Magical Epress - no car seats allowed? Is it legal?

[Lewisc]

I think Edd has a point, in the middle of his misleading statements and half truths.

Political considerations and industry lobbying play a part in the decisions to allow lap babies on airplanes and not to require seat belts in buses.
BUT It's more than a reach to complain about no seat belts in DME coaches but not having a problem with Disney's buses.

I'm sure this doesn't apply to Edd but we frequently find posts from customers that report their towncar driver forgot to bring a requested car seat.

Edd most of us use the term towncar driver to refer to a professional driver who transports a passenger on a pre-reserved (not taxi) basis. We use the same term if the driver is driving a town car, limo or even an SUV.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I'm sure this doesn't apply to Eddbut we frequently find posts from cusomters that report their towncar driver forgot to bring a requested car seat

I agree with you on this, Lewis. Edd's web page states that he can provide two car seats for his passengers while transporting them. I 100% agree that he would NOT forget to bring one or both!

 

[Edd]

Well, I am sorry. I try to operate on facts only. Many times on these boards information gets stretched for the writers purposes. I certainly can't read everyone's minds. There is a huge difference between the three vehicles. I certainly didn't try to cover anything up when the correct information was provided.

Ronda,

Passengers have got what they requested and much more.

 

[rhiannonwales]

Who's Ronda?

 

[goofy4tink]

Who's Ronda?

katieeldr

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

Passengers who are concerned with seat belts and car seats have no option but renting a car. Buses don't have seat belts. That includes DME motor coaches, buses that take you to the parks, school buses and city buses.

For WDW resort guests, the other option would be to take a towncar service — or an SUV service — to one of the Epcot area resorts around Crescent Lake (YC, BC, BCV, BWI, BWV, Swan, Dolphin). Then, rely completely on walking. Epcot and Disney-MGM can be reached on foot. Sure, you'd have to strike MK and AK from your itinerary, but you'd never have to get on a bus without seat belts.

Actually, I agree that it makes no sense to warn that "buses and shuttles to Disney do not have seat belts," and then to advocate that guests should use an SUV service to Disney — when buses within Disney do not have seat belts either.

I feel much safer in a massive DME motorcoach than in a sedan (or SUV), even though the safety of a motorcoach is not based of seat belts.

 

[clkelley]

For WDW resort guests, the other option would be to take a towncar service — or an SUV service — to one of the Epcot area resorts around Crescent Lake (YC, BC, BCV, BWI, BWV, Swan, Dolphin). Then, rely completely on walking. Epcot and Disney-MGM can be reached on foot. Sure, you'd have to strike MK and AK from your itinerary, but you'd never have to get on a bus without seat belts.

.

This is totally off topic, but there are many options at Disney where you never have to get on a Disney bus.

Stay at any of the monorail resorts, Shades of Green, Ft. Wilderness, and Wilderness Lodge, and you can get to Magic Kingdom, Epcot, the Studios, Fantasia Gardens, and any of the Epcot resorts by Walkway, Monorail, and boat

Stay at any of the Epcot area resorts, and you can get to all of those areas also.

Also, if you are staying at All-Stars or Coronado Springs, you can get to McDonalds, Blizzard Beach, and WinterSummerland just by walking.

Stay at POFQ, POR, OKW, or Saratoga Springs and you can get to DTD or any of these other resorts by boat or walking.

The only places 100% reliant on buses/POVs are Pop Century, WWoS, Carribbean Beach Resort, Animal Kingdom Lodge, Animal Kingdom, and Typhoon Lagoon.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

This is totally off topic, but there are many options at Disney where you never have to get on a Disney bus.

But the monorails and boats don't have seat belts!

 

[CarolA]

But the monorails and boats don't have seat belts!

And while I "think" there are lifevests on the boats I wouldn't assume you could get to one when you need it.

 

[clkelley]

And while I "think" there are lifevests on the boats I wouldn't assume you could get to one when you need it.

Actually, the "personal flotation devices" are fairly easy to get to. I was curious one day, and lifted up a seat on a friendship and they are right there.

Also, doesn't everyone know how to make a PFD out of their pants and shirt

 

[tracys2cents]

I've heard that several airlines, internationally, do not allow child car seats on the airplanes. The feeling is that car seats are made to be used with shoulder straps, and planes do not have shoulder straps. They feel that a child in the arms of the parent is safer than a child belted into a carseat that is not properly restrained.

So for those parents who pay extra so that their precious ones will be strapped into a carseat on an airplane....something to think about.

 

[CarolA]

I've heard that several airlines, internationally, do not allow child car seats on the airplanes. The feeling is that car seats are made to be used with shoulder straps, and planes do not have shoulder straps. They feel that a child in the arms of the parent is safer than a child belted into a carseat that is not properly restrained.

