Car seat on airplane? Thoughts?

[Torontogal]

Hi all,
We are travelling to Florida in March. We are taking my 2 kids and I am concerned about the 2 year old. I was thinking of taking a car seat for him. He is used to his car seat and this way he will know that he cannot run around the aisles. What are your thoughts on this? He is an absolute angel in the car but I am worried about the plane since it will be a new experience for him. What are your tips? We are flying on Westjet. How were your 2 year olds?
Thanks!

[waspnest]

I would absolutely recommend it. You'll have your own car seat when you get there - won't have to worry about what kind of seat you'll be able to rent. And, just as you said, it will serve to keep the 2 y.o. seated on the flight. I know dd (and my ds, at that age) would much rather be up and running, but if she's strapped in she won't put up a fuss. If I'm just trying to keep her on my lap or in a seat, she'll be screaming and bouncing off the walls - not a pleasant trip for her, me, or the other passengers.

[princessjv]

We went to WDW with our DS when he was 2 1/2. We brought the seat, and YES, we were glad we did! This was our DS' 1st trip on a plane and since he was used to sitting in his carseat, I thought it would be a familar thing for him. The family that sat directly infront of us was did not bring their DD's seat and they paid for it! They constantly were telling her to sit down and having to re-buckling her.

Also, in the event of a loss of cabin pressure (or worse), their carseat will protect them much better than the lap belt of the planes seat.

This time our DS is 4 and we will not be bringing his booster (he knows to stay seated), however we will be bringing the carseat for his little sister (10M).

Enjoy Your Trip! :flower:

[tlbwriter]

You're absolutely right. He'll be safer and more comfortable in his familiar seat.

[rchristiansen]

I agree--- bring the car seat. We brought ours for our three year old and will do so until she's out of it. It's much more familiar to them. Otherwise they will want to get out and look around.

[Brina]

I used carseats on the plane for every flight until my boys turned 4. Their first trip without the their seats were due to neccessiry - I broke my collarbone on the vacation and could not carry and install the seats. The next trip after that one I checked their seats and they were upset about it - they actually wanted them on the plane. My dd who is 2 always flies in her carseat.

[mouseaddictoldschool]

To help yourself through the airport(s), buy one of those cheap collapsable luggage carts(you know, the ones common before the apparent law passed regarding all luggage to come with wheels), bungy your car seat to it, and......Voila!! Instant airport stroller. Then, once on the plane, just disconnect it and hook the seat in.

This helped us through several trips.

ps, not my idea, a Delta Operator taught me that one.

[Embel]

I think a car seat works great for keeping them in their seat.

I have gone to DW with 2 yr olds a few times & learned quickly that my kids flew best in the late afternoon with a little bit of Benadryl. Mine are just too active to sit for a plane ride, especially early in the day.

[Tonyp2566]

We ran into 2 small problems with the carseats. Our 2yr DD was flying as a lap child so we didn't pay for a seat. The only way they would let us occupy a seat for the DD was if the flight wasn't full. And the other was lugging the carseat around the airports for transfers. But the pros far out weigh the cons of not bringing it with you.

[emmasmom]

Did you watch the emergency landing last night at LAX? All I could think of is...what if you had a child on that flight without a carseat? I, personally, would be kicking myself because I didn't pay the $$ to have everyone safe. It's worth it! Just make sure to ask about a discounted rate. Last time the airline told me that unless the tickets were over $200, they would not honor an infant rate.

[CleveRocks]

No flames, please. I'm not telling anyone what they should do, I'm just responding to the OP's request for info on our experiences. We just flew with our LITTLE 2.5 year old in May (she's on the small side for her age is what I mean) and she had her own seat WITHOUT a car seat. She did very well during both flights, no problems whatsoever. In fact, she was well behaved and she had a great time. We brought her favorite stuffed animal, lots of coloring supplies and snacks and drinks and stuff like that.

My wife and I are all about safety. She's a pediatrician and I'm a therapist working with people recovering from catastrophic injuries. We don't mess around with safety issues, ESPECIALLY with our two little ones. And we were fine with our 2.5 year old using the airline seat and the lap belt.

[KristiMc]

I haven't flown yet with my little ones but we bought a seat and will be taking a carseat for our almost 2 year old when we go in January. I know there is no way that I would be able to keep him on my lap for 2 hours.

Kristi

[tlbwriter]

No flames, please. I'm not telling anyone what they should do, I'm just responding to the OP's request for info on our experiences. We just flew with our LITTLE 2.5 year old in May (she's on the small side for her age is what I mean) and she had her own seat WITHOUT a car seat. She did very well during both flights, no problems whatsoever. In fact, she was well behaved and she had a great time. We brought her favorite stuffed animal, lots of coloring supplies and snacks and drinks and stuff like that.

My wife and I are all about safety. She's a pediatrician and I'm a therapist working with people recovering from catastrophic injuries. We don't mess around with safety issues, ESPECIALLY with our two little ones. And we were fine with our 2.5 year old using the airline seat and the lap belt.

Please don't take this as a flame, I'm just looking for information. I've seen plenty of info about the dangers of children using lap belts, and the fact that adult lap belts do not properly restrain children (in airplanes or cars). You and/or your wife must have found information that contradicts that research. Would you mind sharing? There's a grey area between "too small for the adult seatbelt" and "at no higher risk than an adult on an airplane wearing the seatbelt," so if you've been able to find research that helps pinpoint that age when a child is perfectly safe in the adult seatbelt (or at least as safe as any of us are, said the woman who is afraid to fly! ;) ), I hope you don't mind passing it on.

