FAA bans pilots' personal use of electronic devices in cockpit

FAA bans pilots' personal use of electronic devices in cockpit | Mobile - CNET News


http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2014-02991_PI.pdf

You have to read the details and reference the FCC rules for definitions but it's unclear whether this applies to e-readers.

It sounds like the intent is to ban communication devices using cell service systems. E-readers have wifi that can be used to load new e-books, I'm not sure if they fall under the FCC definition.

mostly a non-event, except for those who desire to play Angry Birds while in flight. Me, the best show on earth is out your window. Never figured those other guys out, but...

I can enjoy the view for 20 minutes or so (in the west). Looking at 1000 mile eastern undercast was only cool for the first few minutes.

I agree 100% that "interactive" digital activities can be a distraction because they can "demand" your attention at certain moments which might be the same time you needed to catch that radio call. That kind of thing probably should be banned. Hard to say where to draw the line. But good old fashioned reading (hard copy or electronic) is nothing new and should be allowed. Without some kind of mental action, people are more prone to zone out or even doze on the backside. Sometimes the other guy isn't a great conversationalist.

I know 26 pages is a lot for most people to read, but what is unclear about this?

Page 16, under III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule, Prohibited devices
This change to § 121.542 essentially does nothing new, as it only repeats a prohibition already stated in 49 U.S. Code § 44732 - Prohibition on personal use of electronic devices on flight deck.







.

I read it all. The discussion mentions e-readers but the discussion is not regulatory and appears to contradict or muddle the regulatory language. The actual language references an FCC definition which seems to describe devices which use mobile data services, ie cell networks. E-readers which don't use cell phone connectivity would not fall into the category. I think.

is this only part 121/135? cuz my part91 trips that exceed 6 hours crossing th continent will get real boring real quick without a game or two of chess and angry birds. :) the view is only good for a little while haha

Yeah, you're probably right. The first 24 pages of the docket were probably a big waste of time. We don't really need to know anything about the background, intent, or meaning of the single-sentence change to a single sub-paragraph of the whole set of Federal Aviation Regulations. It's not regulatory, and neither is the AIM.

Good luck with that argument when your friendly FAA Inspector takes issue with your use of an e-reader during cruise to break the boredom.

But I'm very interested to see which parts of the wasted 24 pages you believe to "contradict" or "muddle" the actual regulatory language.




(from your first post:
Did you glean the intent from the regulatory language, or did you glean it from the wasted 24 pages of the docket which preceded the actual regulatory language, or did you fashion the intent from thin air?

Here's the intent I read in the docket. In fact, it's on the first page, in the first paragraph:That doesn't even mention electronics or wireless, much less "cell service systems." Maybe that's what you wish it would say, but there's simply nothing to support such a wish.




This wifi thing you talk about ... does that use a wire to connect the device to something else, or does it communicate wirelessly? I mean, if it uses a wire, I could see how you would think it might not fall under the FCC definition of wireless device.

But if it's wireless ... eh, that's a tougher sell ...





Yeah, about that definition. With a few mouse clicks and average Google-foo, you can actually read that definition. Or, you can save some clicks and read here: (49 U.S. Code § 44732 - Prohibition on personal use of electronic devices on flight deck (It's subparagraph (d)))

Oh, what the hay, I'll save you all the clicks and just post it here:And, then you can see you need to figure out what "personal wireless services" means. Again, you can click on the hyperlink, or you can read it here:Or ... better still, you could read the paragraph from the docket, from among the useless, worthless 24 pages, entitled "Prohibited devices":Wow, ain't that handy!?!? BOTH references incorporated in the text of the docket! Oh, and if you still find that confusing, the next paragraph goes on to explain it further:Oh, wait, I already quoted that last sentence before. I guess that pretty much wraps it up then.



I think you should reconsider.






.

It's a change to § 121.542.






.

Stupid. If it means I can't read a book on a electronic device....but it is legal to read a book that is in print.....