scanners in aiports

[sojo96]

I've traveled on airlines with scanners in the past. I've listened to them (using earbuds) at the gate while waiting for my flight but then I pack them in my carry-on, with the batteries and antenna removed from the receiver. I would not consider using them once aboard a plane.

Remember this is not some law in a city that bans use of scanners. You're dealing with FEDERAL LAWS here. While these things may be "harmless", I'd hate to be responsible for interfering with navigation, communication, or some other system.

The FAA says that it is up to the airline. how does that make it a federal law?????

 

[N_Jay]

Back on topic

Who really cares if someone uses a scanner on a plane? I am not worried about it because I know its not going to seriously cause any harm. As I stated (and someone else did too) if there was a chance that could happen it would not be allowed past security period.

Back on to the same mistake that has been made several times in this thread.

SECURITY (TSA) Does not care if you took an aircraft radio on designed to intentionally interfere with the NAV systems (as long as it is not sharp, does not explode, and does not contain more than one 1-quart plastic bag holding liquid containers of less then 3 oz each)!:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[N_Jay]

well i did get back into it but it was others who started argueing while i wasnt even at the computer. nor even at home. but because of this it intrigued me.

Yeah, I noticed.

yeah i cant spell, and i dont take punc or spellin seriously but that doesnt mean you have to rip on me man.

Yes, it does, because punctuation is just as important as the words to communication your point.
If you don't take it seriously, why bother saying anything.
(and it makes yout posts a whole lot easier to read)

can't you just kindly tell me what is wrong with my thinking.

I think I did several times.

i still see no proof.

Hu?

you just posted a thing that said and/or the pilot in command. the pilot is in control of the aircraft. he is the decider for every decision on the plane once it is away from the gate.

You need to read more carfuilly and sometimes it takes a little basic understanding to grasp the point.

ON A COMMERCIAL FLIGHT, the CERTIFICATE HOLDER (airline) has teh legal decision power, not the PIC.

it is not nesc a legal matter because according to the tsa nor the faa they didnt tell me that it was illegal.

Yes it is.

in fact the tsa wrote me back and told me that the faa scientists assure them that no electronic devices cause harm to the aircraft.

I would love to see that letter, but "NONE" is wrong, as I you could easily build or buy one that does.

so what do you have to say about that though? i appologize that i dont get it. i'm not a 40 year old guy who's been scanning and have had a ham license for 20 years. in fact i'm not even 20 years old. i have no ham license. and just started scanning as a hobby a couple years ago. i'd be the first to admit i dont know much about this stuff, however i am also a very very avid aviation enthusiast for many many years since i was a little little kid. i've been on flights with people useing their cell phones, and a flight attendent walks right by. the point i'm trying to make though is that even though it MAY be illegal, (even though it's only a policy, it's no a law that will cuase jail or fine. just getting kicked off the flight) people do it anyways. and if it hasnt proven except in a one in a billion chance that it will effect anything on that aircraft, then i'm going to do it unless they tell me otherwise. or else i'll ask them. and yes after these talks i think i'm going to ask them.

Whatever

and because the PIC is in control of the aircraft, i dont see why he could not make the call.

Simply not true.

he knows the aircraft inside and out. and probobly at least twice as better as anyone in the legal area who would make the call. plus how do you know that the airline doesnt let the pilot make those kinds of decisions? they're not idiots you know. you dont know unless you ask. and if the pilot didnt think it was safe, then i respect that. however if he says its ok, i'm going to do it. because i still dont believe it will casue any damage. only one case as been sighted, and it was sighted as that it may have played a factor. not that it was proven. thanks

I am not arguing the likelihood of interfering.

My points are
1) It is possible (and that is good enough for me)
2) It is prohibited (by Airline rules, that carry the weight of law) and that is good enough for me.


P.S. Take the time to at least separate you thoughts. It will be good practice for the day wen you are over 20 and have to communicate for a living.

 

[N_Jay]

The FAA says that it is up to the airline. how does that make it a federal law?????

Because the airline rules carry the weight of law.

 

[loumaag]

What I am tired of, is people who continue this argument even though the rules are plainly stated by an FAA employee in the Wiki. Go read it! And why this topic comes up so often is that there is a belief in some peoples mind that they know better than the people who make the rules. It doesn't matter if you believe a receiver can cause problems with aircraft aeronautics, it doesn't matter if you sneakily have done so in the past, it doesn't matter what your opinion on the rules are or if N_Jay is right or sojo96 is right, etc., etc.

What matters is that every time this topic comes up it turns into a contest about who has done what, who believes what, who...
I will repeat, go read the rules, and quit bringing up this tired tired tired topic over and over again.

This thread is closed.