NationStates Jolt Archive

Congress: No annoying airplane cell phone calls

By JOAN LOWY, Associated Press Writer Thu Jul 31, 6:28 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Cell phone calls on airplanes in flight are not only unsafe, they're obnoxious and they should be permanently banned, according to some members of Congress.

House members, most of whom board airplanes almost every week, traded horror stories Thursday about their worst experiences with annoying fellow passengers who talk loudly on cell phones before takeoff and after landing. One lawmaker said his wife sat next to a woman who loudly discussed her sex life on the phone.

Another House member topped that with the passenger sitting him behind on one flight who got a "dear John" phone call from either his wife or sweetheart just before takeoff. The begging and pleading was just terrible to listen to, he said. Finally, with the plane ready to take off, a flight attendant had to threaten to have U.S. Marshals drag the man off the plane before he finally put his phone away.

A third House member raised the specter of national security, saying she'd witnessed one man use his cell phone camera to take pictures of sensitive parts of the airplane.

With that, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved by voice vote a bill that would make the current Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Communication Commission ban on cell phone use during flight permanent.

The committee's action comes as the European Union is moving to allow airline passengers to talk on their cell phones during flight. Some U.S. airlines are experimenting with in-flight Internet access. And some lawmakers worry that domestic airlines might try to get the cell phone ban lifted so they can charge passengers extra to sit in no-phone sections.

"I do believe this is important that we don't make what is already a crowded and difficult environment for the traveling public and flight attendants" worse by allowing cell phone use in-flight, said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., sponsor of the Halting Airplane Noise to Give Us Peace (HANG UP) Act.

But Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., said there are a lot of annoying things on airplanes, including children with dirty diapers and noisy MP3 players, but that doesn't mean they should be banned.

"You are trying to legislate courtesy, folks, and that just doesn't work," Mica said.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20080731/ap_tr_ge/travel_brief_airplanes_cell_phones)

Okay, the impression I get from this article is that a bunch of congresspersons are sick of the noise from cell-phone users when they travel by air, so they're gonna introduce legislation to ban it.

Wow.. Talk about emotional snap judgments...

OMFG annoying things like this are a part of life, these ppl need to get over it.

I thought it was already banned? Every flight i've been on they said no one allowed to use phones on the plane unless it has landed.

I think individual airlines make their own rules regarding cell phones, but here they're talking about an outright ban.

Cell phone calls on airplanes in flight are not only unsafe,
False

they're obnoxious
Definitely.


A third House member raised the specter of national security, saying she'd witnessed one man use his cell phone camera to take pictures of sensitive parts of the airplane.
Taking all bets that this woman couldn't identify what the sensitive parts of a commercial aircraft are.

one man used his cell phone camera to take pictures of sensitive parts of the airplane.

What exactly are the "sensitive parts of the airplane"? Are the seat cushions ticklish? If you rub up against the coffee maker, does it have an orgasm?

Terrorism? C'mon. Anybody with the Discovery Channel and a DVR can get pictures of any part of any plane. If you want to ban cell use because it's annoying, fine. Don't resort to bogus arguments.

Damn.. for once, I have to say, I agree with the Republicans on this one. There's nothing wrong with using cell-phones on a plane.

Why is this necessary when most carriers already ban usage during flight?

Good question..

Why is this necessary when most carriers already ban usage during flight?

Because they are thinking of introducing it because people are getting wise to the "cell phones are dangerous to plane operations" load of crap.. And they may be talking about on planes at any time.

Because they are thinking of introducing it because people are getting wise to the "cell phones are dangerous to plane operations" load of crap.. And they may be talking about on planes at any time.

I'm having trouble meshing these two statements.

Cell phone calls on airplanes in flight are not only unsafe, they're obnoxious and they should be permanently banned, according to some members of Congress.

House members, most of whom board airplanes almost every week, traded horror stories Thursday about their worst experiences with annoying fellow passengers who talk loudly on cell phones before takeoff and after landing. One lawmaker said his wife sat next to a woman who loudly discussed her sex life on the phone.

To me, on the ground and in flight are two different things. I also agree with the last quote: they're trying to legislate courtesy.

So if they get wi-fi on planes and I bring along my laptop and skype phone, I can use it and discuss my sex life loudly throughout the flight because it's not a cell phone?

False


Definitely.


Taking all bets that this woman couldn't identify what the sensitive parts of a commercial aircraft are.

1) You have overlooked the fact that the microwave emissions from cell phones are amplified within the hulls of aircraft and vehicles thus making them more harmful than usual.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20080731/ap_tr_ge/travel_brief_airplanes_cell_phones)

Okay, the impression I get from this article is that a bunch of congresspersons are sick of the noise from cell-phone users when they travel by air, so they're gonna introduce legislation to ban it.

