Rear facing passenger seats
I recall that Boeing did some studies into this, maybe in the 1960s, looking at a number of accidents and the various directional forces involved. They found that the restraint rear-facing seats offered against being flung forward was not significant in practice, and the wide range of unrestrained items that can be flung forward (hand baggage items, galley items, etc) caused a sufficient range of head/face serious injuries to rear facing passengers to outweigh any advantage. The rear of normally-arranged seats provides a major cushion against these.
I'm sure you can find this study somewhere.
I'm sure you can find this study somewhere.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have found plenty of research that says rear facing is safer. In Kegworth there were severe head injuries from debris even though seats were facing forward. The head injuries are mainly from overhead lockers collapsing, so bad news either way.
So why no requirement for rear facing seats?
So why no requirement for rear facing seats?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same "safety" logic could be applied to automotive vehicles which worldwide have thousands of crashes every day . . . cars and busses, where only the driver would be facing forward.
It's not an argument, just a statement of fact: The overwhelming majority of riders/passengers prefer to face forward.
It's not an argument, just a statement of fact: The overwhelming majority of riders/passengers prefer to face forward.
Moderator
So why no requirement for rear facing seats?
Whether one might like it or not, the Design Standards are prescribed objectively and can be met either forward or aft facing (or side facing, for that matter). It is up to the applicant as to which approach is adopted.
Having run a great many seat structural tests in a previous life, I am not convinced about the aft facing argument.
Personally, I don't mind aft facers ... in a club configuration .. but only if we have another three to make up a rubber for bridge.
Whether one might like it or not, the Design Standards are prescribed objectively and can be met either forward or aft facing (or side facing, for that matter). It is up to the applicant as to which approach is adopted.
Having run a great many seat structural tests in a previous life, I am not convinced about the aft facing argument.
Personally, I don't mind aft facers ... in a club configuration .. but only if we have another three to make up a rubber for bridge.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try a Google on Dr John Stapp's experiments on rocket sleds at Wright Air Force base in 1949 and on. As a result of his work the USAF MATS and RAF transport command installed rear facing seats for safety reasons.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: South Africa
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reducing being hit in face by objects
Given the choice, on trains one might get a rearward facing seat at the 1st row where there's nothing but the forward-facing row in front of you.
As a pilot, I've longed for a seat-belt, especially on the high-speed trains!
At least have a "sporting chance" at survival in the event of a "prang"!
As a pilot, I've longed for a seat-belt, especially on the high-speed trains!
At least have a "sporting chance" at survival in the event of a "prang"!
