R Digicams Considered Electronic Devices On Airplanes ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Crash, Sep 9, 2003.

  1. Crash

    Crash Guest

    On a recent American Airlines flight from Vegas to Los Angeles, I whipped
    out my digital camera to take pictures. I snapped away during taxiing,
    take-off, the whole flight, landing, taxiing again. Before takeoff from
    Vegas I heard the standard announcement about turning off electronic
    devices. Laptops and cell phones were mentioned specifically. I wondered
    for a second if a digital camera could be an offending electronic device. No
    one asked me to put it away at any time. I was taking pictures right out in
    the open, not being secretive about it. Also, there was an off duty flight
    attendant sitting a few seats away who never said anything. Anyone know
    what the official policy is on digital cameras in airplanes? Perhaps there
    isn't a policy yet? Perhaps it differs from one airline to another?

    Thanks.
    Crash, Sep 9, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Crash

    PTRAVEL Guest

    "Crash" <> wrote in message
    news:fX87b.398991$uu5.73331@sccrnsc04...
    > On a recent American Airlines flight from Vegas to Los Angeles, I whipped
    > out my digital camera to take pictures. I snapped away during taxiing,
    > take-off, the whole flight, landing, taxiing again. Before takeoff from
    > Vegas I heard the standard announcement about turning off electronic
    > devices. Laptops and cell phones were mentioned specifically. I wondered
    > for a second if a digital camera could be an offending electronic device.


    Of course it would. A digital camera is no more nor less than a specialized
    computer. Computer use is precluded by FAA regulation below 10,000 feet.

    >No
    > one asked me to put it away at any time. I was taking pictures right out

    in
    > the open, not being secretive about it. Also, there was an off duty

    flight
    > attendant sitting a few seats away who never said anything.


    Off-duty FAs are just that -- off-duty. You evidently weren't seen by the
    on-duty FAs.

    > Anyone know
    > what the official policy is on digital cameras in airplanes? Perhaps

    there
    > isn't a policy yet? Perhaps it differs from one airline to another?




    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    >
    PTRAVEL, Sep 9, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Crash

    Dutch Guest

    >On a recent American Airlines flight from Vegas to Los Angeles, I whipped
    >out my digital camera to take pictures. I snapped away during taxiing,
    >take-off, the whole flight, landing, taxiing again. Before takeoff from
    >Vegas I heard the standard announcement about turning off electronic
    >devices. Laptops and cell phones were mentioned specifically. I wondered
    >for a second if a digital camera could be an offending electronic device. No
    >one asked me to put it away at any time. I was taking pictures right out in
    >the open, not being secretive about it. Also, there was an off duty flight
    >attendant sitting a few seats away who never said anything. Anyone know
    >what the official policy is on digital cameras in airplanes? Perhaps there
    >isn't a policy yet? Perhaps it differs from one airline to another?
    >
    >Thanks.


    Digital cameras are electronics (there's a pretty impressive little
    computer in there).

    The basic question you should be asking yourself is this. Do you want
    to add, in even the slightest way, to the odds of not arriving safely
    at your destination?

    In other words if you aren't sure then you should probably shut it
    off.


    It's Just a dream...now go back to sleep!
    Dutch, Sep 9, 2003
    #3
  4. Dutch <zespectre> wrote:
    >>attendant sitting a few seats away who never said anything. Anyone know
    >>what the official policy is on digital cameras in airplanes? Perhaps there
    >>isn't a policy yet? Perhaps it differs from one airline to another?

    >
    >Digital cameras are electronics (there's a pretty impressive little
    >computer in there).
    >
    >The basic question you should be asking yourself is this. Do you want
    >to add, in even the slightest way, to the odds of not arriving safely
    >at your destination?
    >
    >In other words if you aren't sure then you should probably shut it
    >off.


    Don't forget to turn off your digital wristwatch too!

    Sheesh. There's a pretty big difference between a notebook and a digital
    camera in terms of wattage.

    (A truer answer would probably be to follow whatever the rules are for
    walkmans. If memory serves, tuners were a problem, but I thought that
    cd and tape players were fine).
    --
    Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
    Jason O'Rourke, Sep 9, 2003
    #4
  5. On my last flight to LA via Air Canada, I simply asked the flight
    attendant whether I could take pictures with my digicam, and his answer
    was "it's fine".

