Rather, what he did was to throw abusive words at the crew.
At this time, another passenger sitting close to him was said to have been miffed by the development and ordered the errant caller to shut up. The caller was said to have faced his fellow passenger and rained curses on him.

Within seconds, the verbal warnings snowballed into fisticuffs as both passengers threw heavy punches at each other. At this time, the aircraft was said to have approached the holding point from where the pilot ordered that they disembark the aircraft.

Expectedly, the pilots called for the immediate arrest of the duo who became unwilling guests of policemen stationed at the airport. Media officer of the Chanchangi Airlines, Adamu Ibrahim who confirmed the story on phone expressed happiness that the fighting men were handed over to relevant authorities.

“It actually happened just when they were taxing, the noise from the passengers were too much she insulted the crew

Was a lady involved in the fight or is this a typo error from The Sun news reporters?

can we have pictures to support this post pls

this is not a new thing now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i was on a flight to france from heathrow.the aircraft had landed and pips were getting ready to get off.we started hearing some sharp slaps behind.the cops ad CDG came and took the two women out in cuffs.what caused the wahala----the nigerian woman called the senegalese one a goat for taking her bag out of the overhead compartment.the cabin crew guys did not even go close!!!!!!!!!!!

so sad indeed-and embarassing too.

This shows the level of indiscipline in our society today where morals have long been thrown into the gabbage can. It should be a norm that b4 any passenger boards an airplane all electronic/electromagnetic gadgets should be turned off and if probably be enacted into the constitution.

The culprit should be made to pay a fine or remanded in prison custody to serve as a deterrant to other.

Gaskiya!!! ko ba haka ne??

@ Jassie

wich kine vex you dey vex be that? no vex o!

Na only bush people no go understand why person no de fight for plane but I no blame you sha, na your background.

both of them acted wrongly!!!!!!!!!

the guy(second passenger)should have controlled himself, he should be fined(N50.000.00)

but the guy making the call should go to jail for 3 months for putting the lives of other passengers at risk, its obvious he's never boarded a plane before, he thinks he is in a beer parlour!!!!!!!!!!!

A stitch in time saves nine. I don't blame the person that tried to stop the caller. The caller alone should have been penalised for not heeding the instruction of the crew members. What an arrogance!

Nigerians are generally desobedient people.the guy who tried to caution the fellow using phone should be freed and the fellow,be floged,like hell,

Na wa
Wonders shall neva cease

Lol, I still can't hold down the laughter. I feel for the justice-fighter though, but paddy-mi suppose know TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE IT RIGHT! Anyway, wish them 'luck' next time.
I've a pilot friend who doesn't switch off his phone when flying as a regular passenger, can you beat that?! And he's fond of making so light the issue,  

I actually watched a movie where Snoop Dogg was the pilot and a passenger used his phone to make a call during flight and the plane dropped down to the ground. Please nairalanders/nigerians/passengers switch off your phone once you're in d plane. until it is approved 4 us to use phone in plane it is against safety rules to use phone. Simple rule . Obey

i think d 2nd passenger who engaged d 1st offender should be upheld as a model citizen.we all see wrong things going on and usually look d other way.he stood up and did get involved.he's a hero in my book, i hope he decked d other guy pretty good.

any stats on who won d brawl?

@ Poster
Thanks for this. It 's quite sensible and educating.

However its quite funny, we are all sentencing the guy in the newspaper without cautioning one of us Nairalanders who flouted the rule and even flaunted it here by posting the picture!

Obedience is such a simple word that too many people pass up without an eye blink!

To you Mr Nairalander who uses his phone in the aircraft for whatever reason, i say to you, you want to be noticed, Fine, you can come down from the sycamore tree! We've noticed you in the Virgin Nigeria aircraft! You did not impress me one bit! When next u are in the plane, whether a Tampico, Beechcratf or Boeing, please, simply switch off ur Nokia Palasa!

Baba Nee:

@ Poster
Thanks for this. It 's quite sensible and educating.

However its quite funny, we are all sentencing the guy in the newspaper without cautioning one of us Nairalanders who flouted the rule and even flaunted it here by posting the picture!

