I am confused.

[MEL-World]

I am feeling very sorry for the pax occupying seat 11K on SQ 107 KUL-SIN 24 January. Not only did he board late but was then so busy with vital business decisions that he needed to use both his computer and mobile until the plane was 300m above the ground on take-off when he obviously lost a mobile signal. He was then restricted to only the computer until 300m before landing when he could go back to his mobile until we disembarked. It was all e-mail with only one call, as far as I could hear so did not disrupt other passengers too much.

He must have been a VVIP as not only did he ignore at least 4 PA messages about use of mobiles and electronic equipment both on take-off, ascent, decent and landing, he was generally ignored by the crew. One female attendant tentatively reminded him to put his computer away but all the male attendants completely ignored him, even telling another female attendant that it was okay. They did check but chose to ignore.

So either there is no danger to aircraft safety from the use of mobiles and computers during take-off and landing and the PA announcements can safely be ignored or SQ has one rule for most of us and another rule for a few. How busy can you be that you cannot relax for a 35min flight?

I am a TPP so fly a lot with SQ but this is the most obvious breach of the rules I have seen - both by the pax and also by the crew. Yes, this issue has been covered often before on SQTalk and other forums but with more airlines making internet access available in the air, do the PA announcements need to be changed or do the crew need to continue to properly enforce the regulations?

I bet the pax would not have got away with this behaviour in the US, much of Europe or Australia, so why is it okay in Asia?

Comments...

[CarbonMan]

You're probably right that he is a VVVIP and probably well known by some of the crew.

Normally SQ is very strict with the rules. I'm a QPP and I do get it from the flight crew to take off my earphones, put my bags away, or stop checking my mail. However, I have to admit I do cheat once in a blue moon, after the crew takes their seats, when I have some time-sensitive stuff to communicate.

Frankly I doubt phone signals will really interfere with flight electronics otherwise they would've already banned them lest the terrorists sends 20 of them up a plane and get all of them to make phone calls at the same time!

These days I feel they are just concerned that if there's an emergency, the pax can hear or sense it (so no distractions like watching a movie), and the path to exit the plane is not hampered in anyway. Also they request that laptops are stowed away in the event emergency breaks are applied, lest the device smacks right into your head, or worse, somebody else's.

In the US, they seem to be more liberal on the rules (in the plane, not the TSA) - one can make phone calls the moment the plane hits the runway.

[sqdazz]

you can be assured that on every single flight there is half a dozen mobiles not turned off in peoples bags and not in flight mode.

people generally don't give a sh**

[ozdude]

Using laptops on take off is dangerous, full stop. Regardless of signal interference, if there is any emergency then that laptop is a missile in the cabin. To me, that is a serious breach, and Singapore Airlines should be made aware that their staff put passengers at risk.

[FlyingDan]

I find it baffling that people actually believe mobile phones can cause interference with the navigational systems. There is none scientific proof to back up that statement at all.

As a result, I always ignore the announcement and continue to text friends and email colleagues. 95% of the time I fly 12+ hour flights and 12 hours actually is a long time without internet access and thus every minute prior to losing signal 500-600 feet up in the air does matter.

[SQGamespeed]

I have found several people blatantly using mobile phones on a few of my flights while the plane was taking off or landing. The crew clearly saw those and mostly never bothered to tell them to turn them off. No complaints from other crew or the pilot either, so it is obvious that a few phones won't cause disruptions to navigation systems for the most part.

So I find that the announcement "All electronic devices MUST (caps are mine) now be switched off" is not taken as an obligation by many pax as implied, but just a suggestion, and crew don't seem to enforce it so much so as upright seats, window shades up, etc.

But it's always good to play it safe, so I usually turn off my phone. However, I once flew from SIN-MEL and discovered upon arrival that my phone had been on for the entire trip!

[mr_botak]

The CAA did a series of tests yonks ago on a 737-200 in a hanger at Gatwick and concluded minimal if any interference occured.

The issue in the US is actually an FCC one, some worry about overloading base stations I think.

I'm more worried about the hard objects flying around the cabin in an RTO or other rapid stop. I'm even more worried that we appear to have spawned a generation who cant cope for even five minutes without thier facbook fix.

As for the VVVIP about the first thing I figured out about life in Malaysia was to just smile and let that sort of thing go :-(

[KC*]

While I agree that mobile phones are probably quite harmless, I still comply with the requirement to turn them off as a courtesy and respect for the rules of the airline. It is also to make it more pleasant for the crew.

[Short Final]

It is also to make it more pleasant for the crew.

Well said.

[B727]

A couple of years back, I was on an SQ flight in J and this male pax boarded at the last minute, sat down in the center aisle across from me one row up, and would not put away his cellphone.

The male pax seated in the aisle directly in front me took one look at him--you could see the displeasure on his face--and growled at him to put away the mobile. And the guy still did not put away his cell! An FSS later intervened and made sure he put away the phone just before we reached the end of the runway!

This past summer on a very full UA flight from MIA to IAH, packed with connecting pax inbound from South American flights, the only phrase in Spanish the otherwise all-Anglophone crew said for pre-take off and landing announcements was "Apaga electronica" which literally means "turn off electronic"

[259850]

Take a few flights in China, particularly flights not originating or terminating in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, etc, and these transgressions will appear minor. On a particularly bumpy CZ flight I took early Dec, passengers just hung out chatting on aisles despite multiple announcements on seat belt rules. I really do pity crew on domestic flights.

[MEL-World]

Take a few flights in China, particularly flights not originating or terminating in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, etc, and these transgressions will appear minor. On a particularly bumpy CZ flight I took early Dec, passengers just hung out chatting on aisles despite multiple announcements on seat belt rules. I really do pity crew on domestic flights.

You are right, of course. I have taken some 'dangerous' flights in China due to passengers not wanting to listen to announcements. Their habit of overloading the bins, a trait copied by US passengers, makes me fearful should a bin open in flight during heavy turbulence. The point of my original post was really the question of safety in flight and passengers who wilfully disregard the safety of the many by their selfish attitude - I am more important that the rest of you.

[MEL-World]

Got a very quick response from SQ that said, in part...

"Please be assured that our staff are trained to be vigilant in checking on the use of electrical equipment and that this incident is not a reflection of our normal standards. "

Just as you would expect, I guess. They say they have passed the comments thru the system (my words) so that they can " counsel the crew members concerned."

My overall impression of SQ crew is excellent but, of course, it is always difficult to enforce a rule with a commercially important customer who is clearly not interested in understanding his responsibilities.

[Inflight Sup]

Front line staff will always get the hits first, from customers or management and at times both.

Rules are rules and there are tools to assist front line crew. In this instance where compliance to a safety rule is ignored, a letter of warning signed by the commander of the flight can be issued.

If non compliance is still practiced, it can escalate to an off loading. This will require the full support of the commander who decides based on the information received from the crew in charge. Once this is initiated, there is no turning back and the flight will be delayed.

No body likes delays. Yet such actions must be carried through or else it may be viewed merely as a threat, or worse, negotiable just because its a VVIP.

Middle management will always take the view ( for whatever complaint) that the staff's skills, demeanor,knowledge is lacking and therefore will be 'counseled'.
Seldom will they take responsibility for poor systems, procedures or training.
( at least never publicly)