If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   Reacting to the latest almost-crash caused by goose strikes, does the FAA 1) begin a goose-culling program, 2) call for jet engine re-design, or 3) hassle the passenger who took the goose-strike video?   (nypost.com) divider line 186
    More: Obvious, FAA, management consults  
•       •       •

7377 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 May 2012 at 12:46 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-03 09:33:55 AM  
"Yes, I violated FAA regulations but because my actions created a popular piece of media, rules don't apply to me."
 
2012-05-03 09:47:07 AM  
I predict this thread will be full of rational, reasonable, and, most importantly, scientific arguments on why electronics should not be banned during takeoff/landing.
 
2012-05-03 09:47:43 AM  

flucto: "Yes, I violated pointless FAA regulations hustled into existence because...well, just because...and you libertarians want Somalia..."


Fixed to include the statist party line.
 
2012-05-03 10:15:37 AM  
What good is a totalitarian police state if you can't hassle the proles?
 
2012-05-03 10:18:41 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: What good is a totalitarian police state if you can't hassle the proles?


Sit down, shut up, and buckle your seat belt boy.
 
2012-05-03 10:42:23 AM  
iPads have no place in aviation!

They are dangerous and should be banned!

forums.macresource.com
 
2012-05-03 11:14:52 AM  

flucto: "Yes, I violated FAA regulations but because my actions created a popular piece of media, rules don't apply to me."


*blink*

that's trolling, right?
 
2012-05-03 12:13:22 PM  
"If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.
 
2012-05-03 12:20:50 PM  
C and a repeat.
 
2012-05-03 12:22:29 PM  

Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.


Not to get in the way of a good rant, but it's the FCC that doesn't like it - it's their law. The FAA rule is that you have to comply with the instructions of the crewmembers, which includes no cell phones. Carry on.
 
2012-05-03 12:27:21 PM  

Charlie Freak: The FAA rule is that you have to comply with the instructions of the crewmembers, which includes no cell phones. Carry on.


And america was BUILT on mindless obedience to faceless government agencies! OBEY citizen! it's THE LAW!

yeesh.

whatever happened to the ability to question authority? did we all just forget about common sense? iPads cannot affect flight controls. they don't have the range, and the OS isn't even remotely compatible with the microcode controlling the flight control consoles up front. study after study proves this. the FAA knows this. you and I know this. But we don't change the rules because....f*ck you, that's why!
 
2012-05-03 12:32:57 PM  
Miracle on the Hudson, or MURDER in the sky?

i487.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-03 12:37:25 PM  

Weaver95: remotely compatible


strangebeaver.com
//hot
 
2012-05-03 12:48:48 PM  
D) Blame Fartbongo.
 
2012-05-03 12:50:03 PM  
They probably did the exact same thing that was done in the article posted yesterday.
 
2012-05-03 12:52:39 PM  
media.steampowered.com

/approves
 
2012-05-03 12:53:25 PM  
But sleep-deprived pilots? Still OK.
 
2012-05-03 12:53:35 PM  

Nasty_McFilth: They probably did the exact same thing that was done in the article posted yesterday.


I came to see two or three commenting on the situation, then 500 people pointing out the repeatness of it.
 
2012-05-03 12:54:03 PM  
That video is great... "moments before takeoff, when the plane was between 800-1000 feet"

In conclusion, fark The Post.
 
2012-05-03 12:55:13 PM  

Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.


Cell phones can get a signal up to about 2000ft above ground. If 100 people are flying through that airspace and all of their cells are being switched from tower to tower that quickly, it tweeks out the cell towers. That's part of the reason they must be shut off- the cell carriers want them to be.

Also. The cellular function doesn't disrupt the instruments. The gps function does.
 
2012-05-03 12:55:47 PM  

Jackson Herring: That video is great... "moments before takeoff, when the plane was between 800-1000 feet (above sea level)"

In conclusion, fark The Post.


I am sure that is what they meant.
 
2012-05-03 12:55:51 PM  
Nobody told me the geese were going out on strike. I must contact my shop steward.

So much for watching "News for Parrots". They just don't cover the news in a fair and balanced way, unlike "News for Silly Geese", aka Fox.
 
2012-05-03 12:56:11 PM  

Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.



Even better... Pilots are now being issued iPads themselves - the exact piece of equipment this guy was using, so any protestations about safety are obviously complete bunk.
 
