Gps On Commercial Airlines

[The New Hampsters]

Hi All.

I'm planning a trip to Ireland and would like to do a little geocaching while there. Just out of curiousity, when travelling on commercial flights, there is a warning to turn off all cell phones and electronic devices. Does this include GPS units? If so, why?

Thanks for your help.

[+Sputnik 57]

Most airlines list GPS receivers as approved electrical devices that can be used when (and only when) above 10,000 feet. Delta (for one) does not permit their use on any flight. You should check with the airline before hand, or failing that, ask a flight attendant to check with the pilot.

[StripeMark]

OK... maybe I'm just clueless here, but why?

 

The GPS is receiving signals and not transmitting anything. Or is the problem from the electrical interference that might be generated?

 

just wondering.....

[+IVxIV]

Probably more to do with the potential electrical interference.. and perhaps a bit to do with naive misunderstanding how GPSr units work.. a lot of people still have never seen one before, and don't realize they're "receive only" devices.

 

But it's even dumber regarding laptop PC's which don't even recieve,, well perhaps they do now with wifi & bluetooth, etc..

 

I fly locally with Air Canada & they allow GPSr usage during flight. A few years ago I flew to Finland (on Finnair airlines) and they said absolotely NOT to use in in their plane

[ElmoClarity]

OK... maybe I'm just clueless here, but why?

The general rule is no receivers and a GPS is a receiver (several receivers actually). The thinking is that receivers, while not transmitting, generate RF signals (ask an electrical engineer or a ham operator for more details). These RF signals could cause interferrence with the navigational and communications of the plane.

 

Personally, while I don't think the modern equipment used in commercial aviation would be bothered by it, but the FAA rules says that if a crew member tells me to turn it off and I don't, I could go to jail. So I don't turn my on (while they are watching )

[+Sputnik 57]

As I understand it, the FAA regulation require the airlines to show that "approved" electronic devices do not interfere with aviation electronic. Some airline have done that. Some don't bother. They just ban the device. Of course, they go to the trouble to confirm that laptops are ok for fear of losing business travelors, but I doubt they fear a loss of GPS users.

 

That being said, most airlines allow GPSrs. Delta just doesn't at this point.

[Neo_Geo]

All electronic devices generate radio frequency (RF) interference - it's the nature of the beast. For the most part, the interference is very weak and generally won't interfere with much unless it is very near to something sensitive with which to interfere. Sometimes something goes wrong (like a short circuit), and then the device does not perform as designed and COULD create stronger interference.

 

Now, when you're in an airplane 40,000 feet up in the air, there's a lot of things that can go wrong - including electronic interference from personal electronic devices. While cruising at 40,000 feet, the flight crew will be able to take the time necessary to troubleshoot a problem with their electronics, have the cabin crew tell the passengers to turn off the devices, and see if that solves the problem. When taking off and landing, the pilots are very busy talking to controllers, turning knobs and switches to change radio frequencies, turning the airplane to navigate intricate trafic patterns, raising or lowering flaps and landing gear and, well, you get the picture. If something goes screwy when they're busy like that, they won't be able to call a flight attendant and have them go through the cabin to have everyone turn everything off. So they simply minimize that risk altogether by having everyone keep their electronics turned off when they're so busy.

[+Airmapper]

Last I heard, there are no cases of electronic devices causing interference in an aircrafts avionics systems. I use my GPS in the plane, a foot from a stack of 2-way communications and navigation radios. It doesn't cause interference. Recently, in general aviation planes, the pilots are now allowed to use cell phones in flight. This is a big help for contacting ground services and possibly the control tower in case of an electrical failure. This would not be allowed if phones, or GPS's caused interference.

 

It is more of a security issue, any devise could be suspected of being used as a detonator for an explosive, disguised as a cell phone or a GPS.

Edited September 29, 2005 by Airmapper

[peter]

That being said, most airlines allow GPSrs. Delta just doesn't at this point.

Are you thinking of American Airlines? Delta has consistently been 'GPS friendly' and explicitly lists GPS as something that can be used while in cruise flight, i.e. subject to similar restrictions for takeoff and landing as laptops and PDAs:

http://www.delta.com/traveling_checkin/inf...vices/index.jsp

 

Technically GPS units, and all other electronic devices with oscillators, do emit a small amount of EMI (electro-magnetic interference). It's on that basis that some airlines restrict their use. The rules are more strict during takeoff and landing since any interference with the plane's navigation systems could be much more serious at that time. So when the plane goes below 10,000' there's usually an announcement that laptops and other electronic devices should be turned off.

