Aircraft bombs may kill off in-flight cellphone and Wi-Fi use

By on November 3, 2010, 1:55 PM
Both the UK government and the US Department of Homeland Security are looking into the technology behind in-flight cellphone and Wi-Fi connections to determine whether it could be used in conjunction with bomb trigger mechanisms, according to New Scientist. It's possible they will conclude that cellphones and Wi-Fi connections are no longer allowed on planes.

The ink cartridge bombs discovered on several flights in recent days contained SIM cards and circuitry which may have been intended to serve as a trigger mechanism. The electronics in the bombs shipped from Yemen are merely timers, and could not have been used as call-activated triggers due to the technological limitations posed by distance and altitude, but it's not impossible. Terrorists could not have used a regular cellphone to call an airplane-borne bomb because it probably wouldn't be able to reach a tower that could bounce the signal properly.

That being said, in-flight Wi-Fi gives them more options, such as Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), for contacting a device on an aircraft. Alternatively, suicide bombers could possibly call a bomb in the luggage compartment of the plane. Other experts argue that "the use of mobile phones on planes does not constitute any additional security threat."

Foiled terrorist plots often end with stricter security procedures, but cellphone use and in-flight Wi-Fi are arguably much more important to us in today's society than not being able to bring fake pocket knives on board. Hopefully, security experts will figure out a way to keep the bad guys at bay while the good guys can continue to enjoy the luxuries of the modern world.





User Comments: 52

Got something to say? Post a comment
Puiu Puiu said:

They need to carefully check what they actually put in those planes instead of trying to figure out how to defuse the bombs.

TomSEA TomSEA, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

Cell phones are commonly used to detonate IDE's in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it doesn't surprise me they'd look at them as a potential triggers in aircraft bombings.

To be honest, I don't see this as that big of an inconvenience. If you can still use your laptop - just not the wifi - well, that still gives you plenty to work with.

And frankly, I'd rather not take the chance of being blowing into a billion bits over the Atlantic from the usage of wifi, thank ya very much. Just not that big of a deal...

bangs777 bangs777 said:

6-7 hrs of flying,or say 12hr of LIVING without cellphone or laptop is definitely a much better choice than death..threats should be neutralize and as well as chances to it..

blimp01 said:

if it stops terrorists ill be happy

customcarvin customcarvin said:

...in-flight Wi-Fi gives them more options, such as Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), for contacting a device on an aircraft. (Read the whole story)

VoIP?!?

*Ring* *Ring*

"Umm, Hello? Bomb? Ya, hi, it's Dr. Doom, I think we shall execute operation "boom boom" now... okay, good... yes... it was nice knowing you too, take care now."

omega00 said:

I wonder if you could install a cell phone jammer on airplanes. Perhaps, airlines should jam all cell phone frequencies, except for emergency situations on-board or at least limit calls to 10 minutes.. up to the discretion of the flight crew. I'd rather be safe on an airplane than having to worry about updating facebook or tweeting about the crying baby two rows down.

Hargert said:

I doubt this would effect safety at all as a simple timer or pressure switch could time a explosive all most as well. With all of the threats to safety I doubt that this is the one that will happen. It will be the one that no one thinks of.

mpribe said:

Not very optimistic on this one. If we can't bring water bottles or hygenic products through security, there seems to be no way they would allow us to use such wireless devices on a plane. On the upside, we won't have to listen to jerks yap on their cellphones for a 4 hour flight.

Maybe instead of wifi, select airlines will be able to install data (ethernet) ports at every seat? Or charge a premium for seats that are so connected?

Richy2k9 said:

hello ...

as time goes by, threats are more & more adapted to actual technology, what will happen one day, some sci-fi based movies would become true, just because someone would give some innocent human something to drink & without any complex mechanic, just by having that person think or dream of something would blow off.

brrr, i'm scared of what i can think of sometimes ... let's hope that there will always better counter-measures found for any threats & let's have real life Jack Bauers' :P

cheers!

