Handheld GPS units and Airlines?

[DrMoab]

Is there any kind of regulation that says you can't bring one on an airline with you?

Always wondered if it would show correct speed.

 

[RedHeep]

Line of sight to the satellites really sucks.

I had mine in the cockpit on a cross country flight and the signal was iffy.

I'd imagine in coach you wouldn't get anything at all.

But it's just an electronic gizmo, so I don't see why you couldn't bring it.

 

[Stumpalump]

They tell you that you can't use electronics that transmit or recieve. You can bring it on but they will tell you to turn it off. You also need to pull it out of your carry on bag because they started asking for almost all electronics to be out of your bag. Turn it on if you want but keep a low profile. Frontier is the worst airline but they have a cool display on location and ground speed. 655mph was the fastest I've seen. 450 is common.

 

[SCW]

Ryan, I take one with me every time I fly, I like comparing the top speed, takeoff speed, landing speed, max altitude, etc. Most of my flights I have saved onto my computer as well.

A few hints-

Sit by the window. I have the 60-series and have to lean the unit against window for reception. The "X" series might not be so sensative. Sometimes you just don't get much reception anyway, when I fly to Wisconsin if I'm sitting on the north side of the plane for the flight over, I can't get much for the second half of the flight, too far north. Never had trouble flying further south in the US, never flown out of the US with a GPS.

Take a magazine. They keep telling you that you can't have electronic devices on during takeoff and landing, so I take a magazine and put it in front of the GPS while the stewardess (or fairy stewards) are walking around. This way I get the entire flight and can see what speed we actually pull the wheels off the ground or touch down for the first time. They only tell you to turn them off during takeoff and landing, most of the time the stewardess will ask how fast we are going, etc during the flight.

I've used an external antenna on a flight before, it allowed me to keep the GPS on the tray in front of me and have great reception, and it's a lot easier than holding the GPS near the window. I've also hooked up the GPS to a laptop and watched the bigger map as we flew, but it's actually sort of a hassle.

When do you head to Chi-town? No offense to those who live there, but I HATE that town and that airport (Midway and O'Hare). Traffic everywhere, damn toll roads, traffic, expensive, traffic, delays at airports and freeways, traffic......

Good luck!

 

[IntrepidXJ]

No offense to those who live there, but I HATE that town and that airport (Midway and O'Hare). Traffic everywhere, damn toll roads, traffic, expensive, traffic, delays at airports and freeways, traffic......

From someone who lives here.....I hate it, too. That's part of the reason I am looking to move very soon.

 

[Stumpalump]

They only tell you to turn them off during takeoff and landing, most of the time the stewardess will ask how fast we are going, etc during the flight.

I was on a flight and a guys cell phone rang. He ansered it and started telling his bud all about the flight and what he saw down below. Us freqent travelers were all looking in dis believe but the flight steward walked up and looked at the guy as he kept on talking! The steward just rolled his eyes, walked away and left the guy talking on his phone.

 

[Boatwrench]

I use my GPS on cross country flights all the time. It's in my backpack along with a camera and cell phone, never been asked to pull it out at security even though all the charger and USB cables are right there with it.

After 9/11 and flight 93, the myth that cell phones would interfere with the plane controls during flight becomes quite questionable.:shhh:

 

[98XJSport]

I use my GPS on cross country flights all the time. It's in my backpack along with a camera and cell phone, never been asked to pull it out at security even though all the charger and USB cables are right there with it.

After 9/11 and flight 93, the myth that cell phones would interfere with the plane controls during flight becomes quite questionable.:shhh:

I think they did it on mythbusters. No current cellphone messes with in flight instrumentation, but it is possible and the results aren't worth the risk...

 

[Captain Ron]

FAR

§ 91.21 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 a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; 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; or
(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 a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate, the determination required by paragraph (b)(5) of this section shall be made by that 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.

That's pretty clear. Add to that all certificated air carriers agument this FAR in their operating contracts. In other words, your ticket contract is more stringent.

I use my GPS on cross country flights all the time. It's in my backpack along with a camera and cell phone, never been asked to pull it out at security even though all the charger and USB cables are right there with it.

After 9/11 and flight 93, the myth that cell phones would interfere with the plane controls during flight becomes quite questionable.:shhh:

It's not flight controls that scare me. It's communication.

Until you have personally shot a complicated precision approach at CAT II or III minimums, dealt with rapid fire controller vectors to an IAP, and assesed the risk levels involved with this in the typical very busy class Bravo airspace in which most air carriers operate, myths and questionable would be words and thinking you should stay away from.

GPS? In my view, it's a passive device. But, the law is clear. It's not your choice to use as you desire in flight. That choice belongs to the PIC. It's also worth noting the FAR that addresses compliance with flight crew instructions. You have zero lattitude in determining what you will or will not do. Period.