So for those parents who pay extra so that their precious ones will be strapped into a carseat on an airplane....something to think about.

Sorry, but I don't buy this. Ask a FA what they think and what they have seen. Ask those Souix Falls FA what happened on thier plane 20 years ago.

Lots of international countries also don't require car seats on the ROAD, I guess that they know something we don't???? Your child is safe bouncing around the car too???

 

[CleveRocks]

I've heard that several airlines, internationally, do not allow child car seats on the airplanes. The feeling is that car seats are made to be used with shoulder straps, and planes do not have shoulder straps. They feel that a child in the arms of the parent is safer than a child belted into a carseat that is not properly restrained.

So for those parents who pay extra so that their precious ones will be strapped into a carseat on an airplane....something to think about.

What I put in bold in the above quote is INCORRECT. Booster seats are meant to be used with shoulder belts, but regular child safety seats (car seats) are ABSOLUTELY NOT made to be used with shoulder belts. That is not how they are attached to cars.

Booster seats are not allowed to be used on any domestic airline that I'm aware of, because their use would just be silly. Their only use in a car is to raise the child high enough to be helped by and not be hurt by the shoulder belt. You may be confusing booster seats with child safety seats (car seats).

My guess is you don't have kids, or that you have grown kids -- what I'm saying is, you wouldn't have written that if you were familiar with car seats currently in use.

 

[lkjasd]

As an ex crash test engineer here's my two cents:

Seat belts are both a benefit and a detriment on a bus depending on what kind of accident you are in. Basically, if in a rollover, you want the seat belt. If in other accidents, the seat belt can actually cause injury. I am really simplyfiying here but in a rollover you get tumbled around and can land on the top of the seats or be ejected. This is bad. For other accident types, (side or frontal) if you are belted with just a waist belt, your waist stays in place and your head and neck impact the wall or seat in front of you. Very bad. Without the belt you just slam into the wall or seat back with your whole body. Still bad but not as bad as with the lap belt. Full three point belts are difficult to implement in school buses but would provide a benefit if done correctly. They are also more difficult to get to fit mutliple size occupants on a bus without it becoming very costly.

With all of that said. Buses are big, when they hit something they generally run over it. The hitee dies and everyone on the bus either walks away or has minor injuries (in general). Rollovers, again, are another story.

So, statistics as they are (check the NHTSA site, I don't have them handy), show that bus injuries are rare and that rollovers seldom occur given the shear number of miles they travel.

In summary, buses are generally so safe that you don't need the belts. Even if you get in a wreck, you are unlikely to be seriously hurt. Driving in a car, with car seats is, statistically, much more dangerous.

As stated previously, do what makes you feel safe. I ride the bus because I have seen too many car accidents and not that many bus accidents.

 

[rhiannonwales]

As an ex crash test engineer here's my two cents:

Seat belts are both a benefit and a detriment on a bus depending on what kind of accident you are in. Basically, if in a rollover, you want the seat belt. If in other accidents, the seat belt can actually cause injury. I am really simplyfiying here but in a rollover you get tumbled around and can land on the top of the seats or be ejected. This is bad. For other accident types, (side or frontal) if you are belted with just a waist belt, your waist stays in place and your head and neck impact the wall or seat in front of you. Very bad. Without the belt you just slam into the wall or seat back with your whole body. Still bad but not as bad as with the lap belt. Full three point belts are difficult to implement in school buses but would provide a benefit if done correctly. They are also more difficult to get to fit mutliple size occupants on a bus without it becoming very costly.

With all of that said. Buses are big, when they hit something they generally run over it. The hitee dies and everyone on the bus either walks away or has minor injuries (in general). Rollovers, again, are another story.

So, statistics as they are (check the NHTSA site, I don't have them handy), show that bus injuries are rare and that rollovers seldom occur given the shear number of miles they travel.

In summary, buses are generally so safe that you don't need the belts. Even if you get in a wreck, you are unlikely to be seriously hurt. Driving in a car, with car seats is, statistically, much more dangerous.

As stated previously, do what makes you feel safe. I ride the bus because I have seen too many car accidents and not that many bus accidents.

The voice of reason! I agree totally. It's the same exact thing that Cleve and Horace have been saying but when a person whos been a crash test engineer says it, it just makes it that much more believeable.

And for the record, Edd, you're right, there IS a huge difference in the 3 kinds of vehicles. SUV's consume more gas, pollute the enviroment more, and are more likely to roll over and cause fatal injury than a Lincoln towncar! Limos are probably the least safe of the 3, because you are compromising the safety of passengers when you change the original design of the auto and customise it.
Sherrie

 

[kaytieeldr]

Ronda,
Passengers have got what they requested and much more.

