No More Third-Party Seat Belt Extenders!!!

[gmeh1]

Yes! Let me bring on my identical FAA approved seatbelt extender. Like the pilot in the article said, there is nothing to maintain, it's a freakin' seatbelt. I'm tired of our nanny government bureaucrats making pointless rules just to justify their existence.

Martin

Seatbelts need to be maintained and replaced when worn out.

 

[gmeh1]

I know a lot of people don't seem to mind, and most probably don't even think about the person behind them. Not deliberately trying to be annoying, like in goofy4tink's situation. Most people are kind of oblivious rather than malicious, it seems.

I have issues with a pinned ankle and bad knee, so that's probably why I feel cramped when the seat is reclined.



I waited for my kids to get to the age we could sit in an exit row - then had my knee give out! Phooey. My boys don't fly often, so they have yet to get the extra leg room. (we mostly fly SWA, so no other option for leg room)

mhconley - I have to agree with you, I really don't see any reason why they would need to make this rule if there are identical extenders on the market. They have a rule for the locks to be FAA-approved, just make the extenders have the same rule. I'm sure that would cover any liability issues.

Oblivious: A truer word was never spoken!!! I ask because it is the polite thing to do. Most of the seat belt extenders on the market are FAA approved, or so they say, and they come in two different forms. A & B.
This society is "sue crazy" and would sue for a broken nail while getting their overstuffed bag from the overhead.
I feel sure the FAA has a good reason for this, like it or not. If it keeps even one person safer, IMHO, it is worth it.

 

[goofy4tink]

When my husband and I fly on a plane with a 3x3 configuration, we often select seats on the aisle across from each other so neither of us has to take the middle seat.

As far as the armrests, airplane etiquette dictates that the poor person in the middle seat gets both armrests. The window and aisle seats each have an armrest no one else can use. You should not have wrestled that man so you could have both armrests. You're lucky he didn't retaliate by constantly asking you to get up so he could take his son to the restroom or to stretch his legs.

A few thoughts....he didn't need to 'take' his ds to the restroom...the kid slept the whole way to Florida. In fact, that child (actually about 12ish) slept up against the window, never even touching his armrest on the left. So...Dad practically had a seat and a half to stretch in.
As for the poor person in the middle seat??? He booked that seat. I'm not sure why you would think that airline etiquette says the person in the middle gets both armrests..not when my tv/radio controls are on that armrest.
Retaliation??? Seriously??? The man was an idiot..plain and simple. He could very well have just used the rear of that arm rest..but no, he had to use the whole thing. Sorry, that's not right. I do wish that JB had things configured differently though....way too confusing as well as annoying as it stands now.

As far as bringing your own extender?? Please....I can't believe the airlines actually thing that an extender is going to be 'damaged' if used during an incident. Really??? The mere action of a passenger rising up, against the extender, is enough to render it useless the next time???? I would think that the seat belt extender industry needs some looking into if that's the case.

 

[OrangeCountyCommuter]

Seatbelts need to be maintained and replaced when worn out.

True.

I have actually seen airline seats that were blocked for use due to defective seatbelts. If the seatbelt has an issue the seat will not be used. No discussion. So if the buckle on a seatbelt attached to the seat can break then why is there this belief that the SAME thing can't happen to an extender.

 

[alaska8]

Well I'm glad you didn't. The idea that someone might get tangled up in one is pretty silly, IMO. DH is the same person, just as kind and STRONG, as he was 29 pounds ago (enough so he doesn't have to use an extender at all), and he could have helped someone just as well then as he could now. And he certainly could have made sure the extender was up on the seat for people (b/c that's where the belt naturally goes when you unclick it). I think the rule is ridiculous.


With all due respect its this kind of attitude that is frustrating. The FAA has spent years testing and analyising data (especially data from aircraft accidents) to make these rules. They even run "real life" testing with volunteers participating in different scenarios. In an emergency when you have seconds to get out of a burning aircraft before toxic smoke kills you the last thing you are going to do while in pannic mode trying to open the emergency window (that most people roll their eyes at when we try to brief them on the operation of one!)is to neatly lay your seat belt with attached extender on the seat. No, you are going to fling your seatbelt open and not care where it goes while the cabin fills with smoke, as a flight attendant makes her way up the aisle against the 100 plus people who are all trying to get out shouting commands at you to open the window! If one person becomes entangled in any way in this seatbelt extension which because of its length is on the floor then that could potentially be life threatening for the person (as people climb over them) and to the rest of the aircraft who now face a delay in getting out. Seatbelts are made so that they dont hang onto the floor so that in an emergency they do not become a tripping hazard. Seatbelt extensions are provided and are available for use in certain seats only. There are plenty on board for everyone that requires them, they are maintained and checked on a regular basis. We are professionals and are able to hand these out to you in a discreet manner.



