NTSB want FAA to require child restraints for all planes, including GA

[flyersfan31]

Who is going to vote against moving up the car seat requirements? Some adult females are under the kid size booster seat requirements. It is stupid. Cloaked as for the children. Want to save children? simply outlaw them flying in GA airplanes problem solved.

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.c...nes-who-think-child-car-seats-dont-work-well/

January 5, 2007, 10:13 am We Are Not the Only Ones Who Think Child Car Seats Don’t Work Well

By STEPHEN J. DUBNER There is a very disturbing report in the new Consumer Reports about child car seats. Here’s an excerpt:
You’d think that in a car crash, infants in their cozy car seats would be the most protected passengers of all. But you’d be wrong, our tests reveal.
Cars and car seats can’t be sold unless they can withstand a 30-mph frontal crash. But most cars are also tested in a 35-mph frontal crash and in a 38-mph side crash. Car seats aren’t.
When we crash-tested infant car seats at the higher speeds vehicles routinely withstand, most failed disastrously. The car seats twisted violently or flew off their bases, in one case hurling a test dummy 30 feet across the lab.
Sad to say, I am not very surprised by this report. (You can read other accounts of the testing here and here.) When we wrote about child car seats, a lot of people responded angrily to our assertion that the seats do not provide much benefit, if any, over lap and shoulder belts for children over two years of age. But of all the arguments, not a single person challenged the central fact that the data seem to support: car seats, as currently built and used, don’t work nearly as well as every parent, every cop, every emergency-room doctor would like to think that they work. And the Consumer Reports testing confirms this to a rather frightening degree.
[Addendum: I should have specified, as one commenter below pointed out, that C.R. tested rear-facing infant seats; we argued against the efficacy of front-facing seats for children 2 and up, since the lap-and-shoulder-belt alternative for infants isn't at all practical. That said, our argument is hardly weakened -- and perhaps is strengthened -- when you consider that even the rear-facing infant seats, for which there is no alternative, failed the C.R. tests so badly.]
One of the most disturbing assertions in the CR report is that European car seats perform better than American models, which suggests that as much as Americans believe they are demanding superior safety, they are in fact getting inferior quality. And when it’s your child who stands to suffer — well, that’s pretty disturbing.
When we wrote the above-linked article on car seats, I had a really hard time finding a crash-test lab that would let me come in and run our own basic tests. All I wanted to do was to submit a child crash-test dummy to one frontal crash in a car seat and one frontal crash in a lap-and-shoulder belt. I got the feeling that the labs knew full well that the seats don’t perform anywhere near as well as they’re supposed to.
Finally I found a lab that agreed to run my tests. They wouldn’t let me name the facility, out of fear of losing crash-test business from the seat manufacturers, but the head of the lab told me he was a fan of science and wanted to help us test a simple theory. But then the engineer whose job it was to strap in the dummies and run the tests nearly refused to participate. He told me that it was idiotic — that of course the car seat would perform well, and that if we put one of his expensive dummies in a crash with only a lap and shoulder belt, the dummy would literally be severed in the crash test.
He was wrong, it turned out. The dummy came out of the crash without serious injury. As did the dummy in the car seat. But as Consumer Reports showed, when you put a car seat through a more realistic crash scenario, the results can be horrific.

• E-mail This
• Print
• Share Close
  • Linkedin
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • My Space
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Permalink

Baby? Where's the baby?? Dammit -- it's out with the bathwater!!!!

Note - not all carseats were condemned. As your snip indicated, Eurostandards create a very safe car seat. That's how I bought ours. Did the research. Bought the best.

I can fix the problem you highlighted. Require kids to be in carseats that meet European standards. There. Safe and sound. ACK!!! DID I JUST PROPOSE EUROPEAN STANDARDS?????? What the heck do they know?? They don't even speak ENGLISH!!!!!

I understand the Libertarian angle. In this case, I really think it's much ado about nothing. Protecting kids, who cannot otherwise decide to protect themselves, is a societal objective from way back. If Zog and Mrs Zog got eaten by a Sabretooth, or Mrs Zog just didn't get the whole breastfeeding thing, the rest of the gang rallied 'round. Society is doing the same thing today..