2012-05-03 12:56:13 PM  
Yeah, this is just some bureaucrats with too much time and not enough real work. Someone should probably take a closer look at their actual productivity and see if the FAA could use some "personnel realignment."

On the other hand, when people started using cell phones in large numbers, there really was a reason to stop people from using cell phones on passenger jets. Cell towers used to be a lot less capable, and the routing/switching hardware could have some issues if a series of towers were doing handoffs too fast.

If a passenger jet was flying low enough for people to still use cell phones, and a lot of people on a jet had theirs turned on, the routing system could hiccup. For a few moments, anyway. So someone at the FCC decided that they needed to stop this from ever happening.

Nowadays, though, pretty much all cell systems can handle the strain easily.

/used a cell at 33,000 feet back in the 1990s
//it didn't work too well, but it did work
 
2012-05-03 12:56:23 PM  
 
2012-05-03 12:56:46 PM  
meh, par for the course.

He's lucky he wasnt' tased and beaten during an arrest
 
2012-05-03 12:57:45 PM  
www.ear.fm

I hope you know that this will go down on your permanent record.

/oh yeah?
 
2012-05-03 12:58:30 PM  

bangmaid: Also. The cellular function doesn't disrupt the instruments. The gps function does.


Bullshiat.

GPS is passive. If this were true then no planes would be safe from this "disruption" as the signals from GPS satellites are coming from space and are simply received by GPS receivers. The receivers don't communicate back to the GPS satellites.
 
2012-05-03 12:58:36 PM  

bangmaid: The gps function does.


hahaha what the actual fark

the gps RECEIVER in your cell phone messes up the aircraft's instruments?
 
2012-05-03 12:58:50 PM  

Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.


Yeah, it's like Class B somehow doesn't apply to airplanes. I've always wondered WTF that was about.
 
2012-05-03 12:59:37 PM  

Charlie Freak: I predict this thread will be full of rational, reasonable, and, most importantly, scientific arguments on why electronics should not be banned during takeoff/landing.


I'm an electrical engineer - my senior thesis many years back involved the uselessness of these regulations. The TL;DR is that any newer (see 1980's+) planes have the correct shielding in place that modern electronics won't impact their communications and control circuitry. If you're flying grandpa's Cessna & you have an early 80's bagphone... then you might might maybe impact comms.
 
2012-05-03 12:59:48 PM  
Just one more reason to stop flying. Seriously. Take a train. Put this ridiculous system out of business.
 
2012-05-03 01:00:22 PM  

Charlie Freak: Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.

Not to get in the way of a good rant, but it's the FCC that doesn't like it - it's their law. The FAA rule is that you have to comply with the instructions of the crewmembers, which includes no cell phones. Carry on.


It boggles my mind that they don't even scan for bluetooth devices to make sure everyone has their phone off (or at least in Airplane mode). Every flight I've been on have shown at least four active devices (besides mine).

The way my computer speaker picks up SMS morse codes when the phone is too close, it should be able to detect the phone's radio signals too. Then the plane doesn't get on the runway untill all devices are off.
 
2012-05-03 01:01:27 PM  
You change your settings on an iphone to "airplane mode" when you get on a plane so that it can't transmit potential harmful electronic whatever.

The video camera still works.

FAA guy is a douche.
 
2012-05-03 01:01:57 PM  
Ok so why are pilots starting to use them during flights in place of the manuals they'd lug around if they're so dangerous?
 
2012-05-03 01:02:02 PM  
I can only imagine the PETArd butthurt if they started ordering geese culled from airports. They tried to cull them from a park that was totally overrun in the town I live in and they went totally batshiat insane. So we have a park no one visits because it's nothing but goose shiat everywhere and the pond is toxic.
 
2012-05-03 01:02:55 PM  

Jackson Herring: That video is great... "moments before takeoff, when the plane was between 800-1000 feet"

In conclusion, fark The Post.


The New York Post - the Fox News of newspapers.
 
2012-05-03 01:03:13 PM  

TheGogmagog: It boggles my mind that they don't even scan for bluetooth devices to make sure everyone has their phone off (or at least in Airplane mode). Every flight I've been on have shown at least four active devices (besides mine).



It doesn't boggle my mind at all, because I have very little doubt that they are well aware that these regulations are in reality pointless and out of date.
 
2012-05-03 01:03:52 PM  

Charlie Freak: I predict this thread will be full of rational, reasonable, and, most importantly, scientific arguments on why electronics should not be banned during takeoff/landing.


