Scanning In Flight

[Voyager]

Your scanner IS a radio receiver! (In case you did not know) :roll:

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/electronics.html

Portable devices that may never be operated inside the aircraft: hand-held scanners, two-way radios, remote controlled toys, wireless mouses or joysticks, watches capable of transmitting data, and other transmitters unless otherwise noted in these guidelines.

Note that Southwest is the only one that specifically prohibits scanners. A scanner is not legally the same as a "radio", as shown by Southwest's SEPARATE prohibition of radios. A scanner is also not an "AM/FM receiver", "TV set", or "transmitter".

Also note that all the devices in their list are intentional transmitters except the scanners.

Southwest does make it very clear that hand held scanners are never allowed to be operated onboard. The rest are open to interpretation (which IS a legal defense).

It still amazes me that the so-called 'reason' for all these prohibitions is RF interference when almost ANY laptop emits more RF radiation than any of the receiver's local oscillators would emit. Why won't they prohibit laptops? Because then they would lose business customers. So the argument about 'safety concerns' is pure BS. They allow devices that emit more interference than scanners. It comes down to money. There just aren't enough people who want to use scanners onboard or who would make enough fuss to get the airline to change their policies.

Also note that you apparently could use a MOBILE scanner legally onboard Southwest. (although I wouldn't want to be the person to push the issue)

You could also apparently use a "wide band receiver" such as the AOR models, as they are not scanners in the technical sense. (same disclaimer as above)

They don't even prohibit 802.11b devices which ARE intentional transmitters. (yet another valid reason to prohibit laptops)

Joe M.

 

[N_Jay]

Note that Southwest is the only one that specifically prohibits scanners. A scanner is not legally the same as a "radio", as shown by Southwest's SEPARATE prohibition of radios. A scanner is also not an "AM/FM receiver", "TV set", or "transmitter".

1) the airlines are free to set their own rules.

The rules of one do not impact the rules of the others.

Just because SWA decided to be more specific does not impact the meaning of the others regulation.

2) A scanner IS a radio. To argue otherwise is foolish!

 

[greateratlanta]

I was under the impression that all scanners create birdie frequencies that could interfere with other communications on those frequencies. It is probably unlikely that your scanners birdie frequencies are identical to those used for Air Traffic, but you can never be sure.

 

[Al42]

I was under the impression that all scanners create birdie frequencies that could interfere with other communications on those frequencies. It is probably unlikely that your scanners birdie frequencies are identical to those used for Air Traffic, but you can never be sure.

"Birdies" are signals the scanner creates that it receives itself.

ALL radio receivers (except crystal sets and TRF receivers) create signals that can interfere with other receivers.

The bottom line, however, is that the law gives the airline the legal right to allow the pilot to allow any non-transmitter (not non-transmitting) electronic device, not otherwise prohibited, to be used while in flight, and makes it a violation of the law if you use a device the pilot or the company tells you not to use. (The company can't insist that the pilot allow you to use a device. It can prohibit him from giving permission or it can allow him to decide.)

 

[N_Jay]

"Birdies" are signals the scanner creates that it receives itself.

ALL radio receivers (except crystal sets and TRF receivers) create signals that can interfere with other receivers.

The bottom line, however, is that the law gives the airline the legal right to allow the pilot to allow any non-transmitter (not non-transmitting) electronic device, not otherwise prohibited, to be used while in flight, and makes it a violation of the law if you use a device the pilot or the company tells you not to use. (The company can't insist that the pilot allow you to use a device. It can prohibit him from giving permission or it can allow him to decide.)

. . . . .And since the company has already said "No" (On the web site, and in every in-flight magazine I have ever seen) asking the pilot is pointless. The Pilot DOES NOT have the right to overrule the company.

 

[Voyager]

I was under the impression that all scanners create birdie frequencies that could interfere with other communications on those frequencies. It is probably unlikely that your scanners birdie frequencies are identical to those used for Air Traffic, but you can never be sure.

