Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!telecom-request From: dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Airphones and TDD? Message-ID: Date: 12 Mar 91 03:55:09 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA Lines: 59 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 199, Message 5 of 13 In article , sbrack@hpuxa.ircc. ohio-state.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: [ in a comment on my followup to a previous article ] > While FAA regulations do prohibit the operation of devices that > interfere with aircraft electronics under Instrument Flight Rules, the > rules nearly all airliners must fly under, the FAA also makes it clear > that "the pilot in command is solely responsible for the safe > operation of the aircraft" (Federal Aviation Regulation 91.3). FAR 91.19 Portable Electronic Devices: (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate, nor may any operator or pilot in command of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S. registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by an air carrier or commercial operator; or (2) Any other aircraft while it is operated under IFR. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to: (1) Portable voice recorders; (2) Hearing aids; (3) Heart pacemakers; (4) Electric shavers; (5) Any other portable electronic device that the operator of the aircraft has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used. (c) In the case of an aircraft operated by an air carrier or commercial operator, the determination required by paragraph (b) (5) of this section shall be made by the air carrier or commercial operator of the aircraft on which the particular device is to be used. In the case of other aircraft, the determination may be made by the pilot in command or other operator of the aircraft. > The threat posed by electronics to aircraft has been greatly > exaggerated. But why take chances? > More specifically, the ILS system is designed so that even if the RF > signal becomes unusable at the worst possible moment, the aircraft may > still safely abort the landing. If the aircraft may still safely abort, then by definition, it is not the worst possible moment, no? ---just nitpiking, I suppose--- Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857