Brace position

[Nath]

Is the brace position we're supposed to take upon crashing designed to save our lives or end our suffering quicker?

Just wondering.

[wingman863]

I can't say that I'm exactly an authority on the issue but are you actually serious?

[teeteringhead]

Keeps the head attached to make the dental ID easier.....

[Onan the Clumsy]

Good question though. If safety realy was inportant, there'd be five point harnesses with backwards facing seats and doors like Soutern Region.

[Hangar3]

Depends on which brace position you mean, there are several different ideas.

Your head is going to hit the seat in front of you anyway so you may as well put it nearer to reduce the acceleration forces upon contact......

[Lord Snot]

Those two mincers on "Myth-Busters" did a busting session on the brace position. They got some wallahs to sit in a mock-up and assume the position before the entire arrangement was dropped from a height onto the ground.

When the dust had settled it emerged that they slightly less intense permanent back difficulties if they used the position.

As a long-term sceptic, I was moved.

The real question is, if they can make the black box (aka flight data recorder) out of light-weight indestructible materials, why not make the entire aircraft that way?

[con-pilot]

That and smoke hoods for all the passengers. However as usual it comes down to cost. Rear facing seats cost more and are heavier than the standard airline seat. Same thing for the 5-point harness, cost.

To answer your question the brace position is to keep your head from slamming into the seat in front of you which is likely to break your neck.

[Ozzy]

Expanding on this thread, is there any record of a commercial flight ditching in a) the sea/ocean or b) a body of water and the majority of the pax surviving by getting out, inflating their life vests, and getting into a survival raft? I've always wondered if the life vests demo is entirely worthwhile.

Ozzy

[bear11]

What do you mean, supposed to take? With some LCC seat pitches these days, you have to assume the position just to fit in the seat - you can see the impression of a nose on the seatback in front of you from the person who sat before. Two hours later, you can't feel your feckin' legs, and you're supposed to get out, inflate your life vest, etc? It'd probably be a small mercy if you were landed at an airport and they blew the slides - you wouldn't feel your legs break as you came off the slide even if you made it out of the aircraft in the first place.

<RANT MODE OFF>

[cessna l plate]

You learn something new every day. I always thought it was so you could kiss your a**e goodbye!!

Sorry, but what do you expect engaging in a meaningful debate in JB?

[Onan the Clumsy]

Rear facing seats cost more and are heavier than the standard airline seat.
I'm not sure why they would cost more Con. I thought the problem was that pax didn't like to sit facing backwards. Sort of a glass half empty glass half full thing.

WN used to have those club seats and it was a little uncomfortable on climb out if you were facing backwards, though it did give you an opportunity to look up the skirt of the woman sitting opposite :E

[Loose rivets]

The army use to make us take the seats out, then put them all back in again...facing the other way for our trooping contracts.

Soldiers are all brave, so they didn't squeal when we rotated. Well, not many of them anyway. However, the spontaneous clutching of the armrests, did cause them to drop their armory. The cabin crew spent considerable time each flight, retrieving hand-grenades, rifles and daggers from the back of the cabin and returning them to the men.

Cries like "I had a blue hand-grenade...:{ " took up a lot of extra time.

[MMEMatty]

Could they not design it so that the lifejackets had a smoke hood built into the back, and the lifejacket only inflated when it came into contact with water?

That way you have one pack for two purposes, and you avoid the situation of silly pax inflating their life jacket when inside the a/c.

Also, im sure i watched a prog about how lifejackets by the nature of their design swung you round so you were facing into the swell, making it that much more difficult to breathe as the waves hit you. In this situation, the smoke hood would keep the water off your face.

See? Full of good ideas me.

Matt

[flugholm]

I had a talk with a mate of mine who runs certification tests on aircraft seats. The subject was childrens seats and restraints. He said that holding a baby in front of your stomach during a crash is a good thing.

Not for the baby -- it gets crushed to death.

But it does help the other person!
:sad:

[DaveO'Leary]

I know, most people are going to jump on me about the cost, cost aside, why not incorporate air bags (as in cars) behind each seat.

I'm ready for a roasting.