Those folks in the front of the airplane operate IFR only, every flight. Unless you have an IR, or have taken the trainning, you have no idea of how easy it is to get disoriented in IMC. One wrong move, and it's over, for everyone. Search CFIT sometime. Why even risk complicating an already very complicated task for the aircrew?

Cell phones can and do iterfere with VHF communications, which includes VOR nav. I'll take you up and prove it. It's also against FCC regs, although I don't know the FR off hand.

--ron

 

[Boatwrench]

Capt Ron,

Thanks for the brief, I guess I touched a nerve. My response irt GPSr may have appeared to you to be more flippant or lassie-faire, it was not meant to be read that way. The flight attendants say something along the lines of the use of portable devices are banned until XXK feet and an approved list is on page XX of the flight magazine. I have not seen GPSr banned in any magazine, I sit by the window generally in the back by the frear galley and the flight attendants have never inquired what is that or told me to turn it off. I don't "sneak it" either, sit right on the tray table.

Cell phones, OK, may mess with comms as you state, but then why was there as recently as this year an FAA proposal to lift the ban on cell phone use during flights? (for the sake of peaceful flights I am glad the ban wasn't lifted).

dunno.
Tom

 

[Captain Ron]

...

Cell phones, OK, may mess with comms as you state, but then why was there as recently as this year an FAA proposal to lift the ban on cell phone use during flights? (for the sake of peaceful flights I am glad the ban wasn't lifted).

dunno.
Tom

Just quoting you to use the terms.

The FAA proposal is based on in flight use, not during departure, approach, and ground operation. The hitches as I read it so far are; FCC Regs, technology cell phones still being supported, and other reasons.

There's a saying in aviation about the FAR's. "They're written in blood". There's a good reason 91.21 went in unchallenged. It's a saftey of flight issue. Lifting it will take a good long time, despite all the high powered lobby efforts, which have all failed so far.

My older Nokia with Verizon is terrible. It'll produce 10 degree swings on the VOR CDI during it's little "chats" with the network, and it's more than clearly audible on the comms. So are Nextel and iPhones. I havn't dared to see what the effect would be on an ILS approach, but 10 degree CDI deviation during an approach means by law you have to go missed at that point.

Going missed in IMC can be high risk move. The possibility of losing SA increases dramatically.

--ron

 

[jmaxj]

Just quoting you to use the terms.

The FAA proposal is based on in flight use, not during departure, approach, and ground operation. The hitches as I read it so far are; FCC Regs, technology cell phones still being supported, and other reasons.

There's a saying in aviation about the FAR's. "They're written in blood". There's a good reason 91.21 went in unchallenged. It's a saftey of flight issue. Lifting it will take a good long time, despite all the high powered lobby efforts, which have all failed so far.

My older Nokia with Verizon is terrible. It'll produce 10 degree swings on the VOR CDI during it's little "chats" with the network, and it's more than clearly audible on the comms. So are Nextel and iPhones. I havn't dared to see what the effect would be on an ILS approach, but 10 degree CDI deviation during an approach means by law you have to go missed at that point.

Going missed in IMC can be high risk move. The possibility of losing SA increases dramatically.

--ron

wow ron your sounding really smart, now quit copying out of the book

 

[redneckboarder]

i have a garmin rhino 130 and my buddy accidentally left it on in his bag ina flight. it recorded top speed and altitude till baout halfway up the climb, it stopped recording ad 385mph and 18000 ft. this was in a carry on in a 737, so it does work

 

[WB9YZU]

Ron the big things about cell phone use are not navigation, but strictly network concerns. In essence, if your phone is in a plane which does not support a local network (AeroMobile for example), you cell phone has the possibility of jamming the groundbased cell network by hitting many thousand cell sites at once.

As far as other electronics, with airlines, most everything is game once you are in the air, though they still frown on use of transmitting equipment in the air.

I never had any problem in my small plane with the use of 2m equipment or camera(s) interfereing with VOR (LF) or Airband (VHF-AM) communications, or with LORAN-C reception, so I don't expect that larger commercial aircraft with a more bullet proof backbone would have any issue.

Most of the big boys don't use VOR or GPS approaches anyway.
RNAV is still alive and kicking.

Ron

 

[Captain Ron]

Ron the big things about cell phone use are not navigation, but strictly network concerns. In essence, if your phone is in a plane which does not support a local network (AeroMobile for example), you cell phone has the possibility of jamming the groundbased cell network by hitting many thousand cell sites at once.

As far as other electronics, with airlines, most everything is game once you are in the air, though they still frown on use of transmitting equipment in the air.

I never had any problem in my small plane with the use of 2m equipment or camera(s) interfereing with VOR (LF) or Airband (VHF-AM) communications, or with LORAN-C reception, so I don't expect that larger commercial aircraft with a more bullet proof backbone would have any issue.

Most of the big boys don't use VOR or GPS approaches anyway.
RNAV is still alive and kicking.

Ron

You might want to go back and fact check just about everything in your post.