Wow.. Talk about emotional snap judgments...

It's a trick. Do you know how much those airphones and special internet connections cost? Do you think the companies providing it want you to be able to use your own cellphones and wireless broadband? Hell no. COngress isn't trying to ban it out of courtesy; it's a pretext to protect the bottom line of their corporate masters.

And they would have got away with it if it hadn't been for this pesky clown. :)

1) You have overlooked the fact that the microwave emissions from cell phones are amplified within the hulls of aircraft and vehicles thus making them more harmful than usual.
To who or what?

Please, I use cell phone all the time when I fly. There's nothing wrong with using them on an airliner.

There's two possible reason for them wanting to outright ban cell phones on airliners. 1. To make us pay those outrageously overpriced in-flight phone. 2. To cut down on the annoyance factor.

You know what's dangerous on planes.

Those roasted peanuts they give you. Some people are fatally allergic.

So if they get wi-fi on planes and I bring along my laptop and skype phone, I can use it and discuss my sex life loudly throughout the flight because it's not a cell phone?
You can, but only because you'll be in first class -- obviously, they wouldn't provide wi-fi service anywhere else even if it suddenly became cheaper or easier or whatever. They're airlines, after all.

To who or what?
Virtually all microwave radiation causes some kind of harm to the body (hell, even spending too much time in direct sunlight can give you headaches and make you feel light-headed or sluggish). Cell phones apparently emit enough radiation, if you use them consistently for many years, to make the growth of tumors more likely.

Of course, someone else's cell phone for about ten minutes in the same room will have a negligible effect on your chances of developing cancer of the brain, but it's the principle of the thing. >:[

To who or what?

The microwaves can cause tissue damage.

http://www.gov.mb.ca/labour/safety/pdf/bulletins/bltn182.pdf

The eyes and testicles are particularly vulnerable.

This is pretty silly. I've never understood why a conversation magically becomes more annoying simply because you can only hear half of it. Or are they planning to ban passengers from talking to their friends across the aisle, too?

This is pretty silly. I've never understood why a conversation magically becomes more annoying simply because you can only hear half of it. Or are they planning to ban passengers from talking to their friends across the aisle, too?

At least talking face to face doesn't emit radiation.

This is just another excuse to hide the truth about 9/11.

At least talking face to face doesn't emit radiation.

Everything emits radiation. Besides, some people's breath could qualify as a chemical weapon. *nod*

I'm hoping they make a typo that bans cell phone use everywhere. :)

I'm pretty sure the FAA already bans cell phones. However, they are probably going to allow them in the future because of studies that prove they cause no disturbance to the plane's instruments.

Also why they're going to start allowing wifi internet...

This is pretty silly. I've never understood why a conversation magically becomes more annoying simply because you can only hear half of it. Or are they planning to ban passengers from talking to their friends across the aisle, too?

One thing I've noticed about cellphone users is that when they're on it, they have a tendency to get quite loud when they speak, especially if the reception is poor. It eventually gets to the point where these people are half shouting into their phones. Talking to someone across the aisle is usually a lot quieter than that.

One thing I've noticed about cellphone users is that when they're on it, they have a tendency to get quite loud when they speak, especially if the reception is poor. It eventually gets to the point where these people are half shouting into their phones. Talking to someone across the aisle is usually a lot quieter than that.

Eh, I've heard some very loud in-person conversations on planes, especially given the ready availability of booze. I see nothing wrong with telling people being too loud, whether on the phone or not, to pipe down.

Eh, I've heard some very loud in-person conversations on planes, especially given the ready availability of booze. I see nothing wrong with telling people being too loud, whether on the phone or not, to pipe down.

And booze can be restricted from being dispensed, or at least taken away. And if they protest, they can be hauled off by air marshals. Unless you propose the same for annoying cellphone users, there's not much that can be done about it.

Everything emits radiation. Besides, some people's breath could qualify as a chemical weapon. *nod*

But cell phones emit it in amounts that can cause tissue damage, especially when amplified.

lol, I know my breath can qualify as a chemical weapon. It's my self defense against those ebil harmanz. :p

And booze can be restricted from being dispensed, or at least taken away. And if they protest, they can be hauled off by air marshals. Unless you propose the same for annoying cellphone users, there's not much that can be done about it.

I see no reason flight attendants couldn't enforce some degree of volume control, and likewise no reason they couldn't treat passengers who refuse to obey those rules the same way they treat passengers who refuse to obey any other rules.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20080731/ap_tr_ge/travel_brief_airplanes_cell_phones)

Okay, the impression I get from this article is that a bunch of congresspersons are sick of the noise from cell-phone users when they travel by air, so they're gonna introduce legislation to ban it.

