4th January 2012 at 11:16 #429348
Anonymous4th January 2012 at 11:16 #429349
AF639 flew back to IAH because a mobile phone was found on board and its owner could not be identified. Result: 5 hours delay (still in the air now): http://maps.vox.flightaware.com/map17/flex/CA9292ED93D0CF58A8E3706909D498BA
Does it make sense? Looking forward to read the specialists…4th January 2012 at 13:05 #429350
didnt look at the maps
presumably it wasnt past its half way point
and there where no nearer airports then yes I suppose it does4th January 2012 at 13:19 #429351
Now I’m no expert on these matters, but couldn’t they have descended to 10,000′ then depressurised the plane, opened the pilots window and dropped it in the sea?4th January 2012 at 18:00 #429352
What is the actual problem with a phone on board?4th January 2012 at 18:08 #429353
It makes no sense at all. But common sense in the US is hard to find these days!4th January 2012 at 18:27 #429354
“Now I’m no expert on these matters, but couldn’t they have descended to 10,000′ then depressurised the plane, opened the pilots window and dropped it in the sea?”
I’m no expert either, but I think the risk of it being sucked into an engine or hitting a control surface would rule that out.
Also, if the DV window wouldn’t close again, they would have to divert re: fuel, so probably not the favoured option.4th January 2012 at 19:46 #429355
Doesn’t exactly sound the type of manoeuvre the CAA would approve of. Why not just open the rear door and drop it out? Naturally, someone hanging on the steward’s legs whilst done.4th January 2012 at 20:49 #429356
Little for them to worry about if it had been a BBerry, as it probably would not have been working.4th January 2012 at 21:10 #429357
Well, proof if it were needed that I’m no expert! Never thought of that DoS!4th January 2012 at 23:00 #429358
Cellphones can be used to trigger explosives remotely and they can also be modified to carry expolsives and receive commands. Someone was very stupid to allow a phone on board (assuming crew did pre flight search correctly).
All in all though I would be far more worried about Air France’s safety record than a cellphone.
I have also been told that certain airbus aircraft have proven sensitive to in flight cell phone disturbance. i will not publish details here but it involves a large number of coincidences and is restricted to two particular airbus families.4th January 2012 at 23:38 #429359
Rich, Which two Airbus families?
And how an airline can restrict mobile phones? We all carry one…5th January 2012 at 00:15 #429360
Not at liberty to provide that info directly. My understanding is they are not the latest generation and steps have been taken to minimize any possible interaction.
All I can say is look at carrier policies on cellphone usage on taxiing…
Airlines do not need to ban cellphones. The worry really comes with modified equipment that is not accompanied.5th January 2012 at 00:46 #429361
What I have always wanted to know is that if you fly an American carrier you can use your phone almost immediately after touchdown the announcements are along the lines of if you can access your phone without moving your luggage you can do so now .. why is this not the case in Europe5th January 2012 at 08:58 #429362
Rich, I wonder if the next cover-up story for the AF447 shoot down will be avionics interference caused by a phone.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.