Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Problem with using a mobile in the Disco 2

  1. #1
    Ian Scott Guest

    Problem with using a mobile in the Disco 2

    I thought all car electrical devices had to be interference proof by law, but page 81 of my Disco manual reminds me to never use the phone in the car. If I do I have to reset the security system and that is very boring. I want to go bush with GPS and next G, laptop etc. but I can see I'll have many problems. LR dealers claim never to have heard of it!
    Does anyone else have this problem and have any advice for me (other than sell the car!)
    Ian

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Adelaide - Torrens Park
    Posts
    7,291
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I work at a Dealer and I have never heard of it .

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Adelaide Hills, SA
    Posts
    85
    Total Downloaded
    0
    G'Day Ian

    I am a radio interference engineer & your story does not surprise me. You are right, cars are supposed to be interference proof by law but some things can slip through the cracks.

    Each case is different, but one thing to consider could be a car kit for the phone that has an external antenna. Put the antenna on the roof, where it does not have a clear path into the cabin. Ditto for any 2 way radios you have.

    The likely coupling path for interference from a transmitter (mobile phone) to the security system is via sensor wires that may go to motion sensors, door switches etc (don't know the Disco too well at this stage) - the wire literally act like antennas to receive the phone signal and route it to the security system, possibly stopping it. If you are talking on a mobile in the cabin, you & the phone may be quite close to some of the wires, so coupling could be pretty good.

    The possibility of interference with ABS, traction control, engine management, etc is very real, and the fact that LR have put something in the book suggests they may know of a weakness. The security system was probably deemed low risk (compare to ABS failure for example) & maybe this is why they didn't add extra filters or shields.

    Hope this helps.


    Paul

    1971 IIA ute, 186 (Betsy)

    they're not dents, they're character...


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dandenong Ranges - Victoria
    Posts
    626
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by pk.hoarder View Post
    I am a radio interference engineer & your story does not surprise me. You are right, cars are supposed to be interference proof by law but some things can slip through the cracks.
    Not wanting to start a war or argue too much about this (your qualification/skill set description makes that dangerous), but nowhere does any Australian law or standard state any electronic item must be immune to electrical noise or interference.

    The standards are biased heavily towards the emmissions (what gets out electrically) rather than being immune to what might get in.

    In a Disco owners manual this is what it states, I think it is called covering one's backside.
    "NEVER operate a mobile phone fitted with its own aerial inside the vehicle - the electromagnetic field radiated by the phone may interfere with the vehicle’s electrical systems."

    The Freelander is obviously a 'hardened' bit of kit, probably to Military spec, it must be because 'never' has been replaced by 'refrain'.
    "Refrain from operating a mobile phone fitted with its own aerial inside the vehicle"


    Your description of the various inherant antenna fitted to the cars wiring is spot on, if it conducts and is connected to other bits it can suck up lovely bits of radio signal.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Grange, Adelaide
    Posts
    699
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Exclamation

    SuperMono and pk.hoarder, you guys are obviously articulate and educated

    True; The D2 Owners Handbook does warn the owner against using the mobile.

    However, who hasnt turned on their mobile when your QANTAS flight is landing, just to see if the 737 spiralls into the ground.

    And who has had a phone call on their mobile when filling up the LR with (a lot of) fuel and exploded!

    Cautionary but only through the worry if prosecution by LR is my un-educated input here.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Melbourne, outer South East
    Posts
    2,283
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Your GPS will be Ok to operate inside the car. It's only a receiver not a transmitter. And the laptop if you turn off any Wi-Fi and possibly Bluetooth.

    As for the phone, sounds like it's been put there to cover themselves for any liability. ( like the "may contain traces of nuts" message on every packet of food you buy these days. )

    Mobile phones are quite low power I don't really think you'd have an issue. If possible, use it with a car kit and external antenna, that way you're putting any radiation outside the car not inside.
    Last edited by waynep; 7th March 2008 at 08:31 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Dandenong Ranges - Victoria
    Posts
    626
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Aside from agreeing that the chance of all or any system suddenly turning hard left into a tree is very low, a quick note about electrical noise.
    It doesn't have to be a radio transmitter to be the source of radio like emmissions. Anything with a (modern) power supply or a CPU (which is basically everything now) can cause Radio Frequency Interference (RFI).

    simonl8353, as I spend a fair bit of time aboad things with QANTAS written on them, can you post your airtravel plans when you make bookings please, I would like to ensure I don't share your test program on a 737

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Grange, Adelaide
    Posts
    699
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Ok, I'll be less obvious from now.

    However, I cannot be specific on what flights I have my phone on lets see...., just consider its with all of them!!!! after all isnt the signal from millions of mobiles filling the airwaves all the time, why would being on the aircraft make the signal any stronger and more harmfull to the aircraft?

    (I really dont understand electronics by the way)

    pps, I never really do turn the mobile on as it lands,
    ... but if it really is a hazard, consider this, why are phones allowed to be carried on and controlled by the passenger, and forks not ?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!