Believe me if there were no rules on the plane then it would make my job so much easier.
Respectfully
A flight attendant


(My views are my own and do not represent the airline which I proudly work for)

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

As for the poor person in the middle seat??? He booked that seat. I'm not sure why you would think that airline etiquette says the person in the middle gets both armrests..not when my tv/radio controls are on that armrest.
Retaliation??? Seriously??? The man was an idiot..plain and simple. He could very well have just used the rear of that arm rest..but no, he had to use the whole thing. Sorry, that's not right. I do wish that JB had things configured differently though....way too confusing as well as annoying as it stands now.

Every person in a middle seat didn't book it intentionally. Sometimes it's the only seat left. No need to get upset that I think it's proper etiquette to let the person in the middle seat have both armrests - I'm not the only one who feels this way. It is accepted etiquette for many frequent flyers:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704396504576204442583904246.html

http://blog.brillianttrips.com/2009/03/the-middle-seat-and-airplane-etiquette/

http://www.alexafischer.com/airplane-etiquette/

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/roadwarriorette/2010/08/26/airplane-etiquette-the-dreaded-middle-seat/

If your entertainment controls are covered by someone's arm, just politely ask them to move their arm for a minute! Or you can talk to the person and agree as to how you will share the armrest. Much easier than engaging in hours of passive-aggressive behavior, unless you enjoy wasting your time with that type of thing and having a miserable flight.

 

[gmeh1]

Well I'm glad you didn't. The idea that someone might get tangled up in one is pretty silly, IMO. DH is the same person, just as kind and STRONG, as he was 29 pounds ago (enough so he doesn't have to use an extender at all), and he could have helped someone just as well then as he could now. And he certainly could have made sure the extender was up on the seat for people (b/c that's where the belt naturally goes when you unclick it). I think the rule is ridiculous.


With all due respect its this kind of attitude that is frustrating. The FAA has spent years testing and analyising data (especially data from aircraft accidents) to make these rules. They even run "real life" testing with volunteers participating in different scenarios. In an emergency when you have seconds to get out of a burning aircraft before toxic smoke kills you the last thing you are going to do while in pannic mode trying to open the emergency window (that most people roll their eyes at when we try to brief them on the operation of one!)is to neatly lay your seat belt with attached extender on the seat. No, you are going to fling your seatbelt open and not care where it goes while the cabin fills with smoke, as a flight attendant makes her way up the aisle against the 100 plus people who are all trying to get out shouting commands at you to open the window! If one person becomes entangled in any way in this seatbelt extension which because of its length is on the floor then that could potentially be life threatening for the person (as people climb over them) and to the rest of the aircraft who now face a delay in getting out. Seatbelts are made so that they dont hang onto the floor so that in an emergency they do not become a tripping hazard. Seatbelt extensions are provided and are available for use in certain seats only. There are plenty on board for everyone that requires them, they are maintained and checked on a regular basis. We are professionals and are able to hand these out to you in a discreet manner.



Believe me if there were no rules on the plane then it would make my job so much easier.
Respectfully
A flight attendant


(My views are my own and do not represent the airline which I proudly work for)

Very well said, Alaska!!

 

[mhconley]

Seatbelts need to be maintained and replaced when worn out.

True.

I have actually seen airline seats that were blocked for use due to defective seatbelts. If the seatbelt has an issue the seat will not be used. No discussion. So if the buckle on a seatbelt attached to the seat can break then why is there this belief that the SAME thing can't happen to an extender.

So what you are really saying is that you do not believe a rational human being intelligent enough to know how and where to purchase a seatbelt extender would know when they are worn and need to be replaced? That I need a bumbling bureaucrat to protect me?

Yes NANNY, whatever you say NANNY.

Martin

 

[OrangeCountyCommuter]

So what you are really saying is that you do not believe a rational human being intelligent enough to know how and where to purchase a seatbelt extender would know when they are worn and need to be replaced? That I need a bumbling bureaucrat to protect me?

Yes NANNY, whatever you say NANNY.

Martin

WOW! Is all I can say. And yes, considering your determination to be "right" that would concern me that you would not be willing to admit when your extender is not working.

 

[deegack]

So what you are really saying is that you do not believe a rational human being intelligent enough to know how and where to purchase a seatbelt extender would know when they are worn and need to be replaced? That I need a bumbling bureaucrat to protect me?

Yes NANNY, whatever you say NANNY.

Martin

Considering some of the things I have seen "rational" adults do I do worry about society at times. And it's not just you te FAA wants to protect but the people around you that you will land on should your belt extender fail in tubulance or other emergency.

