Flight From Reality Reading Passage
Looking to register for IELTS? Check out the upcoming dates!
Flight From Reality Reading Passage
Paragraph A:
The possibility of issues undoubtedly exists. Modern airliners are sealed with electronic devices that control the aircraft and regulate navigation and communications. Each appliance must meet stringent security standards to confirm that it does not emit radiation that would interrupt other devices on the plane; standards that passengers' personal electronic devices may not necessarily meet. Emissions from within the aircraft may potentially interfere with sensitive external antennas.
Paragraph B:
However, after conducting several studies, Boeing, Airbus, and different government organizations have been unable to provide conclusive evidence of difficulties caused by personal electronic devices, such as cell phones. Bays Maryazme Greczyn, a spokesperson for Airbus Industries of North America in Herndon, Virginia, stated, "We've discovered that smartphones have no effect on the guidance system." She also expressed that they do not influence other critical systems. The only effect marked by Airbus was that "When a passenger begins or ends phone contact, the pilot occasionally hears a very faint beep in the earpiece," she explains.
Paragraph C:
The greatest proof to date of concern comes from a study published by the British Civil Aviation Authority this year. In two Boeing airplanes, its researchers developed a system that mimicked cell phone broadcasts. They found that the broadcasts may produce signals with strength and frequency that would not impact the newest technology, but would be above the 1984 safety level and consequently potentially affect some of the older equipment onboard. Exceptions include the navigation system and flying controls. However, malfunctioning systems, including smoke alarms and fuel level indicators, might still cause significant issues for the flight crew.
Paragraph D:
According to Dan Hawkes, head of the CAA's Safety Regulation Group's avionics division, many aircraft still utilize equipment approved to the earlier requirements. When mobile phone signals genuinely cause electronics to fail, the CAA research does not establish the equipment would truly fail.
Paragraph E:
In 1996, RTCA, a consultant hired by the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States to perform testing, advised that the likelihood of problems arising from the use of personal electronic devices was "minimal." However, it suggested a prohibition on their usage during "critical" flying phases such as takeoff and landing. RTCA did not really test smartphones but nonetheless advised banning them on all flights. But if "better safe than sorry" is the present approach, it is inconsistently enforced, according to Marshall Cross, the chairman of Boylston, Massachusetts-based MegaWave Corporation. Why are mobile phones prohibited but computers are not? It is similar to most things in life. Cross explains that the explanation is somewhat technological, partly economic, and partly political.
Paragraph F:
In 1998, the business prepared a study for the FAA stating that it is conceivable to construct an onboard system that can identify potentially hazardous electronic signals. Cross's own judgment, though, is that mobile phones are not the greatest danger. He adds, "It would be difficult to imagine how a cell phone might interfere with an airplane's systems." Cell phones broadcast in the 400, 800, or 1800 megahertz bands. Since no essential airplane equipment runs at those frequencies, interference is extremely unlikely, Cross claims. According to him, the use of computers and electronic game systems is far more concerning. They can create extremely powerful signals at frequencies that might interfere with aircraft electronics, particularly if a mouse is attached (the wire functions as an antenna) or if their built-in shielding has been compromised in some way. Some airlines even want to install laptop power outlets in the seatbacks.
Paragraph G:
There is credible evidence that some personal electronic gadgets have caused system disruptions. On one flight, aircrew discovered that the autopilot was being unplugged and traced the issue to a passenger's portable computer. They could observe the autopilot disconnecting when the computer was turned on. Boeing purchased the computer, brought it to the airline's labs, and even tested it on a flight with no passengers. As with every other interference case recorded, however, specialists were unable to reproduce the issue.
Paragraph H:
However, other engineers, such as Boeing's Bruce Donham, believe smartphones pose a greater risk than computers. "A gadget that is capable of creating a significant emission is less safe than one that has no deliberate emission," he explains. However, many experts believe that it is unreasonable to outlaw telephones but not computers. In addition, the issue is more involved than a simple examination of power and frequency. The aircraft functions in a soup of electronic emissions made by its own electronics and ground-based radiation while in flight. Electronic equipment in the cabin, particularly those sending a powerful signal, might react unpredictably by, for example, amplifying other signals or generating harmonics that destabilize systems.
Paragraph I:
Despite the hearings held by a congressional panel last month, no one appears to be working on a technical solution that would allow passengers to use their phones. This is mostly due to the fact that cellphone users are the only ones who stand to gain significantly by allowing them in the air. Even cell phone corporations are opposed to it. They are afraid that airborne broadcasts might cause issues by simultaneously flooding many network base stations with the same signal. This phenomenon, known as "large footing," occurs because airborne mobile phone signals tend to simultaneously reach several base stations, as opposed to land calls, which typically reach just one or two stations. Even if FAA laws did not prohibit cell phones in the air in the United States, the Federal Communications Commission would.
Paragraph J:
Possible solutions include enhancing the electrical insulation of aircraft or installing detectors that alert flight deputies when passenger gadgets cause hazardous signals. Cross laments, however, that neither the FAA, the airlines, nor the manufacturers are very interested in developing these technologies. The industry's "better safe than sorry" path to mobile phones is established to remain, despite congressional mistrust and the odd frustrated (or incarcerated) mobile user. In the absence of solid evidence that the international airline industry is entangled in a major collaboration to overcharge customers, a hindered phone call appears to be a tiny price to pay for even a small reduction in the likelihood of an aircraft accident. However, you will still be permitted to use your own computer on flights. And as long as this continues to be true, airlines cannot say that rationality has triumphed.
Flight From Reality Reading Questions & Answers
Discover exciting and informative IELTS reading answers about Flight From Reality
