Connect with us

Politics

Here’s the real reason to turn on airplane mode when you fly

Published

on

Here’s the real reason to turn on airplane mode when you fly


Editor’s Note: The views expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer. CNN is showcasing the work of The Conversation, a collaboration between journalists and academics to provide news analysis and commentary. The content is produced solely by The Conversation.



CNN
 — 

We all know the routine by heart: “Please ensure your seats are in the upright position, tray tables stowed, window shades are up, laptops are stored in the overhead bins and electronic devices are set to flight mode.”

Now, the first four are reasonable, right? Window shades need to be up so we can see if there’s an emergency, such as fire. Tray tables need to be stowed and seats upright so we can get out of the row quickly. Laptops can become projectiles in an emergency, as the seat back pockets are not strong enough to contain them.

And mobile phones need to be set to flight mode so they can’t cause an emergency for the airplane, right? Well, it depends whom you ask.

Aviation navigation and communication relies on radio services, which has been coordinated to minimize interference since the 1920s.

The digital technology currently in use is much more advanced than some of the older analog technologies we used even 60 years ago. Research has shown personal electronic devices can emit a signal within the same frequency band as the aircraft’s communications and navigation systems, creating what is known as electromagnetic interference.

But in 1992, the US Federal Aviation Authority and Boeing, in an independent study, investigated the use of electronic devices on aircraft interference and found no issues with computers or other personal electronic devices during non-critical phases of flight. (Takeoffs and landings are considered the critical phases.)

The US Federal Communications Commission also began to create reserved frequency bandwidths for different uses – such as mobile phones and aircraft navigation and communications – so they do not interfere with one another. Governments around the globe developed the same strategies and policies to prevent interference problems with aviation. In the EU, electronic devices have been allowed to stay on since 2014.

Why then, with these global standards in place, has the aviation industry continued to ban the use of mobile phones? One of the problems lies with something you may not expect – ground interference.

Wireless networks are connected by a series of towers; the networks could become overloaded if passengers flying over these ground networks are all using their phones. The number of passengers that flew in 2021 was over 2.2 billion, and that’s half of what the 2019 passenger numbers were. The wireless companies might have a point here.

Of course, when it comes to mobile networks, the biggest change in recent years is the move to a new standard. Current 5G wireless networks – desirable for their higher speed data transfer – have caused concern for many within the aviation industry.

Radio frequency bandwidth is limited, yet we are still trying to add more new devices to it. The aviation industry points out that the 5G wireless network bandwidth spectrum is remarkably close to the reserved aviation bandwidth spectrum, which may cause interference with navigation systems near airports that assist with landing the aircraft.

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - OCTOBER 01: A United Airlines plane taxis past American Airlines planes on the tarmac at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) on October 1, 2020 in Los Angeles, California. United Airlines and American Airlines are set to start furloughing 32,000 employees today after negotiations for a new coronavirus aid package failed in Washington.  (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Airline executives worry about your cellphone’s 5G network. Here’s why (2021)

02:14

Airport operators in Australia and the US have voiced aviation safety concerns linked to 5G rollout, however it appears to have rolled out without such problems in the European Union. Either way, it is prudent to limit mobile phone use on planes while issues around 5G are sorted out.

Most airlines now provide customers with Wi-Fi services that are either pay-as-you-go or free. With new Wi-Fi technologies, passengers could theoretically use their mobile phones to make video calls with friends or clients in-flight.

On a recent flight, I spoke with a cabin attendant and asked her opinion on phone use during flights. It would be an inconvenience for cabin crew to wait for passengers to finish their call to ask them if they would like any drinks or something to eat, she stated. On an airliner with 200+ passengers, in-flight service would take longer to complete if everyone was making phone calls.

For me, the problem with in-flight use of phones is more about the social experience of having 200+ people on a plane, and all potentially talking at once. In a time when disruptive passenger behaviour, including “air rage”, is increasingly frequent, phone use in flight might be another trigger that changes the whole flight experience.

Disruptive behaviours take on various forms, from noncompliance to safety requirements such as not wearing seat belts, verbal altercations with fellow passengers and cabin crew, to physical altercations with passengers and cabin crews – typically identified as air rage.

In conclusion – in-flight use of phones does not currently impair the aircraft’s ability to operate. But cabin crews may prefer not to be delayed in providing in-flight service to all of the passengers – it’s a lot of people to serve.