If you do actually have a PPL, your last 2 statements especially concern me. Might be time for a proficiency check. If you are IR, you just plain scare me.

--ron

 

[WB9YZU]

Ron:

Here is info on the cell info.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-501431.html
http://www.aeromobile.net/

The info on RNAV I got a year ago from a NW pilot who was taking a jump seat flight back home, he was sitting next to me, so I felt free to chat with him. I asked him specificaly about GPS navigation and he said they used RNAV. RNAV, he explaned to me, couples direct to the auto-pilot and most landings were actually "hands off" with the pilot supervising. He also explaned that though GPS was showing up in newer planes, many of the older planes had RNAV systems that worked just great.

You can also look it up on the web.

As far as my personal experience, it is just that. I have no need to research what I have experienced.

I don't think you have much to be scared of Ron

Ron

How can you tell if there is a Pilot in a room?
Ask...

 

[Captain Ron]

...
How can you tell if there is a Pilot in a room?
Ask...

And you answered, and it reads like you needed to correct me. But, the information you post is misleading and in some cases, outright incorrect.

Ron the big things about cell phone use are not navigation, but strictly network concerns. In essence, if your phone is in a plane which does not support a local network (AeroMobile for example), you cell phone has the possibility of jamming the groundbased cell network by hitting many thousand cell sites at once.

As far as other electronics, with airlines, most everything is game once you are in the air, though they still frown on use of transmitting equipment in the air.

It is not strictly network concerns, although you are correct in that ground station saturation can occur.

FAR 91.21 is flight safety regulation. Look it up. It has very little to do with the FCC regulations. Again, I know for fact, and will be happy to prove it to you that certain cell signals do in fact interfere with comms and nav.

As for other electronics being fair game, again, that's not your choice to make, it belongs to the PIC. It sounds like for a few of you folks, this whole thing is less about what is right or wrong, legal or not legal, and more about what YOU want to do.

The PIC could demand zero use, or could care less. His call. If the flight crew says you can use your devices, have at it. If they say no on the next flight, the answer is no.

...
I never had any problem in my small plane with the use of 2m equipment or camera(s) interfereing with VOR (LF) or Airband (VHF-AM) communications, or with LORAN-C reception, so I don't expect that larger commercial aircraft with a more bullet proof backbone would have any issue.
...

I'm taking note of the word "my" here. Obviously, I incorrectly assumed that there's at least a PPASEL connected to that. I say incorrectly because if you were, or are, you'd know VOR and "Airband" are one and the same. VOR's are not LF, they are VHF, along with comms. 108Mhz to around 135Mhz for everything, segmented into VOR, common ground, etc... Basic required knoweledge, alot of which is on the written exam.

As for larger aircraft having a more bullet proof "backbone", I have no idea what you are trying to say.

...
Most of the big boys don't use VOR or GPS approaches anyway.
RNAV is still alive and kicking.

I couldn't believe I actually read this. I mean, if you don't know anything about it, why embarrass yourself with statements like that? Keep in mind, I was still thinking the word "my"...

They do. VOR approaches are still the workhorse, and in alot of cases, the only approach other than NDB availible for a given airport. GPS and GPS overlays are being implemented at a rapid rate, but are far from being the "approach of choice" if there is an ILS approach. Keep in mind lateral nav on an ILS is a VOR...

The RNAV comment was the kicker. Then I read your RNAV comment below. Wow. Simply wow. Search RNAV.

Ron:

Here is info on the cell info.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-501431.html
http://www.aeromobile.net/

Read closely. You are still bound by the aircarrier regs and ultimately FAR 91.21. Niether of those sources are the authority or source of authority on the operation of electronic devices on any flight in the US. Why don't you do a search on FAA testing of cell phones on aircraft systems?

The info on RNAV I got a year ago from a NW pilot who was taking a jump seat flight back home, he was sitting next to me, so I felt free to chat with him. I asked him specificaly about GPS navigation and he said they used RNAV. RNAV, he explaned to me, couples direct to the auto-pilot and most landings were actually "hands off" with the pilot supervising. He also explaned that though GPS was showing up in newer planes, many of the older planes had RNAV systems that worked just great.

You can also look it up on the web.
...

I think you must be forgetting some important details of that talk, or the guy gave you the wrong impression about the important details. Why don't you look it up on the web, and we can compare what I had to learn and be tested on by the FAA so far for my IR with what you find on the web.

--ron

 

[DrMoab]

OK cool.

Guess I will take my GPS on the plane Fri and see what happens.

 

[WB9YZU]

OK cool.

Guess I will take my GPS on the plane Fri and see what happens.

I'd likely ask, but other than that, that'd be my take.

Ron

 

[ChiXJeff]

3 and a half years ago, I flew Frontier out from ORD to SLC with my GPS V in my carry on. The screener wanted to know about the sandbag mount, couldn't care less about the GPS. I didn't turn it on in-flight, I doubt I could care less.