    Eric Gisin wrote:
    > "Jason O'Rourke" <> wrote in message
    > news:bjjct0$1fbp$...
    > | >Digital cameras are electronics (there's a pretty impressive little
    > | >computer in there).
    > |
    > | Don't forget to turn off your digital wristwatch too!
    > |
    > | Sheesh. There's a pretty big difference between a notebook and a digital
    > | camera in terms of wattage.
    >
    > I'm sure most cameras contain a 32-bit RISC processor as powerful as a 5 year
    > old PC.
    >
    >
    Gabriel Lau Kin Jock, Sep 9, 2003
    #5
  6. Crash

    Paul Cordes Guest

    "Crash" <> wrote in message
    news:fX87b.398991$uu5.73331@sccrnsc04...
    > On a recent American Airlines flight from Vegas to Los Angeles, I whipped
    > out my digital camera to take pictures. I snapped away during taxiing,
    > take-off, the whole flight, landing, taxiing again. Before takeoff from
    > Vegas I heard the standard announcement about turning off electronic
    > devices. Laptops and cell phones were mentioned specifically. I wondered
    > for a second if a digital camera could be an offending electronic device.

    No
    > one asked me to put it away at any time. I was taking pictures right out

    in
    > the open, not being secretive about it. Also, there was an off duty

    flight
    > attendant sitting a few seats away who never said anything. Anyone know
    > what the official policy is on digital cameras in airplanes? Perhaps

    there
    > isn't a policy yet? Perhaps it differs from one airline to another?
    >
    > Thanks.


    My understanding is that this is the airlines equivilent of an urban legend.
    I.e. the airlines believe that consumer electronics will interfere with the
    flight instruments. But there is no evidence.
    The airlines make these rules. Every airline is different. There is no
    evidence that anything you carry and use will cause a problem.
    The FAA has no rule.
    The FCC has no rule.
    Never the less, turn it off, as the flight crew has no sense of humor about
    this and will have you arrested if you make yourself a problem.
    Paul Cordes, Sep 9, 2003
    #6
  7. Crash

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    On 9-Sep-2003, "Paul Cordes" <late*> wrote:

    > My understanding is that this is the airlines equivilent of an urban
    > legend.
    > I.e. the airlines believe that consumer electronics will interfere with
    > the
    > flight instruments. But there is no evidence.
    > The airlines make these rules. Every airline is different. There is no
    > evidence that anything you carry and use will cause a problem.
    > The FAA has no rule.
    > The FCC has no rule.
    > Never the less, turn it off, as the flight crew has no sense of humor
    > about
    > this and will have you arrested if you make yourself a problem.


    You are wrong it is an FAA rule.

    http://www.orientaviation.com/pages/back_issues/00_11/IF_V8N2_PEDSSafety.html

    --
    Tom Thackrey
    www.creative-light.com
    Tom Thackrey, Sep 9, 2003
    #7
  8. Crash

    Paul Cordes Guest

    "Tom Thackrey" <> wrote in message
    news:sum7b.633$...
    >
    > On 9-Sep-2003, "Paul Cordes" <late*> wrote:
    >
    > > My understanding is that this is the airlines equivilent of an urban
    > > legend.
    > > I.e. the airlines believe that consumer electronics will interfere with
    > > the
    > > flight instruments. But there is no evidence.
    > > The airlines make these rules. Every airline is different. There is no
    > > evidence that anything you carry and use will cause a problem.
    > > The FAA has no rule.
    > > The FCC has no rule.
    > > Never the less, turn it off, as the flight crew has no sense of humor
    > > about
    > > this and will have you arrested if you make yourself a problem.

    >
    > You are wrong it is an FAA rule.
    >
    >

    http://www.orientaviation.com/pages/back_issues/00_11/IF_V8N2_PEDSSafety.html
    >
    > --
    > Tom Thackrey
    > www.creative-light.com


    Did you even read the article? It only says that this one FAA employee
    wants regulation, not that there is any regulation.
    I stand by my original contention. But am willing to be proven wrong if you
    can cite the FAA reg itself.
    Paul Cordes, Sep 9, 2003
    #8
  9. Crash

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    On 9-Sep-2003, "Paul Cordes" <late*> wrote:

    > "Tom Thackrey" <> wrote in message
    > news:sum7b.633$...
    > >
    > > On 9-Sep-2003, "Paul Cordes" <late*> wrote:
    > >
    > > > My understanding is that this is the airlines equivilent of an urban
    > > > legend.
    > > > I.e. the airlines believe that consumer electronics will interfere
    > > > with
    > > > the
    > > > flight instruments. But there is no evidence.
    > > > The airlines make these rules. Every airline is different. There is
    > > > no
    > > > evidence that anything you carry and use will cause a problem.
    > > > The FAA has no rule.
    > > > The FCC has no rule.
    > > > Never the less, turn it off, as the flight crew has no sense of humor
    > > > about
    > > > this and will have you arrested if you make yourself a problem.