 

Most airlines, incl. Delta, put GPS units in the same category as PDAs and laptops which are allowed at cruising altitudes. But some, incl. American and JetBlue, do not allow use at any time.

[CenTexDodger]

It is more of a security issue, any devise could be suspected of being used as a detonator for an explosive, disguised as a cell phone or a GPS.

Maybe, although if it were truly a security issue, they would not allow them through the security checkpoints.

 

Probably more to do with the potential electrical interference.. and perhaps a bit to do with naive misunderstanding how GPSr units work.. a lot of people still have never seen one before, and don't realize they're "receive only" devices.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head. Some people think GPS is a two way tracking system, if I have GPS then someone somewhere will be able to see where I am.

 

Some people also think OnStar is Satellite phone service. AFAIK, it is not, but because it uses GPS satellites for positioning, then people think it must be a two way communications system. Unless I am mistaken, it is a cell call with embedded position information, similar to a RINO. They sort of give it away with their disclaimer: "not all OnStar services work in all areas."

Edited September 30, 2005 by CenTexDodger

[+Airmapper]

I don't think the Airlines know "why" they don't allow, or will allow the use of eletcronic devices on aircraft. I do not think there is any danger of interference. I could be wrong however, for example an airliner with 300 people on it all turn on a PDA, GPS, Cell phone, or laptop, and things might go crazy.

 

And Tex is right, why would they let it onboard if it was a security issue, but they still complain that it is one.

 

The niave misunderstanding that <Other user, NOT NEOGeo> mentioned is the best explination I've heard yet, some people who do not know technology sometimes assume it can do more powerful things than it can.

Edited September 30, 2005 by Airmapper

[+Sputnik 57]

Ok, I based that on flying Delta (but actually Atlantic Southeast, a Delta affiliate), yesterday with my GPSr. They did not list it as an approved device. I asked the flight attendant, who asked the flight crew, who told her no. She actually said that the flight crew had told her, "No, a GPS is not approved by the FAA." I didn't argue with her. I told her, "Fine. If the captain wants it off, it will stay off."

 

Thanks for the link for Delta. I might print it for my return flight.

[+Old Sailor]

Glad to see that Air Canada allows their use, as I'm going to Dallas next July and am taking both my 600 & GPSMAP60C. Will have to compare them side by side on way down.

[Neo_Geo]

Last I heard, there are no cases of electronic devices causing interference in an aircrafts avionics systems.

CLICK HERE BOEING.COM - Interference from Electronic Devices:

Operators of commercial airplanes have reported numerous cases of portable electronic devices affecting airplane systems during flight. These devices, including laptop and palmtop computers, audio players/recorders, electronic games, cell phones, compact-disc players, electronic toys, and laser pointers, have been suspected of causing such anomalous events as autopilot disconnects, erratic flight deck indications, airplanes turning off course, and uncommanded turns.

 

It's a good read and includes a few specific individual cases...

 

Here are a few more items:

STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN PAUL MCCARTHY EXECUTIVE AIR SAFETY CHAIRMAN AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUTURE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (that's a mouthfull)

 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS E. MCSWEENY, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR REGULATION AND CERTIFICATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

 

Anecdotal evidence suggests that portable electronic devices (PEDs) can interfere with aircraft electronic systems. More research...

 

GOOGLE 'PEDs interference'

 

"PEDs interference" on Yahoo!

 

===================================================

 

The niave misunderstanding that NEOGeo mentioned is the best explination I've heard yet, people who do not know technology sometimes assume it can do more powerful things than it can.

Hardly a "niave misunderstanding". Lots of money has been spent to study the real problem. It's a little naive of you to be flying around up there and not be aware that the potential hazard exists. I have a degree in electronics and work in computer repair and networking - I know the technology and what it can do

I've seen some pretty crazy things in the last 10 years or so.

 

It is more of a security issue, any devise could be suspected of being used as a detonator for an explosive, disguised as a cell phone or a GPS. 

The 9/11 terrorists used handheld GPSrs to navigate to their targets. I have heard that that is the reason American Airlines will not allow them. As for the others, it's mostly an electronic interference thing...