[CleveRocks]

Please don't take this as a flame, I'm just looking for information. I've seen plenty of info about the dangers of children using lap belts, and the fact that adult lap belts do not properly restrain children (in airplanes or cars). You and/or your wife must have found information that contradicts that research. Would you mind sharing? There's a grey area between "too small for the adult seatbelt" and "at no higher risk than an adult on an airplane wearing the seatbelt," so if you've been able to find research that helps pinpoint that age when a child is perfectly safe in the adult seatbelt (or at least as safe as any of us are, said the woman who is afraid to fly! ;) ), I hope you don't mind passing it on.

No unknown research findings to report. Call it a combination of common sense and fatalism.

Most of the reason for a car child safety seat is protection from impact. In an airliner, most "impacts" are likely to result in mass casualities, anyway, so we didn't feel compelled to protect our 2.5 year old from an impact that we could not functionally and effectively protect her from anyhow.

Most of the reason for anyone in an airliner to wear a lap belt is to prevent one from being tossed around the cabin during moderate to extreme turbulence. The physical forces upon the body are different in turbulence than they are in a car accident. Car child safety seats protect mainly against high velocity front end collisions (hence infant seats must face rearward, etc., due to the infants' lack of neck control). In an airliner, the forces that are the most concerning (i.e., the forces that can affect you but that you can LIVE through) are those that might send your airborne and allow your body to impact the ceiling. The hips must be held securely against the seat to protect this. Lap belts are sufficiently effective for this task, in a 2 year old or a 72 year old.

At least that's what we were thinking....

[deide71]

I vote for taking the carseat. We used ours for our son (age 18mo) and purchased a seat. He slept for the whole flight, and we also saved 40$ not having to rent one from the rental car company. It was a bit cumbersome carrying it through the airport though.

[tlbwriter]

The hips must be held securely against the seat to protect this. Lap belts are sufficiently effective for this task, in a 2 year old or a 72 year old.

At least that's what we were thinking....
Well, see, that was my question. I know at *some* point the lap belt becomes just as sufficient for the child as it does for the 72 year old. I just didn't know when. I thought maybe you knew something I didn't. I'm having a hard time finding research in this area - everyone agrees that children under 40 lb should be in a carseat, but after that, I can't really find any data.

[roliepolieoliefan]

If your child loves his car seat by all means take it. My DD( 2 next week) hates her car seat. She is a night mare to travel with in a vehicle. She has already learned how to unbuckle the front of the harness on her carseat. She has her own seat for our flight, but I will not take her carseat. She would scream for the 2 hours she was buckled in it.

[NotUrsula]

Take a deep breath before diving in; there is a LOT of engineering jargon here, and quite a few links to other reports that must be read in order to make the whole thing clear:

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2005/August/Day-26/i16782.htm

(Typically for the Federal Govt., the link to the crash-test video is already broken; here is the correct link for the video: http://www.faa.gov/education_research/research/med_humanfacs/aeromedical/media/vc07.avi. The file is ENORMOUS, don't try to download it unless you have plenty of bandwidth.)

If you are curious, here is the page for the new FAA-approved, airline-provided harness system that is legal effective 9/26/05 for children who are over age 1. As far as I know, no airlines have formally announced plans to put them into service yet. Individuals will NOT be able to buy these; the airlines will have to not only supply them, but the FAA's will have to fasten them onto the seats for you: http://www.amsafeaviation.com/cares.htm

BTW, most impacts experienced onboard an aircraft are survivable, because most of them take place when the aircraft is on the ground. "Falling out of the sky" is very rare; the average flyer is much more likely to experience a hard landing, a runway overshoot, or an on-ground collision with another plane than a fall from cruising altitude. In an on-ground accident, the forces in play are exactly the same as those that would apply in an auto accident, with a much-increased risk of fire added to the situation. (Planes have a greater volume of flammable components and contents than cars do.)

[cruiserkaren]

I'm in the minority here but we just got back from WDW this month. Our DD was a week and a half shy of 2. We didn't take her car seat with us. We did buy her a seat. Like a post above DD is not a great traveler in the car. After about 30 minutes she wants OUT! We were using Disney transportation the whole time and didn't have a rental car so we would have only been using it on the plane. DD did so well. I'm still some-what in shock over it. Never even a whimper. Of course I had a whole backpack of things to keep her entertained on a 2 hour flight. She had plenty of room to play, move around a bit and lay her head in my lap while watching her DVD player. When we flew with her last year at 13 months we took her car seat and I can't help but wonder how much more smoothly things might have gone had we skipped the car seat.

[Parkerpooh]

We didn't take our ds's car seat when he was 20mths old and it was a nightmare with him screaming"down,down!". We'll definately be taking his seat this time. We have a carseat bag with wheels and backpack straps that work great for lugging through the airport. I think it's harder with boys as they don't sit much...ever :rolleyes: My ds is either sleeping or running so 5 point restraint systems are wonderful!! :rotfl:

[livvyb]

man, oh man.....I don't know which way to go with this. We leave in 5 days and because of the volume of things we are bringing I was planning on not bringing his car seat as we will also be using Disney transportation and it won't get used. However, he does OK in his car seat and he does have his own seat in the plane so theoretically we could bring it.....

I am still undecided!

