Infant safety belt
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a word - No!
Each country has its own regulations - US airlines I know do not use infant seat belts whereas here in the UK all infants under 2 must have infant belts
Each country has its own regulations - US airlines I know do not use infant seat belts whereas here in the UK all infants under 2 must have infant belts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahh, ok and thanks,, i did hear a dispute on a Cebu Pacific flight were one passanger demanded belt for the infant,,,but the crew told him they don´t use them..
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
This is actually a live issue in Europe.
Here's an article about it. The airlines would disagree strongly with its conclusions.
The child seat fiasco - Aerospace Technology
Here's an article about it. The airlines would disagree strongly with its conclusions.
The child seat fiasco - Aerospace Technology
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is one of the most stupid things i ever heard 
Why the cabin crew then not demand the passenger stove the baby "under the seat in front of you"
Jisus christ,,and this regulatory`s are suppose to keep the planes in the air not falling down.
Please anyone tell me what the difference is holding a handbag or baby in your lap in takeof ´s and landing´s ???
Why the cabin crew then not demand the passenger stove the baby "under the seat in front of you"
Jisus christ,,and this regulatory`s are suppose to keep the planes in the air not falling down.
Please anyone tell me what the difference is holding a handbag or baby in your lap in takeof ´s and landing´s ???
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
magic,
Thats good! but the Airline i talk about (Cebu Pacific) refuse the passengers using them, bcos they don´t have them onboard
anyway,,no one answered the question
"Please anyone tell me what the difference is holding a handbag or baby in your lap in takeof ´s and landing´s ???"
Thats good! but the Airline i talk about (Cebu Pacific) refuse the passengers using them, bcos they don´t have them onboard
anyway,,no one answered the question
"Please anyone tell me what the difference is holding a handbag or baby in your lap in takeof ´s and landing´s ???"
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: On a plane
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it's pretty obvious really isn't it? A bag isn't a human being. If you let go of the bag, it won't have a risk of dying or suffering an injury. If you have an emergency landing, your grip is likely to be of little or no use. Really, you shouldn't hold anything of any substantial size in case you need to adopt the brace position at short notice anyway
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The land that taste forgot
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
amsafe cares system is a good alternate for infants over 1 year.
slips over the back of the seat and utelises the lap belt to provide a 5 point harness for the nipper.
slips over the back of the seat and utelises the lap belt to provide a 5 point harness for the nipper.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Handbags should NOT be on laps for take off and landing - in a crash they become missiles.
In the United Sioux City crash, having seen an interview with the lead Flight Attendant, parents were told to put babies under the seat in front!
In the United Sioux City crash, having seen an interview with the lead Flight Attendant, parents were told to put babies under the seat in front!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do you prefer coming flying: the baby or handbag?
So in reality the "stove under seat" rule are just a gimmick and the infant problem to expensive to solve.
"Adults’ arms are no match for gravity, even in moderate trouble. When I was writing the Practical Traveler column for The Times, I visited the Civil Aeromedical Institute, operated by the Federal Aviation Administration in Oklahoma City. In a lab were two dummies, each the size of a 6-month-old. One weighed 17 pounds, about average. The other weighed 51 pounds, what the same baby would weigh at 3G’s, a pull three times the force of gravity.
When Van Gowdy, then head of the biodynamics laboratory at the Institute, handed me the 3G dummy, I tried to imagine holding on to it while I was belted in. When it was handed to a flight attendant in the class, she almost dropped it. “What a projectile!” she said."
The Safety Hazard on Your Lap - Jet Lagged Blog - NYTimes.com
So in reality the "stove under seat" rule are just a gimmick and the infant problem to expensive to solve.
"Adults’ arms are no match for gravity, even in moderate trouble. When I was writing the Practical Traveler column for The Times, I visited the Civil Aeromedical Institute, operated by the Federal Aviation Administration in Oklahoma City. In a lab were two dummies, each the size of a 6-month-old. One weighed 17 pounds, about average. The other weighed 51 pounds, what the same baby would weigh at 3G’s, a pull three times the force of gravity.