Wow.. Talk about emotional snap judgments...
Oh, please. This is ridiculous. There's nothing wrong with using cell phones on a plane once it's flying.

I thought it was already banned? Every flight i've been on they said no one allowed to use phones on the plane unless it has landed.

every flight i've ever been on has been the same. they always tell you to turn it off. doesn't bother me

But cell phones emit it in amounts that can cause tissue damage, especially when amplified.
Pray tell me your joking?

During flight by far a greater risks are increased exposure to natural radiation, jet lag, blood clotting from immobility & lower pressure and even accidents.

Given the exposure to various forms of radiation during flight (http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q444.html) I think that cell phones are a pretty minor threat. Its kind of like living in Chernobyl and worrying that smoking ten a day will give you cancer.

I haven't heard of a single aircraft being in danger because someones Nokia is sending out miniscule amounts of 'radiation'
We can't use phones in petrol stations because 'the sparks may ignite the fuel' - bollocks. Again, no stories of exploding petrol stations
I agree that it has been brought in so they can charge a fortune for their own calls

Oh, please. This is ridiculous. There's nothing wrong with using cell phones on a plane once it's flying.

Other than the fact that it's rude and anti-social to yell down a phone when your cramped up with dozens of people all around you who can't get any peace. The problem with cell phones is not the radiation, it's the fact that 99% of people who use them have no consideration for others.

Given the exposure to various forms of radiation during flight (http://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q444.html) I think that cell phones are a pretty minor threat. Its kind of like living in Chernobyl and worrying that smoking ten a day will give you cancer.
Well, except that smoking 10 a day is probably more dangerous than living in Chernobyl today... ;)

Other than the fact that it's rude and anti-social to yell down a phone when your cramped up with dozens of people all around you who can't get any peace. The problem with cell phones is not the radiation, it's the fact that 99% of people who use them have no consideration for others.

True, but courtesy should not be the purview of the law.

Other than the fact that it's rude and anti-social to yell down a phone when your cramped up with dozens of people all around you who can't get any peace. The problem with cell phones is not the radiation, it's the fact that 99% of people who use them have no consideration for others.

It's not radiation. It's rudeiation. :p

True, but courtesy should not be the purview of the law.

But when does an anti-social act become a criminal one? Streaking is illegal, yet ultimately it's not a dangerous/harmful act, merely one of violating the etiquette to be clothed in front of others. Being blind drunk and yelling in public is again not dangerous/harmful but offesnvie to social custom, yet will usually result in some level of police attention.

Okay, I think everybody's starting to go a little south of sanity.

1) You have overlooked the fact that the microwave emissions from cell phones are amplified within the hulls of aircraft and vehicles thus making them more harmful than usual. There's no such a thing happening. Sorry, CBB to explain in-depth, but it's a fact.



Now about the law, this is RIDICULOUS and another bullshit totalitarian regulation. If you don't want to hear people talking on cell phones, FLY AN AIRLINE THAT BANS CELL PHONES.
That's it.

Should this regulation pass, I'll be completely assured it's the time US government needs to be taken down, as it started open abuse of powers to solve the issues of their personal preferences.

Better question: why the Hell is congress discussing cell phone usage in the middle of an energy crisis?

But when does an anti-social act become a criminal one? Streaking is illegal, yet ultimately it's not a dangerous/harmful act, merely one of violating the etiquette to be clothed in front of others. Being blind drunk and yelling in public is again not dangerous/harmful but offesnvie to social custom, yet will usually result in some level of police attention.

Well, I can't argue with you on streaking, but I most certainly will on the blind drunk bit. A drunk like that is acting rather aggressive, and with the drug in his/her system, s/he will be much more inclined to attack others despite very little to no provocation.

This is pretty silly. I've never understood why a conversation magically becomes more annoying simply because you can only hear half of it. Or are they planning to ban passengers from talking to their friends across the aisle, too?

Funnily enough, there was actually a study a few years ago that measured subjects' annoyance levels when overhearing a cell phone conversation vs. a face-to-face conversation, and the cell phone conversation was significantly more annoying. The study used actors to act out the same conversations both ways, so there was minimal variation between trials. So there is some basis for the belief that cell phones are more annoying than just talking. The authors had a couple of hypotheses for why this might be but I never heard about any follow-up.

Unfortunately I can't find the study, but I swear I'm not making this up -- I remember it got covered briefly in Discover but I don't remember the actual journal it was published in.

There's no such a thing happening. Sorry, CBB to explain in-depth, but it's a fact.



