No RF on United??

I flew with DD's Radian. Forward faced her on some flight segments, rear faced her on others. Between the upright-ness of the RF install (which I did do against manufacturer's instructions, I left the boot off, and there was a good chance it was more upright than 30 degrees, but it was reclined as much as possible in the space available and I used the top tether to add stability) and the natural lean of the plane (nose is higher than tail), the RF install was at least as upright as the FF install.

Another time, I flew with the ComfortSport and RFed her. That was fairly upright as well, and again I'm sure it was against manufacturer's instructions (too upright) but it was the best I could do. At the time, DD was less than a year and less than 20 pounds so FF was not an option. There was no way for me to use that carseat 100% correctly on that plane.

Depending on the pitch available and the carseat, RF might not be any more reclined than FF.

Wiggles said:

I've got a question that may seem silly to many of you.

From a safety standpoint (ignoring comfort), would it be enough less safe to forward face on a plane that you would refuse to take your small infant/toddler if you knew you had to forward face on the plan? Also, would the risks of injury due to 'improper installation' be bad enough if the harness were adjusted for rear-facing mode, but used forward facing on a plane that you would have to completely rethread your harness before and after the flight? Or would the fact that junior is restrained be enough?

Click to expand...

The first question is a personal question. Different people have different comfort levels. Some people look at the statistics, see that flying (even unrestrained) is significantly safer than driving (even properly restrained), and not worry about it. Those same people will also be comfortable with a lap child, usually.

Other people will forward face a 1 and 20 child on the plane, but not take a lap baby nor would they FF a 1 and 20 in the car. That's their comfort level.

Yet others want best practice at all times under all circumstances, and will RF in any situation as long as the child is able to fit.

There's not really a right or wrong answer, I don't think. Just different opinions.

For your question about FFing with the harness below, I think partly it depends on how far below (a millimeter? three inches?) and partly on what happens during your flight. The majority of flights are uneventful, with minor turbulence at worst. You could probably do everything wrong and everybody would be fine. Same with in the car, the vast majority of trips are uneventful, and everybody could be unrestrained and arrive at the destination unscathed. In a worst-case scenario, with severe turbulence or a runway incident, it's certainly possible that having the harness improperly routed would be deleterious.

To give you additional information, since it seems like you're trying to make a decision, there is some evidence that RFing on the plane may be even more important than in the car, due to the reduced head excursion room. For the same reason, using a child restraint at all (FF vs lap-only belt) may be more important. Planes don't provide upper torso protection, making a lap belt only child's head more likely to strike the seat in front.

We don't know. I do know that taking off and landing is like being in a car at 150 mph, and I'm not willing to hold my baby on my lap for that. Yes, the seats are taller and compartmentalize, but an unrestrained baby will stay unrestrained.

So yes, if an airline didn't allow rear facing child restraints then I wouldn't fly on them until my child was of an age where I felt comfortable forward facing them. Which for my small kids may be close to two so they at least meet the minimums of the seat.

Wendy

Quick update - I got a call from a lady at the FAA this morning. I sent out a whole bunch of e-mails last week, attaching the FAA rules and the e-mail I got from United. I'm glad my e-mail got into the hands of the right person. Anyhow, this lady used to work directly with United on carseat policy, and she agrees that the FAA rules and the United flight manual do not prohibit rear-facing carseats. She said there must be some confusion about the language pertaining to aft-facing airplane seats (i.e. sleeper seats or flight attendant seats), but they are launching an investigation and will hopefully get to the bottom of this. She said it will take a few weeks, but they will send me an e-mail to let me know what the outcome is.

Of course, in the heat of the moment, I completely forgot to ask if the FAA rules are regulations, which airlines must follow, or if they are recommendations. In the meantime, the only thing we can do is bring along the FAA letter, the United Airlines policy (which does not prohibit RFing seats), and the carseat installation manual. We are looking to travel again this summer, and United has the best prices and flight times, but until this is cleared up, we may choose to take another airline (and hope this issue doesn't come up again). Anyhow, I will post a copy of the e-mail I receive from the FAA as soon as I get it. Hopefully, it will be good news for us!

That's great. So it sounds like if this IS new policy they may be taken to task by the FAA. I await anxiously seeing what the letter says.

Pixels said:

To give you additional information, since it seems like you're trying to make a decision, there is some evidence that RFing on the plane may be even more important than in the car, due to the reduced head excursion room. For the same reason, using a child restraint at all (FF vs lap-only belt) may be more important. Planes don't provide upper torso protection, making a lap belt only child's head more likely to strike the seat in front.

