purchase 10 month old own plane seat?

[lindaso]

"The carseat is supposed to go in a window seat is because it a) projects past the front of the aircraft seat, and b) once strapped into position, is difficult to remove. The reason for the seat placement rules has to do with evacuating the aircraft in the event of an emergency."

NotUrsula...I understand that this is the FAA rule and reason. But my argument is that a forward facing seat with an infant or a toddler takes up less room than an adult in that seat. For example, if I were in the window seat and my DH was in the middle, I couldn't get past him without climbing over his legs. Now if it were my 15 month old baby, I wouldn't have any problem getting past him. Now, in an evacuation situation, I would certainly just unstrap my baby and carry him out and leave the carseat in the seat. Again, no problem getting by it, it doesn't protrude out into the lane.

I'm not arguing with you, I just don't understand the FAA's reasoning. Having flown many times with different carseats, I really don't see the logic. Am I missing something here?

In your opinion, do you think JetBlue will allow my seat in the middle like the ticket supervisor said? She said it was in their guidlelines for carseats to be in the middle. I may just change my seating and get 3 window seats anyway.

 

[jel0511]

"The carseat is supposed to go in a window seat is because it a) projects past the front of the aircraft seat, and b) once strapped into position, is difficult to remove. The reason for the seat placement rules has to do with evacuating the aircraft in the event of an emergency."

The reason for this, is because the car seat once strapped in cannot be moved in an emergency. I've successfully strapped a car seat in MANY times, and I can tell you how difficult they are to get off. If a person is in the middle, and you are in the window, the person, unless incapaciated by the emergency, is fully able to move. Whereas, a properly strapped car seat, which is probably impedeing the area to exit cannot be moved efficiently in an emergency.

 

[lindaso]

Lori...please don't take this as being argumentative, I don't mean to make anyone upset with me. What I'm saying is that the carseat does not need to be disconnected in an emergency. No one would disconnect the seat, they'd unstrap the child. That would happen in the same amount of time it would take to unstrap any seatbelt. I don't see where the carseat itself is impeding the area of exit. You'd just walk right by it like any normal seat.

Do you see what I'm saying?

And how in the world do you get the quote up in the post? I see where you can click on quote, but then there's nowhere to copy and paste what the other poster has written. Do you have to retype it?

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand...

 

[jel0511]

First off to get a quote, you copy the text you want to quote and then hit the quote button. Then you paste the text you want to quote and hit finished. Test is then quoted for you!!!! My car seat (Britax Marathon) is slightly longer than an airline seat and if placed in a middle seat, would block the aisle from the window seat to the main aisle. They overhang the seat and make the pasageway more difficult to get through. Now, your seats might not do this, but mine and I'm sure others do as well. Since the car seat isn't allowing maximum passage as an unoccupied seat would, they want them in the window, or middle of a middle row, to allow maximum exit for passengers.

 

[lindaso]

Thank you Lori...I now see what people are saying. None of my carseats have ever been bigger than an airline seat so I was having a hard time visualizing any problems. I've flown with a Britax Roundabout (rear and front facing), a Fisher Price Futura, and a Century Smartmove...all 5 pt harnesses. Next trip is with the Roundabout and the Futura. I really hope the flight attendants don't give me a hard time putting the Roundabout in the middle, especially after the lengthy conversation with the JetBlue supervisor.

 

[peg2001]

I don't mean to muddy the waters and I'm not sure if what I was told by a Delta FA is true or not. . .but we were told that the carseat can go in the middle seat as long as the window seat was occupied by family. I guess it's ok to block a family member in case of an emergency but not a stranger?!?

Peggy

 

[lmhall2000]

We have flown with our 3 children and several times had infants at one stage or another- we would not buy the tickets for those under 2 and always there were extra seats available- at check-in we would just request to have an empty seat between me and my husband or other child- this usually kept them from filling that seat up with a passenger and we got to use that seat for her carseat. If it's not full I would not buy a seat.
Tara

 

[NotUrsula]

I've recently stopped using my carseat on board, b/c my child is now over 40 lbs., but the trend I was seeing in the last 2 years is that if a passenger showed up at the gate with a seat, the gate agents would offer to sell a seat in order to allow it to be used onboard. (BTW, every carseat I have will project out at least 3" into the legroom in front of an aircraft seat; about the same as a person's knees. If the seat is strapped in, the only way most normal adults could get past it in the dark would be to crawl over it.)

