What are the odds of a phone crashing an airplane?
Evidence quality 4.25/5
Eight-dimension review score against the quality rubric . Each dimension scored 1–5.
- D1 Source grounding
- 4/5
- D2 Source authority
- 4/5
- D3 Arithmetic
- 4/5
- D4 Uncertainty
- 4/5
- D5 Scope
- 4/5
- D6 Prose
- 5/5
- D7 Perception honesty
- 4/5
- D8 Caveat completeness
- 5/5
Lifetime probability · lifetime, US adult
1 in 1,000,000,000
0.0000001% lifetime chance
Most people overestimate this.
range 1 in 10,000,000,000 to 1 in 100,000,000
≈ As likely as
Perceived
For decades, flight attendants instructed passengers to turn off all electronic devices during takeoff and landing, and the cabin announcement became one of aviation's most familiar rituals. The underlying fear — that a phone's radio signal could interfere with cockpit instruments and cause a crash — was never supported by a documented incident, but the regulatory posture implied a real danger. The FAA's 2013 decision to allow devices in airplane mode throughout all phases of flight effectively conceded the point, yet surveys show that many passengers still believe phones pose a meaningful crash risk. The FCC's separate ban on in-flight cellular calls (which remains in effect) is about protecting ground-based cell networks from airborne interference, not about aircraft safety, but this distinction is lost on most travelers.
Rough estimate: A substantial minority of travelers believe phones could interfere with avionics enough to cause a crash
Source: editorial intuition, not polled
Actual
0 confirmed crashes attributable to passenger electronic devices
Global commercial aviation, all years
Show derivation
No aviation accident has ever been causally attributed to passenger electronic device interference with avionics. The FAA Advisory Circular AC 91.21-1D and the 2013 PED Aviation Rulemaking Committee both concluded that modern avionics are sufficiently shielded. Globally, ~40 million commercial flights per year carry passengers using electronic devices (many with phones inadvertently left on). Over 25+ years of widespread cell phone use, this represents hundreds of millions of flight-segments with PEDs present and zero confirmed interference-caused accidents. The 1e-9 value is a structural floor to satisfy the schema; the true probability may be literally zero.
Caveats: The 1-in-1-billion native rate is a structural placeholder. The true rate of PED…
The 1-in-1-billion native rate is a structural placeholder. The true rate of PED-caused aviation accidents is zero in the historical record. The entry addresses crash risk specifically — low-level electromagnetic interference (EMI) events, such as brief static on cockpit audio, have been anecdotally reported by pilots but have never resulted in loss of aircraft control or a safety incident. The FCC ban on in-flight cellular calls (47 CFR 22.925) remains in effect as of 2026, but this regulation protects ground-based cell networks from airborne interference, not aircraft from phones. The FAA relaxation applies to devices in airplane mode; transmitting cellular calls from altitude remains prohibited for network-management reasons.
Risks at similar odds
Other risks with roughly the same likelihood — useful for calibration.
Intimate deepfake
What are the odds an AI-generated intimate deepfake of you will be created or shared without consent in your lifetime?
Recently viewed on this device
Stored locally — clear anytime.
Pick challenger
No aviation accident has ever been causally attributed to interference from a passenger’s cell phone or electronic device. The historical record covers billions of flight-segments over 25+ years of widespread cell phone ownership, during which phones were routinely left on inadvertently (surveys have found that a majority of passengers admit to forgetting to switch off at least occasionally). In 2013, the FAA formally relaxed PED restrictions after a dedicated Aviation Rulemaking Committee concluded that modern commercial aircraft can tolerate RF emissions from consumer electronics. The engineering basis is RTCA/DO-160, the electromagnetic compatibility standard to which all commercial avionics are certified, which tests equipment against RF field strengths well above anything a cabin full of phones produces.
The confusion between two separate regulations has sustained the myth. The FCC’s ban on airborne cellular calls (47 CFR 22.925, dating to 1991) remains in effect, but its purpose is protecting ground-based cell tower networks from interference caused by a phone connecting to multiple towers simultaneously at altitude — a network-management concern, not a flight- safety concern. The FAA’s pre-2013 PED restrictions were precautionary, adopted in the 1960s when avionics were less shielded and portable electronics were rare enough that the theoretical interference pathway could not be empirically ruled out. By 2013, the combination of improved avionics shielding (DO-160G compliance), massive natural experimentation (billions of flights with PEDs present), and formal testing by airlines removed the rationale for maintaining the restriction during takeoff and landing.
Mid-2000s research by Carnegie Mellon and others did detect low-level RF emissions from passenger devices during flights, and pilots have anecdotally reported brief audio-frequency interference on cockpit headsets when phones are in close proximity. Neither observation constitutes a safety hazard — the detected emissions were orders of magnitude below the threshold that would affect flight-critical avionics. The distinction between “detectable electromagnetic emission” and “interference sufficient to degrade a safety-critical system” is large, and the engineering margins in DO-160 exist precisely to ensure that the former never becomes the latter.
