[ajmurmann]

This section makes it even more confusing to me, since I thought that the whole cell phone transmission restriction theater had been removed a few years ago. Was that only within the US and I've been violating EU regulations for years?

[layer8]

I don’t think this is about transmission. Rather, it is probably to reduce the risk of thermal runaway of lithium batteries, which can cause fire and explosion.

The regulation also states that such devices “should be carried as carry-on baggage”, that is, in preference to checked baggage, presumably so that the devices are less prone to damage, and cases of malfunction and fire will be more quickly detected.

[RC_ITR]

Sure. But to that end, are button batteries known to be susceptible to thermal runway?

[layer8]

See for example here: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/lithium-batteries-safe-to-fly...

[Hnrobert42]

That article, while interesting, does not address button batteries. Maybe I missed it. I found it interesting that you can ship any amount of lithium batteries as cargo.

[hulitu]

Button batteries are a different type. They don't overheat when shorted.

[samatman]

Anything which has energy overheats when shorted.

I upvoted you anyway, because by design, button cells have limited potential to cause damage when they short. Yes, they heat up, but they have very little energy to begin with, and a large amount of metal surface area which keeps thermal runaway in check.

[LorenPechtel]

All current *rechargeable* lithium chemistries are an issue, single-use is not. Air-Tags aren't going to start a fire.

[ugjka]

Air tags don't have lithium batteries

[cromka]

Did you bother to check? AirTags doesn't have any battery by itself, they use replaceable CR2032, which are most commonly lithium. Although alkaline alternatives exist.

[ugjka]

My bad :(

[core-utility]

Is the cell phone transmission theater even lifted in the US? I still get asked to turn on airplane mode regularly (though Wi-Fi is okay)

[GuB-42]

Actually, 2G does interfere with aircraft communication, I don't think it is the case for other bands.

You may already have heard the interference. Just before the phone rings, you may hear some a characteristic beeping sound on your headphones or speakers. And guess what, pilots hear it in their headsets too, aviation headsets are just regular wired headsets. I fly small planes and I hear it regularly. No big deal, it won't turn off the engine or anything like that but it is still a minor distraction, and it may affect communication.

I remember about 20 years ago, after the usual announcements, the pilot clearly said something along the lines of "someone has his cell phone turned on, please turn it off, I won't move before it is turned off".

So no, it is not just theater, maybe modern aircraft have a way of shielding pilot headsets from passenger phones, or maybe it is less of a problem with the phasing out of 2G, but it has a real effect I experienced first hand.

[forty]

I'm surprised that anyone who believe that any passenger could mess with airplane communications by not turning their phone off would accept to take that risk and board a plane at all :)

[dhsysusbsjsi]

If a phone can take down airline communications, there is something wrong with the aircraft. These should be properly shielded lines.

There are now millions of hours of airline ops with phones on. It doesn’t cause any problems.

Also hot tip: the pilots are using iPads the entire flight too. With Bluetooth and wifi often linked to other gadgets.

[GuB-42]

- I specifically mentioned 2G networks which AFAIK iPads do not even have, not WiFi or Bluetooth

- It can't "take down" aircraft communications, but it can be an annoyance to the pilots, which can be a problem in an emergency situation. It is a little thing, but aviation safety is a result of a lot of little things. Accidents rarely have a single cause. For example the worst accident in the history of aviation: the Tenerife disaster where two B747 ran into each others during takeoff is the result of a long and improbable chain of minor problems, some of them related to radio communication. Cell phone interference won't be the main cause of an accident but it may be a contributing factor.

- Do you really need to have your phone switched on? It won't work at cruise altitude anyways, and during take off and landing, you probably don't need another distraction.

So yes, having cell phones turned off make a lot of sense, it is a rule that has a small positive effect on security with almost no downside since you can't use electronic devices during take off and landing for other reasons (distraction) and you can't use your cell phone during cruise either because the network doesn't support it.

[luma]

So when has this actually happened? There is a roughly zero percent chance that on any given flight, instructions to disable your phones are followed 100%. So, I think it's reasonable to suggest that literally every commercial flight flown in the past 15-ish years has done so with some device onboard that isn't in airplane mode.

Given that - why aren't airplanes constantly falling out of the sky? If this is the situation on every single flight, why isn't what you are suggesting actually happening?

edit: a downvote isn't exactly an answer, and I think it's a fair question. If the assertion is that cell phones etc cause serious problems for aircraft operations, then why are we not seeing it actually happen? Or are we saying that everyone on the flight is, in fact, turning every single electronic device they own off, every time, every device, for every person?