However, 5G technology is encroaching on the radio bandwidth of aircraft navigation systems; we’ll need more research to answer the 5G question regarding interference with aircraft navigation during landings. Remember that when we are discussing the two most critical phases of flight, takeoffs are optional – but landings are mandatory.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

US Senate backs Trump’s Iran war, shuts down Democratic push to stop conflict

Published

on

US Senate backs Trump’s Iran war, shuts down Democratic push to stop conflict


Members of US House of Representatives gather for fourth round of voting for new House Speaker on second day of 118th Congress at US Capitol in Washington, US, January 4, 2023. — Reuters
Members of US House of Representatives gather for fourth round of voting for new House Speaker on second day of 118th Congress at US Capitol in Washington, US, January 4, 2023. — Reuters
  • Senate Republicans have blocked war powers measures four times.
  • Almost all Republicans remain firmly behind Trump.
  • Democrats warn conflict could escalate.

A majority of the US Senate backed President Donald Trump’s military campaign against Iran on Wednesday, voting to block a Democratic-led resolution aiming to stop the war until hostilities are authorised by Congress.

The Senate voted 52-47 not to advance the war powers resolution, underscoring his party’s continuing support for the Republican president’s war policy more than six weeks after the US and Israel launched airstrikes on Iran.

Trump said in an interview with Fox Business Network conducted on Tuesday and aired on Wednesday that the war was close to over. Also on Wednesday, the army chief of mediator Pakistan arrived in Tehran to try to prevent a renewal of the conflict, after weekend peace negotiations ended without an agreement.

It was the fourth time Democrats have forced Senate votes on war powers measures since the war began. All of them have failed in the face of opposition from every Senate Republican except Rand Paul of Kentucky.

The libertarian-leaning Paul, who often advocates against excessive military spending and for a strict interpretation of the Constitution, was the only Republican vote in favour of the resolution in the latest vote. The only Democratic “no” came from Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman. Republican Senator Jim Justice of West Virginia did not vote.

Although the US Constitution says that Congress, not the president, can declare war, presidents from both parties have long held that the restriction does not apply to short-term operations or if the country is under immediate threat.

‘Nobody is coming to help you, Iran’

The White House, and almost all of Trump’s fellow Republicans in Congress, say Trump’s actions are legal and within his rights as commander-in-chief to protect the US by ordering limited ⁠military operations.

Opinion polls show the war is broadly unpopular, although views differ along partisan lines. A Reuters/Ipsos poll published on March 31 found that 60% of Americans opposed US military strikes on Iran, with 74% of Republicans supporting the action, compared with 7% of Democrats.

Senator Jim Risch of Idaho, the Republican chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, accused backers of the war powers resolution of supporting Iran in a speech before the vote.

“Nobody is coming to help you, Iran, except for the 47 people over here,” he said, referring to senators who back the resolution.

Democrats said they wanted Congress to retake its constitutionally mandated power to declare war, and pull the country back from what they warned could become a long conflict.

“I urge my colleagues … to choose the path of peace before President Trump’s war becomes irreversible,” Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said in a speech urging support for the vote.

Democratic Party leaders have vowed to keep bringing war powers resolutions until the conflict ends or Congress authorises continued fighting.

The House of Representatives is expected to consider a similar measure later this week.





Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Law firms helping migrants pose as gay to get asylum in UK: report

Published

on

Law firms helping migrants pose as gay to get asylum in UK: report


This representational image shows commuters cross London Bridge, in London, Britain, January 13, 2025. — Reuters
This representational image shows commuters cross London Bridge, in London, Britain, January 13, 2025. — Reuters 

LONDON: A BBC undercover investigation has alleged that a network of immigration advisers, paralegals and associated intermediaries has been helping migrants fabricate asylum claims in the UK by falsely presenting themselves as gay, charging thousands of pounds for false narratives, staged evidence and interview coaching.

At least three law firms – one of these owned by Pakistanis – have been accused by the BBC of fabricating the asylum claims through illegal means.

The law firms include Law and Justice Solicitors and Connaught Law. Law and Justice is owned by Michael Oluyemi Makinde and Connaught Law is owned by Nauman Javid, Sheryar Khan, Zehra Tamkan and Awais Javed.

According to the BBC investigation, the abuse centres on migrants, particularly from Pakistan and Bangladesh, whose student, work or tourist visas are close to expiring and who are then allegedly advised to seek asylum on the basis of sexual orientation, as being gay or lesbian.

Using undercover reporters posing as international students from Pakistan and Bangladesh, the BBC said it tested whether immigration advisers would encourage false sexuality-based asylum claims.

It reported finding multiple individuals willing to discuss fake claims, suggest supporting evidence and quote fees for handling such cases. Among the findings were allegations that Connaught Law firm quoted up to £7,000 for a fabricated claim and described the chances of refusal as “very low”, while another adviser allegedly offered to arrange fake supporting letters, photographs and even a supposed sexual partner to back up an asylum application.

The BBC undercover reporter made an appointment with Aqeel Abbasi, a senior legal adviser at Connaught Law, which has its offices in Central London on Gray’s Inn Road.

