Quote:
As a side note, a while back I personally talked to an avionics engineer who worked in flight test at one of the main U.S. airplane plants that manufacturers military fighters about this cell phone interference thing. He said it was all "bullshit". Now, I don't know his credentials, but I do know he knows a lot more about this stuff than I do and had to deal with the testing and fixing of the stuff inside the cockpit of military planes every day. He said that there is no way cell phones, ipods, PSP, Gameboys, or notebook computers are ever going to cause a plane to crash because all of the "critical stuff" that is used to fly, land, take-off, etc. is shielded up the wazzooo from external RF exposure. I'll take his word over any government agency.
I saw a test once that actually showed that a cell phone..laptop or a walkman can actually interfere with the safe flight of the plane and actually cause it to crash..
The catch though....was a private lane with nearly or absolutely no shielding of vital plane equipment..
Everybody knows in this day and age the way the FAA is now ( and of recent years) they require lots and lots of shielding and that is in commercial as well as private planes ( likely not in kit planes)..
Military planes are often so well shielded that they even can survive and operate after being subject to an EMP..
So in todays age...in any type of plane except perhaps a home built or kit plane...RF interference from cell phones or laptops or any other electronic device is NOT something to worry about..
( have you noticed that many commercial aircraft allow or rather have their own pay cellular phones...that are quoto un quote safe for airline use.....those phones are simply a method the commercial planes get away being able to charge very high fee's for talking on the phone while plane is in operation)
Anyway, can we get back on topic of what the
FCC is trying to do with this poor lady? ( i 2ed this )
Linear Mode