Obedience is such a simple word that too many people pass up without an eye blink!

To you Mr Nairalander who uses his phone in the aircraft for whatever reason, i say to you, you want to be noticed, Fine, you can come down from the sycamore tree! We've noticed you in the Virgin Nigeria aircraft! You did not impress me one bit! When next u are in the plane, whether a Tampico, Beechcratf or Boeing, please, simply switch off your Nokia Palasa!

Baba Nee:

@ Poster
Thanks for this. It 's quite sensible and educating.

However its quite funny, we are all sentencing the guy in the newspaper without cautioning one of us Nairalanders who flouted the rule and even flaunted it here by posting the picture!

Obedience is such a simple word that too many people pass up without an eye blink!

To you Mr Nairalander who uses his phone in the aircraft for whatever reason, i say to you, you want to be noticed, Fine, you can come down from the sycamore tree! We've noticed you in the Virgin Nigeria aircraft! You did not impress me one bit! When next u are in the plane, whether a Tampico, Beechcratf or Boeing, please, simply switch off your Nokia Palasa!

Why are you assuming that the picture poster actually used his mobile phone camera to snap that pic. It could have been a normal camera and cameras are allowed to be used on planes.

Disobeying safety instructions is as bad as terrorism. You do not need to belong to any of the groups to be a terrorist. You can be an independent one.If you try that in some terrorism conscious countries you would be thoroughly investigated.Even if you are convinced that mobile phone does not cause interference, wait 4 those that make d rules 2 permit it

its bad enough that security has tightened since 9/11. i mean to carry bottle of water enter checking point, them go take am from you, your makeup too goes through screening, you're told to take off your shoes, belt and whatnot. with almost all your belongings being scrutinized, it won't be long before they ban cell phones on flights completely. i'm sure na human right never allow them yet. i wish people would just follow the rules like decent humans, save themselves and other the embarrasment.
why do nigerians always stand out when it comes to following rules and regulations?

winnipeg:

I think the real question is this; since airline companies know that the use of mobile devices inteferes with navigational instruments which could lead to disastrous consequences, why don`t they install jamming devices on all aircraft in their fleet (they could programme it in such a way that it becomes activated once the aircraft is ready for takeoff). This way, the safety of their pasengers is not compromised and it acts as a foolproof method against the few individuals who feel it`s within their right to cause others harm.

Good question,but simple answer-the airlines' own radio equipment would be jammed

Am sure that guy must be a spare parts dealer.
They are fond of showing off their ignorance.
Nna, Nna,, the container o landi go? ,
No be me talk o!

On the mobile phone 'jammer', readers should know that you must produce frequencies in the 900MHz and 1800MHz range in a 'destructive' interferrence mode to jam the GSM frequencies.  Doing that DOES NOT SOLVE ANY PROBLEM! Instead, you create more because you send even more signals to the cluster.

Nairalanders, please take a little time to go through threads before posting.

It has been pointed out that GSM frequecies have very negligible effect on the aviation navigation signals. Those are one of the extreme safety measures in the avaiation industry. One of the posters mentioned that a pilot friend of his does not switch off - because he is in the system. Please note that I am not an advocate of using phones during flights but dont jeopardise your flight by fighting a passenger who uses his/her phone!

All I can say to the guy making the call is that,
he is a PUNK! arrogant fool. Upon all the arrogance
Police still arrest am. Ode squared

Truequest:

www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2008/jan/23/national-23-01-2008-009.htm

Many thanks for the news.

Just for general education,the word should be TAXIING not TAXING

Why not jammers,
It's simple really, the reason some electronics MAY interfer with navigational equipment is because of the rf (radio frequency) radiation that SOME devices 'leak' out or transmit on are close to frequencies used in aviation.
For a jammer, for instance, to jam a cell phone it would have to work on those same frequencies as the device your trying to stop,
Secondly, some devices don't transmit interfering frequencies intentionally, but rather 'leak' those frequencies as a result of being used. ie: printers, cd players, pc periphials etc,
A jammer won't stop this leaking rf , only add to the problem by creating even more stray rf,

hope this helps,

God bless you!

you will probably jam the aircraft equipment instead of the phones.


and by the way,phone signals does not interfere with aircraft navigational equipments,its been proven again and again.i'll try dig up some info relating to this asap.but because its still been studied and besides, it presents some form of decorum in enclosed spaces like an aircraft thats y the policy has not been reversed.
you can imagine an 'Ina' guy or an 'Ilesha' man yapping away beside you in an airplane.

i think this is already too long and not related to the topic but still some enlightenment wouldnt hurt .hmm.