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Yah, I'm thinking this is going to be another flailing the arms around and screaming "the sky is falling!" situation again, just like every other time some potential terrorist threat is discovered. You know, like the shoe bomber - 1 yahoo gets through with explosive Adidas, and now we all get to take off our shoes going through security. Good times

This will be no different. Let the terrorists win, cut off all in-flight cell phone and wi-fi, and then wonder why an attack still happened when a suicide bomber sitting IN THE PLANE used his laptop's local wi-fi to connect ad-hoc, or something similar. I mean, let's go overboard and completely ignore the fact that the bombs in question (leading to all this speculation) were on cargo planes, which have a whole slew of security issues upstream of them, and don't have passengers, in-flight cell phones, or wi-fi. Seems logical that a terrorist would rather blow something up when it can do major collateral damage (like when it's sitting at a terminal at an airport), not when it's way up in the air. In which case in-flight signals don't matter at all. But, of course, logic and common sense are never the strong suit for government agencies.

Guest said:

By focusing on what could trigger a bomb, doesn't that take away from the amount of people and overall effort of physical airport and airplane security?

Maybe instead of limiting the freedoms of 99.999% of flyers, government officials should focus on preventing such devices from ever being loaded onto a plane. You can't trigger a bomb on a plane if the device never got there.

To me, this is just another way to stray from the actual problem and waste limited resources. Security officials need to stop worrying about these what if's and focus on the core problem: Bombs on planes. What do we [security officials] need to do to ensure this cannot happen. Not "Well, if they DO somehow succeed on getting a bomb on a plane, what if instead of suicide bombing, they decide to make a phone call or send a signal across the internet to the device."

Work on solving the core problem, not spin-off's of it.

Guest said:

In another 5 years airport security will be :-

No laptops or anything over 1 kg, it might be used to bludgeon

Oh dont forget belts, they can be used to strangle, as well as shoe laces

What about fists, they might punch you, you will have to keep your hands open at all times, unless your a karate expert then you have to keep your hands in your pockets

Look guys, no one is out to kill you, your a million times more likely to die crossing the road, from a disease (not bio terror) or a billion more times from a heart attack from all the shite your shoveling down your necks. How can you be scared of terrorists, just look at your belly, is it sticking out a fair way? If yes you should be much more afraid of that than an "unknown enemy".

Get to the GYM fatties!

Kel

matrix86 matrix86 said:

The best way to stop terrorists...no carry-ons, cavity searches of all passengers, everyone boards naked and are strapped to their seats ("your chair may also be used as a toilet" . There, problem solved...thank God I never fly anywhere, lol.

bioflex said:

Guest said:

In another 5 years airport security will be :-

No laptops or anything over 1 kg, it might be used to bludgeon

Oh dont forget belts, they can be used to strangle, as well as shoe laces

What about fists, they might punch you, you will have to keep your hands open at all times, unless your a karate expert then you have to keep your hands in your pockets

Look guys, no one is out to kill you, your a million times more likely to die crossing the road, from a disease (not bio terror) or a billion more times from a heart attack from all the shite your shoveling down your necks. How can you be scared of terrorists, just look at your belly, is it sticking out a fair way? If yes you should be much more afraid of that than an "unknown enemy".

Get to the GYM fatties!

Kel

well in as much as i want to argue with u, i cant agree more......when we often here things like these we ask ourselves ....Where is this world headed to?......

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Thems fightin' words........

6-7 hrs of flying,or say 12hr of LIVING without cellphone or laptop is definitely a much better choice than death..threats should be neutralize and as well as chances to it..
Using a cellphone anywhere, seems to have acquired the status of, "an inalienable right bestowed upon us by our creator"! Point being, don't let the average iPhone owner hear you say that...

You check, it's probably in the constitution somewhere.....BTW, don't take any fives if Lincoln is on a cell phone.

.Where is this world headed to?......
That was a rhetorical question, I hope?
("your chair may also be used as a toilet" . There, problem solved...thank God I never fly anywhere, lol.
Really, although I think all but the lowest budget airlines would supply chamber pots.....

Leeky Leeky said:

Why go to such lengths when a simple solution would be to just "jam" the WIFI and wireless phone network signals.

You prevent anything from leaving the plane, or entering it and your sorted. Preventing it from working inside the plane would also stop anything being detonated locally by radio/wireless too.

