A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Air travel
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

CyberFlying???



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 01:39 AM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default Using electronic devices during take-off and landing (was:CyberFlying???)

Tom P wrote:

What annoys me is being forbidden to turn on a GPS receiver in
flight.


I've never let any such rule stop me from using my GPS.

Or my AM/FM radio. There's really no AM reception possible inside the
plane, but I've listened to many FM stations while crusing at 35k feet.
Most people (including FA's) can't tell the difference between an FM
radio and an MP3 player (and some devices are MP3 and FM radios).

AFA not being a threat, the question is, are devices certified
as not being a threat? As long as there is no certification,
that's the end of the story.


The embargo on electronic devices during take-off and landing is
bull****. We all know that prohibition is there to remove a possible
source of interference or lack-of-attention between the crew and
passengers in cases of emergency (which are more relavent during
taxi/takeoff/landing than during other phases of the flight).

I guess the theory goes that if you're playing with and focused on your
electronic gadget in your lap, or if you're wearing headphones connected
to your own audio device, then your attention will not be on the crew if
they need you do to something or act quickly in an emergency situation.

They don't really want to say that's the reason, so they invent this
bogus bull**** reason that your electronic device will interfere with
the control and navigation systems of the plane. They seem so anal
about it that you wonder why they don't force you to take the battery
out of your wrist watch for christ sakes.

The prohibition against recieving devices (radio's and hand-held TV's -
remember those?) is really to keep the passengers in the dark about
external world events during the flight. You can keep better control of
the cattle - er I mean the passengers - if they don't know and get
worked up about what's happening elsewhere in the world.

But I love using my GPS while on flights. It tells me if we're going
into a holding pattern, or which runway we're lining up for, and gives
me a good ETA to know if I've got to hussle for my connecting flight. I
know what cities I'm passing over, and what actual route we're taking
(is it a straight line? Frequently - no it's not).
  #12  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 01:50 AM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default Using electronic devices during take-off and landing (was:CyberFlying???)

mag3 wrote:

... but given what I've read recently in people being thrown
off of flights for far less severe infractions,


Yea, like wearing baggy pants, or appearing too muslim or arab looking

and what with newfound "IED awareness," it would seem something
both crew and pax. would take a lot more seriously.


If you're sitting quietly in your seat, holding your camera in your lap,
and then turning it on and pointing it out the window - trust me. Other
pax will not give it a second thought.

They did when I was flying.


I've been flying moderately frequently for the past 15 years (but
admittedly far less frequently during the past 3 years). Operating
electronic devices on the QT during take-off and landing is no harder to
do now than it was in 2002 or 1998.

I thought things were actually getting *more* strict.


No. Things are getting less strict.

Remember when there was secondary screening at the gate? When was the
last time you saw that?

The TSA is now setting up inspections at truck stops on the interstate
and bus stations for christ sakes. They're admitting that terrorists
are more likely to be found on the nation's highway system than at the
airports.

But I am a little disappointed, both from a security standpoint
and also, one of "fairness."


I can't help it if you're one of the sheeple that bought into this whole
TSA security theater bull**** thing.

It's done nothing but make flying a friggen pain in the ass.

As silly as the regulation may be (and I agree it is)
it's still a reg, and must be obeyed by all.


I say screw it. Screw the reg's when they conflict with my
constitutional rights.
  #13  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 01:52 AM posted to rec.travel.air
mag3
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default Cyberflying???

On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:19:17 -0400, Fly Guy wrote:

mag3 wrote:

The thread title has to do with what the videos allow people to do
- "Cyberfly" -


There is no such concept as "cyberfly".

That is, watch an aircraft in flight, taxi, etc.


What the hell kind of terminology are you trying to invent?

Documenting or filming various human activities with cameras is not
called "cyber-this" or "cyber-that".

So stop it already with the cyber-bull****.

