Decoding the Design of In-Flight Seat Belts
atlasobscura.com
atlasobscura.com
There was a flight to Hawaii where the roof ripped off and everyone saved except for 1 airline stewardess: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243
> All the passengers were in their seats and belted during depressurization.
And the crash in SF where two people were ejected from their seats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214
> Neither victim was using her seatbelt. It is likely that these passengers would have remained in the cabin and survived if they had been wearing their seatbelts
Ironically, had the other passengers in her row been wearing their belts, she might not have survived, as the off-centre mass was key to her living.
I wonder where this idea came from that plane crashes are essentially unsurvivable. It’s not even remotely close to correct!
One of the messages of the book, repeated several times at various places, is that most crashes are survivable. Even the crashes that result in total loss of the aircraft tend to have significant numbers of survivors.
One number from the Kindle preview is that, of the 53K passengers and crew on the 568 accidents on U.S. commercial craft from 1983-2000, there were 2280 fatalities (4.3%). This includes "severe turbulence" incidents as well as total-loss incidents, contributing to the low 4.3% figure.
But still, over the same time period, of those 568 accidents, there were 26 "serious" accidents involving 2739 people, and about 55% of them survived. 19 of the accidents had some survivors, 7 did not. Of the 19, 66% of casualties were from trauma. Which would indicate that wearing the seat belt is a very good idea.
The book has more statistics and breakdowns that point in a similar direction.
And the crash in SF where two people were ejected from their seats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214
> Neither victim was using her seatbelt. It is likely that these passengers would have remained in the cabin and survived if they had been wearing their seatbelts
> They were not found in early cars, and remained at best
> an option in certain forward-thinking automaker lines,
> most notably Saab, until the late 1950s.
Such a lawsuit is unlikely to happen at this point because air travel has become so ridiculously safe that airliners never crash anymore, especially in the US.
https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NTSB_releases...
It is very much conceivable that a better harness would improve the survival rates and lower injuries further.
Also, unless youre also strapping your head down, holy neck pain, batman.
FWIW, this 4-point harness worked well for us the last time we traveled, when our kid was about 2: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0012E4FV8/
It's FAA approved and no airline will give you trouble for using it. I think some airlines (international if not domestic) provide this if you give them a heads-up during check-in, but it's less hassle to bring your own.
I can't think of a more user-friendly solution to the problem it's actually trying to solve. I wouldn't trade the reel system with low profile plastic-encased push-button buckles in my car for it, but I'm not interested in digging around between the cushions for whatever proprietary design the particular cabin manufacturer of the plane I'm on has come up with, I want something standard that's right in front of me in plain view. And I don't want a reel system either. Every reel system made for public use I've seen has had way too much friction and way too little spring tension to even make sense. And not being able to see the state of the belt and reel tensioning doesn't seem very safe either.
Source is my mum, who was an air stewardess for a decade, and explained this to me when I questioned the purpose (she also mentioned turbulence etc., as the article does).
Everything about air travel is a comedy of the absurd, and being admonished to buckle up is just one more thing in the pile.
In abnormally heavy turbulence, you will be tossed around to the point of injury if you are not buckled up. 4 inches is enough to damage your vital organs.
Seat belts are important.
This has happened, not just during crashes but far more often with turbulences.
Regarding economy class: this is simply the result of people‘s preferences, as expressed by their buying choices. With all the complaints you can hear and read, you’d think those exit seats or economy+ tickets would sell like fresh bread. But every time I check in online, even when most seats are gone, most of the exit seats (about twice the leg room for 20$ extra) are still available.
If you take something away first, then nobody can buy it, you can then say "look, nobody's buying it!".
For example: for the past 5-6 years EU airlines have made intra-europe business class much more like economy class. BA used to have 34" pitch in short-haul business. That went I think 3 years ago. But I'd be willing to pay up to £500 for that now. Can I buy it? No - the majority airlines have done the same.
It's now very easy for BA/Lufthansa/Air France/Iberia etc to say "that's what our customers wanted" because you can't now pay for it even if you want it.