I believe you - I read your website I was pointing out (okay, apparently not clearly enough) to someone who's experienced not getting the requested car seats with a town car reservation that you absolutely do provide them.

Who's Ronda?

​

Edd (and Carol, and Eric, and a few others) have noted my real name in my tag - but as I wrote there, I answer to pretty much anything respectable. Kaytieldr is a name I used to use for a trivia group.

Also, doesn't everyone know how to make a PFD out of their pants and shirt

OMG, I haven't even thought of that in YEARS!

So for those parents who pay extra so that their precious ones will be strapped into a carseat on an airplane....something to think about.

I don't think people pay to bring carseats; I think they pay for SEATS for their children. Some do bring car seats for a variety of reasons - but with or without shoulder belts, a car seat on a plane is still MUCH safer than a parent's lap if the plane hits turbulence.

 

[tjmw2727]

I've heard that several airlines, internationally, do not allow child car seats on the airplanes. The feeling is that car seats are made to be used with shoulder straps, and planes do not have shoulder straps. They feel that a child in the arms of the parent is safer than a child belted into a carseat that is not properly restrained.

So for those parents who pay extra so that their precious ones will be strapped into a carseat on an airplane....something to think about.

Having flown quite often, including overseas with a carseat I have to question your statements.

If you purchase a seat for your child and your carseat is approved for use in the aircraft you may use it onboard. There are some restrictions on where you can place it, no exit row and in the window seat so its best to note this on your reservation so your seats are assigned properly.

FWIW both the FAA and the AAP recommend that children under 40lbs use a carseat onboard.

Car seats are made to be used with either lap or lap/shoulder belts and work fine with either.

So if you choose to travel with a carseat you may if you purchase a seat and you will not have to pay any extra to use it.

TJ

 

[NotUrsula]

I've heard that several airlines, internationally, do not allow child car seats on the airplanes. The feeling is that car seats are made to be used with shoulder straps, and planes do not have shoulder straps. They feel that a child in the arms of the parent is safer than a child belted into a carseat that is not properly restrained.

Well, some truth and some myth there.

In those countries where airlines are allowed to ban carseats, the regulations for the mfr. of CRS' usually *require* that they be belted in using a 3-pt seatbelt. If you have ever seen a UK toddler seat, you'll see that the back of the shell is two layers with a hollow space between, so that the entire lap-shoulder belt runs across the inside of the back of the seat, and serves partially to tether the top of it. A seat like this will not be certified for use in an aircraft, because it cannot be secured properly with only a 2-pt lap belt. Seats sold in the US must be built to be safely restrained with either a 2-pt lap belt OR a 3-pt lap/shoulder belt, so this concern is irrelevant in the case of seats sold in the US. (You will note that I said that the airlines are allowed to ban carseats, not that the countries ban carseats. The way that most of those regulations are written, the decision on whether or not to allow CRS use is up to the airline. For instance, if you board an Alitalia flight in Rome you won't be able to use a carseat of any kind, but if you board a Delta flight in Rome you will be able to use one in a paid-for seat; Delta is a US flag carrier and must abide by FAA regulation, while Alitalia gets to make it own carseat rules under Italian law.)

As to the "arms of a parent" thing, not so. Almost all of those countries require the use of belly-belts for lap children when held in the lap. They know darn good and well that arms alone will not hold a child on your lap in the event of severe turbulence or sudden deceleration. The FAA bans the use of belly belts because tests by the Office of Aerospace Medicine found that children were likely to become human airbags for their adults if belly-belts were used in sudden deceleration situations. However, European aerospace authorities believe that their value in turbulence outweighs that risk, so they choose to mandate them. Different point of view.

The whole carseat issue for aircraft use is about the statistical *odds* of a child dying. Riding in an automobile (with or without a carseat) is statistically more dangerous than flying in a commercial aircraft without a carseat. (Buses are in the middle, btw; statistically safer than a private ground vehicle, but statistically less safe than a commercial aircraft.) The US govt. has determined that the odds of serious injury &/or death are high enough to justify requiring the use of a carseat with a private ground vehicle. They do not feel that the odds are high enough to justify requiring the seat on a commercial aircraft, and in fact, the reason that they do not require them on commercial aircraft is that it is feared that a parent might drive rather than fly, which raises the odds of accidental death. On aircraft the decision is left up the parent, and thus it is up to the parent to decide where he/she stands on the question of odds.

 

[lkjasd]

Great post NotUrsula.

 

[tjmw2727]

Great post NotUrsula.

Agree - thanks for the information!

TJ