"At this time, all electronic devices, including cell phones and two-way pagers, must be turned off and put away. After takeoff, I'll let you know when you may use approved electronic portable devices."

Of course, those "approved electronic portable devices" won't include your cell phone, not until after you land.

The reason is that cell phones interfere with the airplane's electronics, right?

Well, no, actually. The risk posed by cell phones to airplane equipment is unknown, and will remain unknown for as long as possible.

Phones are banned for two official reasons:

   1. Cell phones "might" interfere with the avionics (aviation electronics) of some airplanes.

   2. Cell phones aloft "might" cause problems with cell tower systems on the ground.

Both of these risks are easily tested, yet somehow neither the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) nor the Federal Communications Commission has been able to get a definitive answer in the past 20 years as to whether phone calls in flight cause these suspected problems. (The FAA is responsible for the flight safety portion of all this, and the FCC is responsible for the cell tower part.)

The government's dirty little secret is that it cultivates uncertainty about the effects of phones in airplanes as a way to maintain the existing ban without having to confront the expense and inconvenience to airlines and wireless carriers of allowing them.

Why airlines want the ban

The airlines fear "crowd control" problems if cell phones are allowed in flights. They believe cell phone calls might promote rude behavior and conflict between passengers, which flight attendants would have to deal with. The airlines also benefit in general from passengers remaining ignorant about what's happening on the ground during flights, including personal problems, terrorist attacks, plane crashes and other information that might upset passengers.

One way to deal with callers bothering noncallers would be to designate sections of each flight where calling is allowed -- like a "smoking section." But the ban is easier.

Also: If real testing were done, and the nature of the problem fully understood, it would become obvious that airplanes could be designed or retrofitted with shielding and communications systems that would enable safe calling through all phases of flight. But that would cost money. The ban is cheaper.
However, the airlines know that some kind of plane-to-ground communication is coming, and they want to profit from it. Simply allowing passengers to use their own cell phones in flight would leave the airlines out of the profit-taking. Airlines would prefer that phones be banned while they come up with new ways to charge for communication, such as the coming wave of Wi-Fi access. Meanwhile, the ban is potentially more profitable.

Why carriers want the ban

Cell phone and tower designs are based on the assumption that at any given time, only a few cell towers will be close to any specific phone. So any given tower will use different channels than those used by other towers closest to it, but will use the same channels as towers farther away. However, when a phone is used in an airplane, it might have roughly equal access to two or more towers that use the same channels, which confuses the carriers' computer systems. This situation might result in interrupted calls, reduced system capacity and other problems.

Of course, this could be fixed in any number of ways, including an overhaul of the software used to manage calls between towers, but the fix would cost money. The ban is cheaper.

Why the government wants the ban

Cell phones and other electronics vary in how much they could interfere with avionics. If it's determined that some devices do cause problems, all gadgets would have to do extra certification testing, which the government doesn't want to spend the money to do. The ban is cheaper.

Also: No FCC or FAA chairman wants to sign off a change in the rules because if a cell phone does cause either an airplane crash or a cell tower computer system crash, they don't want to be blamed. Keeping the ban is the safe decision for the politically ambitious. The ban is easier.

What are the facts?

DVD players, laptops, portable game machines, CD players, MP3 players all radiate energy, and theoretically could cause interferences with GPS systems, communications equipment and the airplane's interaction with distant navigational systems.