    > >
    > > You are wrong it is an FAA rule.
    > >
    > >

    > http://www.orientaviation.com/pages/back_issues/00_11/IF_V8N2_PEDSSafety.html
    > >
    > > --
    > > Tom Thackrey
    > > www.creative-light.com

    >
    > Did you even read the article? It only says that this one FAA employee
    > wants regulation, not that there is any regulation.
    > I stand by my original contention. But am willing to be proven wrong if
    > you
    > can cite the FAA reg itself.


    You seem to be partly right. The FAA reg
    14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 121 § 121.306 Portable electronic devices.
    says that airlines must determine which devices do not interfer with
    instruments/radios before they can allow their use inflight.


    --
    Tom Thackrey
    www.creative-light.com
    Tom Thackrey, Sep 9, 2003
    #9
  10. Crash

    Paul Cordes Guest

    "Tom Thackrey" <> wrote in message
    news:Zbo7b.682$...
    >
    > You seem to be partly right. The FAA reg
    > 14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 121 § 121.306 Portable electronic devices.
    > says that airlines must determine which devices do not interfer with
    > instruments/radios before they can allow their use inflight.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Tom Thackrey
    > www.creative-light.com


    Thanks for that. That's more of a rule than I thought existed. So the
    airlines do have some authority to decide the issue and thus, you should not
    attempt to do something they don't want you to do.
    Paul Cordes, Sep 9, 2003
    #10
  11. Crash

    Dreamer Guest

    "Paul Cordes" <late*> wrote in message
    news:Bto7b.11017$...
    >
    > "Tom Thackrey" <> wrote in message
    > news:Zbo7b.682$...
    > >
    > > You seem to be partly right. The FAA reg
    > > 14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 121 § 121.306 Portable electronic devices.
    > > says that airlines must determine which devices do not interfer with
    > > instruments/radios before they can allow their use inflight.


    > Thanks for that. That's more of a rule than I thought existed. So the
    > airlines do have some authority to decide the issue and thus, you should

    not
    > attempt to do something they don't want you to do.


    Interfering with a flight crew is a serious Federal offense. I assume that
    other countries have similar rules. It does not matter if you do not think
    you are interfering: if *they* think you are interfering, you are
    interfering, and they can (and lately, will) have you arrested when you
    reach the ground. You may or may not be prosecuted, but teach you a lesson,
    they will.

    If they tell you to turn something off, and you won't, you are interfering
    with the flight crew, even if there is no FAA or airline policy which says
    you have to. They have almost unlimited authority while the plane is in the
    air (rather like the captain and crew of a ship.) If you disagree, simply
    politely obey their directives and then sue the bejeezus out of them when
    you get home. But don't argue with them if they repeat their directive after
    you state your objection. Keep in mind also that these are nervous times and
    if other passengers think you are fighting with the flight crew, they may
    take it into their heads to do something about it.

    D
    Dreamer, Sep 9, 2003
    #11
  12. I was on a KLM flight in June, where they announced that any
    electronic device **with an antenna** was non-grata during take-off
    and landing. Note this would include any laptop with wireless
    networking functionality.

    /Hans

    "Paul Cordes" <late*> wrote in message news:<Bto7b.11017$>...
    > "Tom Thackrey" <> wrote in message
    > news:Zbo7b.682$...
    > >
    > > You seem to be partly right. The FAA reg
    > > 14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 121 § 121.306 Portable electronic devices.
    > > says that airlines must determine which devices do not interfer with
    > > instruments/radios before they can allow their use inflight.
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > Tom Thackrey
    > > www.creative-light.com

    >
    > Thanks for that. That's more of a rule than I thought existed. So the
    > airlines do have some authority to decide the issue and thus, you should not
    > attempt to do something they don't want you to do.
    Hans Hendriks, Sep 9, 2003
    #12
  13. "Paul Cordes" <late*> writes:

    > My understanding is that this is the airlines equivilent of an urban
    > legend. I.e. the airlines believe that consumer electronics will
    > interfere with the flight instruments. But there is no evidence.


    It is no urban legend. I have personally had a 30-45 degree error induced
    into navigation gear by on board electronics.

    > The airlines make these rules. Every airline is different. There is no
    > evidence that anything you carry and use will cause a problem.


    See above.

    > The FAA has no rule.


    The FAA does have rules, and testing procedures. Got a FAA type aproval
    for your camera? And if you do, if the PIC says jump, you jump.

    > The FCC has no rule.
    > Never the less, turn it off, as the flight crew has no sense of
    > humor about this and will have you arrested if you make yourself a
    > problem.


    See above. I think the penalty is a max of 10 years or so, if you
    don't get done over as a terroist by the Arsecroft goons.

