Nunavut crash prompts call for child seats on planes
Dec 28, 2012, 10:49 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
Nunavut crash prompts call for child seats on planes
It will be interesting to follow the progress of the investigation and see the outcome from this accident...
Nunavut crash prompts call for child seats on planes
TSB, RCMP and Nunavut coroner all investigating recent crash
CBC News Posted: Dec 27, 2012 5:52 PM CST Last Updated: Dec 28, 2012 11:10 AM CST
A tragic accident which claimed the life of a six-month-old baby in Nunavut last weekend has some wondering if there needs to be better safety standards on planes.
At the Iqaluit airport there's no shortage of babies, such as one-year-old Rachel, who's on her way to Clyde River.
Amy Kalluk, Rachel’s mother, said this was her first time travelling with her daughter. She said that she’s worried about safety after the Sanikiluaq crash.
Last Saturday, a Perimeter Aviation turbo-prop plane went down in Sanikiluaq, six-month-old Isaac Appaqaq was the only passenger who didn't survive.
Nunavut's chief coroner, Padma Suramala, said Isaac was thrown from his mother's lap and died of multiple injuries...
Complete article here...
TSB, RCMP and Nunavut coroner all investigating recent crash
CBC News Posted: Dec 27, 2012 5:52 PM CST Last Updated: Dec 28, 2012 11:10 AM CST
A tragic accident which claimed the life of a six-month-old baby in Nunavut last weekend has some wondering if there needs to be better safety standards on planes.
At the Iqaluit airport there's no shortage of babies, such as one-year-old Rachel, who's on her way to Clyde River.
Amy Kalluk, Rachel’s mother, said this was her first time travelling with her daughter. She said that she’s worried about safety after the Sanikiluaq crash.
Last Saturday, a Perimeter Aviation turbo-prop plane went down in Sanikiluaq, six-month-old Isaac Appaqaq was the only passenger who didn't survive.
Nunavut's chief coroner, Padma Suramala, said Isaac was thrown from his mother's lap and died of multiple injuries...
Complete article here...
Dec 28, 2012, 2:12 pm
#2
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
What outcome, an overreaction? It's not like a government regulation or allowance eliminating lap-child infants in planes is going to lower the risk of accidental death -- such a regulation would most probably lead to increased deaths of infants.
Dec 28, 2012, 5:58 pm
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
Effects and Costs of Requiring Child-Restraint Systems for Young Children Travelling on Commercial Airplanes
Certainly, in the U.S., this has been a consideration and was central to their decision in 2005 not to proceed with their plan to require the mandatory use of a child restraint system:
Press Release – FAA Announces Decision on Child Safety Seats
NTSB Acting Chairman Expresses Disappointment at FAA Child Seat Announcement
However, in this accident, travel by road was not an option. It is also possible that there may not have been a cost involved for the individual passengers due to the type of operation being conducted, which would also negate the concept of diversion - that too, will likely come out during the investigation.
Dec 28, 2012, 6:17 pm
#4
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
While there are studies and statistics to support such a view, it relies upon the concept of "diversion" - that is, moving travellers from the aircraft onto the road where they are statistically more likely to be injured or killed in a motor vehicle accident:
Effects and Costs of Requiring Child-Restraint Systems for Young Children Travelling on Commercial Airplanes
Certainly, in the U.S., this has been a consideration and was central to their decision in 2005 not to proceed with their plan to require the mandatory use of a child restraint system:
Press Release – FAA Announces Decision on Child Safety Seats
NTSB Acting Chairman Expresses Disappointment at FAA Child Seat Announcement
However, in this accident, travel by road was not an option. It is also possible that there may not have been a cost involved for the individual passengers due to the type of operation being conducted, which would also negate the concept of diversion - that too, will likely come out during the investigation.
Effects and Costs of Requiring Child-Restraint Systems for Young Children Travelling on Commercial Airplanes
Certainly, in the U.S., this has been a consideration and was central to their decision in 2005 not to proceed with their plan to require the mandatory use of a child restraint system:
Press Release – FAA Announces Decision on Child Safety Seats
NTSB Acting Chairman Expresses Disappointment at FAA Child Seat Announcement
However, in this accident, travel by road was not an option. It is also possible that there may not have been a cost involved for the individual passengers due to the type of operation being conducted, which would also negate the concept of diversion - that too, will likely come out during the investigation.
Dec 28, 2012, 6:38 pm
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
Dec 28, 2012, 6:47 pm
#6
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
What do you mean by not so much? Before there were planes flying in that area, people traveled by surface transport means in that area too.