I really, really, can't get upset about the government telling people to do something that common sense and basic reason would tell you to do anyway.

Plus, it's for the kids.....

 

[woodstock]

Baby? Where's the baby?? Dammit -- it's out with the bathwater!!!!

Note - not all carseats were condemned. As your snip indicated, Eurostandards create a very safe car seat. That's how I bought ours. Did the research. Bought the best.

I can fix the problem you highlighted. Require kids to be in carseats that meet European standards. There. Safe and sound. ACK!!! DID I JUST PROPOSE EUROPEAN STANDARDS?????? What the heck do they know?? They don't even speak ENGLISH!!!!!

I understand the Libertarian angle. In this case, I really think it's much ado about nothing. Protecting kids, who cannot otherwise decide to protect themselves, is a societal objective from way back. If Zog and Mrs Zog got eaten by a Sabretooth, or Mrs Zog just didn't get the whole breastfeeding thing, the rest of the gang rallied 'round. Society is doing the same thing today..

I really, really, can't get upset about the government telling people to do something that common sense and basic reason would tell you to do anyway.

Plus, it's for the kids.....

Actually many of them speak English better than Murricans. I am not specifically referring to the British either.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Yes that is OK, quite OK. Such is the price of freedom. If GA is so hazardous to children perhaps children shouldn't be allowed to fly in GA aircraft. For the children of course.

Some

Stupid

Parents

Will

Kill

Their

Children

Through

Ignorance

Is

That

Ok?

 

[AuntPeggy]

So we need it to be law so mothers can rat out pilots to the FAA for flying their babies around without a car seat?

We need the government to conduct the studies to determine which are the best alternatives and which are the acceptable alternatives when transporting our children. We need the government to mandate minimums so that manufacturers have incentive to provide effective and affordable safety features so that <Mother> can purchase what she considers the best alternative, then put her foot down and say, "You will use that seat."

PS. I said <Mother> is the enforcer, not the rat.

 

[AuntPeggy]

Some

Stupid

Parents

Will

Kill

Their

Children

Through

Ignorance

Is

That

Ok?

Sadly, that is reality. There are a lot of other adjectives besides "stupid" that apply as well.

 

[tdager]

Some

Stupid

Parents

Will

Kill

Their

Children

Through

Ignorance

Is

That

Ok?

Yes it is.

 

[NoHeat]

One of the fatal accidents mentioned in that recommendation occurred half a mile from my home. I'll tell it how I see it, then quote the NTSB recommendation letter.

An Angel flight pilot unbelievably took off in a thunderstorm, with strong winds, just after the wind direction had changed. He took off with a tailwind using the shorter of two runways. A tiny three-year-old patient, just released from one of several visits to the hospital in Iowa City, sat on the mother's lap. The plane ended up gouging a big hole in a drainage ditch across the highway from the runway, and it ended up in the parking lot of an endodontist who was doing a root canal at the time. The two adults were belted, and they survived, both the pilot and mother. The dentist left his patient, ran out to the plane, and attempted to resuscitate the small child, without success. A young life was lost, right there. His entire future was gone, in a flash, due to the stupidity of adults.

When you realize that the belted adults survived, and the lap child did not, I think it's a pretty compelling reason to say that children should be belted, in a car seat or some in a manner depending on their size, but never sitting on a lap. There's just no way that the mother could hold onto the child during a high-g impact.

Okay, that's my side of the story. Here's the NTSB letter excerpt:

One of the two fatal accidents cited in the letter transmitting Safety Recommendations A-93-106 and -107 involved a 3-year-old child who, according to 14 CFR 91.14 (a)(2), should have occupied his own seat. The NTSB investigated a more recent Part 91 accident with a similar circumstance. Specifically, on June 3, 2008, a Socata TBM 700 (850) departed from Iowa City, Iowa, when a preexisting tailwind caused the airplane to aerodynamically stall and impact the ground. A child, age 2 years 10 months, was held by her mother during the flight and was unrestrained, which was not in compliance with 14 CFR 91.107(a)(3)(i). The pilot and the child’s mother received minor injuries as a result of the accident, but the child was killed.