Many, many times, I had gate agents (US carriers) tell me, "There's room on the flight, I can sell you a seat for the carseat so you can use it onboard." The bizarre thing is that, since I always purchased a seat for DS at the adult discounted fare, I already had a seat for it, and the gate agent in question was always looking right at that ticket. I can only think that they must have been working under some sort of commission, to so consistently attempt to get me to pay for the same seat twice over.

I think that free seats for babies are an endangered species on most US carriers. Right up there with food, if it's something they can squeeze revenue from, they are going to go for it. In addition, empty seats are getting scarce nowadays, as airlines cut more and more flights. Personally, I wish the FAA would mandate the use of carseats for babies; their reasoning is kind of bizarre on this. (For those who don't know, the reason they don't require them is that they believe that families required to buy a seat for a baby will decide to drive instead, and that since the risk of accident is higher in a car, it's safer to have them fly unsecured.)

Hey, Bev -- I know your pain. Even though I normally prefer the level of service on UK carriers, we swore off them over-the-water until DS got big enough not to need the carseat. Next time, you might want to try a US carrier over the water; the food isn't as good, but they have generous carryon weight allowance, and carseats are allowed. BTW, I wrote the CAA a while back on the carseat issue, and they told me that they leave the decision entirely up to the airline; the website still indicates that. Have they actually issued a ruling now? (Yes, I know I'm strangely obsessed with this issue; it just drives me mad that there are no consistent rules for this.)

Linda, if you are using 2 carseats in one row, the rule says that you can put them next to one another, one at the window, one in the center, with the adult on the aisle. I've never seen any info on what the rule would be if you had more than 2 carseats together.

 

[ducklite]

SafetyMom--You'll get no flames from me. I also fly alot and wouldn't give up my coveted aisle seat unless they wanted to move me to first class.

Anne

 

[jodifla]

When we fly with our baby, we hold him in our laps. He's unlikely to want to sit in a car seat while we're so close by.

Frankly, I don't buy the "turbulence" argument for buying another expensive seat. I've never been in a plane so rough that I felt the turbulence would wrench the baby out of my arms. I feel he's as safe in my arms as a car seat -- unless the plane is in REAL trouble, and then it won't make any difference.


Soon, he'll be two, so he'll be in his own seat anyway.

 

[ducklite]

Originally posted by jodifla
When we fly with our baby, we hold him in our laps. He's unlikely to want to sit in a car seat while we're so close by.

Frankly, I don't buy the "turbulence" argument for buying another expensive seat. I've never been in a plane so rough that I felt the turbulence would wrench the baby out of my arms. I feel he's as safe in my arms as a car seat -- unless the plane is in REAL trouble, and then it won't make any difference.


Soon, he'll be two, so he'll be in his own seat anyway.

I guess that either you've been lucky or you haven't flown much. I've been on flights so turbulent that I couldn't hold a bottle of water let alone a squirmy baby.

The one time it happens, it's too late to say "I should have".

Anne

 

[safetymom]

jodifla, I agree with Ducklite. I have been on a few turbulent flights. It only takes one time and then what would you say if your baby was injured???

Do you use the same logic in your car?


Ducklite, glad to see there is someone that agrees with me about giving up my seat.

 

[jodifla]

I fly all the time. And while i've flown on some rough flights (once landing on the fringes of a hurricane) I've never been on a flight that had turbulence that would have taken something out of my hands.

Equating a plane to a car just doesn't make sense to me. Most mass transit can't accommodate car seats -- buses, trains, subways, etc.

I have lots of friends with very young children, and most don't buys seats for their children unless they are over two. I even have friends who are sqeezing in three trips before they're son turns 2 so they don't have to pay for a ticket. I know that it's the party line to say you should buy a seat for infants, but I think it depends on the child. If he or she will rest comfortable in a carseat on an airline trip, then it's the way to go.