    --
    Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
    +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
    West Australia 6076
    comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
    Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
    EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.
    Paul Repacholi, Sep 9, 2003
    #13
  14. Crash

    B.Rumary Guest

    Jason O'Rourke wrote:

    > Don't forget to turn off your digital wristwatch too!
    >

    Modern film cameras often contain a fair bit of electronics as well. Oh
    and if you have a heart pacemaker perhaps you should shut that off as
    well. ;o)

    The question is not whether a device contains electronics, but whether
    it emits a significant amount of radio energy, which might interfere
    with the planes systems. I very much doubt that a digital camera does
    emit enough radio energy to do any harm.

    Of course the airline's security staff might _claim_ such a risk, but
    my experience is that security personal are usually minimum wage,
    "rent-a-cop" thickos. The other airline staff who might make such
    claims are the PR department, who are usually much better turned out
    than the security goons, but even dimmer on technical matters.

    Brian Rumary, England

    http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm
    B.Rumary, Sep 9, 2003
    #14
  15. Crash

    Tom Thackrey Guest

    On 10-Sep-2003, B.Rumary <> wrote:

    > Jason O'Rourke wrote:
    >
    > > Don't forget to turn off your digital wristwatch too!
    > >

    > Modern film cameras often contain a fair bit of electronics as well. Oh
    > and if you have a heart pacemaker perhaps you should shut that off as
    > well. ;o)
    >
    > The question is not whether a device contains electronics, but whether
    > it emits a significant amount of radio energy, which might interfere
    > with the planes systems. I very much doubt that a digital camera does
    > emit enough radio energy to do any harm.
    >
    > Of course the airline's security staff might _claim_ such a risk, but
    > my experience is that security personal are usually minimum wage,
    > "rent-a-cop" thickos. The other airline staff who might make such
    > claims are the PR department, who are usually much better turned out
    > than the security goons, but even dimmer on technical matters.
    >
    > Brian Rumary, England


    I doubt if either PR or Security at any airline has anything to do with the
    in-flight portable electronic device rules. I would expect it to be handled
    by the Chief Pilot or Flight Operations, neither of whom suffer the problems
    you describe.

    Pacemakers are specifically allowed by the FAR.

    --
    Tom Thackrey
    www.creative-light.com
    Tom Thackrey, Sep 10, 2003
    #15
  16. Crash

    B.Rumary Guest

    Jason O'Rourke wrote:

    > Don't forget to turn off your digital wristwatch too!
    >

    Modern film cameras often contain a fair bit of electronics as well. Oh
    and if you have a heart pacemaker perhaps you should shut that off as
    well. ;o)

    The question is not whether a device contains electronics, but whether
    it emits a significant amount of radio energy, which might interfere
    with the planes systems. I very much doubt that a digital camera does
    emit enough radio energy to do any harm.

    Of course the airline's security staff might _claim_ such a risk, but
    my experience is that security personal are usually minimum wage,
    "rent-a-cop" thickos. The other airline staff who might make such
    claims are the PR department, who are usually much better turned out
    than the security goons, but even dimmer on technical matters.

    Brian Rumary, England

    http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm
    B.Rumary, Sep 10, 2003
    #16
  17. Crash

    Boomer Guest

    Boomer, Sep 11, 2003
    #17
  18. Crash

    Paul Cordes Guest

    "Boomer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Tom Thackrey wrote:
    >
    > > You are wrong it is an FAA rule.
    > >
    > >

    >

    http://www.orientaviation.com/pages/back_issues/00_11/IF_V8N2_PEDSSafety.html
    >
    > I read that article. Can you point to where it mentions
    > an FAA rule? I read about a conference in Bangkok
    > but no existing rule.



    The FAA reg
    14 CFR - CHAPTER I - PART 121 § 121.306 Portable electronic devices.
    says that airlines must determine which devices do not interfer with
    instruments/radios before they can allow their use inflight.

    From Tom's reply above. So the rule allows the airlines to make
    rules......which probably explains the variation from airline to airline.

    PC
    Paul Cordes, Sep 12, 2003
    #18
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. William W. Plummer

    HTML Considered evil, but why?

    William W. Plummer, Feb 8, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    507
    Moz Champion
    Feb 10, 2005
  2. Replies:
    12
    Views:
    1,533
  3. TH O

    TSA restricts lithium batteries on airplanes

    TH O, Dec 29, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    156
    Views:
    3,100
    ASAAR
    Jan 16, 2008
  4. Mathew Good

    Memory chip breakthrough for electronic devices

    Mathew Good, Dec 11, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    341
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Dec 12, 2006
  5. tony cooper

    Airplanes

    tony cooper, Oct 25, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    732
    tony cooper
    Nov 3, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page