Edited September 30, 2005 by Neo_Geo

[+Cheminer Will]

We recently flew on a multi leg trip, (round trip 6 different planes). Airline was United and we asked the flight crew on each flight if we could have a GPSr on and the answer was an immediate "no" in every case.

[appletree]

American and all other airlines allow GPSr's on all flights, some just do not let passengers use them in flight. The usage rules do not apply to hijackers (how could they?) so it couldn't be a real security concern. If it were a rational concern about RF interference as a safety issue, no airline would allow them on any plane, even in baggage, as passengers could never be relied upon to turn them off and keep them off. Some would forget, others would ignore the rule. Passengers are people, are they not? The real reasons for the rules, like most rules, are ignorance, arrogance, and paronoia.

[HugoOne]

If interference was a real issue then there are devices that can detect it and they can be used to force people to turn everything off. But that is too expensive and the risk is too low anyway to justify the hastle so corporate heads decide to instill the fear of the unknown and put up little rules to hide behind.

In the mean time real dangers don't grab the attention because they're booring.

I've used my Geko 201 in my sleeve pressed against the window from entering the plane until exiting the plane at the destination, got plenty of pretty tracks, too bad my 60C is much bulkier, now I ask and use it during flight when all the laptops get turned on etc, I'm sure the wifi and bluetooth signals fill plenty of planes and we're gonna be able to use cellphones pretty soon here in the EU too.

Edited September 30, 2005 by HugoOne

[+Mr Nibbler]

From a European perspective I've checked with Air Malta this morning (who I'm flying with in a week) and they categorically ban their use. No reason given just a flat "NO"

[+bear&fox]

And banning them outright will become more common as more folks own GPSrs. The main reason, if you ask me, is the terrible world of litigation.

 

Imagine there was the slightest of suspicion that a GPSr brough a commercial airliner down - the survivors, or their families, will sue the living daylights out of the airline company (for not preventing it).

 

dadgum, life is complicated.

[peter]

And banning them outright will become more common as more folks own GPSrs.

The overall trend has been in the other direction - more airlines are allowing use. Since 9/11 a few airlines have switched to banning passenger use of GPS, but a larger number switched the other way and now allow use after previously banning it. Letters/email to the airlines can be an effective way to get more liberal policies. When Continental switched back and forth a few times there was an extensive discussion on the sci.geo.satellite-nav newsgroup and a few of us sent emails asking for the policy to be clarified and preferably made more liberal. After about a month we got responses that an explicit statement allowing use above 10,000' would now be included at the back of the inflight magazine.

 

And as GPS is incorporated into more electronic devices it'll become increasingly difficult to have a meaningful ban. Already Suunto and Casio have a few watch models that include GPS and flight attendants aren't likely to tell passengers with those to turn them off. Airline trials are being conducted with the goal of allowing cellular phone use and many of those now include GPS and it's also part of many PDAs.

[yo_vuelo]

As the holder of a commercial pilot's license, and a graduate electrical engineer, I'd like to weigh in on this subject. The closest reply to this thread was the one about pilot workload during the departure and arrival phase of a flight, as opposed to the enroute segment. In the rare case where some interference from a GPS unit might cause some problem with the aircraft's systems, you just don't want to have to deal with it while you're busy, as the flight crew would be while preparing to land. That's the reason all electronic devices must be turned off during takeoff and landing.

 

As far as enroute use of a GPS goes, different airlines have different comfort levels with relatively unfamiliar devices. Most general aviation aircraft have GPS units in them for navigation, even under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR). The FAA is spending a lot of money to improve satellite navigation. WAAS was developed by the FAA to improve the accuracy, particularly in the vertical plane. Despite their widespread use in smaller planes, the airlines, operating under different rules than general aviation, are NOT permitted to use GPS navigation. That will change in the not too distant future, but right now, it's not permitted.

 

I have three GPS units, one of which is a very expensive aviation unit with a screen that measures 7 inches diagonally. Some users of this particlar model have reported problems with radio interference when the unit is powered up. So, despite being designed for aircraft use, problems can occur. Can you blame the airlines for not wanting to deal with this? I don't. Too many lives at risk, no matter how small the likelihood of any problem.

 

My advice would be, "Don't ask, don't tell." Unless the airline specifically indicates that GPS units are forbidden, assume that you can use yours. If GPS appears on a list of prohibited devices, turn it off and stow it. The Feds have little patience for uncooperative passengers these days.

