All portable electronic devices...
- Thread starter B767
- Start date
lightspeed
Well-Known Member
Could have been a VFR MX test flight.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
That's not exactly what it says.
91.21(b)(5)
(5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used.
My boss is yapping on his phone as we roll down the runway all the time. He talks until the signal drops. I've determined that it doesn't interfere with anything in the aircraft.
Acrofox
All dragon~
Words mean things!
B767
Well-Known Member
I know what it says. I was too lazy to look it up and type it verbatim. A new question arises. How did said captain determine that the device would not cause interference? Must have tested it out. For some reason, I think SWA FOM or SOP probably says no electronic devices. Unless, of course, they are EFB approved. @ATN_Pilot would know more.
Even at that, Southwest is the operator. I doubt they allow electronic devices unless they deemed them not to cause interference. They change their FOM/SOP for a day?
Now that I've seen that video, can I start filming take offs and landings on Southwest?
Yes, I'm taking this to the max! I decided the local beer vendor was overstocked with ale so I had to relieve them of stock. There's football on. And my Patriots aren't on for another 2.5 hrs.
Even at that, Southwest is the operator. I doubt they allow electronic devices unless they deemed them not to cause interference. They change their FOM/SOP for a day?
Now that I've seen that video, can I start filming take offs and landings on Southwest?
Yes, I'm taking this to the max! I decided the local beer vendor was overstocked with ale so I had to relieve them of stock. There's football on. And my Patriots aren't on for another 2.5 hrs.
thevideographer
Well-Known Member
Probably the same way I determined that my phone and iPad wouldn't interfere with the systems of a 172. Common sense. I think you're reading too much into the letter of the law, the intent is that passengers shouldn't be using devices that could interfere with the aircraft without the captain knowing about it. How is filming out the window on takeoff going to cause a problem?
Autothrust Blue
"Those are your factual recollections, Captain?"
Does the Pope poo in the woods?
B767
Well-Known Member
Thank you. I'm glad somebody caught on to that.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Actually, I wouldn't. The hicks still have us as entirely separate operations, so I don't have a clue what's in their manuals. Yes, that's right. Over three years later, and we're still using separate operations.
Show me a picture of you in your leather coat and cowboy boots!
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Still rockin' the blazer and Bostonians. The brainwashing just won't take with me.
Oh, you'll be taxiing at 80 knots soon!
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
3rd one applies in this case I think
iron·ic
adjective \ˌī-ˈrä-nik also i-ˈrä-\
: using words that mean the opposite of what you really think especially in order to be funny
: strange or funny because something (such as a situation) is different from what you expected
: an individual from Florida referring to another individual from Texas as a "hick"
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Um, yeah, I'm not from Florida. I only lived there for a few years a while ago. I live in Georgia, but I was born up in yankee land and all of my family is from Ohio. Nice try, though. And you misspelled Tex-ass.
And you misspelled Tex-ass.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Please understand I'm not trying to get on a soapbox. I just empathize with the FAA on this point alright guys? So keep that in mind reading the following.
While I agree with the sentiment, I'd hope you guys can feel the pain of the FAA who has certain requirements and mandates which govern certification and operating PED's below the 10,000 mark conflict with those mandates. HIRF (High intensity radio freqs) causes issues, it's why we certify with that in mind, and the industry hasn't been able to keep up with technology.
I don't think a kindle is going to bring down an airplane, but cell phones have been shown in the past to cause known issues with VHF nav/comms and we haven't done enough with bluetooth (which signal was shown to interrupt transmissions on electrical signals between boxes) and even this near field stuff coming out. Cell phones, tablets, and gizmo's will continue to innovate and communicate in new and brilliant ways, ways which are not uniform in application or manufacturing. By the time the FAA could put out a SAE or DOE doc on how to test for those devices and industry could respond they'll be 10 iPhone/android iterations from when we wrote the docs and we'll be obsolete before testing. The safest way is sometimes the more illogical and tedious way, but it saves us from actually having to test the units, which would mean regulating and stifling the innovation and moneymaking potential.
Anyway, gizmos good. Just keep them off below 10k
Similar threads
