Timeline for Why would a time signal receiving watch have an airplane mode?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 26, 2016 at 5:48 | comment | added | user16222 | Thats not how this works. The CAA have show that levels above the qualification environment exist. They are the one that govern UK aerospace not you | |
| Jul 25, 2016 at 23:28 | comment | added | Paul Uszak | @JonRB Yes, I admit that I'm a random individual who can't be blindly trusted. However, I've shown you numbers in my edit. Please show numbers to the contrary... | |
| Jul 25, 2016 at 23:26 | history | edited | Paul Uszak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Numerical proof following comments.
|
| Jul 25, 2016 at 8:19 | comment | added | user16222 | publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP%201066.pdf | |
| Jul 25, 2016 at 8:18 | comment | added | user16222 | newscientist.com/article/mg16622401-000-danger-signals | |
| Jul 25, 2016 at 8:07 | comment | added | user16222 | New planes are a lot better but that doesn't dismiss the existence of older planes still in usage. At the end of the day the CAA/FAA/RTCA/EASA/ANAC/.../Airlines set the rules not the passengers. As long as they say "turn off during takeoff and landing" you run the risk of being removed if you do not adhere. | |
| Jul 25, 2016 at 8:05 | comment | added | user16222 | publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP756.PDF "transmission levels produced by a portable telephone used near the flight deck or avionics equipment bay exceeded demonstrated RF susceptibility levels for equipment qualified to standards published prior to July 1984, and as such, as equipment qualified to these standards is installed both in earlier certificated aircraft and in newly built aircraft, the current policy for restricting the use of portable telephones on all aircraft will need to remain in force; and". I would trust the CAA over some random individual on the internet | |
| Jul 24, 2016 at 23:07 | comment | added | Paul Uszak | My "phone fully on" example occurs probably thousands of times a day with no significant effects - people forget to turn them off and there's a million people in the air at any one time. If a phone had any tactical capability they would be immediately banned from all flights in the present climate. They would be confiscated at security and you'd be arrested and waterboarded. | |
| Jul 24, 2016 at 23:03 | comment | added | Paul Uszak | @JonRB Which original bit of the 747 from 1970 do you think is still in service? The multi functional computerised instruments or the GPS navigation system? | |
| Jul 24, 2016 at 22:20 | comment | added | user16222 | That irresponsible to advocate leaving said devices on. The issue is there are a lot of planes in circulation that were designed way before wifi, personal gps etc.. really existed. I am thinking the 747 specifically here. They were designed to consider the DO160 at that time. Now chuck within the main structure another source of RF and well... There are clearly logged incidence where a radio transmitting device interfered with comms (didn't bring the plane down for sure but...). Newer planes have better shielding, routing, susceptibility limits. | |
| Jul 24, 2016 at 21:27 | history | answered | Paul Uszak | CC BY-SA 3.0 |