DO'L

[Ozzy]

why not incorporate air bags (as in cars) behind each seat.
At least the plane would stay afloat upon hitting the sea....:E

Ozzy

[ChrisVJ]

Ozzy
Yes, quite a few, includinga Super Constellation ditched mid Atlantic where every single person was saved.

[Crepello]

There's another point to bracing, and it's a bit squeamish: People have survived incidents but been unable to release safety belts because their arms were both broken. Bracing can reduce the risk of this.

Airbags are a nice idea (fnarr) but equipment levels reflect cost, weight, practicality and - the big one - the probability of need. The chances of a passenger jet making a forced landing on water are miniscule, so it's equipped with basic life jackets or just floatation cushions. (And in many areas, the cold will kill you before the water). Conversely, the risk exposure's higher in a North Sea helicopter so the norm is immersion suits, insulating layers, enclosive lifejackets (MMEmatty's design ;) ) air rebreathers and sometimes 4-point restraints.

If I felt the need, I wonder if I'd be allowed to to travel in a crash helmet... :confused: :\

[con-pilot]

Onan, that is what I thought as well. However when I was with the Marshal Service we decided to turn some of the seats around so the guards could better watch the prisoners on takeoffs and landings. So like a typical government agency we went ahead and tried to turn the seats around, well guess what, you can't just turn them around. (The FAA got real upset with us, not that they could have done a lot about it however.:p )

With rear facing seats the the bracing for G loading is entirely different and the seats heavier due to the additional framework and more expensive due to the additional metal brackets needed for a body's G loading spread over the entire back rest of the seat.

That is probably why all of Southwest Airlines new aircraft have done away with the club style seating arrangement that was installed on the older aircraft. (Now that is just a guess about Southwest mind you.)

[PaperTiger]

Yes, quite a few, including a Super Constellation ditched mid Atlantic where every single person was saved.Well it was a Boeing Stratocruiser, and the Pacific Ocean but otherwise you're spot on :p (google "Sovereign of the Skies").
Several Connies have but ditched with varying numbers of fatalities in every case unfortunately.

Apologies for a serious post.

[con-pilot]

I do remember a Flying Tigers Connie ditching just off Ireland (I think) back in the late 50's or early 60's with US Military families on board and everybody survived. I was living in England at the time, however, I can't remember any details other than the above.

Well, now that I am thinking about it I do remember my father (Air Force Pilot) telling me that the captain had moved everyone to the front of the airplane because the tail section of the Connie had a tendency to brake off on ditching.

Okay, on further research it was flight 923 (I believe) and 28 people died and 48 lived, so I stand corrected.

(Ain't Google great!:ok: )

[flapsforty]

Ozzy, see http://www.super70s.com/Super70s/Tech/Aviation/Disasters/70-05-02(Antillean).asp for a story of a ditching and http://www.airsafe.com/journal/issue6.htm#contents for a few more.

[ExSimGuy]

I can never understand the announcement:

"in the unlikely event of us landing on water"
Darned unlikely - Unless it's an old seaplane, you don't land on water, you crash:eek:

Perhaps Flaps can advise on this - seeing as she seems to be up early in the morning,and still Prooning at disgusting hours at night (well, it's 23:40 here ;) )

[yggorf]

My only real worry is that, in the (unlikely) drop in cabin pressure, when I pull the mask to start the oxygen flowing (see, I do listen to the pre-flight briefing...) the little transparent plastic hose will snap and I'll end up looking blankly at a stupid yellow mask with said hose hanging desperately down, wondering if the principle of survival of the fittest justify my grabbing hysterically the mask of the fat woman sitting next to me, while jabbing my fingers in her eyes to keep her from taking it back.

[con-pilot]

Aw yggorf don't worry about it, you'll probably end up brain dead anyway from the lack of pressurized oxygen.;)

[Hangar3]

Didn't a DC9 ditch in the 70's where the majority of passengers survived.

I think the aircraft ran out of fuel over the Carribbean Sea when he couldn't land after several attempts in bad weather and didn't have enough reserves to reach his alternates.

[airship]

I hear a lot of US pax now carry their own personal emergency smoke hoods etc. Maybe there's a market out there for some sort of 'multi-airbag bodysuit'? It worked for those Mars rover thinggies...sort of?! :8

[Ozzy]

Thanks Flaps, interesting reading but thankfully these are rare events. Scary that a number of pax were unable to remove their life vests from the container below the seats.