Actually, nearly all ELECTRONICS create birdies. The difference is that they don't affect reception since most scanners can also HEAR the birdies.

Now, comparing the number of birdies coming from a PC compared to a scanner is like comparing a 747 to a hang glider.

Joe M.

 

[Voyager]

2) A scanner IS a radio. To argue otherwise is foolish!

1. If it was legally the same, they would not have listed radio separate from scanner. Do you go around saying things twice and then saying the first thing again?

2. Yes, the regulations of one company in an industry DO impact the interpretation of the regulations of other companies - it's called industry standard terminology. SWA left no room for interpretation (OR left more room for interpretation - see below). The other did by the absense of 'scanners' in their list. (assuming it didn't appear elsewhere in the list that was posted). Their standards CAN be used against the others to the point that it shows the others chose to NOT list 'scanners', as SWA did. That opens up reasonable doubt of inclusion and interpretation by the user. Once that is open, it leads to a verdict of 'innocent' - even if the company meant to include scanners. Remember, it's not the intent - it's the letter, and any doubt in either must be ruled in favor of the defendant.

Note what I said about 'wide band receivers'. They are not 'scanners' nor 'radios'. The problem when you go into specifics is that you open the door for other more specific items (such as receivers, frequency counters, nearfield receivers) to be let back in.

Case in point: "Dogs not allowed. Dobermans not allowed. Rotweilers not allowed."
You just opened the door for Labs to be let in by their specific exclusion. If the list had been left at "Dogs not allowed" there would have been less room for interpretation. Since specific breeds were listed, there is room for interpretation, and you cannot fault someone for the wrong interpretation. It was your fault for creating the confusing (one could even say conflicting) rules.

Joe M.

 

[garys]

Note that Southwest is the only one that specifically prohibits scanners. A scanner is not legally the same as a "radio", as shown by Southwest's SEPARATE prohibition of radios. A scanner is also not an "AM/FM receiver", "TV set", or "transmitter".

Joe M.

You bandy about the term "legal" quite freely and in this case incorrectly. Southwest makes neither law nor legal terms. They can and do specify what passengers can bring on to their airlines which they are free to do as long as they don't violate the various laws and regulations that govern commerical airlines.

A scanner is a sub set of devices known as radios. It is designed to recieve RF, which stands for radio frequency. Therefore, I'd say that a scanner is a radio, notwithstanding SWA's redundant terminology.

Gary

 

[N_Jay]

Actually, nearly all ELECTRONICS create birdies. The difference is that they don't affect reception since most scanners can also HEAR the birdies.

Now, comparing the number of birdies coming from a PC compared to a scanner is like comparing a 747 to a hang glider.

Joe M.

A "Birdie" is a frequency where a receiver "Self Quiets" or receives other internally generated signals.

Almost all electronics RADIATES signals that could interfere with other equipment, but these are NOT called BIRDIES.

 

[N_Jay]

1. If it was legally the same, they would not have listed radio separate from scanner. Do you go around saying things twice and then saying the first thing again?

2. Yes, the regulations of one company in an industry DO impact the interpretation of the regulations of other companies - it's called industry standard terminology. SWA left no room for interpretation (OR left more room for interpretation - see below). The other did by the absense of 'scanners' in their list. (assuming it didn't appear elsewhere in the list that was posted). Their standards CAN be used against the others to the point that it shows the others chose to NOT list 'scanners', as SWA did. That opens up reasonable doubt of inclusion and interpretation by the user. Once that is open, it leads to a verdict of 'innocent' - even if the company meant to include scanners. Remember, it's not the intent - it's the letter, and any doubt in either must be ruled in favor of the defendant.

Note what I said about 'wide band receivers'. They are not 'scanners' nor 'radios'. The problem when you go into specifics is that you open the door for other more specific items (such as receivers, frequency counters, nearfield receivers) to be let back in.

