Cellphone headset adapter

[Flightist]

Anyone have or use one of these? Do they work like they say, that is: Do they overide in favor of the VHF radio transmissions? I've seen them for $100 and one for $250. I sure hate to pay the $250 for this. What brand do you have - Do you like it? Where did you get it?

Thanks Much

 

[banned username 2]

Uh, isn't your cell phone supposed to be off during flight?

If you transmit on your cell phone during flight you will "tag" multiple cells and can possible disrupt the cell system in the area you are flying over, and they will know whos phone that caused the problem because each phone has a unique Network Identification Number associated with it...

 

[Flightist]

Yes there is a FAR against using cellphones in flight. These adapters all state in their advertisements that they should only be used on the ground. At least one though states they could be used for inflight emergencies - call up ATC when you lose your radios.

That's an interesting theory about disrupting the cell system in your area by using one in the air. So does that mean that when I use my cellphone on a mountain top where I can reach 6 different cell towers I'm screwing up the system? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, just trying to understand how it all works.

I've seen two brands: one called safteycell which is about $100 and they also have an amplified model for about $160 and I saw another called Flightcell, I think that was the name. Please anyone with info., I'd appreciate it.

Thanks

 

[banned username 2]

That's an interesting theory about disrupting the cell system in your area by using one in the air. So does that mean that when I use my cellphone on a mountain top where I can reach 6 different cell towers I'm screwing up the system? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, just trying to understand how it all works.

No... cell sites are designed around the terrain... if you notice in some urban areas some cell antennas are on very short poles and in other areas they are on very high poles... the engineers design the site based on the terrain and coverage... By adjusting the height of the antenna they can control the size of that particular "cell"

typically mountainous areas have very poor cell coverage, and the antennas are placed to avoid excessive overlap... 2 adjoining cells never use the same frequencies... so you would have to be high enough to "leap-frog" all the ajoining cells to "tag" a cell further away... basically being airborne is about the only way you would do that...

Hope this helps...

 

[RFguy]

cellphones in flight

Actually, the FAA only prohibits cellphone use on IFR flights. However; the FCC prohibits cellphone use while airborne.

Use of a cellphone in flight would "tag" multiple cell sites which causes unnecessary congestion for the cellular carrier. There have also been cases where cellphones interfere with pilot radios....as the structure and cables throughout the airframe create a very unique resonant chamber and can create intermodulation problems with the vhf systems.

However; and more importantly. The use of cellphones in flight can have other detrimental effects, especially for navigation systems. Of particular concern is the CDMA type of cellular modulation which has been known to play havoc with GPS receivers.


Be smart, make sure it is an APPROVED system.

 

[skytrucker]

cell phones

I don't know squat about the adapters; however I do know of several people (GA aircraft) who have and continue to use thier cell phone inflight. No one I know of has had any trouble with com/nav radios. Most times the phone was in analog mode.

I don't advocate using them, however, I think the rule is really because the HUGE cell phone companies lobbied the FCC with the rule because it does use multiple sites, costing them money. I have never seen any hard facts supporting com/nav interferance. maybe it's out there, but I haven't seen it.

regards

 

[FlyinBrian]

I think the rule is really because the HUGE cell phone companies lobbied the FCC with the rule because it does use multiple sites, costing them money.

Don't make it sound like a cell company conspiracy. When you tag multiple sites, they can't bill you properly. It does cost them money to provide service that you haven't paid for, and they have every right to see that your use is regulated only to the service you've bought.

By the way, the fines for violation of this law are pretty steep. Just obey the law and wait until your on the ground. If you MUST make calls in flight, you'll have to buy an airphone.

 

[vja217]

I think flightcell (www.flightcell.com) is a total ripoff; however, the guys at safetycell (moldit.com/safetycell) seem to be a whole lot more reasonable. Thanks for bringing it up - I was looking for exactly the adapter that was mentioned. I pulled these five **LEGAL** uses for the product off that second website:

1. You can call home to let your family know you've reached your destination safely.

2. You have the ability to call your client and tell him you've arrived for the meeting, while the engine's still running!

