The probability that something happens is minuscule, but above zero.
Other examples where the trade off between security and convenience has to be made is the driving of cars and liquids on a plane. I'm really curious in which direction this debate will swing. (FTR: I'm all for convenience ;) )
The reports are for suspected interference. It has never been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
No. This is about security theater and nothing more. Beyond a few anecdotes, we have zero evidence that the practice of making people turn off their devices actually makes flights safer.
I'm pretty sure that only 30% of people admit to not turning off their devices. How many won't admit it? I'm pretty sure if they did a scan for Bluetooth devices during take-off the number would always be non-zero.
If I understand your first sentence correctly, you're saying that there is a high probability that the resolution of the problem was non-coincidental, i.e. turning off the phone solved the problem. This doesn't really gel with your second paragraph, though. Can you clarify?
On my recent flights, I've observed that very few of my neighbors completely powered off their devices and at least one did not turn on airplane mode (he told me so).
I would think that the 30% number is much higher, and probably rising as the years go on and more people forget or care less.
And how many don't even know?
99.99% is 1::10,000. Multiply that by 643 million passengers per year (http://www.transtats.bts.gov/), and you get a lot of interference (64,300 passengers whose devices interfere...).
I believe that the chance of any typical passenger device interfering with critical plane systems is much less that 0.01%, but we need to be careful with seemingly unlikely events multiplied by large numbers.
This is a situation where we need to move beyond platitudes and run some actual experiments, preferably random controlled trials. Load a couple of planes with several hundred smartphones and tablets each. Have the devices on one plane turned off and the devices on the other turned on. Fly a third plane completely empty as a control group. Measure the interference on all three planes and then compare the numbers.
Really? Let's follow your logic. There were 639 000 000 passengers last year. Lets say one tenth follow your thinking. Multiply that by .0001 you get 6390 potentially deadly events of interference. Would that be ok by you?
I tell you something it would not be ok by me if I was on one of those flights.
Of course the number is probably a lot lower than 0.0001. But it is still too high. The number of recorded events of interference are too high.
What this proves is that you are obviously not equipped to make decisions that affect my life and you should not try. You should follow the rules that are obviously the result of much more informed decision making that you are showing here.
And I wonder what part of your electrical engineering coursework makes you think it is ok to keep your devices on during takeoff. You certainly should know that your device emits EM waves even if it is in "airplane mode".
Regardless I am quite sure that he is far better 'equipped' to decide his own certainty, just as you are yours.
But perhaps not for the other passengers, which is the issue here.