[D,L and K's Mom]

We bought a seat for DD who was just turning 2 (she had her b-day in the park!) For the first part of the trip we used the car seat on the plane.....it was a struggle getting the seat buckled on the plane and even tougher getting it unbuckled to get it off. The attendant had to help. My DD is really good on the plane and in the car but the car seat sat her up so high she was able to push her feet into the seat in front of us..thank goodness no one was sitting in it. I am not sure if it was just the type of car seat we have (Britax roundabout). The second part of the trip we checked in the car seat under the plane and we strapped her in the seat. This worked much better. She was able to dit lower and could not kick the seat in front or push on it. She was able to recline (could not do this with the seat strapped in ) and she fell asleep. I liked having her seat for the rental car but I would take it and check it under the plane. I didnt check it through with the luggage becase I was fearful that it would get bumped and banged. Good luck.

[michvin]

No unknown research findings to report. Call it a combination of common sense and fatalism.

Most of the reason for a car child safety seat is protection from impact. In an airliner, most "impacts" are likely to result in mass casualities, anyway, so we didn't feel compelled to protect our 2.5 year old from an impact that we could not functionally and effectively protect her from anyhow.

Most of the reason for anyone in an airliner to wear a lap belt is to prevent one from being tossed around the cabin during moderate to extreme turbulence. The physical forces upon the body are different in turbulence than they are in a car accident. Car child safety seats protect mainly against high velocity front end collisions (hence infant seats must face rearward, etc., due to the infants' lack of neck control). In an airliner, the forces that are the most concerning (i.e., the forces that can affect you but that you can LIVE through) are those that might send your airborne and allow your body to impact the ceiling. The hips must be held securely against the seat to protect this. Lap belts are sufficiently effective for this task, in a 2 year old or a 72 year old.

At least that's what we were thinking....

My husband and I totally agree with you....He flies one to four times a month and has commented about how a carseat isn't going to save anyone if a plane crashes. Its the turbulence. And, for how many times he has flown he has never had turbulence that has thrown him to the ceiling either. But, of course, he wears his belt when he's supposed to. I'm glad we're not the only people going this route and thinking through the whole process.

[shefor24]

This is avery interesting discussion. I have a 15 M.O boy and I am one of those people who HAVE TO take advantage of the "2 and under fly free" or I will regret it foever. So I have been slowly searching into maybe a Disney trip for us before he is 2. I thought the lap was the way to go, but hmmmm after reading this stuff... I don't know. So my question so far is - how does the car seat turn out if you check them to go under the plane? I have traveled often and when I see that mom with 2-3 little guys clinging on to her in the airport and she is lugging a car seat, stroller, etc etc ...I just used to cringe and say "I'd never travel with a kid that small", here I am thinking of it. Funny...

[tlbwriter]

My husband and I totally agree with you....He flies one to four times a month and has commented about how a carseat isn't going to save anyone if a plane crashes.

He's mistaken. In my earlier post, there was a link to an article that mentioned specific cases of children who most likely would have survived actual crashes had they been properly restrained. As NotUrsula pointed out, you have to get away from the idea that most crashes involve a plane falling from the sky. Most are on the ground, and are very survivable (in fact, I heard after the Canadian incident that most people involved in plane crashes live through them! Who knew?) And that's where proper restraints make a difference.

[adisneymama]

We just flew with our 3 yo and we used DME and no rental car as well. We did not take her car seat as we would have been dragging it around for just the plane. The seat belts on the plane were very snug on her and she did fine. She is also very small for her age. Closer to the weight and height of a 2 yr old. We were very pleased. Now if we were going to be needing her car seat after landing we would have taken it. I also probably would have gate checked it with the stroller though. I don't have any problems with DD staying in her seat when told to though. If she was one to try to escape and not sit still we would have brought it anyway.

HTH

[ahutton]

I have 3 kids, and have always used a car seat on the flight until it was impossible for my oldest to sit in her car seat and have enough leg room (she's very tall). I find they are generally more comfortable, as they can lean on the side to nap like they do in the car on long trips, and they understand better that we are in car seats so we don't get up. I also feel better with the harness straps holding them in place in turbulence or if we had a hard landing. I've also been the Mom hauling all the stuff in the airport. I have the best luck putting the baby in a snugli carrier, the middle child in the stroller and using a backpack carrier for one carseat, and strapping the other to the back of the stroller or to our rolling carry on bag. My oldest loves to roll that bag for me (or DH does), and my diaper bag goes in the bottom of the stroller, which I gate check. It takes me a few minutes to unpack everyone at security but DH and I have a system to get through there too.

DH is first through the gate, then the walking kids get sent through with all the stuff. Then Baby and I are last. The girls don't go until Dad is cleared (everyone once in a while he beeps or is selected for additional screening) so they have some to go to. We had a bad experience in Portland once where we each had a child and we both beeped. Never again.

[NotUrsula]

BUMPING to bring up new FAA regs, effective today, 9/26/2005.

(To clarify, the regulation has been in effect for years, but this version contains some new changes effective 9/26/2005.)

[tlbwriter]

BUMPING to bring up new FAA regs, effective today, 9/26/2005.
I wonder if any airlines are using this yet? If it works, it looks like it would be a great help to many parents.
http://www.amsafeaviation.com/images/cares.jpg

[Captain Blue Sky]

The Federal Aviation Regulation that is cited in an earlier post has been practiced on a daily basis with US carriers, and foreign carriers that land on US soil, since early 2002. This is nothing new or different from current practice. All restraints that are used on board an aircraft must have an FAA certification sticker on the child restraint otherwise it cannot be used inflight. This requirement is for those child restraints that have a 3 or more point harness. This is necessary in case the aircraft rolls during flight or for severe turbulence...

