculators, other devices with micro-cell batteries and solar cells"

[Jakef]

My question to you, is why do you feel the need to question what is a reasonable request? If that safety card in front of you says no mobile phones and the Captain of the aircraft asks you to turn your phone off, based on what knowledge and experience do you think you would know better?

I'm not denying that is is a reasonable request, nor am I saying I know any better. I think there is every right to question the reasoning behind it, and yes the PIC may have asked for it via the flight attendants and technically that is the law, but still, I think there is every right to question why?
I think that wanting to know the reasoning behind it is not an unreasonable request.

I wonder if the reaction to this video would be different if the OP had taken the video with a video camera and put that in the description instead of mentioning the dreaded p word (phone).

[NeilP]

Then we have nothing to argue about, and this forum would be terribly boring...

[Greg McDonald]

I'd agree with you Jake. It's probably about time that the powers that be draggged themselves into the 21st century and rewrote some of the archaic laws in every field, not just aviation. There have been a lot of studies done recently and the general advise (at least in scientific circles) is that if it can't transmit and it can't receive then it's impossible for it to affect any aircraft electronics. Common sense says that this really does make the device just a camera. Then again I've been told on a number of occasions to turn my digital camera off for takeoff and landing (strangely always when flying DJ) when this too makes no common sense. As the old saying goes...common sense is not so common .
There are also a number of airlines (including Qantas I think) that are actively testing and considering allowing texting and calling to and from mobile phones while in the air (how I desperately hope that voice calls will never be allowed!!!) . It'll be interesting to see how without any alterations to the aircraft this will suddenly become ok!
I guess the bottom line is that, regardless of if the law makes sense or is correct, it IS the law and therefore must be blindly followed.

[Mick F]

Greg,
Totally agree, perhaps there does need to be more up to date research done on the topic and the rules overhauled. But as you say, in the meantime, the rules still must be followed regardless of ones personal thoughts.

Zac,
Thanks for that. Having never used a camera for take off or landing I have never bothered to take notice.

Mick

[Owen H]

Greg - Alterations to the aircraft are indeed made for these sort of things, and in some cases the aircraft are required to undergo interference testing prior to use.

Besides which, it will be permitted but NOT during takeoff and landing.

ILS (and GPS for that matter) signals are very sensitive. Do some research about interference, and you'll see why the CONSERVATIVE option is taken. You have absolutely NO need to use a phone or electronic device during takeoff and landing, and so the industry is not prepared to spend the enormous amounts of money required to prove that it is (or isnt) safe.

Jake

Yes the reaction would have been different because he would not have been breaking the instructions.

Also, the reason why has been made clear - interference. It is difficult to positively prove that no interference will occur during takeoff or landing, and so it is banned. If you would like to prove to the airlines it is safe I'm sure they'll listen - but I hope you have deep, deep pockets to do the necessary research.

[Darryl Schlodder]

Just watch Mythbusters, they proved that mobile phones do not create any interference at all.

[Owen H]

There is Mythbusters "proof" that it has no effect.

There is scientific research that has showed mobile phones interfering with ILS signals on large aircraft (albeit older generation ones).

Which one do you think the body responsible for the safety of air operations should use, when we're flying low visibility approaches?

[Brock Little]

Mythbusters were restricted by the FAA to conduct ground tests only though.