Wasn't this a chartered flight from Winnipeg? http://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/plane-hea...fant-1.1090077
Winnipeg is not in the Hudson Bay and Winnipeg is not even an awful bike ride away from Minnesota.
Wasn't this a chartered flight from Winnipeg? http://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/plane-hea...fant-1.1090077
Winnipeg is not in the Hudson Bay and Winnipeg is not even an awful bike ride away from Minnesota.
Last edited by GUWonder; Dec 28, 2012 at 6:54 pm
Dec 28, 2012, 6:58 pm
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
LOL... Ok, ok... The plan is to prohibit travel by air and move everyone requiring medical treatment by boat from Sanikiluaq to Churchill (at least when the waters are navigable - dog sled if the Bay freezes) to catch the train to Winnipeg and back. 
I wasn't actually thinking of turning back the clock but you are correct that until the early 20th century, folks travelled by means other than aircraft. Anyway, I still feel that it will be interesting to see what the TSB recommendation(s) may be.
I wasn't actually thinking of turning back the clock but you are correct that until the early 20th century, folks travelled by means other than aircraft. Anyway, I still feel that it will be interesting to see what the TSB recommendation(s) may be.
Dec 28, 2012, 7:22 pm
#8
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
LOL... Ok, ok... The plan is to prohibit travel by air and move everyone requiring medical treatment by boat from Sanikiluaq to Churchill (at least when the waters are navigable - dog sled if the Bay freezes) to catch the train to Winnipeg and back.
I wasn't actually thinking of turning back the clock but you are correct that until the early 20th century, folks travelled by means other than aircraft. Anyway, I still feel that it will be interesting to see what the TSB recommendation(s) may be.
I wasn't actually thinking of turning back the clock but you are correct that until the early 20th century, folks travelled by means other than aircraft. Anyway, I still feel that it will be interesting to see what the TSB recommendation(s) may be.
Dec 29, 2012, 10:18 am
#9
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: France
Programs: United Plus
Posts: 1,761
The whole safety debate is a bit of a smokescreen when it comes to the question of car seats. The issue is limited because of marketing and practical concerns.
That's a part of the world, remote, with extreme conditions and a small population that means small planes are often the only practical way to get anywhere. They often don't have the luxury of choice when it comes to transport...
The debate over seats for everyone doesn't go anywere. The airlines want to keep it. The parents don't want to pay for tickets. There are very few deaths. Statistically speaking, it's a reasonable risk.
There are also practical problems. If car seats are required, who has to provide them? How to keep them clean and available? How are they approved and how are they inspected? Even now, it's hodgepodge, especially outside of N.America.
One good quote I read was that someone in the Orlando airport once said that they couldn't physically clean, maintain and store enough car seats that would be needed in that child-heavy market. He had a point!
Annoying though in that article, that clueless mother thinks her baby is safer in her arms. That article should have countered that with facts. Yes, a car seat would have made a difference and probably would have saved little Isaac. Hate to see misinformation spread around like that. Hope she doesn't believe her baby is safer in her arms in the car!
What transport to take is usually dictated by practical and time constraints. The safety factor also can be somewhat controlled like avoiding driving through the night, putting your child in a good car seat (not necessarily expensive but not expired and in good condition), making sure your car is in good working order before leaving, waiting through bad weather if necessary, etc.
A car seat is the only way to fly safely with a baby but as a parent, we are often faced with calcuted risks. While I'm sorry for the loss of this poor baby, the mother took a "risk" that many of us do (or did). I get more upset seeing children not in any car seats in cars or say, a good friend who used to leave her baby alone in the bath. She left the door open and "could hear the splashing..." The kid is now a teenager so no harm done. Sigh...
That's a part of the world, remote, with extreme conditions and a small population that means small planes are often the only practical way to get anywhere. They often don't have the luxury of choice when it comes to transport...
The debate over seats for everyone doesn't go anywere. The airlines want to keep it. The parents don't want to pay for tickets. There are very few deaths. Statistically speaking, it's a reasonable risk.
There are also practical problems. If car seats are required, who has to provide them? How to keep them clean and available? How are they approved and how are they inspected? Even now, it's hodgepodge, especially outside of N.America.
One good quote I read was that someone in the Orlando airport once said that they couldn't physically clean, maintain and store enough car seats that would be needed in that child-heavy market. He had a point!