Originally Posted By NotUrsula:
BTW, most impacts experienced onboard an aircraft are survivable, because most of them take place when the aircraft is on the ground.

This comment just did not sit well with me. What kind of impacts are you referring to? The greatest threat to anyone while flying is unexpected turbulence and people and items not being secured when the turbulence occurs. Impacts on the ground? When was the last time you experienced an impact on the ground? A hard landing is not an impact. A collision is an impact, a crash is an impact.

Originally Posted By NotUrsula:
"Falling out of the sky" is very rare; the average flyer is much more likely to experience a hard landing, a runway overshoot, or an on-ground collision with another plane than a fall from cruising altitude.

Oh, these comments are even more concerning... You make it sound as if the average flyer will experience these as a matter of course. I can't agree with anything you are saying here. None of these incidences are likely to happen to the huge majority of travelers in their lifetime...

And they usually don't happen to professional pilots, either.

But apart from that, the issue of child restraints on board aircraft is nothing new.

It is more of a revelation that the FAA has decided not to ban lap sit children as it "...would deter families from travelling by air..." as they phrased it.

I think that is a far more important issue, particularly when the American Academy of Pediatrics does not endorse lap sit children on aircraft. They prefer using an FAA approved child restraint.

[tlbwriter]

Originally Posted By NotUrsula:
BTW, most impacts experienced onboard an aircraft are survivable, because most of them take place when the aircraft is on the ground.

This comment just did not sit well with me. What kind of impacts are you referring to? The greatest threat to anyone while flying is unexpected turbulence and people and items not being secured when the turbulence occurs. Impacts on the ground? When was the last time you experienced an impact on the ground? A hard landing is not an impact. A collision is an impact, a crash is an impact.
I think the point is not that impacts are more common than turbulence (which of course is not true), but that when there is an impact, it tends to happen while the plane is on, or close to, the ground. Do you not agree?

Originally Posted By NotUrsula:
"Falling out of the sky" is very rare; the average flyer is much more likely to experience a hard landing, a runway overshoot, or an on-ground collision with another plane than a fall from cruising altitude.

Oh, these comments are even more concerning... You make it sound as if the average flyer will experience these as a matter of course.
Not at all. Just that if *one* of these rare things is going to happen, it's much more likely to be on/near the ground. I think you are reading things that aren't there.

[Captain Blue Sky]

tlbwriter:

When was the last time you experienced an impact while in an aircraft? To try to make the issue a broad, commonly experienced occurrence as NotUrsula was suggesting is completely inaccurate. I've been flying professionally since the late '80s and the only incident I experienced, that was even remotely close to being dangerous, was a 15-second period of very pronounced turbulence while flying to Brussels, Belgium as a passenger in a B747. And I've flown the equivalent of over 12 million nautical miles!

So by all means, talk impacts if you will, but you must also talk rates of prevalence of their occurence. And I haven't seen you write anything about that...

The ball is in your court...

[tlbwriter]

tlbwriter:

When was the last time you experienced an impact while in an aircraft?
When someone kicked the back of my seat on the way to Orlando last December. :rotfl:

So by all means, talk impacts if you will, but you must also talk rates of prevalence of their occurence. And I haven't seen you write anything about that...
Then you haven't been paying attention.

The post you are replying to says, and I quote:

if *one* of these rare things is going to happen
Please note the use of the word "rare," which refers to the "prevalence of their occurence." Impacts are rare. Survivable impacts that occur during landing or takeoff are rare, but the unsurvivable "plane falling out of the sky" scenario is even more rare. Severe turbulence is also rare, but it is less rare than impacts. Do you disagree with any of these statements? Do they not correspond to your experience? If so, I want to find out what airline you fly for, so I can avoid it. ;)

[NotUrsula]

tlbwriter read my intent correctly. I never meant to imply that any impact is common, but the sort that I described is statistically more likely than a TWA800 sort of crash, which is the type of impact that people are saying that a carseat won't save a child from. Of course it wouldn't, but who would expect it to?

Perhaps I'm just unlucky. While I've never been in an aircraft that overran the end of a runway, I have been involved in 2 incidents of minor taxiway collisions, a couple of near-misses that required hard braking, and a situation where we hit debris on takeoff. The most recent incident of that sort that I experienced was about two years ago. I've also seen turbulence bad enough to knock an FA off her feet several times.

I also did not mean to imply that the FAA regulation was completely new, only that changes to it became effective yesterday. I cited the report because someone asked at what weight the lap belt becomes as effective as the CRS, and the data is in the report.

[justhat]

I have never been involved in an 'impact' so to speak, but when my daughter was both 3 months and 4.5 months old we had very, very severe turbulance, both resulting in aborted landings. The first was her 2nd flight ever, on the way home from WDW the day before she turned 3 months old. I bought her a seat for the plane based on things I read here on the DIS and I was the mos thankful mommy ever when the plane was so violently turbulent that I worried that I would not have been able to hold her without hitting her head onto an armrest, the seat in front of me, or another passenger or the window if I had not had her carseat. Instead, however, Madison slept soundly in her carseat. We ended up aborting the very scary landing we had attempted and flew back to southern VA and circled for awhile. When we got home I kept telling my husband how thankful I was that we got the seat. 6 weeks later we flew again (her 6th flight now) and again the turbulence was horrible. This time after our landing in Charlotte was aborted we flew to an airport in SC and had to wait out the storm. A few hours later we were back in the air en route to Charlotte with okay weather.