 

[bnlbebes]

In the case where turbulence is so bad that you cannot physically hold a baby, I find it difficult to believe that the same child would want to sit by themself in their own seat. I think that it's much more reassuring to have the baby in your own lap. So I agree with jodifla.

Remember, to each is own. What makes one parent feel comfortable may not be the same for all parents. I think that the DIS Boards is a great place to gain different perspectives, but it is also important not to trash others' opinions. This is something I work hard to teach the 4th graders in my class during the school year, so let's hope that adults on the DIS Boards can act just as well.

 

[safetymom]

I worked in the field of occupant safety for many years. I used to talk with people all the time that had that once in a lifetime accident. They were the best people to tell others how quickly something can happen. Just because it hasn't happened to you doesn't mean that it won't happen to someone else. If the OP won't change her mind maybe others will when they read this thread. The argument of whether or not they are comfortable doesn't mean anything in turbulence. The seat belt is not designed for a 2 year old either.

As far as buses they are designed to be used without car seats. They are compartmentalized so in the event of an accident you are not thrown around. The same isn't true in an airplane.

My question still is, What if something does happen how do you explain that to the child if they are hurt?

 

[Merija3]

I saw a harness in a catalogue that was designed for flying with an infant. The basic idea is that it connects you to the child so that in the event of turbulence the baby will not go anywhere if you lose your grip. Has anyone had any experience with this??

Also while I'm here... How do I display my countdown to Disney at the end of my posts? Thanks!

 

[BevS97]

Frankly, I don't buy the "turbulence" argument for buying another expensive seat. I've never been in a plane so rough that I felt the turbulence would wrench the baby out of my arms. I feel he's as safe in my arms as a car seat -- unless the plane is in REAL trouble, and then it won't make any difference.

I have been in some pretty rotten turbulence, and while I tend to agree that it's unlikely to wrench a baby out of my arms, I wouldn't want to find out the hard way. I am MUCH more comfortable on a UK plane where we use a belly belt as opposed to not using a belt at all. I don't understand the ruling that one cannot be used - and saying that in a crash landing babies must be put on the floor is just incredible to me. Maybe I will crush my baby, maybe I won't, but on the floor he/she has no chance at all.
Saying that, I would like the option to use my carseat - I don't know if I would choose to do so, but I find it infuriating that it's not even an option,

Not Ursula - I did TONS of research into this a few weeks ago the CAA have a website here
and the significant excerpts are...

Infants under six months of age must be secured on an adult’s lap by means of a supplementary loop.
...
The use of a car type or aircraft type safety seat is permitted for children between 6 months and 3 years of age. my aside - note that technically over 3s can't use a carseat either
...
The policy on the criteria and use of car type safety seats can differ between airlines. In the UK, a safety seat must be fitted in the same direction as the passenger seat on which it is positioned.

just to avoid confusion, I want to emphasise that all the above is the UK law and not the US law - NotUrsula asked me about it, so I have included it, but I don't want to confuse anyone - it is completely different from the FAA rules which apply in the USA

basically, the airline can decide if it will accept carseats, and if so, which models, but they must be forward facing and only for children over 6 months. Interestingly, Virgin don't accept any carseats at all, they will provide their own safety chair
You can see a picture here, you may need to register but again, it's only suitable over 6 months. They have offered me a skycot, which is very convenient, but has no safety benefits at all, and is not used during takeoff and landing or turbulence, at those times the baby must be attached to a parent using the belly belt.

We booked through Virgin for a few reasons, but none of them were related to infants as we booked before I knew I was pregnant, and then were able to change the date so that we could travel after the baby was born. The main problem with choosing a US based carrier is that none that I am aware of, fly direct between the UK and Orlando, they all involve a change.

An interesting exception which raises questions, which I don't know the answer to, involves Continental, who code-share with Virgin, so you can book a Continential flight and fly on a Virgin plane, or vice versa, in that case, I don't know whose rules would apply.