You are focused here in this thread on the use of electronic devices
during take-off and landing, so that's the correct subject line for this
thread.


or something pointed at the engine to make it fail after take off?


Are you serious?

And if they have to put the camera down for a second while a FA passes
by, how do you know that that part isin't edited out of the videos that


remainder of hissy fit snipped

you see?


I see that there's no point in waisting anymore of my time/energy arguing
with the likes of you... Adios.

plonk

____________________________________________
Regards,

Arnold
  #14  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 01:58 AM posted to rec.travel.air
James Robinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 495
Default CyberFlying???

Tom P wrote:

Cell phones do generate a lot of electronic RFC noise, so I can
understand why they are not allowed. What annoys me is being forbidden
to turn on a GPS receiver in flight. This is a totally passive
electronic device.


So choose an airline that permits the use of GPS. There are lots of them:

http://gpsinformation.net/airgps/airgps.htm
  #15  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 02:35 AM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default Using electronic devices during take-off and landing (was: idiotic"CyberFlying")

James Robinson wrote:

So choose an airline that permits the use of GPS. There are lots
of them:


What a crazy-ass piece of advice.

Who in their right mind is going to choose a carrier based on whether or
not they allow GPS use in flight - vs just using a GPS irregardless of
the rules?

I use GPS all the time in flight - to hell with the rules.
  #16  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 02:40 AM posted to rec.travel.air
Fly Guy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 193
Default Using electronic devices during take-off and landing (was: idiotic"CyberFlying")

mag3 thought he was being cool by saying:

remainder of hissy fit snipped


What ever floats your boat there child.

I see that there's no point in waisting anymore of my time/energy
arguing with the likes of you...


If you can't stand the heat, then I accept your surrender.
  #17  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 03:37 AM posted to rec.travel.air
DevilsPGD[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default Using electronic devices during take-off and landing (was: idiotic "CyberFlying")

In message someone claiming to be Fly Guy
typed:

James Robinson wrote:

So choose an airline that permits the use of GPS. There are lots
of them:


What a crazy-ass piece of advice.

Who in their right mind is going to choose a carrier based on whether or
not they allow GPS use in flight - vs just using a GPS irregardless of
the rules?


If rules are important to you, and all other things are equal then why
not prefer an airline over their rules?

Sure, ignoring the rules is an option, but some people like to follow
all rules possible unless there is a reason to disregard a rule.

--
It's always darkest before dawn. So if you're going to
steal your neighbor's newspaper, that's the time to do it.
  #18  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 12:18 PM posted to rec.travel.air
tim....
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 398
Default CyberFlying???


"DevilsPGD" wrote in message
...
In message someone claiming
to be mag3 typed:

I guess my question is, how is it even possible to acquire such footage
from inside the
aircraft given the prohibition on "portable electronic devices" below
10,000ft? Perhaps,
it may have been "overlooked" in the earlier days of "heightened security
awareness,"
but I'm really wondering how anyone could get away with it today? Even if
permission
were to be granted by the captain or crew, the passengers wouldn't
necessarily know
that and might raise a ruckus on their own... leaving the crew to clean
up.


The short answer is that electronics aren't a threat and everyone knows
it. Nobody cares if you use a phone or similar on the ground, on the
runway, during takeoff/landing or anywhere else.


The reason that you are not allowed to use "electronic devices" during
TO/Landing has got nothing at all to do with their electrical
characteristics.

It's because that is the part of the flight where there is the largest
chance of their being some emergency that requires passengers to react
immediately and they want to be sure that you aren't doing anything which is
going to distract you from performing this immediate action

tim




  #19  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 12:33 PM posted to rec.travel.air
mag3
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default CyberFlying???

On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:59:16 -0700, DevilsPGD wrote:

You don't need to obey regulations, just the flight attendants. If
you're personally told to do something, do it. If not, don't be a moron
and you'll be fine.


Sure, you might get the odd passenger who freaks out, but you're just as
likely to have them hiding their own phone under their jacket too.


