For the same reason the above message cites as reasons to think the rules were always bunk, the "reported incidents" are also likely to be bunk. It is very unlikely that any one passenger's electronics are the only electronics left on, and therefore very unlikely that the guy who gets berated for leaving his iPod on is causing any problems.
So you think that all the reports dating back to the 60s when superhet transistor radios appered, are likely bunk?
Wouldn't that imply a worldwide, secret pilot conspiracy, especially with incidents where the pilot has been able to reproduce the interference by asking the passengers to turn the device back on?
It's certainly very unlikely that an iPod will cause any problems. That doesn't mean it's physically impossible, as many people seem to think. Which is why I recommend reading the FAA report, which goes into a lot of detail on exactly what considerations they've taken, the risk analysis and why they are changing the rules now.
Some people believe anything from a government agency is wrong and that there aren't smart, capable people doing their jobs on the other end. Of all the things with air travel to pitch a hissy fit over, this one has always comes across as the silliest to me. Things really are going down the tubes if you can't be bothered to not look at your piece of glass for a minutes.
> Things really are going down the tubes if you can't be bothered to not look at your piece of glass for a minutes.
Every time this comes up, somebody's got to get snooty about Kids These Days and Their Attention Spans and Facebooks and Pokeymans.
All I really want to do is read a book during takeoff and landing. Reading is still a thing mature, responsible people do, right? Thanks to ever-decreasing passenger and storage space, it can be a genuine pain to fit even a mid-size paperback into my carry-on luggage in such a way that it's easily accessible during flight, especially for big, tall folks like me. It's much easier all around if I can read a book on my phone, which I have to have with me anyway; or, for some people, a slim tablet or e-reader is an easier fit.
But no, I can't do that (yet). I have to either cram a book in there somewhere, or spend 20+ minutes with nothing to distract me from the heat and the cramps and the screaming babies but vapid seat-back magazines. I know it's not the end of the world, but it's one more frustration piled on top of an already deeply frustrating and dehumanizing experience. After paying hundreds of dollars for the privilege of getting treated like a criminal suspect and then packed into a can like a sardine, it's not unreasonable to keenly desire a little bit of comfort and distraction, is it?
I agree with you, and I hope that lighter devices like ebooks and phones will be exempted eventually. Personally I always opt for a window seat and spend all that time looking outside enjoying the view of other airplanes. So in short, I'd recommend becoming an aviation geek, that will do a lot to distract you from all those annoyances. :)
Usually people say "minutes" when they are talking about time intervals of several minutes. The period you cannot use electronics is from the time the cabin door closes to the moment the plane reaches some arbitrary height on take off and the reverse sequence on landing. This can easily be anywhere from half an hour to several hours e.g. if the flight is delayed it will just stand at the gate with the closed door waiting for clear. You cannot use any electronics during that time.
You are responding in the context of a rather simple, factual argument ("How bad can these devices be since common sense shows they're already on during takeoff anyhow?") with first a political attack, then an emotional attack. Was this really a helpful post?