Now about the law, this is RIDICULOUS and another bullshit totalitarian regulation. If you don't want to hear people talking on cell phones, FLY AN AIRLINE THAT BANS CELL PHONES.
That's it.

Should this regulation pass, I'll be completely assured it's the time US government needs to be taken down, as it started open abuse of powers to solve the issues of their personal preferences.

In the US the FCC already bans the use of cell phones in flight, so going with another carrier is pointless....
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/cellonplanes.html
http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=6275

...Unless the other carrier is Greyhound or Amtrak.

In the US the FCC already bans the use of cell phones in flight, so going with another carrier is pointless....
Unnecessary, more precisely. The gov't is trying to ban again what it has already banned twice.

Funnily enough, there was actually a study a few years ago that measured subjects' annoyance levels when overhearing a cell phone conversation vs. a face-to-face conversation, and the cell phone conversation was significantly more annoying. The study used actors to act out the same conversations both ways, so there was minimal variation between trials. So there is some basis for the belief that cell phones are more annoying than just talking. The authors had a couple of hypotheses for why this might be but I never heard about any follow-up.

Unfortunately I can't find the study, but I swear I'm not making this up -- I remember it got covered briefly in Discover but I don't remember the actual journal it was published in.

Oh, I'm well aware that many people find hearing only half a conversation more annoying. I just don't understand why.

I do wonder, sometimes, if people actually do subconsciously object to conversations upon which it's harder to eavesdrop, given how many people have also expressed annoyance about people speaking in foreign languages near them.

Unnecessary, more precisely. The gov't is trying to ban again what it has already banned twice.

Twice?

FAA and FCC.

FAA and FCC.

FAA never banned them. FAA doesn't allow personal electronic devices below 10k with waivers available. It's not the same. The FAA says you can't use your gameboy, ipod, computer, pda, cell phone, ect below 10k. While they might not like the idea, they never banned them for the rest of the flight.

1) You have overlooked the fact that the microwave emissions from cell phones are amplified within the hulls of aircraft and vehicles thus making them more harmful than usual.
This would be a neat trick. I spend hours every day trying to figure out how to keep microwave energy from being attenuated by every little thing. A scratch in a waveguide or a little water on the feed window will just kill a 20+ GHz signal. Now you tell me that all I need to do is run the signal through an airplane fuselage and I can get more out than I put in. Wow! Let me say that again. Wow! And again, but louder WOW!

Seriously, the losses in a fuselage are far more interesting because they do represent the effective EMI that would hinder aircraft nav and com.

This report, http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030107608_2003131741.pdf
says that there is no observed interference, given properly operating equipment, but that there are negative safety margins, should the handsets be misadjusted or all operating at the FCC limits for spurs.

Oh, I'm well aware that many people find hearing only half a conversation more annoying. I just don't understand why.

I do wonder, sometimes, if people actually do subconsciously object to conversations upon which it's harder to eavesdrop, given how many people have also expressed annoyance about people speaking in foreign languages near them.

That's as good a hypothesis as any. I also wonder if the pauses in a half-conversation work as a subconscious signal to the eavesdropper -- even if you're trying not to pay attention, your brain at some level is saying "pause detected, response required," and the effort of constantly having to push down the impulse to respond is what makes the half-conversation intrusive and therefore annoying. If it's two or more people jabbering at each other in a constant stream then the loop is complete and your brain can block it out more easily.

Or that could just be my experience because I'm so ADD. I've been rude enough in the past to answer questions in conversations I'm not involved in, just so the conversers will shut up.

Well, I can't argue with you on streaking, but I most certainly will on the blind drunk bit. A drunk like that is acting rather aggressive, and with the drug in his/her system, s/he will be much more inclined to attack others despite very little to no provocation.

OK, second one not the best example, but the first example illustrates my point well. The police do already intervene in matters of "courtesy", general non-violent "yobbish" behaviour would be another example.

Oh, I'm well aware that many people find hearing only half a conversation more annoying. I just don't understand why.

I do wonder, sometimes, if people actually do subconsciously object to conversations upon which it's harder to eavesdrop, given how many people have also expressed annoyance about people speaking in foreign languages near them.

I always thought it was because in both those instances (person on mobile and people speaking in foreign language) the person doing the sneaky listening is shut out of the conversation. When two people are sitting chatting across the aisle the third person can, if they wish, join in the conversation but with people talking, for example, Polish or on a mobile they can't, because they can't understand what is being said and because they have no means of directly conversing with the person on the other side of the phone. This means it is more irritating for themvas there is no way for the person, and humans are apparently innately social animals, to become involved in the other people's conversation and that gets their evolutionary goat?

That was always my take on it anyway.