RE: Cell Phones

["Laning, Jim" <JLaning@jocoems.org>]

It also bears mentioning that the cellular phone system was designed and licensed as a "Terrestrial" service (as opposed to an "Aeronautical" one) under the FCC rules this would not authorize the use of cell phones when in the air. 

 

ElectroMagnetic Interference (EMI) is an extremely complex situation.  The bottom line is the FAA just wants to prevent your flight deck instruments from taking you where you don't belong.

 

Imagine an approach to minimums in fog at night and someone in back fires up their cell phone to call home and keep dinner warm, then at 200 feet your Glideslope suddenly says your way too high!  Now if your flying daytime VFR in severe clear it's not an issue. But it can (in theory) happen, that's why the rules were written the way they are.

 

Now there are aeronautical phone systems that are designed (and licensed) to be used when airborne.  They have been tested extensively and installed to exact specifications to prevent any interference with the flight instruments.  Some of the folks on this list probably have some experience with them and can speak to it themselves.

 

I would also agree with an earlier posting that discussed the definition of "emergency" as relating to an aircraft emergency rather than a patient one.

 

Jim

 

low-time cessna driver

amateur radio operator NØWUU

EMT-P

former flight medic (in another life)

Mr Mom (part-time)

chief scout camp fire builder

principal light bulb changer

etc etc etc...............

 

-----Original Message-----
From: christopher davis [mailto:ratback5@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 7:41 PM
To: flightmed@flightweb.com
Subject: Re: Cell Phones

Thats what i was thinking.  During my Search & Rescue training, we were taught they are "safe" to use in the air, but the cell companies were complaining to the FCC they didnt' know how to bill for multiple towers being used at once.  Don't they have better things to do, like make a cell phone bill that you can actually understand?

C.M.Davis, FP-C

Ncline7@aol.com wrote:

It has always been my understanding (after having it explained to me by a tech at Pac. Bell) that the problem was not locking up multiple towers, but with knowing how to bill for the calls. since the signal does open multiple sites, they all could not bill for the same call, and they could not determine who is the rightful vendor was. So, it was easier just to say "no cells."

---

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software