Hanger3, you are thinking of the flight detailed in the first of Flaps links above.

Ozzy

[Lon More]

Paper Tiger, here's (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19620923-0) a link to the Connie.

[flynverted]

Keeps the head attached to make the dental ID easier.....


If they don't know who I am, how do they know who my dentist is.............. ?
:hmm::rolleyes:

[airship]

Hey, that's right! Everyone complains about the fingerprints databases, the DNA databases etc. because they might infringe civil liberties. But there must be a bleedin' humongous 'dental' database out there by all account...?! :8 :(

Now, why have I always hated dentists...? :confused: :*

[Mallan]

As an ex matelot (24 years before the mast). When ever I flew Crab Air, and in those days it was a VC10. All the seats faced to the rear. Was this mearly a milatary thing or did the civvy versions also have rear facing seats. Also when I flew out of Gib the seats opposite me by the (let me out quick) exit also faced to the rear. This I can see was to give the space by the door to do a runner when the plane got in to difficulties. This was on a Dan Dare 737 I believe.

[ExSimGuy]

No - it was only "Crab-Air" that used this config - I remember walking to the flight deck of the VC-10s through the empty aircraft before the pax boarded, that the seats were strictly "civvie config" on BOAC.

Now the Dart Herald, DID have @ss-facing seats - I think they were in row 1, where the occupants of the first 2 rows had a table between them - bit like British Rail - so they could have a meeting whilst flying - if they could hear themselves above the prop noise ;)


(The VC-10 was in the days when I was paid to go jump-seating :O as a fligh sim engineer)

[flapsforty]

ESG, no idea mate; have always wondered about that one myself when I fly with the competition. :confused:

[Ontariotech]

The Mythbusters TV show in the US did a real life experiment, into the use of the crash position. Now, they were using a mock up aircraft that was suspened about 13 feet in the air, and impacted the ground at about a 60 degree angle. They used a dummy with G meters and other gadget's.

They actually found that the brace position reduced injurys upon impact. And increased survivability of the occupent. You would really need to watch the episode to get all the info they found. And believe me, these two guys on this show are the least scientific two you will find on the planet. But, they doo get some good insight into the Myth of the Brace position, and it's pros and cons.

[KTPops]

The passenger seats at exit and bulkhead rows on our A340-600 a/c are all fitted with airbag seatbelts designed to inflate upon impact. They are also fitted to the Upper Class Suites. I was told this came into place after a safety recommendation follwing the BMi Kegworth disaster. Can anyone confirm this for me?


KTP xx

[pigboat]

If I wuz on an aircraft preparing to ditch, I'd assume the put-your-head-between-your-legs-and-kiss-your-ass-goodbye position. :}

[steinycans]

dont you guys know anything? the brace position was designed so crew could pinch as much stuff as possible from the o/h bins without being seen.

some religions claim the brace position has mystical powers and is an act of reverence to the flight deck crew not unlike kneeling and praying with heads bowed

i just hope when its my turn that it is not to bumpy to keep reading my book between my feet.

[Nath]

If it were safer to fly backwards as such, I think I'd rather do so. I've never tried it before obviously but if the military do so for safety reasons I'd not disagree with such a configuration.

I'm not a medic of any sorts but I wonder if it would increase the risk of DVT and such?

[Rushton]

Brace position? What you lot on about planes for?

Put on handbrake, chock rear wheels, take wheel brace to wheel nuts and loosen, jack up car, undo wheel nuts with brace. Brace position should be both feet firmly on ground, knees bent and back kept straight. Apply force to wheel brace in an anti-clockwise motion. Nuts should loosen:eek: Repeat with other nuts. Change wheel and apply reverse procedure to above.

Off to bunker again...

[Descend to What Height?!?]

Also to come out of the Kegworth crash was that many people survived the crash, but were killed in a subsequent fire, or from loff of blood.
The reason was that when sitting in a forward facing seat, when the aircraft and the seat come to an abrupt stop, unless your legs are in the correct brace possition, your legs fly forward. Your shin bone is then neatly broken just below the knee on the lower structure of the seat in front of you.
So even if you are not knocked out due to head injury, you are unable to leave your seat due to one or more broken legs!