 

[PittsDriver]

CR Report:
"While improvement in the standard is needed, car seats are still effective when properly installed. According to Safe Kids Worldwide, properly used safety seats decrease the risk of death by 71 percent for infants and 54 percent for toddlers. "

That sounds like a good thing. Parents want to do keep kids safe so we use the good stuff. Should be no argument there.

If the argument is about whether The Man should make you use the good thing or not then there's consequences of both sides. The Man made you wear your seat belt in your car and your automobile insurance rates improved whether you did it or not. I like lower insurance rates so passing the laws is another good thing. Making aircraft manufacturers put the "Latch System" in planes - I have no idea how complicated or expensive it is to retrofit or even test a FAR 23 compliant airplane seat with a child strapped in to it so see how it works in a crash.

I know that the airlines won't let you use some car seats on commercial flights until it says on the seat that it's designed for that use. I have no idea what the difference is but I threw that seat out and got one for the car that was compliant and the best I could find based upon a number of test lab reports.

 

[Everskyward]

For airlines, I see the bigger issue as being the fact that the parent would need to pay for an extra ticket, not the fact that they need to bring a seat along. GA doesn't have that problem unless you are filling the airplane and there are no more seats for the kid.

 

[ScottM]

For

The

Parent

To

Decide

NOT

The

Government

In an ideal world that would be great.

But

There

Are

Too

Many

Stupid

Parents

Who

Do

Things

Like

This

Or the morons I saw the day before yesterday jaywalking, well jayrunning, with their kids in strollers across US1 dodging high speed (60mph) traffic.

 

[ScottM]

For airlines, I see the bigger issue as being the fact that the parent would need to pay for an extra ticket, not the fact that they need to bring a seat along. GA doesn't have that problem unless you are filling the airplane and there are no more seats for the kid.

This is the excuse for not mandating seats for kids on commercial planes. I see some parents holding their kids on their laps for the flight instead off coughing up the money for the seat. Is this really in the best interests of the kids and parents? Shouldn't the airlines want to sell the extra seat and to help a kid not to become a projectile?

 

[Everskyward]

Shouldn't the airlines want to sell the extra seat and to help a kid not to become a projectile?

Maybe, but they are probably afraid they would lose a lot of the family business if they instituted a policy like that. I can see requiring car seats for lap children (less than 2) but I don't think they should be required for older children. Everyone else on the airlines (not counting the pilots) is only held in with a lap belt anyway so you wouldn't have the shoulder harness problem.

 

[ScottM]

Everyone else on the airlines (not counting the pilots) is only held in with a lap belt anyway so you wouldn't have the shoulder harness problem.

i had a flight earlier this year where there were shoulder harnesses for the pax. Well the 1st Class pax. Everyone else in the cargo err passenger compartment had regular seat betls.

 

[ScottM]

Maybe, but they are probably afraid they would lose a lot of the family business if they instituted a policy like that.

So you think that the compromise of safety for business is ok? A lose object like a child can do a lot of damage to the other passengers when the parent loses control of the child in a sudden deceleration incident.

An incident not unlike this one from earlier today.

http://avherald.com/h?article=42fb63a9&opt=0

 

[Everskyward]

i had a flight earlier this year where there were shoulder harnesses for the pax. Well the 1st Class pax. Everyone else in the cargo err passenger compartment had regular seat betls.

Could you disconnect the shoulder harness from the lap belt?

 

[ScottM]

Could you disconnect the shoulder harness from the lap belt?

Yep. These were on the new UAL sky suits. Shoulder harness were required during take off and landings but not in flight, even if the seat belt sign was on. This was the first time I had ever seen shoulder harnesses on a part 121 flight in the pax compartment.

 

[rpadula]

Some

Stupid

Parents

Will

Kill

Their

Children

Through

Ignorance

Is

That

Ok?

Retroactive

Darwin

Award???

P.S. I like this new formatting option.

 

[ScottM]

P.S. I like this new formatting option.

