Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Special Interest Travel > Travel with Children
Reload this Page >

Consolidated Infant Restraints in Premium Cabin

Consolidated Infant Restraints in Premium Cabin

Old Dec 6, 2014, 12:13 pm
  #76  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: IAD
Programs: No Loyalty to any airline
Posts: 2,378
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Is there a link
Go to congressional records
Ask a pediatric surgeon in Atlanta, Chicago, la, ny
Ask flight attendants
I testified to the five I have seen - not to what others have seen
I am not going to wade through the entire Congressional Record, but here's one hearing I found regarding requiring seats for children under the age of two:
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees...pw104-63_0.htm

If you don't want to wade through all of it, it discusses a total of SIX children who weren't in car seats and who were injured/killed.

One on DL 1288, one on UA 232 in 1989 in Sioux City (and this child died from smoke inhalation which has nothing to do with being a lap child). 111 people died in this crash, and one would assume these people were wearing seat belts - three other lap children survived.

Some of the testimony is a little confusing, it states one child was injured on US in 1994, but I am not sure what crash they are referring to. I find a crash listed for US 427, where everyone on board was killed, so seat belts were obviously not an issue. I also find US 1016 where there were 37 deaths and 15 passenger injuries. Again, assume all passengers were wearing seat belts.

Record mentions two injuries on an AA flight MIA-SFO (I can't find anything about this incident, and one on an AA flight to San Juan (can't find the flight number or the date).

I think children should be in child seats, but you are going to have to provide some empirical data to be taken seriously. Doubt most pediatric surgeons have ever dealt with a child injured in airline turbulence.


I had to look up the flight numbers for almost all of them. One would think that at a Congressional Hearing, people could add the flight numbers.
6rugrats is offline  
Old Dec 6, 2014, 2:08 pm
  #77  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LAX
Posts: 10,905
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Is there a link
Go to congressional records
Ask a pediatric surgeon in Atlanta, Chicago, la, ny
Ask flight attendants
I testified to the five I have seen - not to what others have seen
Since it's been a year since i responded to that stuff, i'll repost my reply with the link you provided back then
http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/_previ...-30_Part43.pdf

Originally Posted by azepine00
You are misquoting data from the report which suggests that between 1978 and 1994 a TOTAL of 5 infants died due to being unrestrained on a plane.

That report also notes that every year 10,000 children PER DAY fly in that manner - making it over roughly 3 million per year and about 50 million over the reported time frame.

This makes the rate appr 1 in 10,000,000

As a reference the chance of being killed by lightning every year is 1/5,000,000

As another reference post neonatal (28 days old+) infant mortality rate is appr 2 per 1000 live births and with appr 4 mil births in US the rate is appr 8000 infant deaths per year...
(http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db120.htm)

This would make appr 130,000 deaths over 16 year period and apparently 5 of them were caused by being unrestrained in airline accident...
azepine00 is offline  
Old Dec 6, 2014, 5:26 pm
  #78  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
As an actuary for more than 40 years, I like to believe that I know a thing or two about risk. So I'll take off my moderator hat and add my 2 cents to this discussion.

Clearly, air travel is the safest travel there is. The only safer thing for a baby is to stay home -- and even staying home is not risk-free! So, if a family needs to go from Point A to Point B (and these points are too far apart to walk), then getting that family into an airplane is going to be safest, regardless of whether any babies are in car-seats or just wandering around the plane loose. The overwhelmingly vast majority of trips in commercial airliners are smooth, uneventful and injury-free. Those are just facts. No one can dispute them.

Are babies safer in car-seats than not in car-seats? Sure. Nobody disputes that, either. It's true in cars, and it's true in planes. Car-seats protect little babies -- and they do it well. But putting a car-seated baby on a plane today -- when nearly all flights are full -- requires buying that baby a ticket. Many families have enough trouble buying tickets for the adults, let alone buying another ticket for their baby. If requiring car-seats for babies drove even a few families from planes into cars, the overall effect on infant safety would be negative. More babies would die, in other words. The ones whose families could still afford to travel on planes would be very slightly safer, but the ones whose families switched to cars would be in much greater danger. Many more babies (and older people, too) die in cars every year than in planes, no matter how that's measured (deaths per mile, per trip, per day or whatever).