Abbasi told the BBC reporter that he could help him stay in the country and appeared to be willing to direct him on how to fabricate evidence for a fake claim. He promised that the chance of refusal by the Home Office was “very low”.

He said his fee would be £7,000 and, once that had been paid, his office would contact the undercover reporter to guide them through the process and the kind of evidence required.

This would include advising him on “where to go or what specific actions to take”.

The legal adviser also suggested the undercover reporter would need to find someone willing to pretend to be his male/gay partner. When the reporter said he had a wife in Pakistan, Abbasi was quick to suggest a cover story to explain this, by saying that things were “more open” in the UK than in Pakistan and that he now had a male partner.

“We will prepare a statement for you, and once you read it, you will understand exactly how it is,” said Abbasi.

A significant part of the investigation focused on Worcester LGBT, a support organisation for gay and lesbian asylum seekers, which holds monthly meetings attended by large numbers of migrants from across the country.

The BBC traced the undercover reporter’s route to the group through Mazedul Hasan Shakil, a paralegal at Law and Justice Solicitors, an immigration firm based in Birmingham and London, who is also described as founder and chairman of Worcester LGBT.

The reporter received a call from a woman identified as Tanisa (Shakil’s associate), who, in Urdu, allegedly became much more direct about using a “gay case” as the only realistic route to stay in Britain.

When told the reporter was not gay, Tanisa replied: “There is nobody who is real. There is only one way out in order to live here now and that is the very method everyone is adopting.” The BBC identified her as Tanisa Khan, an adviser linked to Worcester LGBT.

The broadcaster then described an initial meeting in Forest Gate, east London, which took place in Tanisa’s home.

According to the report, she laid out a plan to fabricate an asylum claim on the grounds of same-sex orientation, warning that the applicant would have to memorise a false story convincingly for Home Office interviews. The report said she offered to obtain a letter from someone claiming to have had sexual relations with the applicant and said she would fully prepare him for the Home Office process.

She charged £2,500, with additional costs if the claim failed and went to appeal. The BBC also said she suggested that if the reporter later brought his wife from Pakistan to Britain, she too could make a false asylum claim by pretending to be lesbian.

The BBC showed its footage to immigration lawyer Ana Gonzalez, who has 30 years of experience. She said Tanisa appeared to be “committing fraud by manufacturing a claim” and warned that such conduct makes life harder for genuine asylum seekers, especially LGBT claimants whose cases are often difficult to prove objectively.

The report said precise figures for fabricated claims are impossible to establish, but Home Office data suggests a disproportionate number of sexuality-based asylum claims come from Pakistani nationals.

In 2023, there were 3,430 initial decisions on LGBT asylum claims and nearly 1,400 new claims based on sexual orientation. Of these, 42% were lodged by Pakistani nationals, who also accounted for the highest number in each of the previous five years. The article noted that Pakistanis were only the fourth most common nationality across all asylum applications and made up just 6% of total claims overall.

Nearly two-thirds of asylum seekers claiming persecution on grounds of sexual orientation had their claims granted at initial decision stage in 2023.

The Home Office told the BBC that making an asylum claim through deception is a criminal offence and that anyone convicted can face prison and deportation.

It said misuse of protections designed for people fleeing genuine persecution because of their sexuality was deplorable, but insisted that the asylum system includes safeguards and that claims are rigorously assessed.

The department added that abuse is actively investigated and procedures are continually reviewed.





Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Iran says to host Pakistani delegation as exchanges continue with US

Published

on

Iran says to host Pakistani delegation as exchanges continue with US



Iran will be hosting a high-ranking political and security delegation from Pakistan on Wednesday, as indirect exchanges of messages between Tehran and Washington continue, the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman announced.

Esmail Baghaei, speaking in response to a question from IRNA, confirmed that Tehran is expected to receive the Pakistani delegation today.

“Today, we are most likely hosting a delegation from Pakistan,” Baghaei said.

“Following the talks that took place in Islamabad, and also the discussions that the Pakistani side has had with the United States, our views have been conveyed and heard,” he said.

He added, “Naturally, during this visit, the two sides are expected to discuss their viewpoints in detail.”

Meanwhile, informed sources in Pakistan confirmed that a high-level security-political delegation, comprising prominent Pakistani figures, left Islamabad for Tehran a short while ago, IRIB news reported.

According to the sources, the delegation is carrying a new message from Washington for Tehran.

The delegation is scheduled to meet with Iranian officials to discuss future negotiations, the sources said.

The development comes as a two-week ceasefire between Iran and the United States will expire on April 22.

The United States and Israel launched their unprovoked war of aggression against Iran on February 28, assassinating the Leader of the Islamic Revolution and striking nuclear facilities, schools, hospitals and civilian infrastructure.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending