Mobile phone headset adaptors

rogcal · Post by **rogcal** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 7:15 am

Has anyone used a mobile phone in an open cockpit environment using a headset adaptor and if so, what if any problems did they encounter?

I've seen a couple of adaptors available and one is amplified and before I go spending my hard earned dosh, I'd like some feedback from anyone who has used the amplified and unamplified adaptors.

Thanks.

Nigel Ramsay · Post by **Nigel Ramsay** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:59 am

Worth pointing out to the readers in general; It's ILLEGAL! There is a problem apparently when a mobile locks onto more than one 'cell' at a time. Having said that I've spoken to and from a/c by mobile and it's generally a bit of an iffy reception (same reasons perhaps).

Captain Pulsar · Post by **Captain Pulsar** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:44 am

To my mind, one of the best bits about flying is not having to answer the phone!!

martin payne · Post by **martin payne** » Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:58 pm

The reception of mobile phones will be a bit iffy, as the base station Tx/Rx are very low level, they are designed to throw signal out at ground level and don't have much height. you can't even get a mobile to work on the roof of Canary Wharf.... You would think you would get a marvelous reception, wouldn't you?......Think again.
I would think any use use in a light aircraft would be a non starter for the same reason.

Dave Hall · Post by **Dave Hall** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:24 am

It certainly can work - I received and sent texts from home to an aircraft 'somewhere in England', keeping the pilot updated on WX reports for an extended cross country on a day when the wind was substantial. I wonder if that constitutes being an accessory?

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:57 am

Yes Dave, it does seem to work as I have certainly received texts and voicemail when airborne, and felt the phone vibrating when people are trying to get hold of me. When I was looking around for a new headset, some of the Lightspeed models had a dedicated phone input socket (apparently it is legal in the US).
Must say I agree with John though, wouldn't want to be bothered with phone calls when flying.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:36 am

Hi Nigel, you state it is illegal but can you point to the actual legislation.

I agree that the pilot has enough to cope with, pax less so, but as a potential communication backup I even think some authorities have OKed it.

Wx actuals - current rainfall graphics etc could be as useful in the air - they are on the ground.

Nigel Ramsay · Post by **Nigel Ramsay** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:37 pm

Try this for starters... http://www.flyer.co.uk/news/newsfeed.php?artnum=713 seems it's good old Aunty!

rogcal · Post by **rogcal** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:46 pm

Thanks for the responses and Nigel's link to the Flyer article was extremely enlightening.

Obvioulsy OFCOM and the CAA assume "mobiles" affect all the current technology in our aircraft.

I must warn the the basic 50 year old instuments in my VP1 panel to be onguard against spurious mobile phone interference!

merlin · Post by **merlin** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:55 pm

I was getting confused with the D and D number given out a couple of years ago for use if radio failure occurred (esp if no xpdr was fitted).

re the "Any mobile phone on an aircraft which does not have a base station will attempt to reach a base station by using an increasingly strong signal, eventually (potentially) reaching a point where it could interfere with the aircraft's systems. A CAA study in 2003 showed that mobile phones could 'skew' navigation bearings by up to five degrees; the CAA says that it affects older (dial/gauge) systems"

It is just possible that nav systems would be out if radio failed.

From other threads in other places it seems that Ofcom might live in the world which used to ban mobiles in many hospitals.

So in extremis I would try my mobile.

tnowak · Post by **tnowak** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:56 pm

Rogcal,

You are slightly missing the point! It is also interference to the terrestrial ground network that makes cellphone use in the air a no no. This is an extract from an OFCOM report on cellphone use in airliners and why special equipment (located in the airliner) must be used.

"Mobile handsets and devices switched on during flight have the potential to interfere with numerous terrestrial base stations. Mobile handsets on the ground are normally only a metre or two above ground height and terrestrial clutter will ensure that only a small number of base stations will be in the served area of a mobile at any one time.
Mobiles in an aircraft, on the other hand, can detect numerous base stations at any time as they try to register with the closest of them. Given the long distances covered by aircraft, this could increase co-channel interference beyond that assumed by the network planners and thereby degrade the quality of service on the ground."
Hope this helps.
Tony Nowak

Joe Iszard · Post by **Joe Iszard** » Tue Mar 31, 2009 8:58 pm

'Chuntering' up to Suffolk from the London area one day, a couple of years ago, and in contact with Wattisham when the Controller asked me to turn off my mobile - Whoops!

rogcal · Post by **rogcal** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 3:15 am

OK, OK, so it's cocoa tins and waxed string from now on then!

Nigel Ramsay · Post by **Nigel Ramsay** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:13 am

Now Now! Why try to push the bounds of acceptable technology - Homing Pigeons like what they threw out of Lancasters when they had radio failure! I used to work with a guy who had been a radio tech in the RAF during WW2. When it was a foggy day, he'd sit at his desk muttering "all the radios will be buggered today"!

mike newall · Post by **mike newall** » Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:30 pm

Not to drift the thread too much - if you want to take an audio feed out to a video recorder so that the radio/intercom etc can be heard, what is the easiest way of doing it without rewiring the radio ?