So, in my humble opinion, our society is better off putting families on planes for long-distance travel, even if their babies are not optimally protected. The huge advantage of air travel's greater overall safety overwhelms the small disadvantage of not necessarily being in a car-seat.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Dec 7, 2014, 12:20 pm
  #79  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: IAD
Programs: No Loyalty to any airline
Posts: 2,378
Originally Posted by azepine00
Since it's been a year since i responded to that stuff, i'll repost my reply with the link you provided back then
http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/_previ...-30_Part43.pdf
Thank you. Now, can someone figure out how many US taxpayer dollars were wasted discussing five children who died, and ten that were injured over a 16 year time period?

What a waste of time and money.
6rugrats is offline  
Old Dec 8, 2014, 5:19 am
  #80  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Paris, Chicago, Rome, London, St John
Programs: DeltaPrivateJet, Ritz PP, Delta 4 million miler - Flying Colonel; AA Exec Plat (3 million + USAir)
Posts: 796
Ok I will respond

Firsr Bruce, your logic that more kids would be injured in cars is false. Per the Natioan Trauma Registry maintained by the American College of Surgeons, ther are very very few kids injured when they are properly restrained in a car seat (including middle position back seat)

Second, my kids are my "most valuable" passionsion. I believe it is child abuse not to put them in a car seat.

Reports: the FAA reports deaths and severe injuries. It does not report broken arms and concussions (as these also not diagnoses until at the hospital). If you don't want to ask a FA, we gave flyers who do way more miles ask on this board how many have seen a baby fly when thelane hits turbulence.

As for the CARES seat, it is accepted by all US (FAA) airlines, but I be
Jefe there r some European who don't - while they do regular car seats

Finally, ther FAA in bold letters recommends them

Impossible by physics to golf a child when turbulence hit
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/trave...children_N.htm

FAA recommends : http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngogl...s-right-wrong/

http://ideas.time.com/2012/06/12/lap...rs-on-a-plane/

http://carseatblog.com/16971/lap-bab...ents-must-see/
BeatCal is offline  
Old Dec 8, 2014, 8:57 am
  #81  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: IAD
Programs: No Loyalty to any airline
Posts: 2,378
Beatcal - no one reports broken arms and concussions for car accidents either. How many children sustain the same injuries in sports activities or just from playing?

It's pointless to discuss this. I think under two year old children should be in car seats on planes, but they aren't required to be. Statistically, they are safer on a plane than traveling in a car, no matter what some FA told you or what you believe.

Go over to the family forum on a Cruisecritic.com. You'd probably enjoy some of the ludicrous discussions about bringing a car seat while cruising. The majority of posters there seem to feel it's unnecessary to restrain a child while taking a cab in port. They'll just ask the driver to be careful and go slowly, and they remain convinced they could hold onto their child if there was an accident.

Apparently, the laws of physics are suspended while one is on vacation.
6rugrats is offline  
Old Dec 8, 2014, 9:06 am
  #82  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Ok I will respond

Firsr Bruce, your logic that more kids would be injured in cars is false. Per the Natioan Trauma Registry maintained by the American College of Surgeons, ther are very very few kids injured when they are properly restrained in a car seat (including middle position back seat)....
Oh, my goodness, this never seems to end. Yes, "very very few kids" are injured while in cars and in car-seats. But "very very few" is still many times the number injured in planes! And, as far as deaths are concerned, many (maybe even all) children who die in planes would have died in any case, because the plane crashed. A car-seat is irrelevant in that scenario.

Can we stop now? Please?

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Dec 8, 2014, 8:06 pm
  #83  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 9,089
I would like to see the stats on injuries caused to parents by lugging around car seats (in addition to a diaper bag, 2 carry-ons, and a bag with toys).

Quite a few rotator cuff injuries that required surgery for starters (including mine).
erik123 is offline  
Old Dec 8, 2014, 10:49 pm
  #84  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LAX
Posts: 10,905
Can we move recent posts to more appropriate thread - this is not really relevant to business and first travel with kids...
azepine00 is offline  
Old Dec 8, 2014, 11:08 pm
  #85  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
Good idea. Done!