Over in two. I knew I had you favorited for a reason, Charlie Freak. :-)
 
2012-05-03 01:03:52 PM  

Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.


During take off and landing. It's similar to why you can't lean your seat back. If there's an emergency, people can't be blocked from exiting the plane or distracted from doing so
 
2012-05-03 01:04:13 PM  
The ban on portable electronic equipment during flight critical moments has nothing to do with interference, and everything to do with making passengers shut up and pay attention during the most dangerous parts of the flight.

Which is why it is reasonable.
 
2012-05-03 01:05:22 PM  

Gulper Eel: flucto: "Yes, I violated pointless FAA regulations hustled into existence because...well, just because...and you libertarians want Somalia..."

Fixed to include the statist party line.


Truth to power, man!
 
2012-05-03 01:05:30 PM  
I've said it before and I'll say it again.

I suspect this is more about not having a hundred people crammed in a metal tube all screaming into their phones than about interference with equipment.

Just imagine trying to talk on your phone because it's allowed now and both people in your row are also trying to talk. And the people in front of you. And behind you. And all around you.

It sounds like a recipe for a brawl every single flight.
 
2012-05-03 01:05:51 PM  

Eve L. Koont: Ok so why are pilots starting to use them during flights in place of the manuals they'd lug around if they're so dangerous?


My best friend flies for a major airline - he's sent me pictures of approaches and takeoffs that he routinely takes. He once @ssdialed me from DEN while landing. I'm pretty sure he's not the only pilot that leaves his electronics powered on.
 
2012-05-03 01:05:58 PM  

vwarb: Just one more reason to stop flying. Seriously. Take a train. Put this ridiculous system out of business.


Not sure if trolling or just weapons grade stupid....
 
2012-05-03 01:06:04 PM  

bangmaid: Rain-Monkey: "If there is even a minute chance that an iPad could take a plane down then it is the FAA's obligation to ban the devices from flights or require the airlines to confiscate them when you check in," he said.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

No cell phones on airplanes is the biggest piece of horseshiat regulation the FAA has on the books. Recent studies of portable electronic devices interfering with safety of flight are inconclusive at best and there is ample evidence of continued use through all phases of commercial flight every single day.

Cell phones can get a signal up to about 2000ft above ground. If 100 people are flying through that airspace and all of their cells are being switched from tower to tower that quickly, it tweeks out the cell towers. That's part of the reason they must be shut off- the cell carriers want them to be.

Also. The cellular function doesn't disrupt the instruments. The gps function does.


So this is why text messages cost $.10 each? I'm a bit confused about the GPS function claim. I doubt my device is communicating TO the satalite signals. So there isn't any output on my garmen or phone related to GPS (as far as I know).
 
2012-05-03 01:06:11 PM  

Bungles: The ban on portable electronic equipment during flight critical moments has nothing to do with interference, and everything to do with making passengers shut up and pay attention during the most dangerous parts of the flight.

Which is why it is reasonable.


DON'T YOU TELL ME WHAT TO DO. YOU EXIST TO POPULATE MY EXPERIENCE.
 
2012-05-03 01:06:42 PM  

Bungles: The ban on portable electronic equipment during flight critical moments has nothing to do with interference, and everything to do with making passengers shut up and pay attention during the most dangerous parts of the flight.

Which is why it is reasonable.


But I don't wanna! How come I can look at a magazine, but I can't have my laptop out, huh? How come I can look out the window, but I can't have my tray table down?
 
2012-05-03 01:07:18 PM  

Eve L. Koont: Ok so why are pilots starting to use them during flights in place of the manuals they'd lug around if they're so dangerous?


Because if the ipad starts messing with the flight controls, the pilot can immediately shut the thing off. If it's a passenger, they have to find the thing first and then deal with unruly "I got my rights/stick it to the man/your rule makes no sense to me so I can ignore it" types before it can get shut off.
 
2012-05-03 01:07:56 PM  

Bungles: The ban on portable electronic equipment during flight critical moments has nothing to do with interference, and everything to do with making passengers shut up and pay attention during the most dangerous parts of the flight.

Which is why it is reasonable.


except that, in this article/blog the FAA makes no such claims. in fact, they deny that the purpose of the 'no electronics' rule is to keep passengers focused.

There is some thought that the rule forbidding devices during takeoff and landing was made to ensure that passengers paid attention. The F.A.A. has never claimed this. (If this was the case, passengers would not be allowed to have books, magazines or newspapers during takeoff and landing.)
 
Displayed 50 of 186 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report