Case in point: "Dogs not allowed. Dobermans not allowed. Rotweilers not allowed."
You just opened the door for Labs to be let in by their specific exclusion. If the list had been left at "Dogs not allowed" there would have been less room for interpretation. Since specific breeds were listed, there is room for interpretation, and you cannot fault someone for the wrong interpretation. It was your fault for creating the confusing (one could even say conflicting) rules.

Joe M.

When you get to court, let us know the rulling!

For now, I would think that in the absense of further clairification WITHIN a single companies rules the "reasonable persons" interpretation of RADIO would cover all RADIOS.

 

[N_Jay]

You bandy about the term "legal" quite freely and in this case incorrectly. Southwest makes neither law nor legal terms. They can and do specify what passengers can bring on to their airlines which they are free to do as long as they don't violate the various laws and regulations that govern commerical airlines.

A scanner is a sub set of devices known as radios. It is designed to recieve RF, which stands for radio frequency. Therefore, I'd say that a scanner is a radio, notwithstanding SWA's redundant terminology.

Gary

Well put.

The issue is that the rules of the aircraft operator carry the weight of law, and violating those rules is a federal offence.

 

[Al42]

Case in point: "Dogs not allowed. Dobermans not allowed. Rotweilers not allowed."
You just opened the door for Labs to be let in by their specific exclusion.

I think it's more like Supermarket A doesn't allow Dobermans or Rotweilers. Supermarket B doesn't allow dogs. What Supermarket A says doesn't affect what you can or can't bring in to Supermarket B. Especially if supermarket requirements carry the weight of federal law.

 

[mciupa]

So , mkewman the moral of this post is :

Please do not take your dog into the supermarket before you board the plane with your scanner.:roll:

I love these pedantic discussions.

 

[oregontreehugger]

Wow... two whole pages of posts about something that the company clearly stated.

To the layperson a scanner looks like a radio. This means it looks like a radio to the flight attendant. And to the pilot. And to the guy who is drooling on your shoulder from the seat next to yours.

They aren't going to care if you can tune in the FM broadcast band or anything else. It looks like a radio, sounds like a radio, so it must be a radio.

If someone wants to support their local lawyers and challenge the airlines' policy, I say go for it.

Me, I'll just turn my scanner off and put it back in my bag before getting on the plane.

 

[Voyager]

You bandy about the term "legal" quite freely and in this case incorrectly. Southwest makes neither law nor legal terms. They can and do specify what passengers can bring on to their airlines which they are free to do as long as they don't violate the various laws and regulations that govern commerical airlines.

A scanner is a sub set of devices known as radios. It is designed to recieve RF, which stands for radio frequency. Therefore, I'd say that a scanner is a radio, notwithstanding SWA's redundant terminology.

Gary

In any contract or policy statement, there are terms which must be made clear. That is where the legal meaning of words comes into play. You can't enforce a law that says 'no dogs' against someone who brings in an Iguana. An Iguana is not a dog - even if the intent was to ban all animals. Even if it is dressed up to look like a dog, it is not a dog.

Any laptop with 802.11 capabilities is a radio based on your definition. Since it's virtually impossible to distinguish which laptops do or do not have that ability, they too are prohibited 'radio devices'. IOW, if you find someone using a laptop that has 802.11, they are just as guilty as you are (again, using your definition). Even without 802.11 abilities, laptops also send and receive RF to operate. They just do it without regard for the external envoronment. (they don't care about the birdies/RF they produce)

I wonder if they make WinRadio units that fit into a PCMCIA slot yet... :twisted:

Joe M.

 

[N_Jay]

In any contract or policy statement, there are terms which must be made clear. That is where the legal meaning of words comes into play. You can't enforce a law that says 'no dogs' against someone who brings in an Iguana. An Iguana is not a dog - even if the intent was to ban all animals. Even if it is dressed up to look like a dog, it is not a dog.

Any laptop with 802.11 capabilities is a radio based on your definition. Since it's virtually impossible to distinguish which laptops do or do not have that ability, they too are prohibited 'radio devices'. IOW, if you find someone using a laptop that has 802.11, they are just as guilty as you are (again, using your definition). Even without 802.11 abilities, laptops also send and receive RF to operate. They just do it without regard for the external environment. (they don't care about the birdies/RF they produce)

I wonder if they make WinRadio units that fit into a PCMCIA slot yet... :twisted:

Joe M.

