mobile phones

[metadigital]

Not really ... it would help your case to quote the actual research AND for it to voluminously detailed and exhaustively tested ... but it seems that they had some initial scary findings (MAY skew telemetry equipment by up to five degrees ..!) and now want to investigate further.

[Calax]

didn't the mythbusters already do this and find nothing changed?

[taks]

yes they did, but they actually found that there are a few pieces of equipment, related to bearing i believe, that are affected. i don't think these pieces of equipment are widely used anymore, however.

 

taks

[Guard Dog]

didn't the mythbusters already do this and find nothing changed?

See post #18 on pg 2 of this thread.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Don't use cell phones at all anyway.

 

They give you brain tumor.

[tarna]

More proof fro CAA (BBC website)

 

"Mobile use is currently prohibited on planes because there is evidence that they interfere with onboard communication and navigation systems.

 

Research published in 2003 by the CAA found mobile phone signals skewed navigation bearing displays by up to five degrees. "

 

In your face, annoying upper middle class bint!

Christ on a coat-hanger! Couldn't you find anything more current than 4 year old data? :wink:

As it happens, I was listening to a broadcast today that stated that most of the 'complaints' related to cell phones was due to poor judgement on the part of cell users ( ie...blabbing on a cell phone during medical exam and being dumb enuf not to turn off your phone while getting a medical exam. ). To 'politely' counter this bad habit, med staff stated that it was a 'hazard' to use cell phone around sensitive' med equipment when in fact it was because people were too stupid to turn off or ignore their cell phones.

 

Recently 7-11 ( a US convenience chain ) stated that adding nacho cheese to packages of potato chips was toxic. I told them a year or so ago that this was bull s**t and that they should be honest and admit that they didn't want to give free cheese to students that wanted to add cheese to their chips. They looked at me like I was high ( intelligence is not highly appreciated at 7-11 ). Now, they are adding a $1.00 charge to those wanting to add cheese spooge to their potato chips ( I guess cheese and aluminum packaging is no longer toxic! ). I even bet a local 7-11 $1000.00 USD that I would take a med exam before and after that I would suffer no 'toxic harm' eating said combination of potato chips and cheese mung ( other than what was expected from eating such swill ). I told them to send the 'bet' up the chain of management until a 'taker' was found. I'm still sitting on my $1000. If 7-11 doesn't have to confidence to take a bet on their 'crotch-squeesing cheese', why should I?

 

My point is ( as Dr House would say..."All people lie" ) people have their own agendas in mind and I'm throwing the bulls**t flag on this one.

 

This same crowd claimed to having pilots blinded by green pen lasers and I call them liars on that and this.

 

Until someone shows me that raw data indicating power/frequence saturation input into the various boards, I will continue to call them liars. I have built devices particularly designed to saturate/destroy devices ( police radar ) and have a familiarity of the actions of frequency/power consequences.

[Walsingham]

Dear sweet mother of christ. *sigh*

[Guest Accept]

Well... I have a cellphone!

 

I don't think anyone of you are interested but I got this one:

 

It is a couple of years old by now but... yeah, it's working just fine.

[Guard Dog]

Christ on a coat-hanger! Couldn't you find anything more current than 4 year old data? :wink:

 

Tarna as a point here. 4 years ago GSM was in it's infancy and almost all cell phones used either IS-136 (TDMA) or IS-95 (CDMA). Today TDMA is utterly obsolete and is not sold anywhere, and most companies have dismateled their TDMA networks. IS-95 is still around but only in small markets and GSM and CDMA-2000 are the standard signal formats. They are both very very different from their predecssors and if TDMA might have caused interference it certainly does not follow that GSM would. The modulation and transmission format are totally different. Ditto for IS-95 and CDMA2000. Citing old data when talking about cell phones does not mean anything really. If it's 2-3 years old, everything has changed since.

 

On a side note, GSM is about to give way to UMTS.

[Walsingham]

Good grief. look, if you want to take it up with the expert I originally cited here he is:

 

http://www.dcmt.cranfield.ac.uk/daps/commu...chardOrmondroyd

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7050576.stm

 

Seemed relevant...

[taks]

it's not a matter of destruction, tarna, just interfering frequencies. even current phones still use the same frequency bands, ~800 MHz or ~2000 MHz, for cellular transmission. the modulation schemes are different now than they were even just a few years ago (in fact, my advisor recently told me i should be concentrating on WCDMA or cdma2000 instead of IS-95, but they are all three a QPSK waveform), though the frequencies are the same as they have always been.

 

the equipment these frequencies muck with is likely older technology, that which hasn't been updated to the state of the art. i don't know a lot about airplane equipment, so i cannot speak intelligently about _what types_ of equipment would be affected, but i'm guessing they have some legacy stuff that operates in or around these bands. there's no real reason to update something that works fine, though pressure from the commercial communications industry may ultimately provide motivation to do such upgrades. i'll learn more about airport guidance/radar in the near future (i'm going to consult on a DIA project we're doing), which will give me a little more perspective on the issue. my out of the gate assumption, however, will be that any new technology they want to implement will necessarily be designed to avoid the cell bands as well as wifi and public safety stuff (my company also does the wifi at DIA, btw, as well as all of their frequency planning, which is much more complex than even i expected). we shall see...

 

taks

 

NOTE: DIA = Denver International Airport

[Walsingham]

May I add that a detailed explanation of what they screw up would be tantamount to publishing an how-to guide?