After those 2 incidents I vow never to try to save money by not getting my daughter a seat (she's still under 2 so she could still go free). We just booked a last minute trip to WDW for this weekend and when buying our plane tickets there were only 2 seats left at the cheap rate so my husband bought them and thought that we could just bank on an empty seat on the way home and use that for our daughter's carseat. He looked at the seat chart and the plane was showing as half full so he thought we'd be okay (this was just last Sunday, so less than 2 weeks before the flight). Then I see that JetBlue landing in LAX and I started crying thinking about if we were on that flight and something happened to our daughter because we were too cheap to buy her a seat. My husband agreed with me and immediately went online and bought her the seat for the way home not to take the chance.

[brymolmom]

I have researched the car seat on an airplane thing before and am always angry at the vague data I've found. Has anyone ever found studies/statistics on the number of injuries to lap children vs. injuries to car seated children? I understand that 'most' of the problems on planes likely do occur near/at takeoff and landing and that is when the lap child is restrained b the parent, just wondering if there has been significant difference in the outcomes of parents holding vs. restrained in a car seat? I have never found this information and have not always brought car seats on the plane. On our most recent trip we were using WDW transportation and didn't want to lug the car seat around just for the plane.

One other thing to consider besides safety (safety being first, of course) is that planes have other passengers that parents and staff need to try to be considerate of. On our plane trip 2 weeks ago, my almost-2 year old was on my lap for landing and there were extra seats available, so a flight attendant 'yelled at' me and berated me asking if I put her in a car seat at home and reminding me that we were going 500 MPH (I refer back to a pp who mentioned - at 500 MPH is it really going to matter? I agree not so much). Anyway- I put her in her own seat an forcibly held her hands because she liked to play with the lap belt and since they are so easy to un-latch, even a 1 year old can do it - she was doing it. Anyway- this resulted in screaming at the top of her lungs for the last 15 minutes of the flight. Almost (but thank goodness, not quite) to the point of throwing up. Anyway-I felt the most badly for those around us. I had her content and happy on my lap - but the flight attendant insisted that she upset the travel of everyone in our area. 2 year olds don't understand the whole ear- thing and some (depending on tiredness, etc.) might be a heck of a lot happier on the parent's lap. So, it's a hard call for me - I like to try to be considerate to those around me but if someone could prove to me that she is considerably safer in a car seat - I would choose that first.

I just have never been able to find conclusive studies or numbers.

[tlbwriter]

I have researched the car seat on an airplane thing before and am always angry at the vague data I've found. Has anyone ever found studies/statistics on the number of injuries to lap children vs. injuries to car seated children?
Did you read the FAA link NotUrsula posted earlier? It contained this text:
3. Normal lap belts, for children who weighed 33 pounds, provided
adjustable tight fit, a belt path over the pelvic bone, and no
indication of submarining or roll out during dynamic tests. However,
because lap belts are not designed to inhibit upper torso flail, head
impacts against the seat structure that were severe enough to cause
head injury occurred during testing. These impacts were substantially
higher than those exhibited in the forward CRS tests.

So, while it's not a statistical comparison, it is a test that showed that for children weighing 33 lb (or less, one may presume), children in lap belts would suffer "substantially higher impacts" than children in a CRS. As for children being "restrained" by a parent's arms:

On October 15, 1992, the FAA broadened the categories of CRSs that
were allowed to be used on aircraft to include CRSs that meet the
standards of the United Nations or are approved by a foreign government
(57 FR 42662; September 15, 1992). NHTSA does not set these standards.
In the preamble, the FAA stated ``Using these restraints in an aircraft
will provide a level of safety greater than that which would be
provided if the young children were held in the arms of adults or if
safety belts alone were used.'' (57 FR 42664) (emphasis mine)

One other thing to consider besides safety (safety being first, of course) is that planes have other passengers that parents and staff need to try to be considerate of.

As a passenger, I appreciate your consideration. But I find it unnecessary. As a parent, my child's safety will always, always, always come first. And I expect the same from other parents. If your child is screaming to get out of her carseat, I will give you a pat on the back for keeping her there. Some people will complain. I really couldn't care less about those people. ;) No, of course that's not true... I don't want them to be miserable. But if it's a choice between them having an unpleasant flight or me risking the serious injury or death of my child just because it's more comfortable or convenient, it's a no-brainer. I will do whatever it takes to lessen the impact on other passengers. I will stop her from kicking your seat, even if means I have to hold her legs down myself during the entire trip, and I will do everything I can to keep her quiet, even if it means feeding her M&Ms for the entire trip. But I will NOT compromise on the carseat.

On our plane trip 2 weeks ago, my almost-2 year old was on my lap for landing and there were extra seats available, so a flight attendant 'yelled at' me and berated me asking if I put her in a car seat at home

It sounds like the FA was rude, and that was uncalled for. But she was right -your child would be safer in a carseat.

and reminding me that we were going 500 MPH (I refer back to a pp who mentioned - at 500 MPH is it really going to matter? I agree not so much).

That's simply incorrect. There have been several posts, in this thread and others, pointing out that a carseat DOES make a difference. Most crashes are survivable. And children in carseats are more likely to survive than lap babies.

I like to try to be considerate to those around me but if someone could prove to me that she is considerably safer in a car seat - I would choose that first.

I just have never been able to find conclusive studies or numbers.