[dahart]

> These should be properly shielded lines.

Hehe, why do you assume the lines are a problem, when the physical comms system ends in a big antenna? Of course modern airliners have wiring that is all “properly” shielded.

> It doesn’t cause any problems.

Isn’t that a funny response to a pilot’s first hand account that a problem exists?

[greyhair]

Exactly. Maybe needs to be cross posted to r/confidentlyincorrect

[_moof]

Just so there's no confusion on this, the cell phone rule is FCC, not FAA. It's not about interfering with the aircraft, it's about causing problems with cell networks.

[Firmwarrior]

Well, they used to come scream at you if you were reading a Kindle during takeoff, so that part has relaxed at least

So far as I know you're supposed to put your phone into airplane mode to turn the cellular radio off, but they don't seem to care if you use bluetooth any more

[squeaky-clean]

The reason for that one I've heard from pilot friends is just that they want you upright and alert during takeoff and landing. I've been told to stop reading a book during a landing once. But imagine most of the flight crew don't want to deal with the potential fights from telling someone to put away a non-cellular device.

[blowski]

I seem to remember from "Cockpit Confidential" that things could get thrown around in the air during a bumpy landing, causing a risk of head injury to passengers. This includes books.

[cassianoleal]

I'm usually playing games, reading or watching videos during takeoff and landing. Nobody has ever told me not to. Why would I need to be alert? Do they think I'm not going to notice if the plane suddenly starts falling off the sky?

[Semaphor]

> want you upright and alert during takeoff

I’m great at sleeping, so I sometimes fall asleep during taxi and before takeoff. That was never an issue.

[vladvasiliu]

I'm the opposite, basically never sleep on a plane.

But I've seen many people asleep during landing and turbulence, and can't remember a single instance of the attendants even attempting to wake them up. They would go open the windows and taking care not to bother them.

[Semaphor]

I don’t envy you, my wife is the same, so those long flights (Germany <--> South Africa) are pretty hard on her. And yeah, as long as you are visibly belted, they don’t bother you.

[grapescheesee]

They are supposed to ask everyone stow devices over 2 lbs.

[newguynewphone]

i fly exclusively delta, and i always get asked to turn airplane mode on and any services that transmit audio are explicitly banned while on board (Discord, teams, etc.)

[vineyardmike]

> services that transmit audio are explicitly banned

Because taking a call is annoying AF to the 50-100 other people in the shared giant tube.

I’ve been seated next to people who insist im not on a call, this is FaceTime and I’ve always wanted to yell at them for their disrespect.

[ranger_danger]

> Because taking a call is annoying AF to the 50-100 other people in the shared giant tube.

Then why did airplanes used to have built-in phones in every seat?

[franga2000]

This hasn't been the case for over 20 years on most planes and the onboard phones were so expensive that only business or 1st class passengers would even consider using then. As usual, their convenience was valued more than everyone else's. I'm sure nowadays if a 1st class passenger got on a call over the in-flight wifi, the staff wouldn't bother them either.

[ghaff]

With the ubiquity and generally reasonable pricing of in-flight WiFi, I'm actually a bit surprised that you don't see more people jabbering away. I've never bought WiFi myself and I suspect there are quality issues and I assume some ports may be blocked, but I haven't seen many people obviously on active calls at all.

[vineyardmike]

> “Used to”

They don’t anymore for many reasons. They also ask you to stop if you try to take one.

[borski]

Why don’t you?

[bmn__]

If you have to ask this question, it is a sure sign you are not sufficiently socially calibrated to interact with other people on an air-plane. I advise you to invest time into better understanding your fellow humans by learning about psychology.

Yelling would be an overreaction, likely leading to further escalation and diminishing the chance of achieving the goal of stopping the maladaptive behaviour. GP acted correctly to suppress the impulse, I guess in the end he did nothing, which is the next best course of action. Adults are supposed to treat the problem situation in a calm manner and implicitly point out the established social boundaries (this works better if your personality is more masculine than feminine): interrupt the talking person and get his attention, kneel down to the same eye level, state clearly what can be observed what he's doing (having a conversation, perhaps talking loudly), what the effect is (annoying the other passengers), and remind him that calls are not allowed by the relevant authority (flight crew). Firmly direct him to end the call right now. Throughout the conversation keep stern demeanour, keep eye contact and the same level of volume when you speak.