 

[LilyWDW]

So what you are really saying is that you do not believe a rational human being intelligent enough to know how and where to purchase a seatbelt extender would know when they are worn and need to be replaced? That I need a bumbling bureaucrat to protect me?

Yes NANNY, whatever you say NANNY.

Martin

Considering some of the BS I have seen "rational human beings" do, then I don't think they are all intelligent enough to do those things. Plus, people hate to spend money so many wouldn't replace the belts when it was needed.

Obviously they saw a need to make this rule. If you don't like it, then you don't have to fly. It's pretty simple. Flying is not a right.

 

[gmeh1]

WOW! Is all I can say. And yes, considering your determination to be "right" that would concern me that you would not be willing to admit when your extender is not working.

Good one!!!

 

[NotUrsula]

...
I'm not sure why you would think that airline etiquette says the person in the middle gets both armrests..not when my tv/radio controls are on that armrest. ...

Normally the controls are on the side of the armrest, while the space being occupied by the middle passenger's arm is on the top of it, but she's still right; the armrest rule is pretty universally recognized among frequent fliers: as compensation for being stuck in the middle seat, you get to use both armrests.

The thing is, normally if you are the middle-seat passenger and you are using an armrest that contains media controls, you put your elbow only on the rest, and you try to keep it toward the back of the seat. The person using the controls says "excuse me" when they need to use them, and otherwise keeps that hand somewhere else. It normally works just fine in practice.

As to how they will enforce the rule against carrying your own, I'm guessing that they will enlist TSA to enforce it. The shape of the metal buckle mechanism is rather distinctive and should show up plainly on an x-ray. FWIW, I agree that if you need an extender, you probably do not belong in the exit row. (Not only is there the issue of the extender ending up on the floor, but someone that size is really not likely to be agile enough to be able to easily maneuver between rows of coach airline seats, and someone who is helping with an evacuation needs to be not only strong, but agile as well. Being able to get out of the way is just as important as being able to wrench open the door.)

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

Normally the controls are on the side of the armrest, while the space being occupied by the middle passenger's arm is on the top of it, but she's still right; the armrest rule is pretty universally recognized among frequent fliers: as compensation for being stuck in the middle seat, you get to use both armrests.

The thing is, normally if you are the middle-seat passenger and you are using an armrest that contains media controls, you put your elbow only on the rest, and you try to keep it toward the back of the seat. The person using the controls says "excuse me" when they need to use them, and otherwise keeps that hand somewhere else. It normally works just fine in practice.

+1

Exactly the way it should work. No childish fighting over an arm rest.

 

[goofy4tink]

Every person in a middle seat didn't book it intentionally. Sometimes it's the only seat left. No need to get upset that I think it's proper etiquette to let the person in the middle seat have both armrests - I'm not the only one who feels this way. It is accepted etiquette for many frequent flyers:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704396504576204442583904246.html

http://blog.brillianttrips.com/2009/03/the-middle-seat-and-airplane-etiquette/

http://www.alexafischer.com/airplane-etiquette/

http://boardingarea.com/blogs/roadwarriorette/2010/08/26/airplane-etiquette-the-dreaded-middle-seat/

If your entertainment controls are covered by someone's arm, just politely ask them to move their arm for a minute! Or you can talk to the person and agree as to how you will share the armrest. Much easier than engaging in hours of passive-aggressive behavior, unless you enjoy wasting your time with that type of thing and having a miserable flight.

+1

Exactly the way it should work. No childish fighting over an arm rest.

I am very seldom passive-aggressive, or childish. BUT.....if I want to change the channel on my TV, and I try to politely do so, I don't expect a major attitude from the middle seat person. It's not as if I was trying to take over the armrest. And no, this person did not just put his elbow there....he draped his entire arm along the entire rest. And that's fine. But, when someone politely says 'excuse me? I need to use the control area' and you get 'geez, again???' and it's only happened one other time, 40 mins ago??? Sorry, but good manners go both ways!!!
I wasn't a pain in the butt...I was polite....on the three occasions that I needed to use the controls.

 

[declansdad]

You must be rather slim. Some airline seats are only 16 inches across.... I don't know many people who are comfortable sitting in a seat that size.

I can only find two airlines that have a seat width of less that 17 inches - Japan Airlines and Phiilipines Airlines.

 

[declansdad]

Yes! Let me bring on my identical FAA approved seatbelt extender. Like the pilot in the article said, there is nothing to maintain, it's a freakin' seatbelt. I'm tired of our nanny government bureaucrats making pointless rules just to justify their existence.

Martin

I think it is more of a society that will sue at the drop of a hat than a nanny state.

Also, I don't think enforcement would be that hard, they could be screened for at security.