The accident report from Kegworth reccomended an improved brace possition, where you tuck your legs as far back under your seat as possible. When you stop, the motion of your body going forward, pushes your legs slightly down, thus preventing them flying forward, and impacting the seat in front of you.

Many airlines have changed the brace possition in the flight safety cards to reflect this, but how many pax have noted this?

It may just save your life!

Having flown in the flight test area for many years, it always shocks me some of the information in the seat back cards, lack of pax attention to pre flight briefs. When flying down the back, I was always glad we had rear facing seats in al our "heavy" aircraft.

Questions for you to think about,
when you drive a car in Europe, people expect a 3 point harness, airbags etc etc. When flying, that single lap strap is all you relie on to hold you for much higher decelleration forces. Thus causing pelvic injury? How many people choose to face the rear when in a train? Why did the military (not known for spending needless money) insist on rear facing seats for the VC10? So how much does the aviation industry put into your survival as opposed to proffit?

[Mr Chips]

I believe that after kegworth, the brace position was changed so that you puut one hand on top of the other, rather than interlocking fingers. This was because many people suffered broken fingers and couldn't undo lap belts...

[mixture]

Erm ... surely they cost just the same, just turn them round 180 degrees and there you have it ..... a rear facing seat. :p
That and smoke hoods for all the passengers. However as usual it comes down to cost. Rear facing seats cost more and are heavier than the standard airline seat. Same thing for the 5-point harness, cost.
To answer your question the brace position is to keep your head from slamming into the seat in front of you which is likely to break your neck.

[Exhaust Manifold]

Descend to What Height That's actually very interesting, didn't know that and haven't seen or heard it in any briefings.

The last time I tried to show someone the brace position she wasn't very happy when I stuck my head between here legs, nearly kissed my own ass good-bye after that ;)

[con-pilot]

Dear mixture, please read all of my posts, thank you.

With rear facing seats the the bracing for G loading is entirely different and the seats heavier due to the additional framework and more expensive due to the additional metal brackets needed for a body's G loading spread over the entire back rest of the seat.

That is probably why all of Southwest Airlines new aircraft have done away with the club style seating arrangement that was installed on the older aircraft. (Now that is just a guess about Southwest mind you.)

You cannot just turn the seats around and hope for the best. First reason are the seat tracts, the other are above.

[419]

Several Connies have but ditched

Happens most Friday nights just outside our company bar:rolleyes:

[Krystal n chips]

Could be wrong, but didn't some of Dan-Air's 727's have rearward facing seats on a couple of rows at least ? Seem to recall a conversation with a close friend at the time who used to fly to AGP a lot with them and she commented how much she preferred them as a pax.

[ZFT]

I seem to recall sitting in a BEA Trident facing rearwards as well.

[PAXboy]

I recall BEA doing pax acceptance testing around 74/75 (or 75/76!) I went from LHR to HAM and had been asked if I would like to try the rear facing seats and fill in a form. I did and said that it was fine. The rotation felt a little strange but one would easily have adjusted to it.

I agree with the postings that we will not get rear facing seats as they will say that 'we' will not pay for the stronger and better seats. "After all, if we have got away without for so long - why change now?" Is the kind of thing they will say - indirectly!

I am all too well aware that the lapbelt and front facing seats will not help in any kind of awkward landing. The only way that I could improve the risk would be to always fly BA Club and ensure that I have a rear facing seat and, with no BA Club sleeper seat on short and medium haul, then I would have to hire me private a/c and ensure the seats are turned round.

The only thing that I can do to influence my saftety is to follow instructions, keep abreats of developments - for which many thanks about the poistioning of legs, post Kegworth, which I had not heard - and carry a personal smoke hood. My smoke hood has 20 mins of O2 and if that is not sufficient, the fire or crash will have probably already done the job!