If he complies right away, then mission fucking accomplished, requite by showing approval (nodding, making a slightly more friendly face), or perhaps even something expressing gratitude if that's appropriate in your culture.

The argument "not on a call, this is FaceTime" in an attempt to shift away from the central point of the conversation. Do not let him pull you into his frame. Simply ignore this sentence, keep referring to the call as a call. If he's stubborn, or ignores you, or wants to have a quarrel, then it is okay to metaphorically lose the fight. Walk away and inform the flight crew instead, it's out of your hands now. In the end, it is a certainty that you will win, even if the talking person turns out to be highly neurotic or narcissistic and throws a tantrum.

Pointing out disrespect is not likely to work, the talking person has already shown he does not care. However, shaming is more likely to work, it is a powerful social tool and it is very much appropriate to use here. You could say that all the people around are affected (insert hand gesture here) and they do not approve of what the talking person is doing.

What should not be done is body contact other than touching the shoulder to get attention; trying to take the headphones or mobile device; talking down (literally and figuratively). Do not ask, beg or demand, instead use the appropriate word that comes closest do instructing or directing, use the imperative verb form in your language.

[Gene_Parmesan]

> Firmly direct him to end the call right now. Throughout the conversation keep stern demeanour, keep eye contact and the same level of volume when you speak.

I'm not quite sure the other person is the one whose social calibration is off. This would be incredibly patronizing behavior unless you're speaking to a literal child. Besides, "Why don't you?" was obviously a throwaway half-joke.

[c0balt]

I think that was the highest question to answer text ratio I've seen in a long time: 1 - 192

[knorker]

Supposedly not putting in airplane mode will also wreak havoc with cell towers when flying low enough to cause interference and hella-frequent base station handovers.

Though I've found the latest generation of planes to be pretty much faraday cages, with most planes I'd believe it.

[belter]

The main reason for what you call "theater" is possible interference with ILS. And saying mobile phones or other devices are not in the same frequencies, does not cover the scenarios of misbehaving/cheap or uncertified devices.

"Instrument landing: why do all electronic devices need to be shut off?" - https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/11555/instrumen...

"Why aren't cell phones allowed to be used in aircraft?" - https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/2021/why-arent-...

MythBusters dismissed it a few years but forgot to consider misbehaving/cheap or not certified devices. And I would not trust two hipsters to be the certification committee for commercial airliners... -

https://web.archive.org/web/20140715091521/http://www.discov...

[smoldesu]

The more predominant issue is keeping anything with a lithium-ion battery in checked luggage. They'll crack down on anything from laptops to hearing aids.

[rx_tx]

CR2032 batteries that are in airtags are NOT lithium-ion, they're non-rechargeable and are usually Lithium/Manganese Dioxide [1] (lithium metal). I believe they're fine to have in checked luggage if contained inside some equipment (like the airtag). [2] Look for PI 970 If transported by themselves, they're cargo aircraft only.

Source: [1] https://data.energizer.com/pdfs/cr2032.pdf [2] https://www.iata.org/contentassets/05e6d8742b0047259bf3a700b...

[layer8]

The wording “containing lithium metal” from the ICAO regulation still applies.

[luma]

That same org also explicitly calls out button cells are not being covered. They really aren't the same thing as a rechargeable lithium ion cell.

[FabHK]

They're fine to have in checked luggage (under some restrictions). But the device containing them must be completely switched off, according to the rules. That is at issue here.

[Zak]

Both lithium-ion and lithium metal batteries that are installed in devices are allowed in checked baggage in the US and most other places. The devices must be powered off. What that means is a bit ambiguous as most modern laptops, tablets, and phones have some components powered any time a battery is installed.

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/lithium-batteries-baggage

[layer8]

The regulation specifically states that "the devices must be completely switched off (not in sleep or hibernation mode)", and mobile devices normally all have a way to completely shut them down, with no components remaining active. The only exception I'm aware of are wireless earbuds (e.g. AirPods). Presumably you're not allowed to have those in checked baggage.

[Hnrobert42]

I would wager most people don’t realize that to completely turn off their iPhone they must adjust their settings to not use Find My even when powered off.

[tinus_hn]

And to tell it somehow not to keep the clock running. Which of course is not possible.

[atoav]

So electrical engineers could just use a MCU let it power itself of during flight, use passive components (discharging capacitors) to trigger a wakeup after a set time and you are good to go?

[someweirdperson]

> use passive components (discharging capacitors)

mechanical egg timer?

[llampx]

Definitely no problem with a ticking noise coming from your luggage.

[atoav]

Candle clock