Problem solved, time saved, and lives get to grow old.

vangrat said:

To all of these people who go about saying "I would rather the government take away my freedoms, than for me to live in fear." That is what the people of Nazi Germany told themselves, that is what the people of every communist society have told themselves, that is what the people of every fascist dictator and upright king from the middle ages told themselves. Do you see what I am getting at here? Yes bad people do bad things. But, why is it, that good people are being punished for these bad people doing bad things?

The next thing you know, they are going to want to strip search everyone as they go through the airports before getting on the planes...oh wait, they have technology that can do that now...ffs.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Aw...daddy Adolf won't let you use your widdle cell phone....?

To all of these people who go about saying "I would rather the government take away my freedoms, than for me to live in fear." That is what the people of Nazi Germany told themselves, that is what the people of every communist society have told themselves, that is what the people of every fascist dictator and upright king from the middle ages told themselves. Do you see what I am getting at here? Yes bad people do bad things. But, why is it, that good people are being punished for these bad people doing bad things?

.

Well that's because if you're not allowed to use your God damned cell phone, you cry that you're being punished. Why don't you climb on a plane with a bomb in it, and run your yap all you want. Hey, then you can come back and tell us all about how your flight was. It will be fun! BTW, the people on Flight 93 were using their phones when that hit,.

kazarm said:

You cannot stop remote control by banding mobile phones.

If the terrorist wanted to activate a bomb by remote control. They could just as well have used a normal radio (VHF/UHF/Walkie talkie), and then let someone trigger the radio from the ground at the arrival site.

The problem is cargo do not undergo the same security scan as passenger luggage, when it is transported with a passenger plane.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

You cannot stop remote control by banding mobile phones..
Yeah well you can certainly shut down that aspect of it, now can't you?

And I thought that "banding" was something that you did to carrier pigeons.

If the terrorist wanted to activate a bomb by remote control. They could just as well have used a normal radio (VHF/UHF/Walkie talkie), and then let someone trigger the radio from the ground at the arrival site.
You seem to know a lot about this

klepto12 klepto12, TechSpot Paladin, said:

IMO this is crazy no phone on a plane who the hell would leave there phone with no way of contacting anyone at all for say a 5 day vacation away from there kids. The world is becoming ridiculous with all the bs that is going on lets ban all freedoms on a plane no getting up during flight no matter what you have to use the bathroom to bad set down. All the Flight attendants need to be Air marshals who rule with an iron fist. This is what is going to happen if something is not done about all the crap that is going on in our country right now. We set back and watch all this happen but don't stand up to do anything about it.

Leeky Leeky said:

IMO this is crazy no phone on a plane who the hell would leave there phone with no way of contacting anyone at all for say a 5 day vacation away from there kids. The world is becoming ridiculous with all the bs that is going on lets ban all freedoms on a plane no getting up during flight no matter what you have to use the bathroom to bad set down. All the Flight attendants need to be Air marshals who rule with an iron fist. This is what is going to happen if something is not done about all the crap that is going on in our country right now. We set back and watch all this happen but don't stand up to do anything about it.

It could be worse, you could be stripped naked, and then chained inside a padlocked cage...

Hargert said:

That or just kept asleep during the flight via drugs and shipped in pods that can be blown off of the plane if you are still a threat.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

IMO this is crazy no phone on a plane who the hell would leave there phone with no way of contacting anyone at all for say a 5 day vacation away from there kids. The world is becoming ridiculous with all the bs that is going on lets ban all freedoms on a plane no getting up during flight no matter what you have to use the bathroom to bad set down. All the Flight attendants need to be Air marshals who rule with an iron fist. This is what is going to happen if something is not done about all the crap that is going on in our country right now. We set back and watch all this happen but don't stand up to do anything about it.

Well. I guess you're just going to have to wait for my book. I'm dedicating a special chapter on what to do with yourself if, "you're stuck on a deserted island with no phone, no internet, and only a picture of Christine O'Donnell for company"!

bakape said:

hargert said:

That or just kept asleep during the flight via drugs and shipped in pods that can be blown off of the plane if you are still a threat.

I smell Fifth Element. Big Bada Boom!

