Why the FAA May Finally Relax In-Flight Device Rules

Nick Bilton at the New York Times has been writing skeptically for years about the FAA's ban on even the most benign electronic devices during takeoff and landing on commercial passenger flights. He writes in the NYT's Bits column about the gradual transformation that may (real soon now) result in slightly more sensible rules; a committee established to review some of those in-flight rules has recommended the FAA ease up, at least on devices with no plausible negative effect on navigation. From the article: "The New York Times employed EMT Labs, an independent testing facility in Mountain View, Calif., to see if a Kindle actually gave off enough electromagnetic emissions to affect a plane. The findings: An Amazon Kindle emitted less than 30 microvolts per meter when in use. That is only 0.00003 of a volt. A Boeing 747 must withstand 200 volts per square meter. That is millions of Kindles packed into each square meter of the plane. Still, the F.A.A. said “No.” ... But then something started to change: society." Of course, the rules that committees recommend aren't always the ones that prevail on the ground or in the sky.

What about cowbells?

[For a Free Internet]

WHEN WILL I BE ALLOWED TO HAVE A CONSENSUAL, PRIVATE RELATIONSHIP WITH A COWBELL ON THE AIRLINE OF MY PERSONAL CHOICE, AMERICA?

This is a matter of human rights that concerns all living and mineral beings, like you. even if you think i am yelling, you are wrong, i am only demonstrating the injustice of america and its war on cowbells.

Re:What about cowbells?

[Anonymous Coward]

Personal choice my ass. Cowbells can't give consent you filthy deviant.

Re:What about cowbells?

[JustOK]

Plus, you could catch the clapper.

no set the pico-cell to be a non US one and the ro

[Joe_Dragon]

no set the pico-cell to be a non US one and the roaming fees will make people trun them off after they get the bill from 1 flight

Re:If devices left on could take a plane down...

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't the plane headed for Washington D.C. on September 11 crash prematurely after frantic mobile phone use?

Re:pocket knives

[bitt3n]

How foolish of me to have forgotten that epidemic of oafs bleeding out from self-inflicted pen-knife injuries in the dark decades before those seductive instruments of mayhem had yet ceased to imperil the skies.

Re:pocket knives

[msauve]

...but two or three cans of Coke combined together are a danger. Just ask Michael Bloomberg.

Re:Better for kids

[Anonymous Coward]

I look forward to toddlers being placed in pet carriers in the hold for flights if only for this.

Re:Like the reporter has a clue...

[crakbone]

If there is the possibility it could cause a problem with the flight it should be scanned before going on. Because trusting someone to turn it off on a flight where such a device could cause interruption to sensitive electronics on takeoff and landing is crazy. Considering a little while ago you were not trusted to carry finger nail clippers on. But here your trusted that you will not VOLUNTARILY mess with the the actual controls of the aircraft. But you could be setting up forced manicures of the planes occupants and that must be stopped.

Re:Silly

[PopeRatzo]

So should they ban me from having a book or talking to the passenger next to me, too?

Yes. And for god's sake, stop staring at the flight attendant's ass like a rabbi studying the Torah.

Re:Require stowing of potential projectiles

[0123456]

There's been at least one case of someone surviving a plane disintegrating at altitude because they were still strapped in the seat and it absorbed much of the impact when they crashed into the jungle. And, if the plane suffers rapid decompression and you're not wearing a seat belt, your head will probably smack into the overhead bins and break your neck.

Re:Seems simple enough

[qbast]

There is no need wear anything red (or whatever colour you hate), so the FAA should play it safe.
There is no need to allow electronic devices, books or any other forms of entertainment for duration of whole flight, so the FAA should play it safe.
There is no need to fly without my patented 'crash averting' rocks, so the FAA should play it safe.