« The age of a woman | Main | Think about it! »

September 16, 2003

Laptops vs Airplanes

I think this is a case for lateral thinking. There is an article in the SMH today, entitled: "The truth about your laptop and landing safely". The article meanders around the place, collecting isolated and unrelated tidbits of information and then attempts to spin a coherant point which concludes with:


Laurie Cox, a spokesman for the Australian Federation of Air Pilots, said more research was needed into the effect of electronic devices.
"You've got to ask, do you want to get there, or do you want to use your laptop?"

The article freely confuses the question of interference during takeoff and landing (which is currently not permitted) with the use of laptops during the flight. I for one could not survive a trip to the US without my laptop :-)

So what about the lateral thinking? Well, just maybe, instead of complaining about the interference they could shield against it? A faraday cage is not that heavy (nor is it that expensive). Why are airplane electronics so much more sensitive than other equipment? Either isolate the planes electrical systems OR provide an isolated area on the plane where electrical equipment can be used.

This version of the article is provided as a reference because the original has no permanent link and will vanish after a relatively short period of time. Please use the original link if it is still available.

The truth about your laptop computer and landing safely
By David Higgins and Joel Gibson

Next time you're on a flight and the plane suddenly begins to climb or pitch to the left, don't panic. It's probably just the kid next to you conquering level 16 on his computer game.
Pilots have become accustomed to unexpected problems caused by passengers using mobile phones or other portable electronic devices.
Over the past decade there have been more than 100 incidents in Australia of navigation system failures, autopilot malfunctions, interference with radio transmissions, incorrect readings from flight management computers and false alerts from engine warning systems - all due to portable devices.
In one case last year, the ground proximity warning system in a 34-seater plane suddenly went berserk even though the plane - which was just 22 kilometres south-west of Sydney - had levelled off at 5000 feet.
The pilot noticed a mobile phone interference signal in his headphones, according to an incident report lodged with the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. "The aircraft continued to its destination without further incident," the log entry says.
On another occasion in 1996, a Boeing 767 pitched and dropped 120 metres before pilots recovered control. A passenger using an electronic dictionary was asked to turn it off, and the plane's systems returned to normal.
On more than one occasion, laptop computers have been blamed for changing an aircraft's internal cabin pressure.
Pilots routinely ask for portable devices to be switched off during take-off and landing. because they are too busy to deal with problems with interference. But, once in the air, when passengers are allowed to switch devices on, pilots have had to contend with a range of bewildering malfunctions.
The incidents, logged in an Australian Transport Safety Bureau database, have been collated for the first time and detailed in the latest edition of Flight Safety Australia, published by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
Perhaps most worrying of all, the devices often cause autopilot malfunctions, which have resulted in planes climbing, oscillating, or disengaging from the autopilot system altogether.
CASA wants to ban the use of mobile phones on all flights and prohibit the use of laptop computers, video cameras and electronic games during take-offs and landings.
CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said the level of interference was manageable but any increase would require more serious consideration. "None of these [incidents] led to anything life-threatening . . . but we have this issue constantly under review," he said. "The thing we're relying on at the moment is the common sense of passengers not to use mobiles, transmitters and other devices when they're told not to, and the vigilance of the cabin crew."
Laurie Cox, a spokesman for the Australian Federation of Air Pilots, said more research was needed into the effect of electronic devices.
"You've got to ask, do you want to get there, or do you want to use your laptop?"

Posted by Ozguru at September 16, 2003 09:09 AM

Comments

I'd say ban 'em. I'm one of the harsher critics of mobile phone/electronic devices overuse...I'd gladly accept jammers in theatres, restaurants, public places etc. And working on electronic devices while flying is clearly something that people can learn to do without.

Posted by: Jivha at September 16, 2003 09:09 AM

I would say accommodate non-criminal human behavior. If you criminalize what is perceived as harmless behavior, people will tend to sneak it anyway. It is better to build safeguards than to expect people to not do something that comes naturally. You will improve both, the user experience and the security.

Posted by: Kingsley at September 16, 2003 09:09 AM

Jivha: I don't think I could stand a flight to the US for WWDC without some form of entertainment (like a coding session). I switch off the wireless network and I can't really belive that the amount of interference generated by a laptop can make that much difference to the plane. As suggested, maybe they could isolate one section somewhere and say - "geeks sit here". Kingsley: That sounds like a good topic for a whole article....

Posted by: ozguru at September 16, 2003 09:09 AM

I have always thought that the FCC is suppose to regulate the interferences of electrical devices. They set guidlines for frequency ranges of tolerable operation for countless devices. I thought that the purpose of this was to insure that one device is compatible with others. Compatible, being able to work in conjuction with another device. This all seems like a foul up caused by the short-sightedness of this agency. I have also wondered, like you Ozguru, just isolate the cockpit from the troublesome signals. This seems to be a design flaw of our aircraft as well and I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't another over-sight of the FCC.

Posted by: Tony S. at September 16, 2003 09:09 AM

The problem is not with the devices but with the design of the aircraft electronics. If you fly in a military aircraft they have far fewer problems with EMI, due to being designed to resist intensional jamming in the 1st place. Most aircraft were designed to resist interferance from outside the plane, but no thought was given to interferance from inside the skin of the plane. SO alot of wires that carry the navigation signals run thourgh out the aircraft with minimal sheilding and inproper grounding. There have been studies about the lack of grounding can turn cables and metal objects into antennas and then thier signal interfers with the engine sensors. In one such test a tech was able to shut off the engines on a plane just by keying up a tower radio. I don't think this problem will be sovled until the current fleet of 20 year old aircraft gets replaced.

Posted by: Matthew at September 16, 2003 09:09 AM