Why is it against the rules to operate a scanner radio on commercial
airliners? It's not a transmitter. It can't do harm to the aircraft in
any mannner. So what's the big deal? Steve

"Steve Giovanis" wrote in message
...
Why is it against the rules to operate a scanner radio on commercial
airliners? It's not a transmitter. It can't do harm to the aircraft in
any mannner. So what's the big deal? Steve

While it is not a transmitter by design it still transmitts weak signals.
There are various oscillators in the scanners that can act as very low power
transmitters without antennas. The range may be only 100 yards but that
can be enough to cause problems with the radios and other electronic gear in
the plane. Just imagine the scanner outputs a stray signal on the
navagation receiver or it blocks a transmissoin from the tower at a critical
point. Not likely that it can hapen but they want to cover all the bases.

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 19:48:04 -0400, Steve Giovanis
wrote:

Why is it against the rules to operate a scanner radio on commercial
airliners? It's not a transmitter. It can't do harm to the aircraft in
any mannner. So what's the big deal? Steve
it IS a transmitter if it is a superhetrodyne design, the local
oscillator for the mixer is often several milliwatts, and can end up
right smack in the middle of Navigation and Communications bands.

You tune your scanner to the correct frequency so the local oscillator
is spot on you can interfere with navigation and communications.


the use in flight is explicity prohibited under FAA regulations, if
you choose to ignore, them fine, but you could find the FBI awaiting
your arrival at you next destination, and you may be spending the
night in somewhat less than 5 star accomodation..

In article .net,
Ralph Mowery wrote:

"Steve Giovanis" wrote in message
...
Why is it against the rules to operate a scanner radio on commercial
airliners? It's not a transmitter. It can't do harm to the aircraft in
any mannner. So what's the big deal? Steve

While it is not a transmitter by design it still transmitts weak signals.
There are various oscillators in the scanners that can act as very low power
transmitters without antennas. The range may be only 100 yards but that
can be enough to cause problems with the radios and other electronic gear in
the plane. Just imagine the scanner outputs a stray signal on the
navagation receiver or it blocks a transmissoin from the tower at a critical
point. Not likely that it can hapen but they want to cover all the bases.


Yet they will allow you to use a Laptop, portable DVD, Gameboy,
electric shaver, etc. All of these will put out as much if not more RF
interference than a scanner. If the airplane's navigation system is so
suceptible to RF interference, what's stopping terrorists from taking
advantage of this by using a scanner secretly, say in their pocket with
an earpiece? Or, does the scanner have to be seen by the flight crew
for it to have any ill effects?

Yet they will allow you to use a Laptop, portable DVD, Gameboy,
electric shaver, etc. All of these will put out as much if not more RF
interference than a scanner. If the airplane's navigation system is so
suceptible to RF interference, what's stopping terrorists from taking
advantage of this by using a scanner secretly, say in their pocket with
an earpiece? Or, does the scanner have to be seen by the flight crew
for it to have any ill effects?

I don't hear computers, DVDs, Gameboys, and shavers over a block and
a half away in my car on VHF and UHF, but I can show you areas where
I CAN hear the LO of a scanner 'sweeping by' when I drive through
at that distance.

It's not ALL scanners. Some are worse than others.

Heck, I've gotten permission to use my 2M ht in flight, as long as I
promised
not to transmit, and advise the captain when I turned it on AND when I
turned it off. (I assume he was actually going to look at things to see if
he
could detect any issues.)

Stop whining, keep the scanner shut off when you fly, unless you are in a
private place and the pilot in command says it's ok.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

the use in flight is explicity prohibited under FAA regulations, if
you choose to ignore, them fine, but you could find the FBI awaiting
your arrival at you next destination, and you may be spending the
night in somewhat less than 5 star accomodation..

It's up to the airline. Delta used to allow their use, but no longer.

- --
John Mayson
Austin, Texas, USA

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Linux)

iD8DBQFA3M6z2kz4fWh3iuERAkLJAJ0eujPO/hnvf//uxNdhEMVq9oRq1QCaAkas
IrXrHSW9smdAM54ziFWOpbA=
=rh0g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Just imagine the scanner outputs a stray signal on the
navagation receiver or it blocks a transmissoin from the tower at a critical
point.

I know some people who live right near airports. (almost right next to the
airports).

could them listening to scanners in their own homes interfere with the
airports' and airplanes' navigation sysyems and cause the planes to crash?

I hope not, but it sounds to me like they can from the information given in
this newsgroup.

My understanding from an aviation standpoint is that there really is no
problems with using these devices on or near aircraft. The problem lies in
that some devices MAY cause interference MAYBE. It is easier to paint
everything with the same brush and just say no than it is to say what is
allowed or not. Then you get into fighting with every clown that wants to
bring their device just because "someone else was doing it so why cant I"

As for living next to the airport and using a scanner....scanners don't
cause airplanes to crash....pilots cause airplanes to crash. Think about
it. Airports use some heavy duty transmitters...RADAR, and VHF/ UHF and
aircraft transmit all sorts of signals. Why hasn't one pilot on one
airplane or an ATC transmission caused another aircraft to get lost/act
funny/fall out of the sky?

We are merely being protected from the few that would try to use this
equipment with malicious intent.

S


"Mediaguy500" wrote in message
...
Just imagine the scanner outputs a stray signal on the
navagation receiver or it blocks a transmissoin from the tower at a
critical
point.

I know some people who live right near airports. (almost right next to the
airports).

could them listening to scanners in their own homes interfere with the
airports' and airplanes' navigation sysyems and cause the planes to
crash?

I hope not, but it sounds to me like they can from the information given
in
this newsgroup.

Following a midair crash over Manhattan in the late 50's/early 60's that
was traced to a transistor radio in one of the airplanes that was tuned
to a NYC AM station that interfered with that plane's avionics,
non-approved radios were banned from use in in-flight commercial
airliners. I don't blame the airlines for being a bit "paranoid".

"Mediaguy500" wrote in message
...
I know some people who live right near airports. (almost right next to the
airports).

could them listening to scanners in their own homes interfere with the
airports' and airplanes' navigation sysyems and cause the planes to
crash?

I hope not, but it sounds to me like they can from the information given
in
this newsgroup.


Uh, think about that for a moment. A scanner can cause interference for a
few hundred feet. How far is that plane? It's the planes receiver that's
at
issue for interference, not the ground.

It's like the idiots on Long Island that protested the first Concord flights
because they were aftraid of the supersonic airliner when it landed. The
press seemed to be sympathetic to the cause, but the night before the
pilots were featured at a press conference and were asked about that.
I think it was the co-pilot that pointed out that if the Concord was
supersonic during landing, they had a lot of other issues that were probably
more of a problem.