Kibaruk Kibaruk, TechSpot Paladin, said:

It does look like a concern people must have, but if they say its not possible, who should we trust'

ruzveh said:

I support with the aircraft people on this and should restrict users from accessing thier cell phones and wifi in fight as it disturbs the other gps navigations which captain use

EDO219 said:

That's silly ... all the terrorists would have to do is replace the cell phone for a barometer. The cabins, of course, are pressurized, but there are very noticeable fluctuations (i.e. the point at which many people experience a popping sound in their ears.)

So don't ban cell phones. Use this design flaw to our advantage and scan for the SIM chips much like warehouses bounce low radio frequencies off of small data chips attached to shipping crates to read what the chip says is in there. Iran uses this same concept on a much larger scale to hunt down the rebel factions near the Iraqi border, forcing them to abandon cell phone use near their camps.

sMILEY4ever said:

TomSEA said:

...

And frankly, I'd rather not take the chance of being blowing into a billion bits over the Atlantic from the usage of wifi, thank ya very much. Just not that big of a deal...

Yeah, cuz that happens so often.

Serag said:

Well that makes sense, more strict in-flight rules for everyone!

But seriously, I guess any line of wireless connectivity could be used to trigger, including radio for example.

---agissi--- ---agissi---, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Why cant they just scan the luggage better to detect bombs and triggers? Wasnt that the whole point to start with. Now theyre outlawing what you can take on to be preventative. Like my toothpaste!

AbsolutGaloot said:

I can't even use my sony ebook reader (no wireless) during takeoff because it's "electronic" as if that tiny e-ink screen can somehow irreparably mangle the plane's navigation systems. It's high time that the airlines got a good look at what's actually causing the problem (people) and addressing that (israeli airports have a great system) instead of just trying to ban everything that might be used by these people. Ban something, they'll just come up with something new. Learn how to get the threatening individual identified, and you cut to the root of the problem. Just more of the grand american way of treat the symptoms, not the root cause.

Neojt said:

OK remind me not to take my cell phone with me on my next trip i dont really feel like getting it consfiscated

Uvindu said:

Why is it that good guys always loose functionality due to bad guys. Look at software pirating. It is easier to install pirated content than installing legal things due to all the security requirements one has to fillow to make sure software is limited. Music is becoming less accessible so that it is harder to make copies but pirates don't suffer from that...

B00kWyrm B00kWyrm, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Tempest in a Teapot!

The cell detonator trigger in the checked bag is discoverable by currently used methods.

The wifi detonator trigger in the carry-on is one of the more difficult means of making a triggering system.

I won't suggest any of the easier ones.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

If you think about it, this could bring about a new cottage industry at resorts and airports everywhere, rental cell phones!

gobbybobby said:

On the flights where you can get on the internet its stupidly expensive. Its not worth it most airports have free wifi now. (and thats where you end up spending most yer time!)

matrix86 matrix86 said:

I just can't help but laugh at all the people getting upset. I joked in my last comment, but let's be serious here. We are a spoiled society where if we don't get to use our phones or laptops, life as we know it is ending. Trust me, you're not going to die because you can't use your phone or laptop on a long flight. You see, they make these things called "books" and "magazines".

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Umm, people, you do realize they're talking about eliminating the in-flight USE of cell phones and wi-fi in flight, not that you can't even bring the equipment on. If they banned the mere carrying of cells and laptops onto a plane, they would kill the airline industry, which relies heavily on business travelers who have to keep that stuff with them (for layovers, to avoid lost items, etc).

Leeky Leeky said:

Umm, people, you do realize they're talking about eliminating the in-flight USE of cell phones and wi-fi in flight, not that you can't even bring the equipment on. If they banned the mere carrying of cells and laptops onto a plane, they would kill the airline industry, which relies heavily on business travelers who have to keep that stuff with them (for layovers, to avoid lost items, etc).

I don't think it would. Nobody is going to sail from England to New York just because they can't take a laptop or mobile phone onboard with them when they travel on a plane.

The airlines will do whatever they like to ensure safety - You as a customer don't have a choice, you can suck eggs, or not travel by plane. They'll still have plenty of passengers either way. lol.

I don'r agree with it myself, but then I also accept there is much I can do about it - So not much point letting it bother me.

