The Basics
Portable electronic devices (PEDs) include a wide variety of
(primarily battery-powered) equipment that might be brought on board aircraft
by passengers or crew. The range of devices includes those that do not intentionally
transmit radio-frequency (RF) signals, such as compact disk players and
calculators. It also includes devices that intentionally transmit RF (e.g.,
cell phones and other wireless-enabled devices such as personal digital
assistants or PDAs); such devices are often called transmitting PEDs, or T-PEDs.
The use of PEDs and T-PEDs on board aircraft creates several
significant technical and operational air safety issues. In the United States,
the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) regulates the use of PEDs on aircraft through regulations including
Sections 91.21 and 121.306, which prohibit the use of PEDs aboard
aircraft unless the operator or certificate holder verify that such use will
not interfere with the aircraft’s communications and navigation systems. In
particular, the FAA is concerned with the potential for PEDs to interfere with
aircraft communications and navigation equipment. Section
91.21 of the FAA rules (supplemented by Advisory Circular AC91.21-1A)
prohibits the operation of all PEDs, including cellular phones, onboard an
aircraft unless the operator of the aircraft has determined that operation of
the PED will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system
of the aircraft on which the device is to be used.
In March 2003, RTCA, Inc.
formed a special committee at the request of the FAA to present an up-to-date
evaluation of the use of PEDs on board civil aircraft, with emphasis on T-PEDs.
This committee, known as Special Committee 202 (SC-202), includes
representatives from consumer electronic device manufacturers, avionics
manufacturers, aircraft manufacturers, airlines, aircraft operators, pilot and
flight attendant associations including AFA-CWA, regulatory agencies, and
related industry associations. The committee works closely with other industry
groups such as the Consumer Electronics Association. With the October
2004 publication of its Phase 1 report, Guidance on Allowing Transmitting
Portable Electronic Devices (T-PEDs) on Aircraft (RTCA document DO-294),
SC-202 has developed testing procedures to assess the risk of interference for
particular PEDs onboard aircraft, and operational procedures for mitigating
operational (human factors) impacts. In
Phase 2, a longer-term PED technology assessment, the committee focused on
emerging PED technologies, for example ultra-wideband devices or pico-cells for
telephone use on board aircraft. The final report - DO-294B, Guidance on
Allowing Transmitting Portable Electronic Devices (T-PEDs) on Aircraft, was
issued December 13, 2006. On October 11, 2007, the committee published a second
guidance document, which is intended to mitigate identified PED risks for
"new" aircraft design and certification, entitled DO-307, Aircraft
Design and Certification for Portable Electronic Device (PED) Tolerance.
The U.S. Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) also regulates some types of intentionally
transmitting PEDs on aircraft. In 1991, the FCC adopted a prohibition on
using 800 MHz cellular phones while airborne. This rule, Section 22.925, prevents the airborne use of
cellular phones carried onboard by passengers or crew members, as well as use
of cellular equipment that might be installed permanently, on both private and
commercial aircraft. As explained in a recent FCC document, this “ban was adopted to guard
against the threat of harmful interference from airborne use of cellular phones
to terrestrial cellular networks. In a regular terrestrial call, a cellular
handset usually communicates through the nearest cell site that can serve it.
The farther the signal from the handset travels, the weaker it becomes as its
energy spreads out and is attenuated by terrain and obstacles, such as
buildings, and is blocked by the curvature of the earth. Consequently, a handset
signal is normally too weak to cause co-channel interference at other, more
distant, cell sites, and this allows the same frequency to be used by those
cell sites to carry cellular calls from other handsets. This principle, called
frequency re-use, is the fundamental characteristic of cellular system design
that leads to efficient spectrum use. By contrast, if a cellular call were to
be made from a handset on an airborne aircraft, the handset signal could be
strong enough to cause co-channel interference at multiple cell sites. This is
because, even though the airborne handset signal becomes weaker as its energy
is spread out, unlike the terrestrial case, it is not attenuated by terrain and
obstacles, and it is not blocked by the curvature of the earth. Thus, the
signal from an airborne handset may remain sufficiently strong to cause harmful
interference or other undesirable effects (e.g., a large increase in
noise) at cell sites other than the one that is in communication with the
airborne handset.”
In addition to FAA and FCC restrictions on PEDs, the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) of the U.S.