Me

Too

!

 

[Everskyward]

So you think that the compromise of safety for business is ok?http://avherald.com/h?article=42fb63a9&opt=0

We don't like to say it but it's always a compromise, isn't it? That logic extends to ground transportation too. Why don't city buses have seat belts? How about light rail trains? Maybe some do but it is not common.

 

[ScottM]

We don't like to say it but it's always a compromise, isn't it? That logic extends to ground transportation too. Why don't city buses have seat belts? How about light rail trains? Maybe some do but it is not common.

Oh I agree! It is a compromise, and the question is where is the line drawn. Also who draws that line.

 

[Bob Noel]

We don't like to say it but it's always a compromise, isn't it? That logic extends to ground transportation too. Why don't city buses have seat belts? How about light rail trains? Maybe some do but it is not common.

Do school buses have seatbelts?

 

[Everskyward]

Do school buses have seatbelts?

They didn't when I was a kid but I have no clue about now.

 

[ScottM]

Do school buses have seatbelts?

School buses are designed to not need seat bealts. Well at least that is what they say when there are not seatbelts installed. There are higher than normal seats that are padded.

http://www.ncsbs.org/testimonies/seat_belt_background.htm

You decide.

 

[wsuffa]

Oh I agree! It is a compromise, and the question is where is the line drawn. Also who draws that line.

Which begets a nanny government that will stop at nothing to keep everyone safe from everything, even if doing so makes us less safe in other ways.

To add a little fuel to the Part 121 fire, would any frequent traveler mind if the airlines were required to charge for a baby seat, meaning that some of the family business were lost, meaning that the "chuck-e-cheese" environment at FL380 were reduced? Scott, would you mind it at all if the crying, screaming, ill-behaved children were not on the plane? (and before you say it's a "steerage" problem, one woman brought her acting-out brood into the F cabin on my flight last week while waiting for the front lav to open up).

 

[ScottM]

Which begets a nanny government that will stop at nothing to keep everyone safe from everything, even if doing so makes us less safe in other ways.

That is an opinion. Would you prefer Upton Sinclair version of the government? one were we eat the rotted flesh or workers who happen to fall into the meat grinders at a processing plant? Where is the middle ground?

To add a little fuel to the Part 121 fire, would any frequent traveler mind if the airlines were required to charge for a baby seat, meaning that some of the family business were lost, meaning that the "chuck-e-cheese" environment at FL380 were reduced? Scott, would you mind it at all if the crying, screaming, ill-behaved children were not on the plane? (and before you say it's a "steerage" problem, one woman brought her acting-out brood into the F cabin on my flight last week while waiting for the front lav to open up).

I would not say that it is a steerage problem. I have seen kids many times in the front of the plane. I had a kid kicking the back of my seat once in 1st class because the parents had her sitting with them and she of course did not have a seat so was sitting on the floor. They let her run around naked while they were getting out her jammies. I was prevented from putting my seat back because the kid would have been squished. That is when I complained and the FAs were all too happy to tell those parents to start parenting. They also moved my seat!! Thankfully far away from the little uncontrolled house ape!

 

[wsuffa]

That is an opinion. Would you prefer Upton Sinclair version of the government? one were we eat the rotted flesh or workers who happen to fall into the meat grinders at a processing plant? Where is the middle ground?

Yes it was an opinion. And this is an opinion: once Government starts substituting it's judgement for the judgement of it's citizens, special interests kick in seeking to "protect" us from everything.... to the point that citizens neither need nor can exercise judgement on their own. Since "the middle ground" is in the eyes of the beholder, there is a tendency to "lowest common denominator". If you believe the rhetoric, it's amazing any of us are alive today! And I'll drop it there 'cause we're rapidly heading to Spin Zone territory.

 

[ScottM]

Yes it was an opinion. And this is an opinion: once Government starts substituting it's judgement for the judgement of it's citizens, special interests kick in seeking to "protect" us from everything.... to the point that citizens neither need nor can exercise judgement on their own. Since "the middle ground" is in the eyes of the beholder, there is a tendency to "lowest common denominator". If you believe the rhetoric, it's amazing any of us are alive today! And I'll drop it there 'cause we're rapidly heading to Spin Zone territory.