B00kWyrm B00kWyrm, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Umm, people, you do realize they're talking about eliminating the in-flight USE of cell phones and wi-fi in flight,

Ummm ... when was the last time you tried to find a wifi hotspot at 35000ft?

If you ever did find one, momentarily, ... ooops... out of range again... again... again...

Neither of these devices work like "walkie talkies"!

And currently , you may NOT use cell phones... except after you are back on the ground.

And currently , while in flight, you may not use devices (wifi/bluetooth) that could possibly interfere with the airplane electronics.

So, as I said... Tempest in a teapot!

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Ummm ... when was the last time you tried to find a wifi hotspot at 35000ft?

If you ever did find one, momentarily, ... ooops... out of range again... again... again...

Neither of these devices work like "walkie talkies"!

And currently , you may NOT use cell phones... except after you are back on the ground.

And currently , while in flight, you may not use devices (wifi/bluetooth) that could possibly interfere with the airplane electronics.

So, as I said... Tempest in a teapot!

Heh, you must not travel much B00k. Quite a few airlines now offer wi-fi internet connections in-flight, and a few are playing around with in-flight cell phone connection systems (they both usually use satellite connection to provide the link). I've had the wi-fi option on at least 1 leg of each of the last 10 flights I've taken recently. So, the technology is out there, and spreading. THAT is what the investigators are looking into, whether to quell those in-flight connection systems. Not banning wi-fi and cell phone equipment from even being carried on (as some readers are obviously assuming, based on their comments).

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I don't think it would. Nobody is going to sail from England to New York just because they can't take a laptop or mobile phone onboard with them when they travel on a plane.

Oh, I agree there... Long distances, you have no choice, really. But for short distance jaunts, it could become an issue. You'd be amazed at how many high end business executives and lawyers would scream and cry if you took away their toys. Or techs who rely on their equipment for their jobs. And, if you make them stow them in the cargo area, and lose the luggage on the way, imagine the lawsuits involved in lost/damaged equipment, and potential losses (like if you fail to make a presentation because the airline lost your laptop enroute). Charter and private planes, as well as trains and other transportation, could become much more attractive, adding to the struggle the big airlines are already having just trying to keep their heads above water. Not saying it would put a bullet in the brainpan of the airlines, but it has the potential to kick them in the crotch, at least.

B00kWyrm B00kWyrm, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I am not the most frequent of frequent flyers, but I still get around.

Availability of services may depend in part on airline and in part on the route.

In the last 20 of my flights NONE of them had either option.

And every flight was insistent upon "No Wifi or Bluetooth" from before the plan left the gate until its docking at the desitination gate.

Though a few had the VERY pricey "in flight" phone system.

(Handset in the back of the seat in front of you, with credit card scanner to take your payment).

IMO The frills currently available on a few flights will not be missed on the majority,

simply because, they were never there to begin with.

SO... "my sampling" vs "your sampling"... For MY typical flights - no net effect,

UNLESS they want to ban the cellphone or laptop on the plane;

Which is really (as I see it) the only way to control it on the flights of which I have been speaking.

(Any jamming process would have a spillover effect upon other needed flight systems!)

Anyone have a definitive study of the percentage of flights that could be affected by loss of these "frivolous" - erm - "frill/luxury" - erm - "needed business" services?

Leeky Leeky said:

I guess it will affect you Americans more than it will us Brits, because our island is relatively small, and driving from top to bottom isn't really even a full 24hr drive. From where I am, I can be in Wales within two and half hours, and thats the opposite side of the country (Well Wales is another country) to me. Going up North, I can be in another country (Scotland) in around 4 hours with a heavy right foot.

I'd imagine (but ignorance is bliss!) the state of California end to end is bigger than our entire Island two fold, if not more.

With the exception of people like my mum (who don't drive), nobody really flies unless they're going to Europe or further afield. Most people even drive to France via the Eurotunnel train, and to further in Europe rather than fly. I've driven across Europe plenty of times in the past myself.

EDIT: It would appear I'm on to something in regards to our Island to California:

Landmass of UK: 94,526 sq mi

Landmass of CA: 163,696 sq mi

Assuming Yahoo answers can be believed of course.

vangrat said:

captaincranky said:

Aw...daddy Adolf won't let you use your widdle cell phone....?