Just my luck I'd get the "freak out" pax. turning me in.

General Safety, for one... Not that cameras/camcorders would be a huge deal, but
other devices and gear (ie. laptops etc.), should not be allowed below 10,00ft, in
order to maintain emergency egress for all and the paths clear (at a time when the
probability for an emergency egress is greatest).


Indeed. This is exactly why I don't care about my phone, or other
handheld devices. Should we need to check out quickly, I can buy a new
iPhone should I happen to survive.


As long as you backed it up at home or somewhere else, no problem.

Okay, or I might keep it in my pocket and become "that asshole" but only
if it fits in my pocket. Laptop? Forget it, can be replaced... But the
phone might become useful 2 minutes after getting out of the plane.


I have no issue with things that can fit in one's pockets. In fact, it's why I always
kept my windbreaker jacket with me and stuffed down and away from view. In an
emergency egress, they may tell me I can't take my carry ons, but they can't
stop me from taking my jacket. And in there, I can put all my critical stuff (passport,
keys, blackberries, etc. etc.). Of course, if it's an egress into water, that may be
an issue for everything you carry.

I wouldn't be real happy if someone
is futzing around with their laptop (or other devices) and blocking my exit when the
"evacuate" order is given. After all, isn't that why all that carry on stuff "must fit
completely underneath the seat in front of you or in the overhead bins," and "All
tray tables locked and seat backs returned to their full/upright position?"


Either that or just realize that the number of crashes/etc where time
matters is so tiny it basically doesn't matter. Either you die or not.


Maybe, but in the event we can egress to safety, I'd want those pathways totally
clear and free of any kind of debris.

Maybe crews are more "educated" about electronics now. But I guess I thought that
pax. would not know the difference and would want to stop even a "perceived" threat for
security reasons, or at least bitch about someone else getting away with a reg violation.


I suspect most regular travelers have accidentally left their phone on,
seen someone else leave their phone on, heard a stowed phone ring, etc
and noticed the plane didn't fall out of the sky.


Which is why those particular things may very well go unchallenged. But how often,
by comparison, does one see someone pointing a camera/camcorder out a window?
I rarely did. And God forbid one actually points the camera *inside* the cabin, and
thus, be caught spying on one's fellow pax. 8-O

Next they noticed that water and other harmless items are being
confiscated while electronics are given a pass at airport security.


Given a pass "after screening," I hope...

If electronics were even a theoretical threat like liquids are, they'd
be banned.


I think even the TSA knows that it's impossible to ban all electronics in this
"electronic age." At minimum, Fob keys for your car, cell phones/blackberries,
laptops, all must all be allowed, or the market for business travel would drop
to almost nothing... and, ultimately, they'd all be out of work. The best they can
do is screen them as best they can, and try and stay ahead of the ever improving
technology in IEDs.

Besides, many of these videos include pushback and engine starting, when
the FAs are *not* strapped in and are still checking the aisles.

That should give you an idea of how much the flight attendants care, no?


Sadly, yes.


Why sadly? They have real issues to worry about, non-safety related
rules aren't worth their effort at this point in the flight.


Say that the next time Al Qaeda gets an IED made like a camcorder or cell/blackberry
through and is able to detonate it.

____________________________________________
Regards,

Arnold
  #20  
Old October 22nd, 2011, 12:45 PM posted to rec.travel.air
William Black[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 332
Default CyberFlying???

On 22/10/11 12:33, mag3 wrote:

I have no issue with things that can fit in one's pockets. In fact, it's why I always
kept my windbreaker jacket with me and stuffed down and away from view. In an
emergency egress, they may tell me I can't take my carry ons, but they can't
stop me from taking my jacket.


Actually they can, but they won't because they'll see you're messing
about putting on a jacket and and so ignore you because you're suicidal.


--
William Black

Free men have open minds
If you want loyalty, buy a dog...
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.