(Yes, I know I'm strangely obsessed with this issue; it just drives me mad that there are no consistent rules for this.)

Yes me too, and becoming more obsessed by the day!

 

[SuzanneSLO]

Although there is a lot of debate about whether parents should have the right to choose not to purchase a seat for infants, this debate really has no impact on whether not using a child safety seat is an acceptable risk for your child.

The FAA recommends that all children under 40 lbs. be in an appropriate child seat. See the brochure at http://www1.faa.gov/index.cfm/apa/1325.

In the Section called "Facts About Turbulence" of that brochure, it noted that 3 people died and 80 were seriously injured between 1981 and 1987 due to turbulence.

Also interesting is the the Policy Statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics from 11/01: http://www.aap.org/policy/re0101.html

This article points out that tests have shown that a harness or belly belt will not prevent head injury to a restrained child during turbulence. On an airline where child seats are allowed, I can't understand why you would even be considering this much less safe option. On an airline where no car seats are allowed, it might be a slightly safer option than no restraint at all.

Hope these articles help in your decision. -- Suzanne

 

[ducklite]

Originally posted by Merija3
I saw a harness in a catalogue that was designed for flying with an infant. The basic idea is that it connects you to the child so that in the event of turbulence the baby will not go anywhere if you lose your grip. Has anyone had any experience with this

While many international carriers will allow them. no US carrier will. If there is an accident the child will be crushed by your weight between you and the seat back in front of you.

As far as putting the baby on the floor--good reason for that too. if the accident is going to be that bad that the child probably doesn't have a chance of survival in the parents arms and no seat has been purchased, at least by putting them on the floor there is less likelihood that they will become a projectile and injure or kill another passenger.

Kill your own kid, fine by me (not really, but for the sake of arguement here) but kill me...no way.

Anne

 

[NotUrsula]

"In the case where turbulence is so bad that you cannot physically hold a baby, I find it difficult to believe that the same child would want to sit by themself in their own seat."

Since when is a baby allowed to decided if and when it *wants* to sit in a safety restraint? We don't allow them to dictate where they sit in cars, so why would we do it in aircraft? The answer is simple: cost. There are thousands of people out there who feel that the cost of buying a carseat is too much to bear, too. However, we have made it the law of the land that if they want to transport a baby in a private automobile, they have to strap the child into a carseat, or risk getting fined for breaking the law.
Somewhere along the line, we the people have decided that requiring parents to buy a carseat for repeated use is reasonable, but requiring them to purchase space in an aircraft seat for a one-time trip is not.

When you look at the differences from a safety perspective, you have to understand that the gravitational forces that come to bear in a turbulence situation are in 3 dimensions, in a way that no ground accident can be. The most dangerous situation for a lap baby is a sudden loss of altitude. If the plane suddenly drops, everything you are holding, and your own body as well, will suddenly surge upward with no warning at all. Since this is gravity, the force is going to be at LEAST equal to 32/ft./second, squared, and probably much more, as the engines will still be propelling the plane forward. How many people do you know who routinely hold a child in their laps with their own arms locked down over the child's shoulders? That is probably what it would take to keep the child anchored; having your arms around them horizontally would not be enough. (Imagine holding a baby in your lap on the first drop of RNRC, and you'll have an idea of what it would be like. A drop of a couple of hundred feet is not a big drop when the plane is flying at 30,000 ft., but that's a much bigger drop than you get on most coasters.)

I'll make a confession here, evil mommy that I am. I have always purchased a seat for my child, but safety in turbulence was not initially the reason I did it. My initial reason was that holding a baby in my lap for several hours while seated in an uncomfortably cramped chair was a royal PITA! Coach seats are uncomfortable enough without adding a squirming baby to the situation. I first started looking up the seating regulations in an effort to make sure that I had an ironclad and unanswerable reason to get that seat into the aircraft cabin every time I flew. The safety aspect is compelling, yes, but in the end, I admit that I bought that seat mostly for my own comfort and peace of mind. If I have another child, you bet your bippy I'm going to do it again!

Edit: typo in the speed of gravity.