Japanese Airlines Ban DS, PSP

Gamespot is reporting that Japanese Airlines such as Japan Airlines and ANA have banned the use of wifi-capable game devices, including the DS and PSP, over 'safety concerns'. From the article: "A law banning on gaming systems with wireless capabilities came into force on Monday, according to the Hollywood Reporter. Japan's transport ministry has concluded that the electromagnetic waves from the wireless networks can interfere with aircraft navigation systems, so it's no Nintendogs for passengers flying with Japanese airlines. The new law also bans wireless computer mice, and headphones that have not been provided by the airlines, although the use of electric razors, calculators, and cassette players is permitted, readers may be relieved to know."

Ob.

[pushing-robot (1037830)]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/10/30 [penny-arcade.com]

How enforcable is this ban?

[antifoidulus (807088)]

the DS and PSP are obviously easier to ban because everyone knows what they look like and that they have wireless, but for most electronics, can you really tell just by taking a look at them whether or not they have wireless? For example, some mp3 players have wireless, some don't. Other than perhaps Zune(and who actually has one of those?) and the iPod touch(which could be an iPhone in airplane mode once it reaches Japan :P) I doubt very many flight attendants could tell you on the spot whether or not a given device is wireless or not. So if they cannot enforce the ban, why have it at all? You are just going to make people angry without adding any safety.

But this does make the environmentalist in me happy, maybe more people will take the train vs. a plane for domestic travel, and having lived in Europe, the US and Japan, I can say that the Japanese is by far the best. Though one thing I still cannot understand in both Europe and Japan is why are plane tickets more often than not cheaper than train tickets?

Re:

[Babbster (107076)]

Here's my problem with this banning: It would be a trivial exercise to teach flight attendants how to tell if the wireless is active on a Nintendo DS, and I assume that the PSP has a similar activity light. 30 minutes (or less) of training for its employees and they could avoid angering their game-playing customers - that sounds like a pretty good deal.

Intentional Transmitters

[Detritus (11846)]

Any RF transmitter has the potential to cause interference with the aircraft's communication and navigation systems. Besides the intended signal, transmitters also produce spurious outputs and noise at other frequencies. This can be a real problem for systems that deal with weak signals like GPS receivers. It doesn't take much power to jam a GPS receiver. A plane full of wifi devices could create an interference nightmare.

Inconsistent regulation

[sunderland56 (621843)]

So, they ban wireless computer mice - but not laptops, which all have 802.11 wireless capabilities, and many of which also have bluetooth?

They should ban transmission of RF - so your laptop/cellphone is fine as long as you turn off the radio part. I'm not sure if the DS or PSP can disable it's wireless capability but if it can - then you should be able to play games while on board, just not interact with other users.

Amazing how people in government/management are all technically inept, isn't it?

Why the PSP?

[sqlrob (173498)]

You can easily turn off the wireless with a switch.

There isn't a switch in the DS, but it's not on unless you use a game that turns it on.

Re:

[CRiMSON (3495)]

You mean the headphones they hand out free? Not sure how you can fleece someone with a free product. I've been on 4 different airlines in the past year and the headphones were always free to use.

Re:Fleecing?

[SighKoPath (956085)]

That entirely depends upon the pilot and the weather.

Headphones?

[Kozar_The_Malignant (738483)]

Sorry, but I fly on noisy commercial turboprops a lot (EMB 120 Brasilias), and I wear noise canceling headphones starting the instant those loud bastards start up. Many regular passengers do. I don't plug them into my ipod until the "OK to start your electronic devices" announcement. I've never had any question from a flight attendant. They're all wearing hearing protection too.

Re:well,

[king-manic (409855)]

whilst I would like to see some research done into this I think that it seems like a fairly sensible policy if there is insufficient knowledge currently to be sure of the effect that it might have. If it saves even one life it seems to be worth the inconvenience (which is pretty minor anyway).

That idea can get pretty silly. For instance Peanut butter can kill people with severe allergies, ought we ban all peanut butter in public places? Bee stings can kill certian people, ought we ban bees? A CD could presumably kill someone in exactly the right circumstance ought we ban CD's? A Scarf could kill someone too (and have killed many children), it's only a small inconvenience to go without one so ought we ban scarves?

Re:

[walt-sjc (145127)]

This is the nanny society we live in. In fact, many schools DO have a total ban on peanut butter just for that reason. Having a "peanut free" table instead would discriminate against the poor kids suffering with a peanut allergy. Yes, even at a high school, where the kid with the allergy should have enough sense not to eat another child's food by that age. I've lived with severe allergies my entire life, but a total ban on anything like that is insane.

Re:well,

[Babbster (107076)]

Yeah, you know what? Anyone that allergic ought to be wearing a fucking surgical mask. Hundreds of people - whether adults or children - should not have to change their eating habits for one person. Peanuts are not only tasty but they're nutritious as well. I'd certainly rather kids be enjoying some peanuts at lunch rather than some of the crap served by, and present in, public schools...

