Digital Photography On Aircraft Not Permitted on Take Off or Landing

In article ,
says...
Gene S. Berkowitz wrote:
In article , says...

I agree with this. I would have thought that there would be more danger if a
passenger inadvertently left a cell phone on than would be the case if a
couple of pics were taken with a digital camera, but I may be wrong? It
would seem logical to me if some sort of electronic "sweeping" of the cabin
was done before takeoff that looked for cases of cellphones being left on or
other harmul RF emissions from other equipment. Would this be difficult to
do? Would it be worthwhile doing? Is it done now?

I think it would not only be worthwhile, but also highly entertaining,
if such sweeps resulted in the owner of the detected equipment being
dragged off the aircraft by their ankles.

--Gene

Given that cell phones can be used until takeoff begins, and after
landing, now, that would be a bit inconvenient.
Grin.

Okay, then let's start the sweep as soon as the wheels leave the ground,
and shred the offending items right then:

http://www.willitblend.com/videos.as...e&video=iphone

--Gene

"Barry Lennox" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:40:20 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-13 17:42:25 -0800, "Podge" said:

I was on an Air New Zealand flight a while ago, and I started to take
a few pics (from my digital still camera) as the aircraft took off. An
air hostess politely told me that the use of electronic devices was
not permitted during take-offs or landings. I told her that I was
using a dedicated still digital camera and not a camcorder, but she
still asked me to turn it off.

I guess the real question is whether you want to trust your life to a
mode of transportation that is so fragile that a forgetful tourist
taking a picture is a possible threat to it. :-) And I might have asked
the flight attendant that very question. I think the airlines are
sending the wrong message here.

And the answer would have been; "Those are the rules, follow them, or go
to jail." Pretty clear choice there. Flight attendants aren't usually
technically qualified enough to know the difference between a DSLR and a
P&S camera, much less a model with, and without Wi-Fi, or other features
that transmit data via radio frequencies. While it is very doubtful ANY
digital camera would actually cause serious disruption of flight
systems, being safe, rather than sorry, is the emphasis. If you are
really dedicated to taking pictures out the windows during takeoff and
landing, take along a film camera, and enjoy.

So how do you KNOW that a the motor drive in a film camera has not
developed a noisy commutator and is arcing and splattering "from DC to
daylight" ?

As you rightly observe, tis better to be safe than sorry. Can't be too
careful when it comes to safety you know.

Here's another thread on the topic of photography on aircraft:

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question...5101435AAJk8VH

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:43:56 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote in :

It is certainly possible, but not really feasible. In particular, cell
phones only transmit periodically when not in use, and those intervals
are minutes long. Try setting your cell phone in front of your monitor
for a few minutes. You will see some interference with the image (on a
CRT monitor, at least), every few minutes, and just before the phone
rings for a call. I don't know if all cell phones do this, but my
Motorola GSM phone certainly does. I can't leave it on my night table
because the radio makes strange noises every few minutes all night.

Blame your carrier: GSM is normally configured for much less frequent
re-registration by mobile devices.

Blame your radio: Much too sensitive to cell phone radiation.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 23:20:02 +1300, Barry Lennox
wrote in
:

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:40:20 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote:

And the answer would have been; "Those are the rules, follow them, or go
to jail." Pretty clear choice there. Flight attendants aren't usually
technically qualified enough to know the difference between a DSLR and a
P&S camera, much less a model with, and without Wi-Fi, or other features
that transmit data via radio frequencies. While it is very doubtful ANY
digital camera would actually cause serious disruption of flight
systems, being safe, rather than sorry, is the emphasis. If you are
really dedicated to taking pictures out the windows during takeoff and
landing, take along a film camera, and enjoy.

So how do you KNOW that a the motor drive in a film camera has not
developed a noisy commutator and is arcing and splattering "from DC to
daylight" ?

As you rightly observe, tis better to be safe than sorry. Can't be too
careful when it comes to safety you know.

Amen. Commercial airlines are for *transportation* not entertainment.
If you want to *entertain* yourself taking snapshots, hire a plane.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
...
C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-13 17:42:25 -0800, "Podge" said:

I was on an Air New Zealand flight a while ago, and I started to take a
few pics (from my digital still camera) as the aircraft took off. An air
hostess politely told me that the use of electronic devices was not
permitted during take-offs or landings. I told her that I was using a
dedicated still digital camera and not a camcorder, but she still asked
me to turn it off.

I guess the real question is whether you want to trust your life to a
mode of transportation that is so fragile that a forgetful tourist taking
a picture is a possible threat to it. :-) And I might have asked the
flight attendant that very question. I think the airlines are sending the
wrong message here.

And the answer would have been; "Those are the rules, follow them, or go
to jail." Pretty clear choice there. Flight attendants aren't usually
technically qualified enough to know the difference between a DSLR and a
P&S camera, much less a model with, and without Wi-Fi, or other features
that transmit data via radio frequencies. While it is very doubtful ANY
digital camera would actually cause serious disruption of flight systems,
being safe, rather than sorry, is the emphasis. If you are really
dedicated to taking pictures out the windows during takeoff and landing,
take along a film camera, and enjoy.

There is some doubt as to whether, even film cameras, can be used during
take-offs or landings.

On its web site, Air New Zealand says that portable video recorders AND
CAMERAS may be used after take-off and before landing, when the seatbelt
sign is off. This statement would seem to include film cameras. So this
would prevent you from using your film camera during take-offs and landings.

http://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/trave...#restricteduse

Cameras are not included with "items for use at any time". In any event,
because there are so many different types of digital cameras, an air hostess
could be forgiven for assuming that a film camera was a digital camera and
request that it not be used during take-offs and landings. There mightn't be
time to prove to her that it was a film camera and not a digital camera. And
in accordance with the "flying missile" problem, a film camera presents the
same problem as a digital camera.