To all of these people who go about saying "I would rather the government take away my freedoms, than for me to live in fear." That is what the people of Nazi Germany told themselves, that is what the people of every communist society have told themselves, that is what the people of every fascist dictator and upright king from the middle ages told themselves. Do you see what I am getting at here? Yes bad people do bad things. But, why is it, that good people are being punished for these bad people doing bad things?

.

Well that's because if you're not allowed to use your God damned cell phone, you cry that you're being punished. Why don't you climb on a plane with a bomb in it, and run your yap all you want. Hey, then you can come back and tell us all about how your flight was. It will be fun! BTW, the people on Flight 93 were using their phones when that hit,.

Hey Captaincranky

Nice with the sarcasim. That really gets your point across...

In any case. I am not against the banning of phones on planes. I completely understand the reasons behind remote detonation. Never in my comment did I say I was against that. What I implied, although now I can see from your lack of understaning that I should have stated bluntly, was that I was against the government intervening with laws to block people from brining these phones. There is a difference, although a subtle one. When the governement gets involved with blocking freedoms, it causes a chain reaction that, although started with planes, may lead to people not being able to stand in their own house and talk on a phone. Yes this is a drastic jump, but than so was Nazi Germany.

So yes, phones on planes are bad. But your cursing, and snide remarks have not helped in any way with furthering this topic. I was not "crying" as you have stated. I was pointing out the inherient troubles involved with the government blocking its citizens freedoms.

Vrmithrax Vrmithrax, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Well... To put the whole in-flight wi-fi thing into perspective (as far as how much it is spreading)... Southwest Airlines, the most widespread bargain airline in the US, has started offering it for $5 (it was free when they introduced it). There are entire companies built around and dedicated to providing wi-fi internet on commercial airliners. Often, the option is there and you don't even know it, unless you look for it. It's becoming more of an "always connected" society, for sure.

Banning wi-fi will have huge financial consequences on the airlines (not to mention the companies that do nothing BUT in-flight connections). Considering the huge amount of investment airlines have put into equipping and launching the services for their customers, there stands to be some substantially upset shareholders.

---agissi--- ---agissi---, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Theyre probably talking about this / these imminent dangers so that they can add on a taxation for "extra securities provided" or something of the like.

xcelofjkl said:

Guest said:

In another 5 years airport security will be :-

No laptops or anything over 1 kg, it might be used to bludgeon

Oh dont forget belts, they can be used to strangle, as well as shoe laces

What about fists, they might punch you, you will have to keep your hands open at all times, unless your a karate expert then you have to keep your hands in your pockets

Look guys, no one is out to kill you, your a million times more likely to die crossing the road, from a disease (not bio terror) or a billion more times from a heart attack from all the shite your shoveling down your necks. How can you be scared of terrorists, just look at your belly, is it sticking out a fair way? If yes you should be much more afraid of that than an "unknown enemy".

Get to the GYM fatties!

Kel

Wow, +1 to you friend.

hitech0101 said:

xcelofjkl said:

Guest said:

In another 5 years airport security will be :-

No laptops or anything over 1 kg, it might be used to bludgeon

Oh dont forget belts, they can be used to strangle, as well as shoe laces

What about fists, they might punch you, you will have to keep your hands open at all times, unless your a karate expert then you have to keep your hands in your pockets

Look guys, no one is out to kill you, your a million times more likely to die crossing the road, from a disease (not bio terror) or a billion more times from a heart attack from all the shite your shoveling down your necks. How can you be scared of terrorists, just look at your belly, is it sticking out a fair way? If yes you should be much more afraid of that than an "unknown enemy".

Get to the GYM fatties!

Kel

Wow, +1 to you friend.

If you were climbing down a building hit by a plane or the one with a bomb you won't be saying the same thing.

Then people cry what was the government doing all this time can't they prevent such things.When they measures to prevent such things take threats seriously people come out with this shit.Just have logical view what if terrorists are capable of knocking out planes using wi-fi or something else imagine they disrupt the plane's navigational systems, just imagine if they send out such a signal to all the planes flying then like millions in air are in jeopardy & billions in the ground can see planes heading towards their homes.

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.