I know this isn't a big deal for many of you, but it is for me. They specifically name GPS devices as "OK" on Southwest Airlines when over 10K feet.
I so enjoy this, as I love to mark waypoints of interesting things I see below, take the waypoints to Google Earth and find out what the stuff below was when I land.

I've never had a problem taking a GPS in carry-on and using it shouldn't be an issue to safety of flight. Why was this a concern?

Because the dammed airline industry is a bunch of paranoid fools and almost anything with an "on" switch was banned in flight on many of the flights I've been on for the last few years.

Interesting. I'll admit I don't fly commercial aviation much, but the few flights I've been on taking my GPS along and using it in flight was never an issue. The only issue was disabling the "lock on road" function

It sure is nice to be able to jump in a rental car, throw your GPS on the dash and drive straight to a destination in a town you've never visited. A lot of rental cars come with GPS units, but they aren't nearly as friendly as one that already has your destination programmed in.

On the subject of GPS, just received my Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx and I'm waiting for a 2 GB micro SD card to add additional road and topo maps.

Russ,

I actually have a brand new Garmin Dash Mount (P/N 010-10456-00) that is designed specifically for the Astro and all 60 series GPS units. I never used it, and no longer have a need for it, so shoot me a PM if you're interested. It's still in the original package with the instruction manual, although the edge of the package has been opened.

Jim

In Oct we will fly from Miami to Seattle at the end of a repo cruise. I plan on taking my GPS along, just to have it leave breadcrumbs the entire trip, and keep track of the distance we cover. So I really hope that whatever airline we use (don't know yet) will allow me to take the GPS on board...

OBG, what's a repo cruise?

"Repo Man" comes to mind. Hope that's not it.

Nurit

The cruise line, Norwegian in this case, repositions their Alaska boat to cooler climates for the winter. Ours will be going from Seattle to Miami, with stops in L.A., S.F., three places on the Mexican Riveria, thru the Panama Canal, Colombia, Aruba, Curacao, then up to Miami. 19 days. Repo cruises are normally less expensive than a "regular" cruise (the boat is gonna go, no matter how many people are on board). We have a friend sharing our cabin, which really helps us with the cost. Including airfare, it is now down to less per person per day than staying at Motel 6 and eating at McD's...

Thanks OBG, that's very good to know.

I used to dream of taking a cheap trip on a tramp steamer (or is it tramp freighter?). Did a quick search not long ago and was horrified to see how high the prices are now. Repo cruise sounds like the way to go.

Nurit

"...Repo cruise sounds like the way to go..."

They are unless you are rolling in money and can afford the owners suite or something. And having a third (or even fourth) person in the room can really save each person money. Of course there is no privacy in those little cabins, so all had better be able to handle that. Lucky me, our third is a gal...

"Tramp" generally refers to a ship that does not follow a set schedule. A tramp goes to where the cargo is to take it to anywhere the shippers or consignees want it to go.

The opposite of a tramp operation is a "liner" service. A liner service, today, is likely to be a company operating container ships on a set route with regular calls at a certain set of ports. If you were to get on a container ship today, you would probably not get to see all that much besides the ocean, the ship and for a day a week a container terminal. In New York Harbor, the container ships arrive at the sea buoy about 4:00, dock around 7:00 and begin loading and unloading at 8:00. In all likelihood, that ship will be on its way to another port within 24 hours.

And the container terminals are not in the scenic places. Few port operations are today.

A repositioning cruise is simply that. The ship is used in one area for a while, such making cruises from the Seattle-Vancouver area tio Alaska during the summer. At the end of the season, the ship is repositioned to service a different area. A ship might service the Caribbean from November to May and leave during hurricane season, so that it can service the Alaska cruise trade from June to October.

OBG, and any one who takes a cruise, read you ticket contract. These things are enforced STRICTLY. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnival_Cruise_Lines,_Inc._v._Shute

Dan, thanks for this info.

Nurit

The problem with cell phones is that they were constantly trying to lock on to a cell as you flew over... You would often be in range of several cells, so that ground stations couldn't route to your phone. You were essentially overpowering several cells.

They did research on putting a 'cell' on a plane and having the plane's radio link to a ground station. That would work much better.

Definitely no interference for the plane tho.

Not the case. GSM phones are remarkably noisy and can and do interfere with all kinds of electronics with their "buzz-bidy-buzz-bidy-buzz-buzz" that can be picked up by all kinds of radios and other electronic devices.

All in all, limiting electronic devices to only be used whilst in cruise is still probably a safe bet.

Yeah, the MythBusters pretty much demonstrated that radio signals from mobile phones can influence navigational equipment… particularly the tracking of VOR stations and/or ILS signals. Their experiment showed a CDI swinging pretty wildly when the radio signals were turned on and off, I believe to the point of going back to its default position when no VOR signal is being tracked. Somehow, I think having the ILS start going wonky when you are coming in on an autopilot landing can be problematic, especially if the pilot is not prepared to take manual control immediately.

These experiments were done in a Faraday cage to exclude all external radio signals, and all the avionics wiring was completely unshielded. I do not remember how they produced the VOR signal inside the Faraday cage, but it worked somehow. They were not able to replicate the results in an actual aircraft, which has shielded avionics (and had to remain on the ground due to FAA regulations).

So, it is generally regarded that using a mobile phone while in flight won’t cause too much trouble, but the FAA seems to want to play it safe anyway. Probably a good idea as there actually may have been an aircraft crash where a cellphone signal played a role: Crossair Flight 498: Alternative Theory.

Of course, the ban on cellphones is in flux right now, and changes may be on the horizon: Mobile Phones on Aircraft.