In this country the government is 'us'. If it is doing something you don't like you get to vote it out of existence. That is the beauty of our system, it tends towards the middle ground. Granted it is a sinusoid of too much / too little based on the will of the people at any given time, but it does seem to work. In this specific case we have the NTSB making a call to increase regulation. Is it the right thing to do? I don't know, as a reasonable person I do not need this regulation. But it is the NTSB's job to make these types of recommendations so that there can be a discussion. Where we fail as a people is that far too many will just vent their opinion on a newsgroup such as this, or at a bar, or the airport, and will really do nothing to make their voice heard where it counts.

 

[wsuffa]

In this country the government is 'us'. If it is doing something you don't like you get to vote it out of existence. That is the beauty of our system, it tends towards the middle ground. Granted it is a sinusoid of too much / too little based on the will of the people at any given time, but it does seem to work. In this specific case we have the NTSB making a call to increase regulation. Is it the right thing to do? I don't know, as a reasonable person I do not need this regulation. But it is the NTSB's job to make these types of recommendations so that there can be a discussion. Where we fail as a people is that far too many will just vent their opinion on a newsgroup such as this, or at a bar, or the airport, and will really do nothing to make their voice heard where it counts.

You don't know me very well, do you?

My expression of opinion goes to folks that (supposedly) count. All I need is the cash to make large campaign donations and it will be more effective.

The rest can be discusssed in Spin Zone.

 

[Everskyward]

Oh I agree! It is a compromise, and the question is where is the line drawn. Also who draws that line.

Like it or not I think in the end our society draws the line. You are right in saying that we elect representatives who make the laws. There will be people on both sides who want either stricter or more lax standards but in the end it is a compromise.

 

[ClimbnSink]

No elected official wants more lax standards, there is no future in lax standards. Add in rentseeking car seat manufacturers and there is only one way to go. Can't wait to hear about someone getting busted on a ramp check for not having a(or the right) car seat.

 

[gismo]

Personally I think that any parent that holds their child on their lap during takeoffs or landings should be arrested for child endangerment whether on a 747 or Piper Cub. I suspect that there are some parents who would consider shipping their kids in the cargo hold to save airfare if that were allowed.

 

[ClimbnSink]

I think there are more people that believe any parent who would let their child fly in a small airplane should be arrested for child endangerment than there are pilots. But sensible community standard derived rules are OK.

Personally I think that any parent that holds their child on their lap during takeoffs or landings should be arrested for child endangerment whether on a 747 or Piper Cub. I suspect that there are some parents who would consider shipping their kids in the cargo hold to save airfare if that were allowed.

 

[Bob Noel]

Personally I think that any parent that holds their child on their lap during takeoffs or landings should be arrested for child endangerment whether on a 747 or Piper Cub. I suspect that there are some parents who would consider shipping their kids in the cargo hold to save airfare if that were allowed.

Which is more hazardous, holding an infant on a 767 ride across the
country (say LAX to LGA) or having the infant in a car seat and driving
from LA to NY?

 

[Gmaper]

No elected official wants more lax standards, there is no future in lax standards. Add in rentseeking car seat manufacturers and there is only one way to go. Can't wait to hear about someone getting busted on a ramp check for not having a(or the right) car seat.

Except when it comes to gun control.

 

[tdager]

In this country the government is 'us'. If it is doing something you don't like you get to vote it out of existence. That is the beauty of our system, it tends towards the middle ground. Granted it is a sinusoid of too much / too little based on the will of the people at any given time, but it does seem to work. In this specific case we have the NTSB making a call to increase regulation. Is it the right thing to do? I don't know, as a reasonable person I do not need this regulation. But it is the NTSB's job to make these types of recommendations so that there can be a discussion. Where we fail as a people is that far too many will just vent their opinion on a newsgroup such as this, or at a bar, or the airport, and will really do nothing to make their voice heard where it counts.

I see what you are saying Scott, and I am sure you will disagree with me, but the government has not been "us" in a very long time. It is a self-perpetuating, ever-growing beast that exists solely to take more and more for itself.