Re:well,

[Mattintosh (758112)]

Hey, if your kid is so allergic that my normal kid has to eat bologna sandwiches instead of PB&J, you can either pay to have your kid put in a bubble, pay to have your kid put in a private school, or pay to have my kid eat bologna. Your rights end where my nose begins, and this works both ways. I may have no right to knowingly make your kid sick, but you have no right to expect me to pick up the tab for it either.

Re:well,

[Cecil (37810)]

A lot of peanut allergies are really severe, and just the dust from someone a few seats over eating peanuts can cause a sometimes severe reaction.

Myth. Peanut allergies can be severe, but never that severe. If you were in a peanut processing facility, or the person a few seats over was smashing hundreds of peanuts into peanut butter, maybe. Just eating peanuts is going to produce an infinitesimally small amount of dust. The likelihood of inhaling even a single particle of dust in that scenario approaches zero, and is not far from the likelihood of inhaling a piece of peanut dust that was picked up on the wind from a chinese peanut factory and blown around the world and directly into your mouth. They are both statistically implausible. And even if it were to happen, a single piece of peanut dust is not enough, in any recorded case of peanut allergy, to cause even a noticeable reaction.

Enough peanut allergens can actually be transferred through saliva (kissing) to cause a mild reaction in the severely allergic but even that is very infrequent, and I can't find a single case of death as a result (No, the death of the Quebec girl had nothing to do with her peanut allergy, contrary to the media reports, it was a cigarette-induced asthma attack)

Re:well,

[AcidLacedPenguiN (835552)]

I believe there was a man who went by the name of Darwin who would have something to say about this.

Re:well,

[mchale (104743)]

Some people have peanut allergies so severe that even talking about peanuts is potentially fatal.

Re:

[bentcd (690786)]

Some people have peanut allergies so severe that even being on the same planet as a peanut is potentially fatal.

Some people have peanut allergies so severe that even talking in a language that has a word for peanut is potentially fatal.

Some people have peanut allergies so severe that even the existence of the idea of something that may be vaguely peanut-shaped is potentially fatal.

Re:

[adavies42 (746183)]

It's a minor inconvenience to the public if we lock you up for the rest of your life on the off chance that you might someday, accidentally or deliberately, kill someone, hurt someone, or hurt someone's feelings. If it saves just one person's life, limbs, or dignity, how can it not be worth it?

Re:

[Voltageaav (798022)]

You try spending an overseas flight without a PSP and then tell me it's a minor inconvenience. I generally can't sleep on planes, I can't read for more than 8 hours streight which is usually only half the flight. I'll go crazy without something to keep my mind occupied. My PSP has been a saving grace while flying and long flights are the only reason I bought extra batteries for it.

Re:

[dintech (998802)]

I think maybe Hell is something like that. A never ending late night, long haul flight with a bunch of kids making loads of noise while all the adults try to sleep.

No so bad if you're Gary Glitter...

Re:Umm...

[toriver (11308)]

That's a myth: Statistically there are usually some switched-on mobile phones on a plane, and those devices are anyway regulated for frequency bands other than the ones used by air traffic systems and the like.

The real reason is that when you are in the air, they will try and contact - at their maximum power because of the distances involved - the multiple cell network stations the plane passes as it flies at a high speed. This screws with the switching system.

So it's in the interest of the user to turn it off to preserve both battery power and their genetic material :) and in the interest of the cell phone companies to preserve network stability.

Modders to the Rescue!

[bigdady92 (635263)]

If this 'wireless' thing is such a big issue and the people see that there is no wire, they'll ask you to stop using it.

Now, we being the ingenious lil monkies we are, can easily take a single black wire and electric tape it to the inside of the headphone and then to the device. It doesn't have to be molded or connected in any way shape or form to something useful, just a nice thick attachable cable that stewardess can see and identify and pass on by.

Stewardess: Excuse me papa san, you can't use that headph

Re:Question for those who fly more then me....

[EtoilePB (1087031)]

No. I just flew cross country (JFK/LAS) twice in the last four days. The speech says that anything with an internal transmitter must have that transmitter disabled but the devices themselves are allowed. In fact I was playing MarioKart on my DS Lite most of the way back from Vegas (and my boyfriend was playing Phoenix Wright on his).

It's a cell tower problem.

[tepples (727027)]

It's funny how cell phones are banned in planes, where they've never caused a serious wreck, but in the US are allowed in cars, where they've caused a bunch of wrecks.

Standard (GSM or UMTS) mobile phones are designed to use terrestrial antenna towers. In most cases, you'll get a much stronger signal from one or two of these towers at once, and your phone will remain connected to one tower for a long period of time. In an airliner, you're so far off the ground that your phone can see more towers, and you're traveling so fast (900 km/h for a Boeing 747) that several towers might come in and out of range per minute. This load on the roaming system is why the mobile network operators don't want you using mobile phones on an airliner flight.

Re:Irony

[Detritus (11846)]

That's debatable. They are suspected of causing the crash of Crossair flight LX 498.