Scanning In-Flight (again)

[mkewman]

i know this topic has been talked about way too much, but i just called the TSA, and they told me that as long as the scanner doesn't transmit, it's allowed inflight.

now i'm not sure if they even have any say in this...

but that's what they said.

i know there's something in the wiki about this but has anyone actually scanned inflight?

 

[toydriver_det]

i know this topic has been talked about way too much,...

You're right!

 

[N_Jay]

i know this topic has been talked about way too much, but i just called the TSA, and they told me that as long as the scanner doesn't transmit, it's allowed inflight.

now i'm not sure if they even have any say in this...

but that's what they said.

i know there's something in the wiki about this but has anyone actually scanned inflight?

I just called the local dog catcher and he said the same thing.

Of course neither the TSA nor the dog catcher has responsibility or jurisdiction over the use of electronic equipment on an aircraft.

That is the responsibility of the FAA, (in some regards the FCC) and the "operator of the Aircraft.

 

[RobRWinters]

I actually have scanned in-flight. I flew Midwest Express from DFW, connected in Milwaukee on to DC. I asked the captain when I boarded. He told me that it would be okay once we pass 10,000 ft and the announcement was made that it was acceptable.

On the return trip, I asked the captain, and that one said no.

So, again it just depends on the captain.

 

[kc8unj]

I found some helpful info in the wiki:
http://www.radioreference.com/wiki/index.php/Scanning_on_an_Airplane

 

[N_Jay]

So, again it just depends on the captain.

Actually (and this has been covered about 1000 times already) it is ONLY up to the Captain/Pilot IF (big IF) the operator (The Airline) has given him/her permission to make that decision.

If the Operator (The Airline for commercial flights) has not given the Captain/Pilot permission to allow it, or if they have specifically prohibited it, then the Captain's/Pilot's permission is worthless.

For MOST commercial airlines it is specifically prohibited, as are all other RADIO RECEIVERS.


(Now some here will go into the illogical argument that "RADIO RECEIVERS" and other such language only means AM/FM Broadcast receivers and not scanners; but I will not follow those people down that rabbit hole!)

 

[mkewman]

anywho,

i created this thread to hear the experiances of people who have scanned in flight... i don't think i made that clear enough, i really didn't want this to turn into a flamewar.

 

[nicklep417]

I've tried scanning on flights before. I guess it depends on where you are going and where you happen to be flying over at the moment, but in my experience, there's really not much to hear. I don't have a portable that is capable of recieving ariband, so I couldn't listen to the pilot or other air traffic. But all of you with more modern scanners can listen in on your pilot if you wanted to.

 

[N_Jay]

All depends where you are.

Works well from a Cessna over LA, except you may get interference from multiple systems on the same frequency (that are using the ground level terrain for separation, i.e. short spacing)

Yes you are allowed to scan in a private aircraft with the pilot's permission. (helps a whole lot if he is also a ham )

 

[JLHDU]

Monitoring doesn't affect the avionics...why would they care.

J

 

[MacombMonitor]

Monitoring doesn't affect the avionics...why would they care.

J

Because you might be able to tell the pilots been drinking!

 

[N_Jay]

Monitoring doesn't affect the avionics...why would they care.

J

Any receiver throwing a strong enough LO signal CAN affect the NAV receiver. :roll:

The fact that you don't recognise this FACT is EXACTLY why the FAA makes these rules.

Edit:
Just looked at your profile.

Hmmm, interesting occupation. Would have suspected they covered the basics of aircraft navigation technology better. :roll: I guess you don't really need to know how something works to use it. :wink:
SO true in many fields. :twisted:

 

[JLHDU]

I just tell them where to go and what to do...not fly them.

And...make alot more money than the pilots. ;-)

 

[N_Jay]

I just tell them where to go and what to do...not fly them.

And...make alot more mone than the pilots. ;-)

Yes, but I (wrongly) assumed, you would have an understanding of why the rules are structured the way they are. :roll:

As for the salaries, I would guess it has much to do with the class of aircraft and the amount of seniority.

