From Richard Epworth
Your article on the use of cellphones in aircraft reveals that illegal calls are being made throughout flights (10 September, p 44). I suggest that a picocell base station on the plane would be invaluable in identifying illegal phone use (in addition to its designated function of limiting the phones’ output power levels). The picocell need make no network connections to the outside world, but simply generate an initial warning to the offender, then record details of the offence if further action needs to be taken.
From Chris Knight
While the use of a mobile phone was a possible factor in the crash you describe in your article about mobile phones on aeroplanes, I would suggest the pilot’s lack of necessary flying experience was a significant factor.
“Flying the needles” – only following the glide slope/localiser indicator – is an elementary mistake. Industry sources expressed the opinion that the circumstances of the accident may indicate poor training and supervision, insufficient management and reporting procedures and testing by aviation authorities.
Advertisement
If a pilot prepares correctly, flies the instrument approach in accordance with procedure and carries instrument approach charts, then a number of factors would alert him to the fact he is flying too low. In this case, a cross check of instruments, assuming one is done, specifically the altimeter together with radio aids, would have clearly indicated an impending predicament.
The most striking aspect of the case was that the pilot was flying below the altitude at which the runway must be visible prior to attempting a landing. The visibility minima are normally 300 to 500 feet above ground level for an instrument rated pilot.
Cellphones may cause interference to some avionics. However, aircraft are fitted with various duplicated systems operating on different frequencies or, in the case of altimeters, air pressure.
Otego, New Zealand
Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire, UK
