My Cell Phone Experiment - Boeing 737

I'll be getting on a plane within the next couple of months. I'd like to take a couple of cells phone aboard and document the signal quality and call duration.

Coincidentally, the aircraft will be an American Airlines, Boeing 737. The flight will leave Toronto (Pearson International) and land in Miami Florida before connecting to an island south of Florida.
This means I will be over some very dense cellular networks and there will be no excuse for lack of tower distribution over these major cities. Therefore, I should be able to get a signal at altitude

Two cell phones will be available: an older model Sanyo SCP-2300, and a RIM Blackberry Pearl 8120 phone using a Rogers cell plan.


Specifications
Dual Band/Tri Mode Digital: 1.9 GHz, 800 MHz; Analog: 800 MHz
Tx/Rx Sensitivity: Forthcoming


Specifications: Forthcoming
Other Apparatus: Digital Still Camera, and Video Camera

Purpose
To observe cellular signal strength inside of an aircraft at ground level vs. cruising level
To observe call duration at airport vs. cruising level
To observe whether AVSAT / SATCOM system installed on aircraft

** AVSAT (Avionics Satellite) / SATCOM (Satellite Communication) is a system used to
relay cellular signals from an aircraft to ground cellular stations.

Method
- Sample signal on both cell phones at Pearson Airport before entering aircraft
- Take photo/video of each cell phone display
- Place a local call/long distance call on each phone and observe quality
- Repeat steps once seated (during taxi to runway?)
- Repeat steps once flight level achieved

Resources
A. K. Dewdney
Pilots for Truth Core
Cell Phone Manufacturer Data


If anyone has suggestions, or tips for this test please post them here, or send me a U2U!

I had the pleasure of having A.K. Dewdney in my home and I plan to call him/meet
with him to get more pointers this month. Here is a photo of A.K. Dewdney and a good buddy ( ) at my place last January.



For those that don't know, Mr. Dewdney has a Ph.D. in mathematics from
U of Michigan. A professor of computer science at the University of Western Ontario, a mathematician, environmental scientist, and author of books on diverse subjects.

He performed a cell phone study in aircraft at altitude and published his
results. THere are many videos of this including one presented at the
University of Waterloo (my former home town) along with Professor Graeme MacQueen.

Here is a video of Mr. Dewdney explaining cellular technology:

video.google.ca...

Please post up some tips / suggestions for my experiment; I want this to
be thorough and accurate!



[edit on 13-8-2009 by turbofan]

[edit on 13-8-2009 by turbofan]

I left my phone on once while flying over Texes and it did ring. I had to tell the attendant that it was just my alarm going off. Signal bars were full. I really think that shutting off your cell does nothing since the incoming background communications is still business as usual. My phone was a Palm Pro. So far it works everywhere i have been, even in the clouds....

Some airlines now (but not in 01!) provide mobile coverage on the aircraft as standard... They have a node somewhere in the cabin and then the calls are routed through the aircraft's systems - maybe satellite? VHF? Something like that.

So my suggestion would be to make a general enquiry to the airline just to ask about that... because that would pretty much ruin your experiment, as you would know you can't choose how your phone connects - it just goes for the strongest signal.

Yes, I will ask if there is an AVSAT/SATCOM system in the aircraft before going ahead.

As far as I'm aware, not all aircraft have this feature; at least not all older aircraft have been updated.

Most newer commercial jets (especially those with business, and first class seating) will likely have this system in place.

[edit on 13-8-2009 by turbofan]

reply to post by Now_Then


Unless he travels back to 2001 of course, this doesn't seem like a very good experiment seeing as we are in 2009 and the phone lines/connections will be much different.

Originally posted by bl4ke360
reply to post by Now_Then

 

Unless he travels back to 2001 of course, this doesn't seem like a very good experiment seeing as we are in 2009 and the phone lines/connections will be much different.

If the aircraft does not have an AVSAT system, the experiment is totally valid
even in 2009.

Cellular reception would have only improved since 2001, and if I'm not able
to get a signal and/or complete a call at altitude, it will further compliment
A.K. Dewdney's experiment.

