FLC OF DC9-30 EXPERIENCES NAV PROBS ON BOTH VORS DURING CRUISE AND INTO THE LNDG. PED SUSPECTED SINCE CREW DETERMINED THEIR EQUIP WAS OPERATING PROPERLY AS WAS THE GND BASED EQUIP.

Narrative

WE BEGAN TO GET ANOMALOUS INDICATIONS FROM BOTH VORS AND DETERMINED THAT BOTH OUR EQUIP AND THE GND XMITTERS WERE IN OPERABLE CONDITION. I SUSPECTED PED (PERSONAL ELECTRONIC DEVICE) INTERFERENCE AND ASKED A FLT ATTENDANT TO DO A PED SURVEY OF THE CABIN. SHE RETURNED TO SAY THAT WHILE A COMPUTER ON INTERNAL PWR AND A SMALL ELECTRONIC GAME WERE IN USE; NO TV'S; RADIOS; CELL PHONES; PAGERS OR DEVICES WITH EXTERNAL PWR APPEARED TO BE IN USE. AFTER LNDG; HOWEVER; SHE INFORMED ME THAT A FIRST CLASS PAX HAD RECEIVED A CALL TO HIS PAGER WHILE ON BASE LEG. SHE ASKED HIM TO SHUT IT OFF AND HE REFUSED. WE CONTINUED TO SUFFER NAV INDICATION ANOMALIES THROUGH TO LNDG. I STRONGLY SUSPECT A LINK BTWN THE PAGER OP AND OUR NAV DIFFICULTIES. I AM OUTRAGED THAT A PAX WOULD HAVE REFUSED TO SHUT OFF A PED WHEN ASKED AND I AM ALSO CONCERNED THAT OTHER PED'S (LIKE PAGERS) SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF BANNED ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS MADE TO THIS EFFECT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE DID NOT FIND OUT ABOUT THE PAX UNTIL AFTER THE PAX HAD LEFT THE ACFT. THE CREW WAS NOT ABLE TO TRACK HIM DOWN TO EXPLAIN THE SERIOUSNESS OF THIS NAV INTERFERENCE. RPTR DID DISCUSS THIS WITH HIS SUPVR BUT HAS BEEN ON VACATION SINCE THE INCIDENT AND IS NOT AWARE OF ANY FOLLOW-UP. THE FLC DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO PROB WITH THEIR EQUIP. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME RPTR HAS HAD NAV INTERFERENCE FROM PAGERS AND THEY HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT BRANDS OF PAGERS. HE KNOWS HIS INFO IS NOT SCIENTIFIC BUT FROM HIS AND OTHER PLTS' EXPERIENCE HE BELIEVES THAT PAGERS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT IS MADE ABOUT USING PED EQUIP ON BOARD THE ACFT. IN THE FUTURE HE WILL MAKE A PA TO THE PAX IF THERE IS ANY NAV INTERFERENCE TO SHUT OFF ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES INCLUDING PAGERS.