Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Honestly? This was a flight attendant who may have had some special way to contact the ground due to her position. As to the other phone calls? Cell phones did not work at that altitude in 2001.
Honestly? This was a flight attendant who may have had some special way to contact the ground due to her position. As to the other phone calls? Cell phones did not work at that altitude in 2001.
yes cell phone did especially the analog phones (analog has greater range than digital)
yes cell phone did especially the analog phones (analog has greater range than digital)
”Once you get to a certain height, you are no longer in the range of the cellular network, because cell phone towers aren't built to project their signals that high.” Washington Post, 12/9/04
"Today's vote by the FCC is intended to address whether technology has improved to the extent that cell phone calls now are possible above 10,000 feet -- they weren't in the past.” San Francisco Chronicle, 12/15/04
That is not in question. It is the usage of his LAST NAME in question.
It was probably just indicative of his state of mind at the time.
Besides, if the call were part of some kind of government conspiracy, do you really think they wouldn't have tried to make it sound as realistic as possible?
”Once you get to a certain height, you are no longer in the range of the cellular network, because cell phone towers aren't built to project their signals that high.” Washington Post, 12/9/04
"Today's vote by the FCC is intended to address whether technology has improved to the extent that cell phone calls now are possible above 10,000 feet -- they weren't in the past.” San Francisco Chronicle, 12/15/04
PLEASE NOTICE these articles were written in 2004.
A NASA report from 2001 summarizes "14 years of incidents reported by pilots to the ASRS" of interference caused, or suspected to be caused, by passengers electronic devices. Mobile phones were the most frequently identified source of interference with laptop computers a close second. In no cases were the affected avionics found to be defective upon later testing. Degrees of correlation or confidence were not among the data summarized in the report.
A 2000 study by the British Civil Aviation Authority concluded that:
interference levels produced by a portable telephone, used near the flight deck or avionics equipment bay, will exceed demonstrated susceptibility levels for equipment qualified to standards published prior to July 1984. Since equipment qualified to these standards are installed in older aircraft, and can be installed (and is known to be installed) in newly built aircraft, current policy for restricting the use of portable telephones on all aircraft will need to remain in force.. …For safety reasons, the Regulatory Authorities should continue to prohibit the use of portable telephones by passengers on aircraft whilst the engines are running.
In the old analog cell system a channel was simply a frequency pair: There were seven groups of 35 channels each and no two adjacent cells used the same channel groups
Marvin Sirbu, professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University said on September 14, 2001, that "The fact of the matter is that cell phones can work in almost all phases of a commercial flight."[
btw
the people on the phones were using the built-in verizon air phones or using cell when the plane was at a lower altitude. all but two calls from Flight 93 were made on air phones, not cell phones, and both calls lasted about a minute before being dropped.,,,,,, Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that Flight 93 was supported by several cell sites. There were reportedly three phone calls from Flight 11, five from Flight 175, and three calls from Flight 77. Two calls from these flights were recorded, placed by flight attendants Madeleine Sweeney and Betty Ong on Flight 11.
...Cell phones did not work at that altitude in 2001.
You've never been in an airplane that had those phones in the backs of the headrests? You swipe your card and make a call. Presto! So easy, even a caveman could do it...
A NASA report from 2001 summarizes "14 years of incidents reported by pilots to the ASRS" of interference caused, or suspected to be caused, by passengers electronic devices. Mobile phones were the most frequently identified source of interference with laptop computers a close second. In no cases were the affected avionics found to be defective upon later testing. Degrees of correlation or confidence were not among the data summarized in the report.
A 2000 study by the British Civil Aviation Authority concluded that:
interference levels produced by a portable telephone, used near the flight deck or avionics equipment bay, will exceed demonstrated susceptibility levels for equipment qualified to standards published prior to July 1984. Since equipment qualified to these standards are installed in older aircraft, and can be installed (and is known to be installed) in newly built aircraft, current policy for restricting the use of portable telephones on all aircraft will need to remain in force.. …For safety reasons, the Regulatory Authorities should continue to prohibit the use of portable telephones by passengers on aircraft whilst the engines are running.
In the old analog cell system a channel was simply a frequency pair: There were seven groups of 35 channels each and no two adjacent cells used the same channel groups
Marvin Sirbu, professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University said on September 14, 2001, that "The fact of the matter is that cell phones can work in almost all phases of a commercial flight."[
btw
the people on the phones were using the built-in verizon air phones or using cell when the plane was at a lower altitude. all but two calls from Flight 93 were made on air phones, not cell phones, and both calls lasted about a minute before being dropped. Brenda Raney, Verizon Wireless spokesperson, said that Flight 93 was supported by several cell sites. There were reportedly three phone calls from Flight 11, five from Flight 175, and three calls from Flight 77. Two calls from these flights were recorded, placed by flight attendants Madeleine Sweeney and Betty Ong on Flight 11.
just a little research will get you a long way
You really have to learn how to cite your sources. Read up a few posts where I DO and it wasn't possible until 2004. And flight 93 was in nowheres-ville in PA so I HIGHLY doubt there were towers reaching 30000 feet.
”Once you get to a certain height, you are no longer in the range of the cellular network, because cell phone towers aren't built to project their signals that high.” Washington Post, 12/9/04
"Today's vote by the FCC is intended to address whether technology has improved to the extent that cell phone calls now are possible above 10,000 feet -- they weren't in the past.” San Francisco Chronicle, 12/15/04
PLEASE NOTICE these articles were written in 2004.
Really? I have used my cell phone (analog) more than 100 miles at sea...That was before 9/11 too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