 

I think you can dismiss the idea that the airlines are paranoid. They have to be cautious. I also don't think that fear of terrorism is an issue. If it were, you would not be permitted to take your unit aboard the plane. And realistically, how much information do you really need about your location while flying? It's fun, yes, but hardly essential. Of course, you can always pick your airline according to their policy on GPS usage. Safe flying!

[+Airmapper]

<edit to remove irrelevant statements>

Edited September 30, 2005 by Airmapper

[+WeightMan]

We recently flew on a multi leg trip, (round trip 6 different planes). Airline was United and we asked the flight crew on each flight if we could have a GPSr on and the answer was an immediate "no" in every case.

Last March I was flying on United after upgrading to first. I was sitting in the window seat and had my 60c running. The flight attendant had noticed the unit and asked the captain, who approved the use. She then approached me about the unit and told me that the flight crew had said it was OK. United's policy is that the use of the GPSr is approved as long as it meets FCC requirements. That being said, if the captain says no, the answer is no. The captain is in charge and whatever the captain says is what happens. In this case the flight attendant approached me a couple of times later just to see where we were.

 

I have not flown American lately and when I have flown Alaska I have not had the unit with me as I was not going to be caching at my destination so I can't speak to those airlines. Both of them tend to be a bit more sensitive about what they perceive as security problems. On Alaska you cannot line up for the restroom in the front of the plane. I understand their concern on that one. Sometime before 9/11 they had a customer or two try to kick in the cockpit door.

 

I might also add that many general aviation pilots will carry a hand held as a back up to navigation.

 

Someone reported in this thread that the 9/11 hijackers used hand held units. The only place I have ever seen such a report was in another thread in this forum. Before I believe that I want to see some kind of reference. If it did happen, I have to assume the 9/11 Commission Report would have it, but I am not spending any of my time looking for it. Let us see some proof of such statements. They had no need of a GPSr. The weather was absolutely clear that day and if they could not see the Twin Towers from many miles away they would have to have been blind.

[Neo_Geo]

You spent a lot of time and effort trying to prove me wrong.

 

I'll admit when I'm wrong, if you look in my profile it says student pilot . Not big iron, old ace, pilot. I occasionally put my 2 cents in, I don't make any guarantees they are stone cold facts. I also said I didn't know of any instances, and I hadn't heard of any. I don't scour the internet trying to prove a point that isn't that important and I can't do anything about. If you've got the degrees, you should know how to diminish the effects of interference and convince the airlines to let people use GPS's in flight. This is a Geocaching forum, your a moderator and ought to know experts aren't lurking around here.

 

Passenger-carried PEDs on commercial airplanes will continue to present a source of uncontrolled emissions and as a result may cause interference with airplane systems. The potential is great that PEDs will continue to be blamed for some anomalies regardless of whether they are the true cause. 

 

Airliners are supposed to be built to a higher standard, more resistant to interference and failures. I can see that none of the instances resulted in any danger, except the pilot being inconvenienced because he had to fly instead of the computer doing it for him. Some of the devices did in fact cause the interference, we are taking about GPS units, I didn't see any mentioned in the reports you gave me.

 

I'm not going to stop using my GPS in the plane cause you think it's naive, and if/ when I decide to have a cell phone I'll use it in there too for contacting flight services, the FAA allowes it, and it's a useful safety tool. The reason the FAA is allowing it is because there isn't any proof that it's a great danger. Pilots regularly use laptop computers and PDA's to run flight data equipment, in the cockpit .

 

I'll apologise if I drastically altered someones thinking with my comments, but this is a forum, all statements made are not always completely true. I say what I believe, and if I'm wrong, what I believe will change upon good evidence.

 

I still maintain that the naive ignorance YOU mentioned is the main reason GPS's are in some cases not allowed to be used in flight, because there is no mention of GPS units causing interference and that they are allowed on the plane in the first place.

My intention was NOT to TRY to prove you wrong, and I didn't really spend a long time doing it (just quoted and linked a few items from a basic Google search). My intention was to show that the issue of interference is real with many reported incidents of specific causes and effects. While there may not be any specific incidents caused by any specific GPSr (there may be - I didn't do that much research), GPSrs DO in fact fall into the broad category of "Personal Electronic Devices" as the airlines call such equipment, and given the right circumstances could very well could cause such an event!