I doubt you make a lot more then some of them.

 

[JLHDU]

Ok...let's play monday morning quarterback. I can see how it would affect an NDB, ILS or even a VOR approach but how could it affect point to point nav? I don't know and am not bragging that I do. And yes...I work JETS.

 

[N_Jay]

Ok...let's play monday morning quarterback. I can see how it would affect an NDB, ILS or even a VOR approach but how could it affect point to point nav? I don't know and am not bragging that I do. And yes...I work JETS.

If you can see how it could affect ANY of the NAV systems, and since the passenger would have no way of knowing what systems the pilots may be relying on at that moment, then would you not agree a general rule prohibiting receiver use is prudent?

Is not much of the point to point NAV accomplished by phase detection of directional data carried on the AM modulated NAV beacons?

Aren't AM receivers very susceptible to interference?

Isn't a very weak signal from a nearby source received with the same or stronger level as a distant but more powerful transmitter?

Would not the three issues above make you concerned about LO leakage potentially affecting NAV reception in an aircraft?

 

[JLHDU]

If you can see how it could affect ANY of the NAV systems, and since the passenger would have no way of knowing what systems the pilots may be relying on at that moment, then would you not agree a general rule prohibiting receiver use is prudent?

Is not much of the point to point NAV accomplished by phase detection of directional data carried on the AM modulated NAV beacons?

Aren't AM receivers very susceptible to interference?

Isn't a very weak signal from a nearby source received with the same or stronger level as a distant but more powerful transmitter?

Would not the three issues above make you concerned about LO leakage potentially affecting NAV reception in an aircraft?

Yes. Yes. Yes, I think? And...yes.

It was a poor choice of judgement to assume the average everyday flier would know how a scanner could/would affect navigational equipment. BUT, wouldn't most scanner hobbyist know the potential possibilities? I know that doesn't make it ok, but. I am new to the hobby and do not know myself precisely how a cell phone could affect nav? I heard recently that the FAA was going to lift the restriction of cellphones? Is this true/possible? Many carriers have phones onboard (although they don't work until they are at altitude), what kind of system do they use? Everyday, communications professionals on websites like this educate novices like myself...I have alot to learn.

-JLHDU

 

[N_Jay]

From the postings on this board, I would say that MOST scanner hobbyists know as much about how there scanners work as most drivers understand an automobile engine works (Well enough to use it, and that is about all).

There are plenty here who have a much better understanding, and there are a few here who "think" they have a better understanding.

The cell phone issue is a separate topic. The actual restriction is an FCC not an FAA restricted. (If the FAA were to say yes, or more accurately give the airlines permission to say yes, then it is still illegal (for some very good technical reasons) from an FCC standpoint.

The Airphone systems are NOT cell phones at all, do not have the technical issues that cell phones have and are specifically licensed for aeronautical use.

 

[JLHDU]

From the postings on this board, I would say that MOST scanner hobbyists know as much about how there scanners work as most drivers understand an automobile engine works (Well enough to use it, and that is about all).

There are plenty here who have a much better understanding, and there are a few here who "think" they have a better understanding.

The cell phone issue is a separate topic. The actual restriction is an FCC not an FAA restricted. (If the FAA were to say yes, or more accurately give the airlines permission to say yes, then it is still illegal (for some very good technical reasons) from an FCC standpoint.

The Airphone systems are NOT cell phones at all, do not have the technical issues that cell phones have and are specifically licensed for aeronautical use.

Thanks...I didn't know that.

-J

 

[mjw357]

The cell phone issue is a separate topic. The actual restriction is an FCC not an FAA restricted. (If the FAA were to say yes, or more accurately give the airlines permission to say yes, then it is still illegal (for some very good technical reasons) from an FCC standpoint.

I am hoping it stays resrticted, just from the standpoint that I don't want to be on a plane for 6 hours with 95 idiots talking an thier G.D. cellphones the whole way.