See above. And see also this position paper from the Association of Flight Attendants, (http://www.afanet.org/kidscrs.htm) which says in part

In July, 1994 during the fatal crash of a USAir plane in Charlotte, North Carolina, another unrestrained infant was killed when her mother could not hold onto her on impact. The available seat next to the mother survived the crash intact. The National Transportation Safety Board believes that had the baby been secured in that seat, she would have been alive today. In fact, in a FAA study on accident survivability, the agency found that of the last nine infant deaths, five could have survived had they been in child restraint devices. (emphasis mine)

The type of studies you're looking for may not exist. But there is plenty of evidence showing that children in a CRS are much more likely to survive a crash than those who are held in their parents laps, and that smaller children are safer in a CRS than in an adult seatbelt.

[NotUrsula]

I'll look for some data on injuries this weekend, but my guess is that other than the crash tests for the report cited above, the numbers have not been separately compiled. Children in this age group remain a very small part of the air passenger population, unlike the number of children who travel in automobiles on a regular basis. Though I think that the FAA's reasoning is somewhat faulty on the drive-vs.-fly decision, I will freely concede that anyone, regardless of age, is statistically safer travelling on a commercial aircraft than by ground motor vehicle.

The thing is, it is a judgment call for the parent. Putting a child who is under the recommended weight in a carseat is safer than not doing so; that much is a fact, as the crash tests demonstrate. However, since the FAA has chosen not to make carseats (or the newly approved AMSAFE harness) mandatory for children who fit the weight recommendations, the choice of what level of safety precaution to take is up to the parent.

If you feel comfortable with the level of risk you are assuming, then you are within your rights to assume it, and I personally don't feel that it is my place to judge anyone on how they handle this. My personal decision is to always use a carseat for an under-40 lb. child so long as I am permitted by law to do so. The truth is that initially my primary reason for doing so was my comfort and that of my fellow passengers; my squirmer would never sit still unless restrained, and would constantly struggle to get down if we tried to hold him. I also could not sleep on overseas flights if I did not feel assured that he could not wander while I slept. I didn't start deeply researching the state of the FAA regulations on the subject until I encountered airline personnel who told me that I could not use the seat.

[D,L and K's Mom]

DD's first flight was when she was 6 months old. We brought along her infant carrier and the "Cradle" that it locked into. We had it locked into the plane seat just like we used it in our car when the Flight Attendant came over and said we needed to remove the base and just lock the baby carrier in with the seat belt and not use the base at all as it was not FAA approved. I didnt know that as the car seat had a sticker on it. If you are using a car seat ask the flight attendant if it is secured properly and if it is approved. If they are not busy I am sure they will help out. Last time we took our seat DD was 2 and we took our Britax...it was horribe. It took forever to buckle into the seat and we could not get it off. (The belt slipped behind the seat and the buckle was inside....it took my 13 year olds skinny arm stuck into the car seat to unbuckle the seat belt to get it out...it was HORRIBLE and took such a long time I thought we were going to miss our connection. I would take a seat again but I would look into another type as the BRITAX sat up high in the seat and she kicked the seat in front of her and her legs and knees were squished the whole ride. We always get her a seat but the last time we didnt use the car seat coming home just the belt. I think a booster would be a better choice.

[Captain Blue Sky]

Originally quoted by tlbwriter:

In July, 1994 during the fatal crash of a USAir plane in Charlotte, North Carolina, another unrestrained infant was killed when her mother could not hold onto her on impact. The available seat next to the mother survived the crash intact. The National Transportation Safety Board believes that had the baby been secured in that seat, she would have been alive today. In fact, in a FAA study on accident survivability, the agency found that of the last nine infant deaths, five could have survived had they been in child restraint devices. (emphasis mine)

As I had mentioned in my earlier post, the REAL issue here is the recent announcement by the FAA that they will not ban lap sit children on US carriers in leu of restraining them in an approved restraint in a seat because the FAA does not want to discourage air travel by families with small children.

And tlbwriter illustrated this very well. That is the REAL issue, more worthy of discussion than making global generalities and then claiming that you didn't.

And I already mentioned the airline I fly for.
Originally quoted by tlbwriter:
If so, I want to find out what airline you fly for, so I can avoid it.

As far as I'm concerned, you can walk to your destination!
:rotfl:

[tlbwriter]

Originally quoted by tlbwriter:



As I had mentioned in my earlier post, the REAL issue here is the recent announcement by the FAA that they will not ban lap sit children on US carriers in leu of restraining them in an approved restraint in a seat because the FAA does not want to discourage air travel by families with small children.

And tlbwriter illustrated this very well. That is the REAL issue, more worthy of discussion than making global generalities and then claiming that you didn't.

And I already mentioned the airline I fly for.
Originally quoted by tlbwriter:


As far as I'm concerned, you can walk to your destination!
:rotfl:

Hmmm... no attention to detail *and* can't take a joke. And refuses to answer simple questions. I thought only doctors thought they were God. :rotfl:

You know what? If you can show me where either I or NotUrsula said impacts were common, I'll admit you're right and I'll apologize. But I know you can't do it, because neither of us said that. And if you'd bother to read posts before you reply to them, you would have realized that. There were posts that said certain types of incidents are more common than others. I have asked you if you can deny this is true, and you have refused. Therefore, one can only assume that you know it IS true. (And, again, if you didn't know whether it was true or not, or if you said it was untrue for your airline, I would *choose* to walk to any destination rather than fly on your airline. :teeth: )

Anyway, it is ridiculous that you have taken a perfectly good, informative thread and tried to twist it into a personal insult. Completely ridiculous.