[TightSlot]

Expanding... I've always wondered if the life vests demo is entirely worthwhile.Ozzy
The life-jacket demo has a value besides a mid-ocean ditching: Many runways protrude into lakes/oceans, or have departure/approach tracks that run across water. Any kind of incident on take-off or landing may result in the aircraft (and passengers) getting unexpectedly wet. Two particular incidents spring to mind, not sure why (must have been discussed on a training course?):

20 September 1989; USAir 737-400; La Guardia Airport, New York - The aircraft ended up in Flushing Bay on a dark and freezing night after coming off the end of a runway on take-off
13 January 1982; Air Florida 737-200; Washington, DC - The aircraft struck a bridge and ended up in the Potomac: Life jackets were later discovered with teeth marks on - people had been unable to open and inflate them.No doubt others will have access to more detailed information about these accidents: From the Cabin side, all we need to know is that you can get wet when you least expect it (Maybe not the best way to phrase that on reflection, but you know what I mean).

BTW - One of the more useful things that can be done to enhance your survival chances is to dress appropriately for the weather outside should you evacuate. At destinations where the temperature is below freezing, I require my crew to keep either boots, jackets, cardigans or sweaters on until after take-off (in short any uniform item that might keep them warmer without hindering movement). It would be a pity if we survived an accident and subsequent evac, only to be rendered ineffective afterward by the cold. The same also applies to passengers, although we never say anything - a Tee Shirt might not be the best thing to strip down to immediately!!

:8

[SRB]

Descend to What Height?!? Good post. I would only query one comment:
"The accident report from Kegworth reccomended an improved brace possition, where you tuck your legs as far back under your seat as possible."
I don't think this is true. The angle is important but I think the knees have to be bent so that your feet lie behind the knee joint, but not all the way back. If in doubt, look carefully at the picture on the demo card which displays it correctly (at least it should in UK registered airlines). Then do what it says on the card.

[Tarq57]

How do you think a lower-legs-forward ie actually resting against the seat in front would be? It seems to me that this would reduce the possibility of compression damage to the leg/ankle/knee, while also preventing a shin-breaking impact.

[SRB]

You would have thought so but it doesn’t. I have seen demonstrations and numerous videos at QinetiQ’s acceleration/deceleration track over the years. They still had some of the Kegworth seats there years after the event. Whilst we can all sit here pontificating and theorising on what may or may not work, we forget that there are real experts out there using very expensive equipment who spend their lives looking at and researching into these things for our benefit. Believe me when I say that they have probably tried every combination of posture and restraint, using post-mortem studies, to produce the recommended brace position that we see today.
I saw films of crash test dummies which had their legs forward as you describe. It is not a pretty sight, even on dummies, as there is still enough forward momentum on the lower limbs to fracture them on the rigid seat frame in front.

[Tarq57]

OK, thanks SRB. I'll stick with the tried and true, in the unlikely event that....

[Descend to What Height?!?]

SRB
you are indeed correct. My mistake.
I also spent time at Farborough and Boscombe watching those trials and trying to put the leassons learnt into practice.
I was fortunate that all the "heavy" types I flew had rear facing seats down the back, or if not, at least 4 point harnesses. I think the best were in the old Farnbrough Commet, huge leather things they were!
Oh happy days,
appart from the wet drills in that cold outside pool on a cold winters day at Boscombe.

[sinala1]

why not incorporate air bags (as in cars) behind each seat.
Not such a bad idea - infact has already been introduced on VS A340-600's (and I would guess any other A346 operator? :confused: ). My understanding is that any aircraft design that was certified after 1994 is required to have airbags fitted to seatbelts where a headstrike (against anything other than the seat in front) is possible. VS have AirBag Seatbelts in the Upper Class Suite, as there is the possibility of headstrike against the privacy barrier in the event of a sudden stop. These airbags activate under certain G force pressure... As the airbag inflates, it follows the path of least resistance - so will mould to fit around the person or adult/baby combination. There is also airbags in the economy cabin where a headstrike is possible against the door bustle or bulkhead.

:ok:

[Sumatra]

Obviously lessons were learned from the unfortunate Kegworth crash and new safety practices recommended.

Were there any infants on board and if so was the infant loop seat belt effective? (I'm trying to tie this in with Lufthansa's reply to a query posted here on Pprune)

[SRB]

I don't remember there being infants in the Kegworth crash.
There is a trans-Atlantic divide on the issue of child restraints for children under 2 years old. (I'm referring to the lap belt that loops around the adult's belt). The UK mandate having them, the FAA forbid them.