And if you check with MOST ALL airline regulations ANYTHING that transmits must be turned off or put in an "airplane safe" mode.

Yes they are still radios! Laws are not perfect, but the "Reasonable Person" test usually works JUST FINE!

(I don't thing REASONABLE PERSON, would find your argument REASONABLE!) :lol:

 

[eorange]

Common sense prevails over any kind of legal nitpicking and wordsmithing. We know today's prevailing circumstances when we fly. If in doubt, ask. When told no, then turn it off and put it away. I always packed a scanner when I traveled, but never even thought about taking it out and turning it on while on the airplane.

FWIW, I got busted in March 2001 on a flight when I used my GPS. It was very cool for the 5 minutes when I got to use it!

Erik
KA3FYU

 

[N_Jay]

Common sense prevails over any kind of legal nitpicking and wordsmithing. We know today's prevailing circumstances when we fly. If in doubt, ask. When told no, then turn it off and put it away. I always packed a scanner when I traveled, but never even thought about taking it out and turning it on while on the airplane.

FWIW, I got busted in March 2001 on a flight when I used my GPS. It was very cool for the 5 minutes when I got to use it!

Erik
KA3FYU

Interestingly enough, some airlines specifically allow GPS, others specifically note it with the "Not Allowed" equipment.

 

[flyingwolf]

Interestingly enough, some airlines specifically allow GPS, others specifically note it with the "Not Allowed" equipment.

And of course thats up to the specific airline.

I really dont see what all the fuss is about.

If the company says no you cant then thats it
No representative of the cmapny can say you can. Simple. Only the company itself can change its own rules.

Falling under federal law is becuase of the danger to life and limb.

If one company says its ok that doesnt mean al lcompanies say its ok.

Applebee's says all thier restaraunts are non-smoking. That doesnt mean all restaraunts must now be non-smoking, and it also means that the manager cant let you smoke there. Yes he runs the restaraunt. But not the comapny.

there really is no interpretation here.

Your in my car and light up I am gonna kick you out. Simple.

How did such an obvious question get to be a 2 page discussion.

To answer the OP.

Is it illegal? No not at all. Its a rule though.
Does it actually cause interferance? Well honestly I dont know. I would hope planes would be well shileded enough so as not to be brought down by a simple scanner. But who knows.
They are built by the lowest bidder.

 

[K5MAR]

The last time this topic went around, oh, about a year ago, there happened to be an article in the Smithsonian Air & Space magazine that touched on it. I posted the info at the time and don't have access to the issue now, but basically it said (as I recall) that there had been several incidents of interferance to flight instruments caused by the use of consumer personal electronic devices by the passengers. This is why the FAA and the various airlines have certain restrictions in place. We can argue all we want which devices cause more interference, it really doesn't matter. The FAA has given the aircraft operator (which, in the case of commercial aircraft, is the Company, not the pilot) the power to decide what they will allow. This makes sense, as it is the operator that has the final liability if something goes wrong.

My suggestion: if you are planning to take a trip, call or email the airline in question and ask if the use of a radio scanning receiver, or any other radio receiver, is allowed. If they say no, than that's it. No means no. If you try to circumvent the rules and get caught, you are basically at the mercy of the flight crew. They might slap you on the wrist, or the might kick you off at the next stop, or worse. Think they can't? I just saw on the news that SouthWest Airlines kicked a passenger off after she refused to change her t-shirt which had what was deemed an obscene word on it.

Interestingly enough, a couple of years ago I had a late night contact on 146.520 Mhz (the Amateur Radio 2m simplex calling frequency) with the pilot of a Chicago-bound airliner. He had the antenna attached to the cockpit side window using a Radio Shack suction cup mount. I won't name the airline, but their rules do not allow this sort of activity by the passengers. Hmmm!

Mark S.