[tlbwriter]

Last time we took our seat DD was 2 and we took our Britax...it was horribe. It took forever to buckle into the seat and we could not get it off. (The belt slipped behind the seat and the buckle was inside....it took my 13 year olds skinny arm stuck into the car seat to unbuckle the seat belt to get it out...it was HORRIBLE and took such a long time I thought we were going to miss our connection.
Sometimes you need to twist the belt so the buckle faces the other way when you install the seat. It's a pity more flight attendants aren't trained in this area and available to help

We always get her a seat but the last time we didnt use the car seat coming home just the belt. I think a booster would be a better choice.
You can't use a booster seat on an airplane. Boosters can only be used with a shoulder harness, which commercial aircraft do not have, and they are not approved by the FAA for use on airlines.

[NotUrsula]

As I had mentioned in my earlier post, the REAL issue here is the recent announcement by the FAA that they will not ban lap sit children on US carriers in leu of restraining them in an approved restraint in a seat because the FAA does not want to discourage air travel by families with small children.

Yes, I got that, which makes it surprising that you seemed so concerned with the semantics of what is and isn't an impact. I'll concede to your expertise on impacts -- so noted.

The thing is, your surprise at the FAA's reasoning is more shocking to me than the reasoning itself. Just as you pointed out, the regulation covering use of CRS' has existed in something very close to its current form for years. However, so has the argument that has prevented a ban on lap-children. I have read the very same arguments and the very same conclusion in FAA reports on the subject going back as far as 1986. I find your reaction quite surprising because you say that you have been a commercial pilot for a very long time; surely you realize that the airlines are the principal lobby influencing the FAA's decision not to require child restraints?

FA's and pilots support the use of CRS', physicians and representatives of the NTSB are for them, yet the FAA consistently declines to require them. They have been using this same argument since the days of the dual mandate, and that is the key to why they are using it; because it promotes flying. (BTW, there is a bill currently before the Aviation Subcommittee that would restore the FAA's dual mandate and put back the duty to promote aviation, HR2787.)

If the deciding factor was really about families choosing to fly instead of drive because of the cost of the add'l seat, then why have they not mandated the use of CRS' for children over 24 mos. but under 40 lbs., who already have to have their own ticket? I'll tell you why, because the airlines don't want to have to be the ones enforcing the rule and telling city dwellers who don't own cars that they will have to buy an approved CRS before Jr. can fly. Prior to the certification of the AMSAFE, the practicalities of requiring ticketed underweight children to be in a CRS would have required the airlines to provide a CRS to passengers who showed up without them, and as a group, US air carriers did not want to go to the expense of creating, maintaining, and stocking airworthy carseat-sized CRS devices. (BA and Virgin have done so, but only because they don't want hardshell toddler carseats on board at all, and UK law allows them to refuse passengers' using them. They only provide about 6 CRS' per aircraft, and only on long-haul flights.) The airlines' collective opinion on taking on this expense and responsibility may change now that the AMSAFE CAREs has been certified, but I'm not willing to bet the farm on it yet.

(To be fair to BA & Virgin, their position has some validity, as carseats sold in the UK are not designed for or tested with lap-belt only installation.)

[Nancyg56]

Wow! Touchy subject! We are flying in Jan with our 4 year old DGD. I had assumed that we could simply take her car seat with us. She is tiny for her age. I am going to ask DD to call airline we have chosen to make sure that the seat that is approved for the car will be accepted on the aircraft. I was not confused before reading this thread, but I sure am confused now.

[tlbwriter]

Wow! Touchy subject! We are flying in Jan with our 4 year old DGD. I had assumed that we could simply take her car seat with us. She is tiny for her age. I am going to ask DD to call airline we have chosen to make sure that the seat that is approved for the car will be accepted on the aircraft. I was not confused before reading this thread, but I sure am confused now.
Most carseats sold in the U.S. are approved for airplane use. The exceptions would be seats like booster seats without an internal harness, shield boosters (which no one should be using anyway, in a car *or* a plane), and specialty seats that are too large to fit between the armrests, such as the Britax Husky. So you're probably okay. But it's good to check.

[Nancyg56]

Most carseats sold in the U.S. are approved for airplane use. The exceptions would be seats like booster seats without an internal harness, shield boosters (which no one should be using anyway, in a car *or* a plane), and specialty seats that are too large to fit between the armrests, such as the Britax Husky. So you're probably okay. But it's good to check.


Thank you. Our seat is a 5 point harness, and I know that it can be secures with an ordinary seatbelt. I also know she purchesed an expensive on, but I am not the one who makes these purchases. My DGD and SIL take care of this. My children are all adults, and the seats that we used when they were little would never be acceptable today. It's a wonder that any kids raised in the 70's are still alive today. I would never use any of the seats, strollers, bouncers, etc. that I was happy with then.

[Captain Blue Sky]

Most carseats sold in the U.S. are approved for airplane use.

Not altogether true. There are many "carseats" that are not approved for FAA use and you can by them today. Cosco makes a model that isn't approved, so does GRACO. Agents are trained to locate the FAA certification sticker that MUST be present. Also, if you REMOVE the sticker, your seat is not longer certified and it can be denied a presence in the cabin. And this has happened on more than a couple of flights I have worked.

Separate and apart from that,

I find your reaction quite surprising because you say that you have been a commercial pilot for a very long time; surely you realize that the airlines are the principal lobby influencing the FAA's decision not to require child restraints?

Are you assuming that pilots support ALL airline management decisions??? If so, girl, YOU ARE WRONG! How simple and uninformed you must be to think that ALPA members and management converge in their opinions regarding this! The elementary wing is to your left, deary...