US. airlines alone carry on average some 2 million passengers per day. If just 1% of these passengers accidentally or deliberately leaves their cell phones on, that means some 20,000 cell phones remain on during flights every single day. Despite this, no crash has ever been definitively attributed to cell phone or gadget interference.
Many headsets used by private pilots come with jacks for using them with cell phones. The manufacturers say they're for use on the ground only. But many private pilots use them in the air without incident.

Cell phones are used in airplanes every day, and no crash has ever been definitively attributed to cell phone or gadget interference.

The TV show MythBusters "busted" as a myth the conventional wisdom that phones interfere with avionics.

However, a Carnegie Mellon University study conducted some four years ago found that portable electronics interfere with airplane systems -- especially GPS -- even more than previously feared.

The Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA), a nonprofit corporation that advises the FAA, studying the effect of phones on avionics. The RTCA is also looking at technologies that would minimize any disruption, including the use of ultrawideband frequencies and extremely low-power cellular phone systems. They're predicting a definitive answer to all this, but don't hold your breath.

Just this week, the FCC officially dropped its inquiry into lifting an existing ban on using cell phones during commercial flights. The FCC said after the ruling that "given the lack of technical information in the record upon which we may base a decision, we have determined at this time that this proceeding should be terminated."

So the ban remains in place because the government can't seem to come up with definitive answers.

But does that even matter? Interference problems could be overcome with well-understood techniques of shielding, reprogramming and other technology designed to facilitate safe calls.

(When I say "we," I mean we Americans. In Europe, they're working on both legalizing and facilitating calls on airplanes.)

What's wrong with the ban?

The government's reasoning for banning cell phones in airplanes is weak, lame and evasive.

Don't buy the government's bull about electronic interference. The truth is that the ban is cheaper and easier for airlines, carriers and the government than mustering the political will and leadership to make in-flight cell calls a reality.
Here's another problem with the government's abdication of responsibility on this question: Either phones and other gadgets can crash airplanes or they can't. If they can, then we've got a serious problem on our hands, and airplanes need to be upgraded to protect the public safety.

What's to stop terrorists from testing various gadgets, finding the ones with the highest levels of interferences, then turning on dozens of them at some crucial phase of flight, such as during a landing in bad weather?

If gadgets can't crash planes, then the ban is costing billions of hours per year of lost productivity by business people who want to work in flight.

For the government to avoid knowing the answer is incredibly irresponsible.

Clearly, using cell phones is a public benefit, not to mention a business benefit. Shouldn't the airlines and the regulatory agencies figure out how to make that happen?

We can put a man on the moon -- and let him chat with his friends in Houston for the whole trip. Surely, we can solve the problems associated with in-flight cell calls.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9015839&pageNumber=1

But during 9/11, there were reports of passengers communicating with people on ground with mobile phones. Infact that was how those on the plane that crashed in Pennyslavania got the wind of what was going on and decided to fight the hijackers. So how come liver turned to bone when it reaches the turn of the toothless oldie?

Pure madness, putting on other people's lives at risk 

That man receiving the call must be sent to cause another plane crash in Nigeria to make 9ja mourn again.

Come to think of it the guy may not be aware he was doing something wrong what ignorance could cause is unfathomable.
So maybe all these airline companies and the aviation ministry should demonstrate practically the risks involoved in using all these restricted gadgets on the plane.

seun001:

,
We can put a man on the moon -- and let him chat with his friends in Houston for the whole trip. Surely, we can solve the problems associated with in-flight cell calls.
,

It is said americans landed man on the moon, in the 1960s, why havent they sent anybody back to the moon since then? The technology is way better than what was available then. The next scheduled date for moon landing = around 2020. that is after about 60years?. doesnt that tell you something? Even if it not a manned moon mission.

Oh yea i heard some dumb excuse that blueprint for spaceship used previously are missing. well Regardless of what the design was back then. Any spaceship that is built now will be way better than what was supposed to be used.

ignorance & hunger!!

This kind of behavior is unacceptable. But then, it's not unique to Nigeria, it happens in other places in the world.
Some people are just too bullheaded and full of their own importance to respect simple safety rules.

lol

@ EloSela
Where is your sense of humour?,can't you see jassie is only joking.You don't have to get all abusive about it.