News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by omegant on Tuesday September 24, 2013 @02:41AM (#6436380)
As a commercial pilot I must say that cell phones and other electronics, have an influence in navigation and comunications. It has evolved over time though, the past generation airliners (like B737-200 and MD80) that didn't have GPS or laser inertial navigation, used a magnetic sensor(it detects the earth magnetic fields and gives the data to the navigation instruments) that was easily disturbed by the first generation of cellphones. It could change your heading indication up to 40 degrees. The worst cases where due to the pilot's mobile. Also cd players and the first portable nintendos used to have a mesurable effect on those planes. Modern airliners are better isolated and shielded, also modern electronics transmit with less watts and are better designed. It has become a smaller problem defenitely. For example the problem with comunications is not a big one, it can be a bit annoying (like when you hear your car radio and the cell phone starts receiving a call), but I haven't hear of any mayor comunication failure or trouble caused by that. The only problem remaining is that the most sensible fase of flight is a low visibility approach with the autopilot engaged. In this mode the airplane is using highly accurate radio signals from the ground station, and radio altimeter readings to guide itself till landing. The frecuencies are very different, but when you have 100 people trying to con ect their cellphones to call home and say that they are landing (while at 200 knots). The phones have to try very hard to connect to the ground antennas. This is not a problem if everything is working properly. But if a cable or a computer is in bad conditions(remember that avionics suffer from physical stress that is not usual to ground equipment: humity, vibration, shocks), that may cause bad signals that may triger a system failure (this is the best case as this way you may go around and try again safely), or just modify signals enough to degrade de autopilot behaviour but not trigger an alarm. Although rare, this has happened and it's been the reason the prohibition has been kept all this time. I suppose that the stadistical and technical study of this faults have led to understanding that this cases are more unusual than they used to be. Also it's a fact that even if you ask people to shut down their electronics, there is always a part of the passengers that simply don't know how to do it (older people), have theirs at the checked luggage, forgot it on with the laptop(the rest of us), or simply ignore the crew and hide the phone. So effectively enforcing the prohibition was impossible. I still recommend to set everything in flight mode at least for take off and landing, as we the pilots usually do (please don't tell anyone!), that way you'll also save battery.
Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by jrockway on Tuesday September 24, 2013 @03:12AM (#6436479)
> But if a cable or a computer is in bad conditions ... that may cause bad signals that may triger a system failure

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rusty_bolt_effect

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by JulianMorrison on Tuesday September 24, 2013 @06:31AM (#6437013)
Seems to me the answer is to put a cellphone "tower" in the plane so the phones all connect to that at low power and stay connected to one place. Meanwhile the plane itself can relay to ground via more sophisticated means designed for flight.
Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by Filligree on Tuesday September 24, 2013 @06:40AM (#6437040)
Or even not relay, depending. The point is to keep them at minimum power, not necessarily to allow phone calls.

I figure that if cellphones actually mattered, the FAA would have long since required such devices in airplanes.

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by wfunction on Tuesday September 24, 2013 @11:57AM (#6438679)
Uh, I refuse to believe for a single second that any sane engineer would design an airplane that could be brought down by a cell phone in "bad conditions".

It's like building a house that can't stand rain.

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by snom380 on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @03:02AM (#6443086)
Most of today's airplanes were designed in the 70s at a time when the only small electronic devices were wristwatches and calculators. They've added shielding afterwards, but an airplane needs antennas and has to receive RF signals, so there will always be a possibility of interference. I exactly the same way that there will always be the possibility if a security hole in a computer connected to the internet, unless you mathematically prove every piece of code.
Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by wfunction on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @03:53AM (#6443209)
> there will always be the possibility [...] unless you mathematically prove

When people say "X is possible", they mean "X has a non-negligible chance of happening in practice", and is therefore worth worrying about.

They do NOT mean "Prob(X) > 0". You're already on the wrong track if you're talking about mathematical proofs of "possibility" in engineering.

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by snom380 on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @09:12AM (#6444305)
Unfortunately aviation safety is concerned with those 0.001% probabilities, because many of them tend to gang together and cause fatal accidents. Just like the sterile cockpit environment rule. What is the chance of some random thing being missed because the pilots were talking about an upcoming football game during landing, and moreover what is the chance of that oversight causing a real accident?

It's really, really, really small, with millions of successful flights done without problems. Yet accidents like those have happened, and have been prevented after that rule was put in place.

I was using mathematical proofs as an example of why in IT security, often times since you can't be sure, you do the proactive thing and don't run services exposed to the internet. If you have a database with credit card numbers, you don't let the DB listen for connections on a public IP, not because you think there is a security hole in the DB, but because you can't be sure there isn't.

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by wfunction on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @02:02PM (#6446197)
Yet accidents like those have happened, and have been prevented after that rule was put in place.

Links please?

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by snom380 on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @02:54PM (#6446521)
Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by wfunction on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @11:21PM (#6448752)
Uh what? I thought we were talking about accidents caused by portable electronic devices.

The rule you point to was put in place because evidence strongly supported the fact that distracted pilots are a hazard.

No such evidence (that I know of) exists for portable electronic devices, and I don't believe for a single second that Boeing would make an airplane susceptible to harm by cell phones.

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by snom380 on Thursday September 26, 2013 @02:05AM (#6449169)
I mentioned specific example of how very low probability events still caused accidents, you asked for links and I provided them.

If you want links to examples of PED interference, I've posted them elsewhere on this thread. All anecdotal of course, but there are enough examples that to say there's no chance if interference would imply a secret conspiracy amongst pilots to file false reports.

And again, you are misunderstanding the concern. It's not whether a cell phone can stop the airplane from working and make it fall out if the sky. It's whether, at a critical time such as during landing and takeoff, it may cause interference that can increase the pilots workload and contribute to an accident.

Re:FAA to lift mobile shut-down rule by wfunction on Thursday September 26, 2013 @02:50AM (#6449262)
Wow, thanks. Narrative 1 on the 55th page [1] is quite intriguing.

http://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/rpsts/ped.pdf