I'm told the FAA argument against them is based on studies that show the child can be injured if the adult "jack-knifes" over the child. In extreme cases the FAA studies consider them to be only marginally effective in preventing injury. Also, their statistics show that there have only been about 3 infant fatalities since the 70s attributable to children being unrestrained in crashes, therefore there is little to be gained in terms of lives saved by making them compulsory.

The UK (and other authorities) consider them effective in preventing the infant becoming a missile which can injure others. Most studies also show that injuries are reduced when there is less opportunity for sudden movement, hence any restraint like an infant lap belt which loops around the adult belt is better than no restraint at all.

[AerocatS2A]

I can see one big potential problem with airbags, how will they affect the ability of passengers to evacuate a crippled aircraft efficiently?

[DaveO'Leary]

As in cars, inflate for x seconds then deflate.

DO'L

[MMEMatty]

DO'L, but wouldnt the deflated airbag then get in the way? It did when i was unfortunate enough to witness a minor RTA, trying to get (uninjured but very shaken) people out of the wreck.

Matt

[Tarq57]

Or if they don't you use a nailfile, penknife, or knitting needle.:rolleyes:

[DaveO'Leary]

Did not the air bag deflate in the vehicle? It should have done. Were not talking cars, were talking a/c and I feel we are diversifing from my original post. I sincerely hope you never see (as I have done) the result of a/c down. I assure you it's nothing like a rta. I still stand by my idea of airbags in seat backs.

Respects
DO'L

[frequentflyer2]

Obviously lessons were learned from the unfortunate Kegworth crash and new safety practices recommended.
Were there any infants on board and if so was the infant loop seat belt effective? (I'm trying to tie this in with Lufthansa's reply to a query posted here on Pprune)

There was indeed at least one baby on board the Boeing 737-400 which crashed at Kegworth.
I don't know whether or not an infant loop seat belt was being used but during the impact the child flew out of his mother's arms and travelled some distance rearwards through the cabin.
I believe he survived but sadly as I recall his mother passed away in hospital some days after the disaster.
There were at least two other older children I know of who died along with their mother.
A survivor told me at the time she had heard a child in the wreckage calling for his parents but sadly by the time rescuers reached him he had passed away.
I've worked as a journalist in the Belfast area for the past 25 years and have covered some harrowing stories but I have to say the Kegworth disaster is the one that really stands out in my mind.
Survivors' accounts of what happened were horrific and I never fly from Heathrow to Belfast without thinking of the victims.

[aeroBits]

Erm ... surely they cost just the same, just turn them round 180 degrees and there you have it ..... a rear facing seat. :p

Not being a techie, but If I remember correctly, forward facing seats just have a break point (set pretty low) so that with a little pressure from behind, you can fold them forward to aid evacuation / decelerate your forhead on it. Hence the rigidity of the backrest is pretty low.

If you turned the seats, I would expect them to be sturdier as you would not want them folding over backwards and breaking your back.

That could explain why you can't / shoudln't just turn the same seats around.

[PVGSLF]

When cabin crew do their training, do they get in hired help to sit in the cabin mock-up to be evacuted or use Joe public?
I generally pay attention to the safety demo, but figure that in the heat of the moment trying to find and put on the life jacket, evacuate through the nearest exit, or wonder just how hard I can pull on the O2 mask before it breaks, might leave me a little worse for where.
So why not offer the chance for pax to play their part in crew training? I for one would like to try it one day, just so that if i ever had to do it for real I might be of more use to the crew and those around me, and not just the quivering wreck i guess i would be!

[KeyboardHeadbutt]

So why not offer the chance for pax to play their part in crew training? I for one would like to try it one day, just so that if i ever had to do it for real I might be of more use to the crew and those around me, and not just the quivering wreck i guess i would be!


A good idea, I'm just a member of Joe Public, only ever flown perhaps 15-20 times. But I can see where you're coming from with that idea. It would also give air crew the chance to see how non-air crew would react in an incident. (i.e. like headless three year olds high on Fruitshoots)