Originally Posted by
s0ssos
...But it doesn't mean it is unsafe to try. It means it is unknown if no one has tested. Doesn't mean unsafe.
Originally Posted by
Often1
This was UA and UA's safety & security policy, filed with FAA and therefore functionally required by FAA, is that seatbacks must be in their full upright position prior to landing. In this case the FA screwed up quite badly.
The rest of the debate as to whether this is a good policy is irrelevant.
Yes agree, the policy is the policy. Whether it is a good policy is another question.
Originally Posted by
phkc070408
...I'm thinking of this from a 100% legal CYA perspective.
Interesting point. I suppose there are UA rules and then there are FAA rules. I don't know how far a FA is required to go to enforce the rules. Or how far they have to ignore the rules to be negligent. I suppose that would be a jury question.
Originally Posted by
tarheelnj
On the 77W in Polaris, it seems the FA's always check passengers, since many of them forget the "across the chest" seatbelt.
I actually remember my first two trips in a polaris seat hearing multiple reminders on the shoulder belt. But on my last two trips, I specifically remember hearing no reminders about the shoulder belt. I had wondered if people were just remembering to put it on or if FA's were forgetting.
Originally Posted by
txaggiemiles
I haven’t done any additional research on this crash, but I don’t understand how the quote about survivors says anything to the fatalities.
OP stated that he believed most fatalities were drownings of people who could not get their seatbelt off. If anything, the quote you provided supports OP’s case- if most survivors were seated, belted, and able to unbuckle- most non survivors didn’t meet one of those three things.
I interpreted the OP's post as there was a finding that the seat belts were either too complicated to use or broken so the passengers were stuck in their seats and couldn't get out. Reading the OP and your replies, I see there was different meaning. Yes the seatbelt contributed to the drownings because the plane was upside down and flooding so their heads were in the water faster. I didn't catch anything in the report stating why the ones who died did not take off their belts, (perhaps due to other injuries?). I just noted the survivors were able to take their belts off. However if they did not wear their belts, I would ASSUME that they would have been thrown from their seats and PROBABLY would have died before having a chance to drown. Ofcourse it does come down to luck. I recall another crash where a survivor said that he had his wife and himself take off their seat belts so they wouldn't be stuck and inflate their vests to help cushion the impact. He did the exact opposite of what is recommended and survived but his wife did not.