When Van Gowdy, then head of the biodynamics laboratory at the Institute, handed me the 3G dummy, I tried to imagine holding on to it while I was belted in. When it was handed to a flight attendant in the class, she almost dropped it. “What a projectile!” she said."
The Safety Hazard on Your Lap - Jet Lagged Blog - NYTimes.com
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eliptic - could you calm down a bit please. I've deleted several posts on this thread - you appeared, having started the thread, to be hovering near hysteria on the subject. Chill out please and try using less excitable language.
Some nations mandate the use of an infant seat belt, some do not. There are discussions ongoing as to which is best.
Big Breath In... and... Big Breath Out... and... Relax.
There... isn't that better?
Some nations mandate the use of an infant seat belt, some do not. There are discussions ongoing as to which is best.
Big Breath In... and... Big Breath Out... and... Relax.
There... isn't that better?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only solution in my opinion is:
Infant seats as rule period!,,even if the risk is that Airline lose business bcos people chose not to fly(cost extra seat)
"In 2004, the chief flight attendant from Flight 232 testified at an NTSB Advocacy Briefing and described how she issued the instructions about placing those babies on the cabin floor. Jan Lohr stated: "We are required to secure all items from carry-on bags to galley items, including coffee pots, to comply with regulations aimed at ensuring safety onboard the aircraft. We do this because we are trained that in an emergency loose items can become missiles flying through the cabin. A lap child is one of those 'loose items' in the cabin that may not only suffer serious injury themselves but also injure others."
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-07-29-lap-children_N.htm
Infant seats as rule period!,,even if the risk is that Airline lose business bcos people chose not to fly(cost extra seat)
"In 2004, the chief flight attendant from Flight 232 testified at an NTSB Advocacy Briefing and described how she issued the instructions about placing those babies on the cabin floor. Jan Lohr stated: "We are required to secure all items from carry-on bags to galley items, including coffee pots, to comply with regulations aimed at ensuring safety onboard the aircraft. We do this because we are trained that in an emergency loose items can become missiles flying through the cabin. A lap child is one of those 'loose items' in the cabin that may not only suffer serious injury themselves but also injure others."
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/mcgee/2008-07-29-lap-children_N.htm
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sweden
Age: 63
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Money money money,,and pressure from the Air industry..
What a joke ,,why not tell the true reason
"So why hasn't the FAA required children under two to travel in restraint devices? The answer is it has to do with cost—the cost you would have to pay the airline for a seat to contain that device.
In August 2005, the FAA issued a public statement on why it would not mandate safety seats: "Analyses showed that, if forced to purchase an extra airline ticket, families might choose to drive, a statistically more dangerous way to travel. The risk for fatalities and injuries to families is significantly greater on the roads than in airplanes, according to the FAA. [In 2004] nearly 43,000 people died on America's highways as compared to 13 on commercial flights. 'Statistics show that families are safer traveling in the sky than on the road,' said FAA Administrator Marion Blakey."
What a joke ,,why not tell the true reason
"So why hasn't the FAA required children under two to travel in restraint devices? The answer is it has to do with cost—the cost you would have to pay the airline for a seat to contain that device.
In August 2005, the FAA issued a public statement on why it would not mandate safety seats: "Analyses showed that, if forced to purchase an extra airline ticket, families might choose to drive, a statistically more dangerous way to travel. The risk for fatalities and injuries to families is significantly greater on the roads than in airplanes, according to the FAA. [In 2004] nearly 43,000 people died on America's highways as compared to 13 on commercial flights. 'Statistics show that families are safer traveling in the sky than on the road,' said FAA Administrator Marion Blakey."
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Gatwick
Age: 59
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Infant safety belt
I have read and watched TV documentaries about Jan Lohr's campaign. After her tragic experience, which clearly affected her deeply, she had a point.
The flip side is: an infant, placed on the lap of an adult in the brace position is likely to be crushed.
Just because they are one year three hundred and sixty four days old, shouldn't our little ones be afforded the same protection as the rest of us?
The flip side is: an infant, placed on the lap of an adult in the brace position is likely to be crushed.
Just because they are one year three hundred and sixty four days old, shouldn't our little ones be afforded the same protection as the rest of us?
