chuck1

I was on a PSA operated CR9 today. I bought two business class for myself and infant.
It was my intention the infant sit in her FAA approved car seat at the window.

I was settled in and the flight attendant came by and said she wasn't sure a car seat was allowed. I explained I was certain it was but she said she had to check with the other flight attendant.
She then went to the flight deck to consult with the Captain.

She came back and told me, quite sure of herself, that under no uncertain terms the baby was only allowed in the car seat during flight when the aircraft was at cruise altitude.
The baby, she informed me, had to held during taxi, take-off and landing or when the seatbelt sign was on as this was much more secure and safe for the baby. This is absolute rubbish.

While I thought about what to do, I sent AA a DM via twitter. As expected, I got an immediate response saying their crew member was incorrect.

I replied that arguing could very well get me kicked off and or worse get me arrested for a federal offense if I violated a crewmember's order.

I can't believe, that even with two new crewmembers, that neither were trained in car seats and the flight deck crew didn't know either.

It really makes we wonder about PSA/AA. I'm upset I didn't push it but I was worried about the repurcussions about getting into any kind of discussion. I paid for a 2nd seat and didn't get any of the safety benefits.

lawly

Friends of mine had the opposite experience lol. They wanted to hold their baby during takeoff/landing, but the flight crew said that since they brought a car seat, the baby must sit in the car seat during these times. Apparently there doesn't seem to be any training with this kind of situation.

LittleBird

Might be worth trying to find the policy in black and white and having a copy with you for the next flight. That way in case it any argument you’ll have something to back you up.

GaryZ

I experienced the same conundrum something like 20 years ago, so apparently it is still reflective of poor crew training. As I recall, our "DOT approved" car seat had a large sticker attached to it stating it was safe for airplane use, etc. Usually showing that to them worked...but not always.

EAJuggalo

I would have died on that hill and they would have either relented or kicked me off. No way am I holding my baby when I paid to have them safely in their FAA approved child safety seat. Here is the relevant FAA document https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/...ac_120-87c.pdf it states that an infant under the age of two may be held in the lap of an adult during ground movement, take off and landing. It is not required if the infant has an FAA approved child safety seat.

chuck1

My relative told me I should have fought them, let them throw me off and then called the news and sued them!
It's not my nature to raise a stink and I'm not pleased with myself for knowingly putting my child in jeopardy.

LovePrunes

what exactly was unsafe about what you did? How did you "knowingly put your child in jeopardy?"
i'm a parent, but this just seems like hyperbole.
AA even has planes with angled first or biz class seats that prohibit car seats from being used. They wouldn't say your baby is "in jeopardy" in those either. They'd just say it's not allowed.
seems like a big fuss over nothing. as soon as wheels up, baby goes in car seat. problem solved. FA's aren't gonna know or care or even be checking during climb, they'll be seated and candy crushing it.

chuck1

The danger is that in the event of an aborted take off at high speed the baby could come free from your arms.
Additionally, if you really followed instructions and kept the baby in your arms and hit severe turbulence, you could potentially lose your grip on the baby.
Please google United 232 Jan Brown. You will see she has been on a personal mission to require car seats.
Here is another quote:
"In severe turbulence, you will probably not be able to hold your child and they will fly through the plane, often straight up," Tom Gibson, a visiting professor at the University of Technology Sydney.

BlooJoo

I don't really understand why there is 100% agreement that a baby in a lap in a car at 60mph is very dangerous, but a baby in a lap on a plane barreling down the runway at 160mph is "a big fuss over nothing."

If lap children are illegal in a car, with good reason, they should be illegal on a plane.

PHL

A plane barreling down a runway isn't likely to collide head on with anything. If it does, the passengers have more things to worry about than projectiles flying forward through the cabin. Though, I do tend to agree that infants be secured in an FAA approved carrier, buckled into their own airplane seat. Airlines would love this, as it allows them to collect revenue for the seat being occupied. Whether they would charge full price or not is a whole different thread topic.

BlooJoo

Yeah but there are aborted takeoffs, and clumsy parents. I get that the risk is lower, but "hold on tight" doesn't seem like a good safety measure plan.