

In-flight WiFi is coming to the friendly skies








Comments     Threshold


RE: I love the wireless "risk" in the sky
By theoflow on 1/23/2008 2:21:14 PM , Rating: 2
The analogy the guy made was good, so let me try another for you.

The Food and Drug administration. Some things are approved and something aren't. The reason they need to go through the testing procedure at all is to make sure that there are no side effects in combination with other foods and/or drugs. When you see those pharmaceutical commercials the narrator talks really fast and usually says something about you should not take in combination with X,Y, or Z. By going through FDA approval and knowing adverse effects, the company is then legally isolated from legal action.

The same thing applies to airplanes but on a much larger scale. First off, electronic equipment is rarely ever tested except by UL labs and that is usually just for appliances. With the sheer amount of electronic devices in the entire market in a given year, that involves a infinite testing regiment that i don't can be accomplished in a given time period. As you said, the engineering and tolerances of modern aircraft are quite rigorous so therefore this testing is required.Start mix and matching plane types and how many models of just cell phones there are in the world and you get that idea. Instead of failing at testing everything, they just ban everything.

So why not just let everything slide because the equipment on planes is good enough. The simple and right answer is YOU NEVER KNOW (i.e. error on the side of caution). One person on the plane might be willing to risk their life to use an electronic device, but you are not the only person on the plane. Given the size of the new Airbus, your talking more than 500 people just so someone could use a electronic device.

By TomZ on 1/23/2008 2:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
Instead of failing at testing everything, they just ban everything.

Your analogy falls apart, because even consumer gear is subject to RFI/EMI testing and is regulated in terms of the amount and characteristics that can be legally emitted. Therefore, these levels are known and can be (and probably are already) incorporated into functional requirements for airplane electronics.

Sure, that won't stop someone's "homemade" device they carry on that exceeds the legal limits, but that's not really the specific concern here.

Although on that note, again, airline electronics would have to be sufficiently sheilded from even rogue gear for security purposes. It's not hard to imagine the case where a bad guy brings on board some kind of electronic device specifically designed to emit RFI to intentionally interfere with on-board electronics, for the purpose of taking down a plane. Therefore, RFI/EMI hardening is also a security requirement.

By PWNettle on 1/23/2008 5:11:21 PM , Rating: 2
"The Food and Drug administration"

Bad analogy IMO, because it seems like the FDA stopped being stringent with approvals, especially drug approvals, years ago. It's all about the benjamins now. I kind of expect to see all kinds of fallout from recent drugs showing up in a decade or two.

All those commercials about "using xx might cause kidney failure, impotence, internal bleeding, spontaneous combustion, birth defects, fatigue, anxiety, depression, euphoria, anal fissures, world peace, WW III - consult your doctor to pay even more before killing yourself with this drug."

How exactly does any kind of "safefy first" organization approve any of the multitudes of drugs you see with those kinds of disclaimers?


I think it's been adequately and scientifically proven that all these devices are no threat to modern aircraft.

Even so, I love the internet and use it all day (at work and at play) but is it really so hard to go without it for a few hours for a flight? Damn. I just read a book or take a nap. Disconnecting from the internet addiction for a little while here and there isn't the end of the world.

So who cares?


Related Articles