 

Lets suppose that a GPSr was in fact NEVER the cause of any interference event. But I do remember reading of a Game Boy causing such an event. How many different kinds of electronic devices are out there in this vast world? Should the airlines list GPSr - Okay, Calculator - Okay, Digital Watch - Okay, Game Boy - NO, CD-Player - Okay, Video Camera - Okay, Tape Recorder - Okay -- simply based on specific cases of what devices have caused interference? The list of specific items would fill an entire book! Each crew member would have to memorize each specific item and whether or not they're okay (they really don't have enough to do already).

 

I am not a forum moderator either - just a contributor like yourself. And my background is in electronics repair - not electrical engineering. There's very little that I can do personally to solve the problem.

 

I must say however that it really scares me to hear a pilot think that airliners turning off course, and uncommanded turns are not a danger! When I hear that, I think about the 737s (N513AU and N999UA) that spun into the ground in Pittsburgh and Colorado back in the mid 1990s. Those crashes were attributed to uncommanded rolling of the aircraft due to uncommanded rudder inputs! (things that make you go, "HMMMmmmmmm...") The accident reports do not say exactly WHAT caused the rudders to deflect - nobody knows. Though you think it would be a minor inconvenience, I sincerely hope that you (or any other pilot) never experience an uncommanded control input of any kind while flying.

 

For the record here, I'm not saying that PED interference caused these crashes. As a matter of fact, I think the chances of that are pretty remote. Still, the fact remains that PED interference have been known to be a cause to which an effect has resulted in at least two airliner crashes.

 

I never said using PEDs in flight is naive - I said it's naive of you to think that PED interference is not a problem. I enjoy using my GPSr on planes too, and I'm certainly not going to stop using my GPSr on flights either. I only fly on airlines that approve their use in flight - even if it costs $50 or more per ticket! But I'm going to keep the issue of PED interference in the back of my mind (not dismiss it as "niave ignorance") when a crew member goes through the cabin and tells passengers to turn off all PEDs.

 

And for the record, cell phone use in flight is/was not allowed because when in flight, older phones would use EVERY TOWER IN SIGHT that they could reach! Newer phones only use the nearest tower. The phones installed in the aircraft seats are okay to use because they are known to use the technology to use only the nearest tower. That is actually an FCC thing.

Edited September 30, 2005 by Neo_Geo

[+Airmapper]

I would like to apologize for an error I made in posting. I misquoted and gave Neo-Geo credit for something he didn't say. In effect it changed the relevancy of the quote to appear like a personal insult to Neo-Geo.

 

If the edit tab is still active I will change my posts to reflect this.

 

<edit to spell check>

Edited September 30, 2005 by Airmapper

[peter]

Should the airlines list GPSr - Okay, Calculator - Okay, Digital Watch - Okay, Game Boy - NO, CD-Player - Okay, Video Camera - Okay, Tape Recorder - Okay -- simply based on specific cases of what devices have caused interference? The list of specific items would fill an entire book! Each crew member would have to memorize each specific item and whether or not they're okay (they really don't have enough to do already).

No, I don't think the airlines should operate with such a list, but that's exactly what they are trying to do with today's rules. Look at the page I cited earlier from Delta's website which gives just such a list. Such lists strike me as illogical since they assume that all devices of a given type will have similar EMI performance.

 

What would make much more sense is for representatives of the airlines and aircraft/avionics manufacturers to get together and establish a maximum allowable level of EMI from passenger electronic devices. The makers of the electronics (whether GPS units, laptops, PDA, gameboys, etc.) could then certify their devices and clearly label them as either meeting or not meeting the established levels. A good starting point would be the FCC 'Class B' rules for electronic devices which have been in existence for many years and are currently met by all handheld GPS devices I've seen. If you look at the back of the unit or in the manual there's an FCC symbol showing a big F followed by concentric Cs - that's the code used to show that Garmin/Magellan/Lowrance/etc has certified that unit to comply with the Class B rules for EMI.

 

Maybe the Class B rules would be deemed sufficient or maybe the airlines and aircraft/avionics makers would feel that more stringent rules are called for. But whatever they decide on could then give the electronics makers a clear target for how to make their units compliant. Once certified the devices could be stamped with a clearly identifiable 'FAA' or other symbol making it easy for both passengers and flight attendants to recognize which devices comply and which do not.

 

Such a change would make the rules more consistent and based on sound engineering principles rather than the whims of specific individuals at each airline.

