Infant restraints??
Guest
Posts: n/a
Infant restraints??
Just watched "Aircraft Emergency" on Meridian ITV...programme was the usual sensationalist rehash of incidents over the last decade or so, however one point the programme raised was quite valid.....
The stewardess from the UA DC10 at Sioux City mentioned a survivor who had lost her baby, having been instructed by the crew to place the infant on the cabin floor as per FAA regs. The stdss questioned this practice after the incident and now campaigns for improved safety for the under 2's in the US.
As the programme mentioned legislation on this differs greatly....here in the UK infants are restrained on the parents lap by means of an extension seatbelt (a separate belt attached to that of the adult), which would seem inherently safer than FAA practice.
Having started my flying career in France I know of DGAC (French CAA/FAA) legislation which states that infants should be held on the parents lap without being restrained by a belt - the argument being that if the baby was restarined by a belt there would be a significant risk of spinal injury to the child as the adult could jerk forward on top of the child in an impact. However with French practice the infant also faces a significant risk of being hurled forward onto a bulkhead/seatback...
I'm sure other regulatory bodies around the world have equally differing regs, however I believe the only way to ensure an infants safety is to have it restrained in an approved infant seat securely strapped to a passenger seat and if the airlines charge a child fare then so be it......
Your thoughts....??
The stewardess from the UA DC10 at Sioux City mentioned a survivor who had lost her baby, having been instructed by the crew to place the infant on the cabin floor as per FAA regs. The stdss questioned this practice after the incident and now campaigns for improved safety for the under 2's in the US.
As the programme mentioned legislation on this differs greatly....here in the UK infants are restrained on the parents lap by means of an extension seatbelt (a separate belt attached to that of the adult), which would seem inherently safer than FAA practice.
Having started my flying career in France I know of DGAC (French CAA/FAA) legislation which states that infants should be held on the parents lap without being restrained by a belt - the argument being that if the baby was restarined by a belt there would be a significant risk of spinal injury to the child as the adult could jerk forward on top of the child in an impact. However with French practice the infant also faces a significant risk of being hurled forward onto a bulkhead/seatback...
I'm sure other regulatory bodies around the world have equally differing regs, however I believe the only way to ensure an infants safety is to have it restrained in an approved infant seat securely strapped to a passenger seat and if the airlines charge a child fare then so be it......
Your thoughts....??
Guest
Posts: n/a
In the US, they are not requiring safety seats because using a cost benefit analysis, if they required infant seats in purchased seats, more people would drive, and because driving is more risky, more people would be killed. I agree that an infant seat in a seat is the safest, and my nephew always travels that way.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The company that I worked for in oz wouldn't allow us to offer infant seatbelts, we were only allowed to give them out if requested. And before an infant restraint seat was allowed to be used it had to have prior approval from the company that it was safe and could be securely fixed to a passenger seat. Otherwise they weren't even allowed in the cabin (child restraint seats that is!).
Guest
Posts: n/a
The airline I work for does not recommend infant seatbelts either. We only give them out on request, and they are not allowed to be used on infants younger than 6 months.
Some parents (not many) do buy a seat for their baby and have a baby seat fitted.
Some parents (not many) do buy a seat for their baby and have a baby seat fitted.
Guest
Posts: n/a
In the airline i work for we do have infant seatbelts(just recently),the normal procedure is still for the parent to hold the infant on his lap.We do give the belts if requested(mostly by british pax).
------------------
"Cabin Crew does it better"
[This message has been edited by latin sky (edited 25 February 2000).]
------------------
"Cabin Crew does it better"
[This message has been edited by latin sky (edited 25 February 2000).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Our Company requires infants to be restrained with the use of a "belly belt" to conform with the law (less than 4 years old). As far as I can tell the reason they have come under fire is the hazard that they can be in a serious crash where the adult can crush the baby. Based on risk analysis, I believe there is a big advantage in using belly belts. When the seat belt sign is on all occupants are strapped in. If there was no infant restraint requirement then these kids are free to roam the cabin and their safety is left to the whim of (often) tired and fed up parents. Countless times I have seen the parents strap themselves in and yet let the kids continue roaming the cabin until the cabin crew round them up and deliver them back.
The ideal answer of course is a seperate car seat-type device.
[This message has been edited by Jetstreamer (edited 25 February 2000).]
The ideal answer of course is a seperate car seat-type device.
[This message has been edited by Jetstreamer (edited 25 February 2000).]