Annoying though in that article, that clueless mother thinks her baby is safer in her arms. That article should have countered that with facts. Yes, a car seat would have made a difference and probably would have saved little Isaac. Hate to see misinformation spread around like that. Hope she doesn't believe her baby is safer in her arms in the car!
What transport to take is usually dictated by practical and time constraints. The safety factor also can be somewhat controlled like avoiding driving through the night, putting your child in a good car seat (not necessarily expensive but not expired and in good condition), making sure your car is in good working order before leaving, waiting through bad weather if necessary, etc.
A car seat is the only way to fly safely with a baby but as a parent, we are often faced with calcuted risks. While I'm sorry for the loss of this poor baby, the mother took a "risk" that many of us do (or did). I get more upset seeing children not in any car seats in cars or say, a good friend who used to leave her baby alone in the bath. She left the door open and "could hear the splashing..." The kid is now a teenager so no harm done. Sigh...
Jul 10, 2015, 5:44 pm
#10
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
December 2012 accident in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut, highlights need for improved safety for infants and children onboard aircraft
Winnipeg, Manitoba, 29 June 2015 — In its investigation (A12Q0216) into the Perimeter Aviation Flight 993 that crashed while landing in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut, on December 22, 2012, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) determined that the aircraft came in too high, too steep, and too fast, striking the ground 525 feet past the end of the runway after an unsuccessful attempt to reject the landing. The 2 crew and 6 adult passengers, secured by their seatbelts, suffered injuries ranging from minor to serious. A lap-held infant, not restrained by any device or seatbelt, was fatally injured.
"Every day, families board commercial aircraft with babies and young children, and the majority trust that, if something goes wrong, a parent’s arms can restrain their child safely,” said Kathy Fox, Chair of the TSB. “In the case of severe turbulence, a sudden deceleration, or a crash such as this one, research has proven that adults are not strong enough to adequately restrain a lap-held infant just by holding on to them. And just like in cars, adult lap belts are not suitable to restrain young children. This accident saw an infant ripped from his mother’s arms and killed in the subsequent impact, even though everyone else survived.”
In its report released today, the Board is issuing two recommendations aimed at making air travel safer for infants and children. First, it is recommending that Transport Canada require commercial air carriers to collect data, and report on a routine basis, the number of infants and young children travelling. Currently, these statistics are not available, and better data is required to conduct research, assess risks, and outline emerging trends related to the carriage of infants and children.
Second, the Board is recommending that Transport Canada work with industry to develop age and size appropriate child restraint systems for infants and young children travelling on commercial aircraft and mandate their use to provide an equivalent level of safety compared to adults.
“This investigation identified issues associated with pre-flight planning, crew communication and unstable approaches—but what stands out most was the tragic fate of the baby on this aircraft,” added Fox. “We think infants and children deserve an equivalent level of safety as adults on board aircraft, and that is why we are calling on Transport Canada and the aviation industry to take action. It’s time to do right by our children.”
Approach-and-landing accidents are on the TSB Watchlist. The TSB continues to call on Transport Canada and operators to do more to reduce the number of unstable approaches that are continued to a landing.
The TSB is an independent agency that investigates marine, pipeline, railway and aviation transportation occurrences. Its sole aim is the advancement of transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability.
Winnipeg, Manitoba, 29 June 2015 — In its investigation (A12Q0216) into the Perimeter Aviation Flight 993 that crashed while landing in Sanikiluaq, Nunavut, on December 22, 2012, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) determined that the aircraft came in too high, too steep, and too fast, striking the ground 525 feet past the end of the runway after an unsuccessful attempt to reject the landing. The 2 crew and 6 adult passengers, secured by their seatbelts, suffered injuries ranging from minor to serious. A lap-held infant, not restrained by any device or seatbelt, was fatally injured.
"Every day, families board commercial aircraft with babies and young children, and the majority trust that, if something goes wrong, a parent’s arms can restrain their child safely,” said Kathy Fox, Chair of the TSB. “In the case of severe turbulence, a sudden deceleration, or a crash such as this one, research has proven that adults are not strong enough to adequately restrain a lap-held infant just by holding on to them. And just like in cars, adult lap belts are not suitable to restrain young children. This accident saw an infant ripped from his mother’s arms and killed in the subsequent impact, even though everyone else survived.”
In its report released today, the Board is issuing two recommendations aimed at making air travel safer for infants and children. First, it is recommending that Transport Canada require commercial air carriers to collect data, and report on a routine basis, the number of infants and young children travelling. Currently, these statistics are not available, and better data is required to conduct research, assess risks, and outline emerging trends related to the carriage of infants and children.