Some airlines do not refer to cameras specifically, for example, Quantas
uses the terms "all electronic devices" and "portable electronic equipment":

http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying...communications

So under the Quantas rules, perhaps the use of film cameras would be
permitted.

Podge

John Navas wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:43:56 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote in :

It is certainly possible, but not really feasible. In particular, cell
phones only transmit periodically when not in use, and those intervals
are minutes long. Try setting your cell phone in front of your monitor
for a few minutes. You will see some interference with the image (on a
CRT monitor, at least), every few minutes, and just before the phone
rings for a call. I don't know if all cell phones do this, but my
Motorola GSM phone certainly does. I can't leave it on my night table
because the radio makes strange noises every few minutes all night.

Blame your carrier: GSM is normally configured for much less frequent
re-registration by mobile devices.

Blame your radio: Much too sensitive to cell phone radiation.

IF amplifiers in radios are often very sensitive to signals that close
(1 foot). It will also cause disruption on CRT screens.
The phone seems to contact the tower about every 10 minutes or so.

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
...
C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-13 17:42:25 -0800, "Podge" said:

I was on an Air New Zealand flight a while ago, and I started to take a
few pics (from my digital still camera) as the aircraft took off. An air
hostess politely told me that the use of electronic devices was not
permitted during take-offs or landings. I told her that I was using a
dedicated still digital camera and not a camcorder, but she still asked
me to turn it off.

I guess the real question is whether you want to trust your life to a
mode of transportation that is so fragile that a forgetful tourist taking
a picture is a possible threat to it. :-) And I might have asked the
flight attendant that very question. I think the airlines are sending the
wrong message here.

And the answer would have been; "Those are the rules, follow them, or go
to jail." Pretty clear choice there. Flight attendants aren't usually
technically qualified enough to know the difference between a DSLR and a
P&S camera, much less a model with, and without Wi-Fi, or other features
that transmit data via radio frequencies. While it is very doubtful ANY
digital camera would actually cause serious disruption of flight systems,
being safe, rather than sorry, is the emphasis. If you are really
dedicated to taking pictures out the windows during takeoff and landing,
take along a film camera, and enjoy.

I think Ron, that an answer of "Those are the rules, follow them, or go to
jail" are perhaps overstating the position a little. My impression is that
airlines are pretty tolerant of people taking pictures during take-offs and
landings. I have more than once seen air hostesses walk straight past people
who are taking pictures when the seatbelt sign is on and not ask them to
stop. But if people started making cell phone calls at any time during a
flight, I'm sure they would be stopped straight away.

People on holiday love to take pics and I'm sure if the owners of boats,
tour buses, or a trains, for example, banned photography at certain times on
their trips, lots of amateur photographers would make make a fuss. But
boats, for example, can be reliant on navigation gear during a thick fog
etc., but nobody tells the passengers to stop using their digital cameras
(or cell phones, or GPS receivers). I doubt whether the navigation equipment
on boats, for example, is a great deal superior to that on aircraft, but it
simply seems safer to some people to be in a boat than on an aircraft. Yet
if interference from PEDs was as serious as some people lead us to believe,
then perhaps boats etc. might also get into trouble. It seems that even the
faintest possibility of a problem on an aircraft causes extreme anxiety
amongst some passengers, but the same passengers on a boat etc. wouldn't
feel the least anxious about the use of digital cameras at any time. If a
person on an aircraft next to me was taking pictures with a digital camera
while the seat belt sign was on, after reading all the posts in this thread,
I wouldn't feel the least anxious about this. However, I respect the
airline's position on this and would not suggest to anyone that they break
the airline's rules.

Podge

On 2008-01-20 00:40:20 -0800, Ron Hunter said:

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-13 17:42:25 -0800, "Podge" said:

I was on an Air New Zealand flight a while ago, and I started to take a
few pics (from my digital still camera) as the aircraft took off. An
air hostess politely told me that the use of electronic devices was not
permitted during take-offs or landings. I told her that I was using a
dedicated still digital camera and not a camcorder, but she still asked
me to turn it off.

I guess the real question is whether you want to trust your life to a
mode of transportation that is so fragile that a forgetful tourist
taking a picture is a possible threat to it. :-) And I might have asked
the flight attendant that very question. I think the airlines are
sending the wrong message here.

And the answer would have been; "Those are the rules, follow them, or
go to jail." Pretty clear choice there.

It is a smart-aleck answer, though. So I would ask again, "If I take a
picture, is the airplane going to crash? Why do they certify airplanes
that are so delicate?"


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

C J Campbell wrote:
On 2008-01-20 00:40:20 -0800, Ron Hunter said:
And the answer would have been; "Those are the rules,
follow them, or go to jail." Pretty clear choice
there.

It is a smart-aleck answer, though. So I would ask again, "If I take a
picture, is the airplane going to crash? Why do they certify airplanes
that are so delicate?"

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Those certified aircraft don't bother me a bit, but I'm
scared to death of arrogant wise ass pilots.

I wouldn't get into an airplane to taxi across the
parking apron with you, never mind letting you actually
fly one with my life in your hands.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 15:49:32 -0600, Ron Hunter
wrote in :

John Navas wrote:

Blame your carrier: GSM is normally configured for much less frequent
re-registration by mobile devices.

Blame your radio: Much too sensitive to cell phone radiation.

IF amplifiers in radios are often very sensitive to signals that close
(1 foot). It will also cause disruption on CRT screens.
The phone seems to contact the tower about every 10 minutes or so.

Neither my TV nor my radio is affected by my GSM cell phone.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
Panasonic DMC-FZ8 (and several others)