Claim ledger
Every number below is what each source reported, with the verbatim quote we relied on and how we arrived at our figure. Click any link to verify directly.
-
[1] Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) — Advisory Circular 91.21-1D: Use of Portable Electronic Devices Aboard Aircraft
Advisory Circular 91.21-1D: Use of Portable Electronic Devices Aboard Aircraft- Statistic
FAA determined that airlines may allow portable electronic devices during all phases of flight, provided testing demonstrates the aircraft can tolerate potential interference- Excerpt
“"This AC provides guidance for use of portable electronic devices (PEDs) aboard aircraft. Operators may determine that certain PEDs may be used during all phases of flight, provided testing and analysis demonstrates the aircraft can tolerate the radio frequency emissions." ”
- Source data from
- 2013-10-28
- Accessed
- 2026-04-18 · archived copy
- Calculation
- The FAA's 2013 advisory circular is the regulatory instrument that relaxed PED restrictions. It followed the PED Aviation Rulemaking Committee's finding that modern commercial aircraft meet RTCA/DO-160 electromagnetic compatibility standards and can tolerate RF emissions from consumer electronics. The AC does not claim that interference is physically impossible — it states that the probability of harmful interference from PEDs in airplane mode is acceptably low given modern avionics shielding. Airlines were required to verify their specific fleet's tolerance through testing before expanding PED permissions.
-
[2] Wikipedia (citing FAA, FCC, EASA, and RTCA sources) — Mobile phones on aircraft
Mobile phones on aircraft- Statistic
No aircraft accident has been attributed to interference from passenger mobile phones; the FCC ban on in-flight calls relates to ground network interference, not aviation safety- Excerpt
“"No one has officially or definitively linked cell phone usage to an airline accident. Researchers in the mid-2000s concluded that cell phones did have the potential to interfere with critical electronics in aircraft, though they couldn't find any instances in which it had caused an accident." ”
- Source data from
- 2024-06-15
- Accessed
- 2026-04-18 · archived copy
- Calculation
- Wikipedia's article synthesizes the regulatory history: the original FCC ban (47 CFR 22.925, dating to 1991) prohibits airborne cellular transmission to protect ground networks, not aircraft. The FAA's separate PED policy evolved from a blanket ban to the 2013 relaxation. The article notes that RTCA Special Committee 202 tested PED emissions and concluded that the theoretical interference pathway exists but at power levels well below those that would affect DO-160-compliant avionics. Used as a contextual source; the FAA AC is the authoritative primary.
- Independence
- Wikipedia synthesizes FAA, FCC, and RTCA sources rather than presenting independent evidence. Included for the concise summary of the regulatory timeline and the explicit statement about zero attributed accidents.
-
[3] CNN — FAA allowing most electronic device use throughout flights
FAA allowing most electronic device use throughout flights- Statistic
FAA announced in October 2013 that passengers may use most PEDs in airplane mode during all phases of flight, including takeoff and landing- Excerpt
“"The FAA said that airlines can allow passengers to use portable electronic devices such as tablets, laptop computers, e-readers and cell phones in airplane mode throughout the flight — with some circumstantial restrictions." ”
- Source data from
- 2013-10-31
- Accessed
- 2026-04-18 · archived copy
- Calculation
- Contemporary news coverage of the FAA's 2013 policy change. The article notes that a panel the FAA established to study the issue concluded that most commercial airplanes can tolerate radio interference signals from PEDs. Included as a timestamped record of the policy change and public communication. The panel's conclusion — aircraft tolerance of PED emissions — is the key engineering finding that underpins the "effectively zero" risk assessment.
-
[4] Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) — RTCA DO-160: Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment
RTCA DO-160: Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment- Statistic
DO-160 is the standard for electromagnetic compatibility testing of all commercial avionics, including tolerance to external RF sources- Excerpt
“"DO-160 specifies a series of minimum standard environmental test conditions and applicable test procedures for airborne equipment. Section 20 covers RF susceptibility, and Section 21 covers emission of RF energy." ”
- Source data from
- 2010-12-01
- Accessed
- 2026-04-18 · archived copy
- Calculation
- RTCA/DO-160 (current revision G) is the engineering standard that ensures avionics can withstand electromagnetic interference. Section 20 (RF susceptibility) tests avionics against RF field strengths well above what consumer electronics produce. The standard has been updated progressively since 1975 to reflect evolving RF environments, including cellular, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth frequencies. Modern aircraft certified to DO-160G are designed to operate correctly in the presence of consumer-electronics emissions. This standard is the technical basis for the FAA's 2013 policy change.