[edit on 13-8-2009 by turbofan]

reply to post by turbofan


Problem is that most of the calls labeled by the media as "cell phone"
were made using the onboard Airphones

AirFone (now dicontinued) used a phone in the seat backs to allow
passengers to make calls to the ground. It used a multiplexed VHF
radio to connect with the land line system

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

On flight 93 only 2 calls were made with cell phones - these were at the
end of the flight when plane was travelling at altitude of 7-8000 ft

This part of Pennsylvania is mountainous and rural - cell phone towers
are more powerful and on mountaintops. The tower near Shanksville
was on a 3000 ft mountain with a tower height of 300 ft giving an air -ground distance of only about 4000 ft

www.911myths.com...

www.911myths.com...

So what id the purpose?

Is this some nutbar stunt to prove that cell phones dont work on planes?

reply to post by thedman


Is that so? As a Satellite RF Technologist, with a good grasp of RF
communication/technology, I highly doubt some of your claims...
but I'll give a chance to prove yourself.

Please provide the LAT/LON co-ordiantes for the cell tower you
refer to on the mountain, or please reference your source for
these antenna altitudes. I'd like to check on them further as
this particular case does not show up in the FCC registered database.

I believe the Airfone has been 'debunked' as there were no traces
of credit card use. If I'm not mistaken, the 757/767 series did not
have Airfones at every seat.

You believe me don't you? (inside joke )

This thread is not to debate your opinions. It's to suggest ideas to
perform an experiment and prove/disprove cell use at select altitudes.

Looking forward to that cell tower info...

[edit on 13-8-2009 by turbofan]

[edit on 13-8-2009 by turbofan]

reply to post by turbofan

As well, several mountain ridges in the Appalachians transverse Westmoreland and Somerset County, with elevations exceeding 3000 ft.[1] The highest point in the state is Mt. Davis, with a summit of 3,213 ft. Even some of the mountain passes, along the Lincoln Highway (Route 30) rise to ~2400-2900 ft in elevation and tend to house cell towers and equipment. The field near Shanksville where United Airlines Flight 93 crashed is at 2200 feet above sea level.

Cell site - Laurel Hill Pa near Shanksville

Laurel Hill summit (~2,600 ft) is located ~14 miles to the west of the crash site, at the Westmoreland-Somerset County border. The cell tower is owned by American Towers, which operates towers for the cell phone industry. This tower is 329 ft tall, located at 2701.9 ft, with an overall height of 3060 ft. The second tower is also owned by American Towers.

Near Jennerstown, ~10 miles to the west of the crash site, this tower is owned by Cingular Wireless. It has been here since 1997. The total height of the tower is 275 ft, together with a ground elevation of 2210 ft, the overall height is 2500 ft. The second tower here is owned by Crown Communications, which owns and operates cell towers, and has been here since 1997

Combine the elevation of the land surface with the low flying altitude, the plane was flying only ~2500 feet above the ground when the cell phone calls were made. For comparison, the World Trade Center north tower was ~1,368 feet tall. It's entirely reasonable that cell phones would work at double that height.

Full version

www.debunk911myths.org...

Only at end of flight when Flight 93 was close to ground were cell phones
used

As for Barbara Olson - ever consider she used someone elses card to make call

Lot simpler explanation that all the others I have heard

All I can say is this,

I was at 35,000 feet over the ocean and it had no signal I had left LAX and after getting over the ocean lost the signal until I arrived in Hawaii.

I was just curious when I took the trip what would happen to my cell phone reception and pretty much lost it the whole time.

posted by thedman
reply to post by turbofan

 

As for Barbara Olson - ever consider she used someone elses card to make call

Lot simpler explanation that all the others I have heard

As for Barbara Olson, since US Solicitor General Ted Olson kept changing his story, it is most likely he was lying and never got any phone call from Barbara Olson at all.

That is a lot simpler explanation than your story isn't it thedman?

The official Pentagon Historians and American Airlines and the FBI seem to think Olson was lying and there were no phone calls from Barbara Olson.

Next question; for what reason would US Solicitor General Ted Olson be lying and reversing his testimony multiple times?

1.) To add credibility to the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY?

2.) Barbara Olson was not on Flight 77 and Ted Olson wanted to place her on the aircraft in the minds of Americans?

3.) To place 5 hijackers on the aircraft armed with boxcutters and the passengers, crew, and pilots moved to the back of the aircraft; which the official Pentagon Historians decided was bogus and very unlikely?

4.) Senility which seems to overtake far too many corrupt US politicians?

Originally posted by Darthorious
All I can say is this,

I was at 35,000 feet over the ocean and it had no signal I had left LAX and after getting over the ocean lost the signal until I arrived in Hawaii.

I was just curious when I took the trip what would happen to my cell phone reception and pretty much lost it the whole time.