Click to expand...

Not really trying to make a decision right now. Just interested in the facts. It'll be years before I have kids of my own, but I'm sure this info will be important to me at some point, since I'm Canadian and my fiancé is American and, no doubt, we'll fly fairly regularly to visit friends far away.

This is what I heard back today.

Dear Ms. Thomas:

Thank you for contacting us about your future date travel with your
infant. Our Reservations specialists have the expertise to assist you
with current or future date domestic and international travel plans.
Please contact United Reservations at 1-800-UNITED-1 (1-800-864-8331)
where specialists are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Reservation phone numbers outside of the U.S. or Canada may be found at
www.united.com by selecting 'United Worldwide Contacts'. We appreciate
your understanding.

Regards,

XXXXXXX
United Airlines Customer Relations

Click to expand...

And my response:

Ms. XXXXXXX,

Seriously? I spoke to two representatives at United. The first, a gentleman whose name I did not get (5/6/10, 9:15 a.m. PDT), just told me to put my infant on my lap. The second, a woman named Karen (not sure of the spelling, 5/6/10, 9:35 a.m. PDT) at least looked into it more and informed me that even though she didn't know initially that you *could* rear face an infant on board, that it was allowed on United as long as the flight wasn't going or coming from the UK. As I thought United was an American carrier and therefore bound by the regulations set forth by the FAA, this confused me. What answer will I get today if I phone a representative? I understand that this is not a question they're asked often, as most parents are most concerned about cost, not safety. I was hoping to get a definitive answer from someone higher up, though.

Disappointedly,

Wendy Thomas

Click to expand...

Wendy - have you tried calling and asking for a supervisor. And if they don't know, asking for their superior, etc?

Yeah, first time I called I asked to speak to someone who would know. He put me on hold for 10 minutes before I hung up.

Wendy

Wow, Wendy, that is such a disappointing response! I was expecting them to at least address your question. I was looking forward to having a second response in writing. The person I talked to was in reservations and she told me that I couldn't use a rear facing car seat on the plane. I hope Camilia gets more answers than we're getting when the FAA investigates, but I wonder how much they will tell her about their investigation once they've done it.

Thanks for trying.

dh (a pilot) says there are 2 things that can happen...

1. when the airline was created they wrote their own manual. if the manual says no rf seats, and it was approved by the FAA, it stands as the rule. if they edited or resubmitted it and it was approved, it's legit.

2. "advisory circulars" are rules, like this one:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...60D70126CF679D5A8625723B007841E7?OpenDocument
"info" sheets like the one linked before are just recommendations.

Here is the email back I got from their customer service when I emailed and asked about it.

"Dear Ms. Hardy:

I received your email and appreciate your inquiry regarding car seats
requirements. Please allow me to clarify our policy.

Only government approved car seats can be used, see information below
for approved car seats:

- Manufactured after February 1985 with label:
certified for use in aircraft.

-Manufactured between 01Jan1981-26Feb1985 with label:
conforms to federal motor vehicle safety standards

-Manufactured outside the United States with label:
U.S. Government approved or made under United Nations standard

Child safety restraint system (CARES) is an FAA approved seat belt with
shoulder harness that goes around seat back and attaches to aircraft
seat belt. It is designed for children weighing between 22-44 pounds
and has a red label: Approved for aircraft use only

Prohibited car seats:
- Booster Seat
- Belly belt that attaches to adult seat belt
- Vest or harness that holds infant on lap or chest of adult
- Seat manufactured prior to 01Jan1981
- Rear-facing child seat for travel to/from/via/within United Kingdom

We hope this information is helpful. If you have any further questions
or concerns regarding your future travel, please do not hesitate to
contact United Reservations at 1-800-UNITED-1 (1-800-864-8331) where a
United Reservations specialist is available to assist you 24 hours a
day, 7 days a week.

We appreciate this opportunity to be of assistance and look forward to
serving you.



Regards,

Joanne Green
United Airlines Customer Relations"

Another update - I got a call this morning from a Manager at United (in charge of flight attendants), and she asked me to forward a copy of the e-mail I got from her customer service dept (the one prohibiting rear facing seats). In her voicemail, she told me that United does not have a policy prohibiting RFing seats, so I'm hopeful that she will get to the bottom of this and re-train the employees who are not allowing us to use them. In the meantime, I noticed some of you have specific questions concerning future flights. If you could send me a short list of questions, I'd be happy to forward them to this manager on your behalf. Sorry - home with a sick infant today, so not enough time to read through the entire thread and jot down the questions.