Department of Transportation on January 1, 2008 issued a new rule for
passengers traveling with lithium batteries in air travel, which no
longer allows loose lithium batteries in checked baggage. From the
PHMSA
press release: “Lithium batteries are considered hazardous
materials because they can overheat and ignite under certain conditions. Safety
testing conducted by the FAA found that current aircraft cargo fire suppression
system would not be capable of suppressing a fire if a shipment of
non-rechargeable lithium batteries were ignited in flight. This rule aims
to reduce the risk of fires involving lithium batteries in the cabin of
passenger aircraft.” In combination with this new rule, the FAA Office of
Security and Hazardous Materials has published Frequently
Asked Questions on Batteries Carried by Airline Passengers, and has
available a list of Battery
and Battery-Powered Device Incidents Since 1991 Reported to FAA.
FAA is continuing to review appropriate methods for extinguishing lithium
battery fires.
AFA Activity and Hot Topics
On December 15, 2004, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) to evaluate whether their ban on use of cellular phones on
airborne aircraft should be relaxed or lifted. (There are two versions of this
NPRM; one is a long version on the FCC website, the other is a
somewhat condensed, official
version that was published in the Federal Register.) Because of
concerns related to possible cell phone interference effects and the
operational problems that would arise from widespread use by passengers of such
devices on board airplanes in flight, AFA objected to this FCC action, and took
the following steps in response:
On January 10, 2005, AFA wrote a letter to former FCC Chairman Michael Powell
requesting that the NPRM be withdrawn.
On May 26, 2005, AFA submitted written comments to the FCC WT docket number
04-435, requesting that the FCC and the FAA maintain their respective bans on
the use of cellular telephones on airborne aircraft to protect national
security, public safety and passenger privacy. In these comments, AFA
noted with approval comments
filed by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation The threat to national security posed
by unauthorized use of cellular technology was made clear in these
comments: “The uniqueness of service to and from an aircraft in flight
presents the possibility that terrorists and other criminals could use
air-to-ground communications systems to coordinate an attack (e.g., a
hijacking).”
On July 12, 2005, AFA International President Pat Friend testified, along with other industry and government representatives, at a
hearing of the Aviation Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, entitled “Cell Phones On Commercial Aircraft - A Nuisance Or Necessity”.
The comments by all participants are a useful summary of varying perspectives
on the safety and security impacts that might result from airborne cell phone
use.
AFA and CWA notified our members through several email
alerts of the issues related to the FCC NPRM.
References
to News Articles
Cell
phones still fiercely opposed on planes, by Tom Belden,
Philadelphia Inquirer, April 27, 2008
Reps
want to fly the silent skies, by Michael Collins, Scripps Howard
News Service, April 17, 2008
Skies becoming
another wireless hot spot, by GERRY SHIH, Cox News Service, February 11, 2008
Airline
Passengers Can Bring Batteries Aboard, After All, by Elena Malykhina,
InformationWeek, January 17, 2008
Plenty of obstacles remain to cell phone use on planes,
by Marilyn Geewax, Cox News Service, July 15, 2005
Lawmakers line up against in-flight cell phones, by
Barbara De Lollis, USA TODAY, July 17, 2005
Bipartisan Opposition Voiced Against Allowing Use Of Cell
Phones On Commercial Aircraft, U.S. House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, July 14, 2005
Proposal
to lift cell-phone ban on planes catches flak, by Martin J. Moylan,
Pioneer Press, March 23, 2005
More Information
Consumer
Electronics Association
Federal
Aviation Administration
FAA Fact Sheet: Get the Facts on Cell Phone Use
DOT/FAA/AR-06/38, Flammability
Assessment of Bulk-Packed, Rechargeable Lithium-Ion Cells in Transport Category
Aircraft, Harry Webster: Documents the findings of a
series of tests conducted to determine the flammability characteristics of
rechargeable lithium-ion cells and the dangers associated with shipping them in
bulk form on commercial transport category aircraft.
DOT/FAA/AR-04/26, Flammability
Assessment of Bulk-Packed, Nonrechargeable Lithium Primary Batteries in
Transport Category Aircraft, Harry Webster: Documents the
findings of a series of tests conducted to determine the flammability
characteristics of primary lithium batteries and the dangers associated with
shipping them in bulk form on commercial transport category aircraft.
Federal Communications
Commission
RTCA, Inc.
UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) CAP 756 Portable Electronic
Device Generated Electro-magnetic Fields on board a Large Transport Aeroplane,
November 30, 2005