You wondered what would happen?

Really?

LMFAO!!!

Did you think that there's cell towers in the middle of the Pacific?

Not sure what it's like in the US, but it might be worth finding out when you guys switched from analogue to digital service for cell phones... If you were using analogue networks in 2001, and are on digital networks now, would that render the whole experiment moot?

Just wondering...

Rewey

Originally posted by Rewey

Not sure what it's like in the US, but it might be worth finding out when you guys switched from analogue to digital service for cell phones... If you were using analogue networks in 2001, and are on digital networks now, would that render the whole experiment moot?

Just wondering...

Rewey

The only major factor that will render this experiment useless is whether
or not the 'plane has a cellualr relay system.

The digital vs. analog scenario doesn't really introduce a problem because
without a relay system the phone must be able to transmit and receive
a signal from altitude to a grounded cell tower.

Tx/Rx power, Tx/Rx and sensitivity are easily found through manufacturer
data.

Differences between digital and analog will be the carrier frequency.
Higher RF carrier signals require less power to propagate, and tend to
be more directional.

Signal strength (Transmit) will be determined by the phone's output wattage. Wattage and Frequency are the key factors in this specification.

Receive sensitivity is a parameter that also must be considered. This is
how little signal is needed at the input of the phone's antenna to process
the digital signal.

That being said, newer technology could only improve, so digital networks
in theory should have better reception and extended coverage.

Funny that someone said Flight 93 made calls at 7-8000 feet (AGL?), as
the aircraft was 'said to be' in a highspeed dive...upside down...and on a
slight angle.

I'll have to review the FDR to see whether or not the "passengers" were
on the roof at this time with major g's acting upon them.

Originally posted by turbofan

That being said, newer technology could only improve, so digital networks
in theory should have better reception and extended coverage.

Yeah - that's what I was wondering. If you WERE able to use your phones now, would it be due to the better reception and coverage that digital vs. analogue provides.

Sounds like you know a fair bit more than me about it, so I'll trust your judgement!

Rewey

reply to post by turbofan

Funny that someone said Flight 93 made calls at 7-8000 feet (AGL?), as
the aircraft was 'said to be' in a highspeed dive...upside down...and on a
slight angle.

Great at distorting things aren't you?

What was said is that only 2 calls made near end of flight were from cell
phones

Nothing about being made while in dive or upside down...

There's no chance that a newer digital phone could produce a strong
enough signal from thousands of feet above ground level to connect
with a cell tower.

If that were possible, the phone wattage would be so strong you would
cook your brain every time you talked on the phone. Power output
is in the area of about 0.2 watts to 0.5 watts.

With a higher carrier frequency, the phone will be able to transmit a signal
futher at the same wattage. I believe the latest technology is higher
frequency/lower power which is opposite of the older phone (in most cases).

I think the Blackberry may be the exception as it has a higher output,
but I wont know for sure until I check the specs.

Keep the ideas coming, this will be a one time shot (at least for a while!).

[edit on 14-8-2009 by turbofan]

Originally posted by thedman

Great at distorting things aren't you?

What was said is that only 2 calls made near end of flight were from cell
phones

Nothing about being made while in dive or upside down...

How is that a distortion? You quoted 7-8000 feet, NOT ME.

According to the FDR, the plane was in a high speed dive and upside down
at that altitude.

I'll be looking into the FDR data when I get home...so sit tight.

Originally posted by turbofan
I'll be getting on a plane within the next couple of months. I'd like to take a couple of cells phone aboard and document the signal quality and call duration.

Coincidentally, the aircraft will be an American Airlines, Boeing 737. The flight will leave Toronto (Pearson International) and land in Miami Florida before connecting to an island south of Florida.
This means I will be over some very dense cellular networks and there will be no excuse for lack of tower distribution over these major cities. Therefore, I should be able to get a signal at altitude

Two cell phones will be available: an older model Sanyo SCP-2300, and a RIM Blackberry Pearl 8120 phone using a Rogers cell plan.

It is illegal to turn on cell phones during flights. In fact it is illegal to have cell phones on wile the aircraft doors are shut.

Shall I notify the FAA for you so they'll issue you a special permit or will you take care of that?

I thought these points were addressed back in '04 when the FCC and FAA
performed experiments for RF intereference and test runs for SATCOM
systems?

It has been a while since I've been on an airplane so I'll check into your
concern. The FAA site currently states no cell use unless authorized by
the pilot during the taxi stage.