No seatbelts for infants! [Comair]
#32
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: VPS
Programs: IHG Diamond, Delta PM, Hilton Gold, Accor Gold, Marriott Silver
Posts: 7,256
So it's a trade off for greater safety throughout the transit process.
#33
Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: LHR
Programs: BA Silver, Aegan Gold, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 393
Latam Chille strange rule
Todllers can seat in Business Class only if they have separate sit and approved car/airplane seat!!!
so inflant belt not needed at all....but sepearate seat needed....in Economy no problem....
, good what I find out at Rio before boarding for connection to SCL where we have 3 seats in IPC
(2 Adults ,1 4 YearOld and 1 Year old toddler) in the end we got refund for tickets and extended our stay at Rio for 7 more days but we couldn't spend Easter 2016 on Easter Island
Todllers can seat in Business Class only if they have separate sit and approved car/airplane seat!!!
so inflant belt not needed at all....but sepearate seat needed....in Economy no problem....
, good what I find out at Rio before boarding for connection to SCL where we have 3 seats in IPC
(2 Adults ,1 4 YearOld and 1 Year old toddler) in the end we got refund for tickets and extended our stay at Rio for 7 more days but we couldn't spend Easter 2016 on Easter Island
#34
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: JAX
Programs: Ex-BA/AA/CP/LY staff, BA Executive Club Blue, IHG Diamond, Marriott Silver, Chick-fil-A Red
Posts: 3,581
A US seat would resolve the BA issue but they can’t be used in the UK (to/from the airport) or EU so this is not really a practical option for most parents especially given the low risk associated with having a lap child. Would it not be more sensible for BA to permit the use of UK/EU approved seats that are designed for use on aircraft? It is very counter intuitive to have to purchase a US seat to secure a child on a UK carrier to a destination that may well not be in the US.
#35
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 126
Which rules apply to a flight that crosses borders, e.g. UK -> SA in this instance and the reverse? Would it be that of the departing country or that of where the airline is registered (which might not always be obvious)?
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,644
Operating procedures are usually those of the country of registration.
#37
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Programs: Mucci Blue, BAEC Gold, Blockbuster Video card
Posts: 1,378
Hello everyone - first time post after a long time lurking...
We have seen this a few times on Comair when travelling with a toddler and a baby. As mentioned above, it is due to the South African regulations. However, the crew happily have us child extension seatbelts after we pointed out that we would prefer the potential risk from seatbelt buckle injuries to that from turbulence. My understanding is that they are carried on all flights but not proactively offered.
We have seen this a few times on Comair when travelling with a toddler and a baby. As mentioned above, it is due to the South African regulations. However, the crew happily have us child extension seatbelts after we pointed out that we would prefer the potential risk from seatbelt buckle injuries to that from turbulence. My understanding is that they are carried on all flights but not proactively offered.
#39
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: AA, DL, Avis, Enterprise, National, IHG, HH, SPG/MR
Posts: 1,852
Regulations apply from the country in which the aircraft is registered.
#40
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Cockeysville, MD
Programs: Marriott Rewards Lifetime Titanium, Amex Plat, Hertz Gold 5*, National Exec, AA Plat
Posts: 9,467
Many US states require a helmet.
Watching Air Emergency one night (don't remember the particular crash-but it was US), the FA advised a woman with lap child to assume the crash position and hold the child against the floor-those where the airlines guidelines. Mother lived. She never saw her child again. A crash is always unlikely, but I simply cannot see how its possible to secure a baby 8-30 pounds with your arms/hands in the event of an emergency. After that, we get a seat and put them in it.
Watching Air Emergency one night (don't remember the particular crash-but it was US), the FA advised a woman with lap child to assume the crash position and hold the child against the floor-those where the airlines guidelines. Mother lived. She never saw her child again. A crash is always unlikely, but I simply cannot see how its possible to secure a baby 8-30 pounds with your arms/hands in the event of an emergency. After that, we get a seat and put them in it.
#41
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 105
It seems clear that the safest option is to have an infant secured in an airline approved car seat in their own seat so why do BA make this impossible?
A number of UK car seats (including the very popular Maxi Cosi Pebble) are approved for aircraft use and designed to be able to be secured with the lap belt. However, they are designed to be fitted rear facing (the same way they are used in the car) but BA only permits forward facing seats to be used on its flights. Given new EU car seat regulations require children to rear face until at least 15 months (and recommend it for as long as possible), BAs position practically makes it near impossible to use a car seat for most infants. BA also apparently require than any seat has a 5 point harness - another requirement that doesn’t match car seat requirements as most use a 3 point design.
Have any of the posters that recommend the separate seat option for under twos managed this successfully on BA with a modern car seat?
A number of UK car seats (including the very popular Maxi Cosi Pebble) are approved for aircraft use and designed to be able to be secured with the lap belt. However, they are designed to be fitted rear facing (the same way they are used in the car) but BA only permits forward facing seats to be used on its flights. Given new EU car seat regulations require children to rear face until at least 15 months (and recommend it for as long as possible), BAs position practically makes it near impossible to use a car seat for most infants. BA also apparently require than any seat has a 5 point harness - another requirement that doesn’t match car seat requirements as most use a 3 point design.
Have any of the posters that recommend the separate seat option for under twos managed this successfully on BA with a modern car seat?
As for a 5 point versus 3 point harness, are you sure yours is not a 5 point? Every car seat I've looked at has a 5-point harness system.
#42
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ipswich
Posts: 7,543
But newborns are not supposed to be placed in car seats for hours at a time. So I guess banning car seats for very young babies is good for the vast majority of infants who travel safely, but less so in the event of a serious incident.
#43
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 592
The assumption with a seat belt extender is that you will crush your child during a severe accident, but the child will not fly through the cabin to injure someone else. Those incidents are rare, but that's the general gist of it.
You have already decided against safety if you fly with a child in your lap, so I'm not really interested in the totally irrelevant opinions you may have on how that is safe.
You have already decided against safety if you fly with a child in your lap, so I'm not really interested in the totally irrelevant opinions you may have on how that is safe.
The most dangerous part of any airplane trip is the drive to and from the airport. Given this, if there is a choice between spending money on an extra seat on the plane and spending money to take a larger and safer vehicle to the airport, the money is almost certainly better spend on the latter.
Of course, if you have unlimited resources, you might choose to do both. However, every parent makes decisions--implicitly or explicitly--regarding safety. The decision to take a child out of the house, to take them on a plane (even in a car seat), to take them in a car, to expose them to places that might have lower standards of safety or healthcare than the place in which you live, etc. all have safety risks. A very rational person, however, can conclude that the benefits outweigh the risks. Even you, taking your child on a trip (with a car seat) increased the risk to that child. I do not blame you (I made the same decision), but let's at least pause to acknowledge that we are making trade offs and that other rational people could disagree.
#44
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,731
They're not supposed to be placed in their car seats all day every day. A few hours while flying is fine.
#45