[marty621]

I have flown Hooter's Air several times recently. In all cases I did not ask to use the GPS, just did it. Once in the front seat the flight attendant asked what that device was and I said it was simply a receiver. She apparently did not quite believe me since she asked again and had another attendant look at it, They did not prohibit me from using it. I was sitting directly opposite them. Once they relaized I was not a terroirst, I was even using the external antenna.

 

On other flights, when the captain tells the attendants to be seated for takeoff , I tuck my EMap between the window shade and the window with it pulled almost all the way down. The EMap is then not visible from inside the plane and I record the entire trip, takeoff to landing. Midflight I just hold it near the window and attendants don't even mention it.

[+northernpenguin]

Found another reason I like my eXplorist yesterday. It's black and has a patch antenna at the top. So I can hold it with my hand over the screen and it becomes nearly invisible. I've recorded a few flights with that. I've also used the window shade method, and when flight attendants have seen it they're usually fine with it, but not during takeoff or landing.

 

The bigger issue I have during those maneuvers is that often the plane will bank a couple times and I'll lose all the satellites I wes talking to.

[+Sputnik 57]

Well, I returned from Atlanta Houston last night, again on Delta affiliate Atlantic Southeastern Air. The aircraft was a Canadian Region Jet 200. On the way to my seat, I asked the co-pilot (who looked like he was about 19 years old) whether it would be okay to use my handheld GPS receiver after we reached crusing altitude. He looked puzzled, and turned to the captain. The captain said, "No. You won't be able to get any signal anyway." I told him that I had a window seat and could get signal on other planes. He then said, "Yes, but it will interfere with our GPS receiver," which according to yp_vuelo's post, commercial airlines don't use. I didn't argue with him. I didn't use it.

 

On flights where I did uses the GPSr, the flight attendants have always asked me about it. One (Southwest Airlines) scolded me for having it on during take off. She told me after she saw it that the flight crew had told her that someone had one on during take off, and please don't use it again below 10,000 feet. Another was the flight attendant on the ASA on the flight to Atlanta on Wednesday, reported above.

 

The Delta Sky magazine on the CRJ 200 does not list a GPSr as an approved PED. I had the Delta online info page saved on my Treo, but chose not to show it to or argue with the captain. It's his bird, after all.

 

I DO NOT recommend don't-ask don't tell. Be honest, follow the rules of that airline. Next time I'll fly Continental.

[+dyankee1995]

We flew on Airtran from Rochester, NY to Atlanta in June and had no problems using ours.

We waited until it was announced that you can turn on any electronic equipment, though. One flight attendant glanced at us for a moment to see what we were doing, but said nothing.

Only problem we had was blinding the guy behind us. The light from outside kept reflecting off of our GPS screen toward the man sitting behind us. OOPS!

[Neo_Geo]

Reading a newspaper does a good job of keeping it out of sight.

[fhew]

FYI. I flew Southwest recently (a week after getting my 60C), and their airline magazine explictly mentions GPS on their 'approved' list of devices.

[+Crusso]

I have flown Hooter's Air several times recently. In all cases I did not ask to use the GPS, just did it.

 

You flew Hooter's and the only thing u could think of to play with was your GPS!

 

Anyway..... I stick my Garmin V on the little ledge on the bottom of the window then turn in my seat a little so my shoulder holds it in place and also blocks it from view so i can record the takeoff and climb tracks. When we get to cruising altitude I just stick it in the corner of my tray table nearest the window.

 

As far as security goes... I work in an airport screening checkpoint and frequently we come across GPSs. Sometimes it happens that we need to search a bag because we saw something else on the xray which needed checking. Thinking we spotted an unfamiliar electronic item and that's why we are searching, the passenger will invariably say "There's a GPS in there. It's used for....." and I'll say "Sir I know what a gps is, ever hear of Geocaching?" "and by the way you can't take this Swiss Army Knife on board the plane!"

 

At least thanks to me the screeners here are now all "GPS friendly!" Oh, and by the way, 9/11 hijackers may have used GPSs to mark some potential targets but there is NO evidence they used them on board.

Edited October 5, 2005 by Crusso

[Aglaia]

I must admit I'm still a little paranoid of losing my GPS while going through security at the airport (Alberta, Canada). I've only taken it on a plane once, and checked it at that time. Tomorrow night I'll fly to the US again on a US Airways flight. Can anyone share any expereinces flying out of a Canadian airport and/or on a US Airways flight?