Bruce
Moderator
bdschobel is offline  
Old Dec 24, 2014, 10:33 am
  #86  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Paris, Chicago, Rome, London, St John
Programs: DeltaPrivateJet, Ritz PP, Delta 4 million miler - Flying Colonel; AA Exec Plat (3 million + USAir)
Posts: 796
Originally Posted by bdschobel
Oh, my goodness, this never seems to end. Yes, "very very few kids" are injured while in cars and in car-seats. But "very very few" is still many times the number injured in planes! And, as far as deaths are concerned, many (maybe even all) children who die in planes would have died in any case, because the plane crashed. A car-seat is irrelevant in that scenario.

Can we stop now? Please?

Bruce
Bruce
If it is your child injured, it is one too many. The false logic is that putting kids in seats will cause more to drive. This has never been shown to be true. It is just a "well, it". I respect your thoughts, but hope it is not your child or grand child that is injured.
Merry Christmas
BeatCal is offline  
Old Dec 25, 2014, 2:38 pm
  #87  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LAX
Posts: 10,905
Originally Posted by BeatCal
Bruce
If it is your child injured, it is one too many. The false logic is that putting kids in seats will cause more to drive. This has never been shown to be true. It is just a "well, it". I respect your thoughts, but hope it is not your child or grand child that is injured.
Merry Christmas
Even if i get abducted by aliens tomorrow it wont change the fact that being abducted by aliens is a rather low probability event. Happy holidays!
azepine00 is offline  
Old Jan 12, 2015, 12:17 am
  #88  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CLE
Programs: UA GS+LT UC, AA EXP+LT PLT, Fairmont LT PLT, Marriott PLT, Hilton DIA, Hyatt Glob, Avis CHM
Posts: 4,652
Originally Posted by Erasmus

DL: Carseat allowed in all cabins. Seatbelt extender required in C on 777/747/767s with airbag seat belts.
Do you have a source for this or just personal experience?

From Delta.com,
"When using a child safety seat, dont select seats in the following areas:

Aisle seats
Emergency exit rows
Any seat one row forward or one row back from an emergency exit row
Bulkhead seats when the safety seat is a combination car seat and stroller
Flat bed seats in the BusinessElite area of a Boeing 777 aircraft*

*Child Safety Seats are not permitted in this area since the airbag seat belt cannot be deactivated."
ctownflyer is offline  
Old Jan 12, 2015, 11:32 am
  #89  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: SAN
Programs: AS 100K, DL MM, AA PLT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by ctownflyer
Do you have a source for this or just personal experience?
Both, but YMMV. I have flown with carseats in lie-flat BE on both DL's 777 and 767, and only once had an FA challenge it (in a 767). After considerable debate (involving FAs, GAs, the pilot, and a redcoat), an off-duty pilot who happened to be seated in the cabin observed that the seatbelt could be deactivated with the proper extender. I've had this confirmed to me by FAs here on FT (although the actual documentation cited was from the procedures manual of another operator).

That said, I've never actually seen said extender. In most cases, the FAs didn't raise an issue with the seat. In the case mentioned above, they couldn't locate the extender either on the aircraft or on the ground (LAX, not a small station for DL) so the FAs allowed the seat, but required the infant sit in a parent's lap during takeoff and landing.

I suppose it is possible that the airbag can be disabled on the 767 (and 747) but not the 777--that would not be inconsistent with the facts as I have experienced them, and does align with the text you point out on the website (which is fairly new, as I have never seen it before).
Erasmus is offline  
Old Nov 10, 2015, 12:52 pm
  #90  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 28
Has anyone actually used a CARES harness on BA Premium Economy or Business recently? I feel like I read somewhere that they don't work in those plane sections.

We are looking to fly YYZ to either LHR, ORY, CDG or AMS, and then on to BSL.

Likely using BA via LHR, but AF to ORY or CDG or KLM via AMS are also options that are on the table.

I've heard that AF's PE type service is not worth it, so would probably just go economy or business (if we find a really good sale).

Never used KLM, so I'm not really looking at that fare, but it could come into play if the C.A.R.E.S. doesn't work on BA's nicer fares.

Any insight is appreciated. I don't want to fly AC, as they normally connect through Germany and I had a mildly sour experiences with Lufthansa/German airports and would prefer not to repeat that.
mlv416 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.