Second, the Board is recommending that Transport Canada work with industry to develop age and size appropriate child restraint systems for infants and young children travelling on commercial aircraft and mandate their use to provide an equivalent level of safety compared to adults.
“This investigation identified issues associated with pre-flight planning, crew communication and unstable approaches—but what stands out most was the tragic fate of the baby on this aircraft,” added Fox. “We think infants and children deserve an equivalent level of safety as adults on board aircraft, and that is why we are calling on Transport Canada and the aviation industry to take action. It’s time to do right by our children.”
Approach-and-landing accidents are on the TSB Watchlist. The TSB continues to call on Transport Canada and operators to do more to reduce the number of unstable approaches that are continued to a landing.
The TSB is an independent agency that investigates marine, pipeline, railway and aviation transportation occurrences. Its sole aim is the advancement of transportation safety. It is not the function of the Board to assign fault or determine civil or criminal liability.
Recommendations
A15-01 (June 2015)
Transport Canada must require commercial air carriers to collect and report, on a routine basis, the number of infants (under 2 years old), including lap-held, and young children (2 to 12 years old) travelling.
A15-02 (June 2015)
Transport Canada must work with industry to develop age- and size-appropriate child restraint systems for infants and young children travelling on commercial aircraft, and mandate their use to provide an equivalent level of safety compared to adults.
Jul 10, 2015, 5:51 pm
#11
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 270
The following link is to a video posted to the Transportation Safety Board site of the ability to hold an infant during an accident.
A12Q0216 (Sanikiluaq): Apparent weight of a lap-held infant
During a serious but potentially survivable crash, the forces at play are greater than you think.
It’s not only the weight of the child but that of your own arms and hands that you are fighting to hold back.
For example: a 7.9 kg infant plus 7.1 kg for adult arms and hands equals a 15 kg load.
That 15 kg, during a serious but potentially survivable crash, would have an apparent weight of 390 kg.
390 kg is equivalent to trying to hold back over 48 infants in addition to your arms and hands.
Tests have shown that it just isn’t possible to hold back that much apparent weight.
TSBCanada YouTube Channel
During a serious but potentially survivable crash, the forces at play are greater than you think.
It’s not only the weight of the child but that of your own arms and hands that you are fighting to hold back.
For example: a 7.9 kg infant plus 7.1 kg for adult arms and hands equals a 15 kg load.
That 15 kg, during a serious but potentially survivable crash, would have an apparent weight of 390 kg.
390 kg is equivalent to trying to hold back over 48 infants in addition to your arms and hands.
Tests have shown that it just isn’t possible to hold back that much apparent weight.
TSBCanada YouTube Channel
Jul 16, 2015, 4:07 pm
#12
Join Date: Sep 2010
Programs: HHonors Diamond; My Mom's Favorite Kid
Posts: 3,929
This can be solved much more easily. Require all kids to be in a car seat when flying. Under 5 and/or under 40 lbs? Then your hiney sits in a 5 point harness!
Can't afford to buy the extra seat? Then you can't afford to vacation.
Can't afford to buy the extra seat? Then you can't afford to vacation.
Jul 16, 2015, 6:29 pm
#13
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,731
What bothers me about this crash and the one in Western Alaska where an infant died is that these are not normal aviation conditions
They weren't in jumbo jets owned by a worldwide airline with millions of dollars at their disposal for maintenance and operations, taking off from huge, multi terminal airports with sophisticated and 24/7 ATC conditions.
It's small commuter planes often flying in hazardous conditions. It doesn't reflect the airline industry at all.
It's not a case of "if you can't afford a seat, you can't afford a vacation."
More like, if we don't fly, we can't get food, mail, provisions or get to a medical professional.
They weren't in jumbo jets owned by a worldwide airline with millions of dollars at their disposal for maintenance and operations, taking off from huge, multi terminal airports with sophisticated and 24/7 ATC conditions.
It's small commuter planes often flying in hazardous conditions. It doesn't reflect the airline industry at all.
It's not a case of "if you can't afford a seat, you can't afford a vacation."
More like, if we don't fly, we can't get food, mail, provisions or get to a medical professional.
Jul 17, 2015, 2:24 pm
#15
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Francisco
Programs: All-Around Kettle
Posts: 3,288
I would probably take a greater risk crossing the street here in downtown SF with my child in a stroller than holding him or her on a flight. Should there be a law that I never cross the street? I mean, I could take an Uber instead, right?