Camilia

Well, the main question remaining, except for WHY people were told RF seats are not allowed if they are, is their prohibition of RF seats going to/from the UK. Most airlines would use FAA guidelines as long as they are a US airline flying to/from the US, no matter where the other end is. So I know Wendy specifically is planning a trip there, and wants clarification on whether RF seats are permitted to the UK (and what their policy is on babies if not.) Also, a question about multiples was brought up. What if you are travelling to the UK by yourself, with twins in infant seats? Can't hold them both.

Wow, so the to/from/within the UK does seem to be consistent.

Otherwise, yes, it was a misunderstanding and rear facing seats are allowed. Good to know we shouldn't use anything made before 1981, though. hehe

Well, mental note. No United to London for us.

Wendy

ketchupqueen said:

Well, the main question remaining, except for WHY people were told RF seats are not allowed if they are, is their prohibition of RF seats going to/from the UK. Most airlines would use FAA guidelines as long as they are a US airline flying to/from the US, no matter where the other end is. So I know Wendy specifically is planning a trip there, and wants clarification on whether RF seats are permitted to the UK (and what their policy is on babies if not.) Also, a question about multiples was brought up. What if you are travelling to the UK by yourself, with twins in infant seats? Can't hold them both.

Click to expand...

Probably what happened is that someone misread the "forward facing seats only" and thought it meant all seats, not just the aircraft seats. No big deal. I don't think it was widespread. Just like one Graco rep saying you couldn't sit on the buckle and all of a sudden there was a panic that kids were outgrowing the Nautilus by crotch room at 32 pounds or something.

We're not planning anything specific to London, but we would like to go to Europe for vacation next year, and it wouldn't surprise me if London was a layover city. No big deal, we'll just not fly United.

Wendy

Right, that seems like a good assumption, however it seems like the reps and FAs need more training if that is the case. So there's still a why-- or rather a what-- what do they intend to do about it? Will they make this policy clear all the way down the line?

I think this might be a misunderstanding.

Once, going through the cabin, I caught a coworker instructing parents to remove their baby from the car seat for take-off and landing. I stopped and "straighten" her out, telling her that the seat was the safest place for her baby to be during those times (and the whole flight in general).

She was French and used to work for a French company (charter). She totally defended this by saying that was their policy. I was all "What the...?!?" and she was upset for me for chewing her out in front of customers. I told her she was giving incorrect advice that could have put that child at risk.

She also got an earful about conscientious parents who went to the trouble bringing a car seat on board and how she was unnecessarily...

Also how she was now working for a U.S. company with different rules and the fact that she originally learned something else is no justification for spitting out the old rules... (I'm especially un-apologetic on this point as I too, came from another, albeit other American company but I had to relearn A LOT).

I'll stop there. It was not resolved.

United's reservations are out of India. Don't say I have anything against Indians-I love India and have been there many times. The same would apply if a Mumbai company used a call center in Omaha... Operating customer contact from a remote location can be dodgy. The agent might have worked for a British company previously. That wouldn't be that surprising as Indian was a British colony for several centuries!

The U.K. bans rear-facing car seats.

One trick my mom uses is to ask for a supervisor. Often the management is back in the home country and they can patch them through.

ketchupqueen said:

Right, that seems like a good assumption, however it seems like the reps and FAs need more training if that is the case. So there's still a why-- or rather a what-- what do they intend to do about it? Will they make this policy clear all the way down the line?

Click to expand...

Why? How many parents buy seats for their infants? Then bring carseats on board? Then would care about rear facing it? How much money would they need to put into education for that? Would they get their money's worth from it?

Wendy

Well, it happened to a real parent, so it's of concern. The potential for lost revenue if they get a bad rep for CS things like this is big. And most of the parents I know personally (I'd say 75%+) do buy seats for infants. Maybe it's the area where I live, but the word is getting out, and hopefully more and more parents will.

Quote:
However, prohibiting the use of a CRS (if a ticket has been purchased) when there are seats on the aircraft, in the same class of service, where the CRS could be used safely is not consistent with the requirements stated in parts 121, 125 and 135.

If you fly United then a bulkhead row generally isn't the same class of service as regular Economy. United terms it Economy Plus and you pay more for the seat. You get more leg room in Economy Plus. The Economy seats are in really tight. I am 5'5" and even I don't have enough leg room, but I make do. I am not arguing, I am just pointing out a possible United response.