As for the NTSB...you really think "we the people" can do much? The NTSB is a governmental, bureaucratic system where most people are NOT voted in but hired. In a country of BIG problems, this is a small issue (hell non-existent) for most, yet important to some of us. What real chance do we have against this? Seriously? Not much...all half-a-million of us could go out and write our Congress-critter and guess what....not much on THIS issue (hell especially since it is "for the children") will happen. As stated above, NO politician is generally for lax standards.

This country stopped being about "us" when the SCOTUS ruled that a state does not have the right to leave the Union.

 

[Everskyward]

As for the NTSB...you really think "we the people" can do much? The NTSB is a governmental, bureaucratic system where most people are NOT voted in but hired. In a country of BIG problems, this is a small issue (hell non-existent) for most, yet important to some of us. What real chance do we have against this?

If you read the posts in this thread you will see that it this is not a one-sided argument even among "us". I would say that "we" are pretty evenly divided on this issue. I have mixed feelings about it myself. I wouldn't mind seeing the elimination of lap children but I don't think car seats should be required for older children. In practical terms I have flown lap children and will continue to do so until the law or company policy is changed.

 

[ScottM]

I see what you are saying Scott, and I am sure you will disagree with me, but the government has not been "us" in a very long time. It is a self-perpetuating, ever-growing beast that exists solely to take more and more for itself.

As for the NTSB...you really think "we the people" can do much? The NTSB is a governmental, bureaucratic system where most people are NOT voted in but hired.

Yes I do believe that "we the people" can do much. The NTSB is not the body that makes the rules. That would be the FAA with their political appointees. Those appointees come from elected officials and the agency is overseen by Congress, another group that is made up of elected officials. While maybe you have given up on America I have not. I do not see that the system is any more corrupted than it has ever been. I just see a lot of people who do not understand how the system works. I also see a lot of people that think when they do not get their way that the system must be broken. But the reality is that the system works on consensus of many viewpoints. With even more voices than ever being heard that consensus is harder than ever to achieve.

In a country of BIG problems, this is a small issue (hell non-existent) for most, yet important to some of us. What real chance do we have against this? Seriously? Not much...all half-a-million of us could go out and write our Congress-critter and guess what....not much on THIS issue (hell especially since it is "for the children") will happen. As stated above, NO politician is generally for lax standards.

This country stopped being about "us" when the SCOTUS ruled that a state does not have the right to leave the Union.

You have a very defeatist attitude and preordain failure by your inaction. Too bad, but then that just gives me a greater voice to get what I want.

 

[ClimbnSink]

You have a very defeatist attitude and preordain failure by your inaction. Too bad, but then that just gives me a greater voice to get what I want.

Got a fat checkbook eh?

 

[ScottM]

Got a fat checkbook eh?

Nope. But I know how to get things done in DC.

For this issue it is the FAA that will have to decide first to even talk about the NTSB ruling, then after they talk about it for a while then they might do an NPRM. That process will take more input and then the FAA, maybe with some Congressional input, will make a final rule.

I have a fat phone book and I know how to get the attention of the so called nameless bureaucrats. I worked on Hill as a lobbyist for a while and know how the sausage is made. IOW who you need to talk to get things done. My batting average is not 1000, but at least my voice gets heard. In a democracy that is a lot. When I was doing business overseas I had more say so into the affairs of some governments than their average citizens did. That really sucks for them and I have never seen our country anywhere as bad as some of those countries.

Sure our systems sometimes screws up. Look at the recent FCC final rule about ELTs. But if you also were paying attention, a small group of pilots was able to use their resources to stop that final rule from going into affect. That says something about how the voice of the people is still powerful in our government.

I am not going to get my knickers in a twist over something like this. Nor will I spittle and rant about big out of control government. It is the NTSB's job to do stuff like this. It is our job to make our voices heard. I would rather focus my energies constructively in this debate.

 

[wsuffa]

Folks, we're at a fork in the thread. If we continue down the politcal path, this will either be closed or move to Spin Zone.