3. Close your flight plan quickly and easily, before you ever leave the aircraft.

4. Get your IFR Clearance at uncontrolled fields.

5. Contact an FBO or Rental Car Agency that can't be reached by radio.

Besides - whether one chooses to use it in the air illegally or not is no one's business except for that person. Since I don't own any cell phone companies, I could quite frankly care less.

My Opinion?
If it was really that big of a problem, cell phone companies would develop or implement technology to prevent cell phones from tagging multiple sites, or disconnecting them immidiately when they do.

 

[Timebuilder]

>>Besides - whether one chooses to use it in the air illegally or not is no one's business except for that person. Since I don't own any cell phone companies, I could quite frankly care less.

Not to rain on your parade, but I heard of one guy who used his phone from a plane regularly. His fine was to be in excess of $10,000, and he settled with the company. The rumor was a payment of $3,000. They had some fifty pages listing the sites he had triggered in under an hour, which represented almost $50,000 in lost revenue to the site owners. Next to each location was the discrete number of his cellphone...

Be aware.

 

[FlyinBrian]

Besides - whether one chooses to use it in the air illegally or not is no one's business except for that person. Since I don't own any cell phone companies, I could quite frankly care less.

It is my business if someone chooses to use their phone illegally. As a law abiding citizen, I'm the one who pays for the cell service that illegal users steal. Saying that adherance to the law is nobody's business except the lawbreaker's is an interesting attitude for someone in aviation.

There are several legal uses for a cellphone in the cockpit. It just seems to me a whole lot easier to just shutdown, hop out and use your phone. If you HAVE to save 30 seconds, then spend the extra cash. But don't boost my cell rates by using your phone illegally.

 

[skytrucker]

cell phone companies...

Brian,

First, clean out your mailbox, dude.


You said the same thing I did in your first post.

Cell companies are HUGE billion dollar companies.
They do lose money if you "tag" sites.
They all have/are currently being sued for illegel billing practices (sidenote). My company have never errored my bill for less money, however they have charged me more, charged me for calls in states I haven't been to, etc; about two dozen times.

The only thing that raise's your bill is thier GREED.

Having said all that, using your phone inflight is a bad idea, unless it is an emergency.

Cheers

 

[prpjt]

(My Opinion?
If it was really that big of a problem, cell phone companies would develop or implement technology to prevent cell phones from tagging multiple sites, or disconnecting them immidiately when they do.)

They do disconnect the service of those individuals who break the inflight rules. There was an article in one of the aviation publications about the service provider in Florida shutting off the service of customers they caught tagging multiple sites. Service disconnection was from 24 to 48 hours.

 

[FlyinBrian]

Got the mailbox cleaned out...

 

[aggiepilot87]

Besides - whether one chooses to use it in the air illegally or not is no one's business except for that person. Since I don't own any cell phone companies, I could quite frankly care less.

I agree totally, with the only addition being the FCC & FAA... lots of busy-bodies out there.

If you're going to fire up your cell phone in the air, it might be smart to use it at the right time. Like not flying along on the phone at 300-kts, above 1000-2000' agl or using it too much. Over downtown Miami might not be too good either.

If that guy who got tagged with $10 G or so in charges really existed, then I bet he was talking dirty to his woman for an hour or so, lighting up half the cells in the state.

BTW, did anyone ever offer any comments on which products work best?

 

[Jetsnake]

First, decide what you want to be
when you grow up, a PILOT, or Phone
Operator.

 

[cvsfly]

Does anyone have the specific FCC reg under 47 CFR that addresses in-flight issues. I need to make a point to my boss and his family who have used their cell phones in air despite having been told in briefings not to use them. Is it likely that the PIC could ever face fines for letting someone else violate the FCC regs.?

 

[FlyinBrian]

47 CFR 22.925

I would imagine that only the cell user would be subject to prosecution under 47 CFR. The pilot would be liable for anything caused by navigation or communication equipment malfunctions resulting from a passenger's cell phone use.