Hmmm... no attention to detail *and* can't take a joke. And refuses to answer simple questions. I thought only doctors thought they were God.

This is really not necessary. Where do you get this anger??? I certainly do not find your writing "funny" in fact I find it more insulting and flaming than anything else. it is how your words are interpreted that is the important point. And I think your words are insulting, in bad taste, and constitute a personal attack.

Furthermore, I have read the posts and I have offered my opinion. If you can't tolerate anyone else's perspective than find a different forum.

Now I know why there are IGNORE buttons on these posts. Let me switch it on for tlbwriter...

:love2:

[justhat]

Wow, what a crazy turn this thread took. Not to take sides or anything, but Captain Blue Sky, tlbwriter did say "most carseats sold in the US are approved for airplane use", not "every carseat is approved for airplane use". I think you agree with her that "most" are since you listed only 2 that are not approved, so one can infer from that short list that many other carseats are approved. No need to be nitpicky, she was just trying to help another poster out.

[tlbwriter]

Not altogether true. There are many "carseats" that are not approved for FAA use and you can by them today.

Once again, the captain has a problem with reading comprehension, as I said "most." And "most" is absolutely true.


Originally Posted by tlbwriter
I find your reaction quite surprising because you say that you have been a commercial pilot for a very long time; surely you realize that the airlines are the principal lobby influencing the FAA's decision not to require child restraints?

I didnt say this. You snipped this from someone else's post. Perhaps *you* are the one who needs the elementary wring, as you are still having problems with reading comprehension. ;)

This is really not necessary. Where do you get this anger??? I certainly do not find your writing "funny" in fact I find it more insulting and flaming than anything else. it is how your words are interpreted that is the important point. And I think your words are insulting, in bad taste, and constitute a personal attack.

Yes, I've noticed you found certain words insulting. It saddens me that if you had bothered to read those words, you would find that they do not say what you assumed they said at all.

Oh well. Since the captain is ignoring me, perhaps someone else can tell him I told him to lighten up, read more carefully, get his panties out of their wad, and have a nice day. :flower:

[NotUrsula]

"Are you assuming that pilots support ALL airline management decisions??? If so, girl, YOU ARE WRONG! How simple and uninformed you must be to think that ALPA members and management converge in their opinions regarding this! The elementary wing is to your left, deary..."

Sigh. No, I'm not assuming that at all; I am fully aware that there is often a great deal of conflict between airline management and airline workers' unions, and/or conflicting opinions the part of individual employees. You are human, after all, just like the rest of us.

I wasn't surprised that you disagreed with the FAA position; I know that most pilots disagree with it, and even said so in the post you are referring to. I was surprised that you appeared to be reacting to the "drive vs. fly" argument as if it were the first time you had heard it. As the airlines are the principal proponents of the argument, and since you have worked in the airline industry for many years by your own account, I would have thought that the "drive-vs.-fly" argument would be very old news to you by now.

(Edited to correct the formatting of the original quote.)

[NotUrsula]

Just in case some folks reading this might be confused by all these mentions of the FAA sticker on carseats, I wanted to remind everyone that though the presence of the sticker (actually 2 labels) in question is mandated by the FAA, the FAA is not actually mentioned in the wording on it. The wording is set by US Federal law, and this is it:

(14 CFR 121.311)
(B) Seats manufactured to U.S. standards on or after February 26, 1985,
must bear two labels:
(1) ‘‘This child restraint system conforms to all applicable Federal motor
vehicle safety standards’’; and
(2) ‘‘THIS RESTRAINT IS CERTIFIED FOR USE IN MOTOR VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT’’ in red lettering

The labels should be found on the outside of the seat's shell, but the placement may vary a bit by seat model and mfr. Of course, if your seat was not purchased in the US, it probably won't have these particular labels. There is provision for acceptance of carseats from outside the US, as long as they have the appropriate labels for their point of origin. If this applies in your case, I recommend that you read the full text of the regulation to find out how to determine if your seat qualifies.

[Captain Blue Sky]

You did say that, tlbwriter, as I snipped it from your posting. You went back and edited out your flipant remark.

It amazes me how far some people can go to perpetuate their "know-it-all" sense of self...

HA-HA!

:rotfl:

[tlbwriter]

You did say that, tlbwriter, as I snipped it from your posting. You went back and edited out your flipant remark.
Nope, sorry, wasn't me. If you're subscribed to this thread, each post in its original form would have been e-mailed to you, and you could go back and see that the remark in question was not posted by me. It probably came from NotUrsula, since she is the one who was talking about FAA regs, and I see she has edited one of her posts. [/quote]

It amazes me how far some people can go to perpetuate their "know-it-all" sense of self...
Yeah, me too. :rolleyes: And I noticed you haven't figured out how to ignore me. Having problems?

[Captain Blue Sky]

Ignore works great! :dancer:

[NotUrsula]

Blue Sky, I said it, and if you look, it's still there. (I did edit that post, but I didn't remove that sentence.) I even replied to your comment on it.

[D,L and K's Mom]

TBLWriter Thank you so much for the info. I am glad you told me you cant use booster seats....I thought I was so smart... :teeth: The attendant was very nice but she could not get the buckle undone either....thank you again for the help. I hope we do fly your airlines(I didnt see where you wrote which it was).....we mainly use DELTA but due to some HUGE problems with them (Well really there COMAIR connection) transporting DS (special needs) I think we will be looking elsewhere......Thanks again.