Backwards facing seats

If they are used in trains/coaches, their operators are subject to the same litiguous pressures as the airlines. Cost isn’t necessarily going to get them off the hook in court as everyone has the same basic duty of care.

I would suggest it is more because there is no definitive evidence either way – a la cell phones causing cancer, electricity lines causing cancer, tumours and headaches….

kev35-
“Backward facing seats are not used because they are dangerous.”

“So why are they used in rail and coach travel?”

Because its too expensive to turn trains around the right way, especially on busy commuter routes

“In a high speed collision a persons back could be broken by the force of their body pressing against the seat.”

“As opposed to being crushed from behind when seats break away and are hurled forward anyway?”

Have you noticed that airline seats have a heavy duty aluminum frame undernieth? The kind of force it would take to rip out the seats is equal to the kind of impact that would turn the airliner into a big black splotch on the ground.

“A persons body could be turned to the side by high G forces putting their body off to one side of the seat and again breaking their back/neck.”

“Surely the body can be turned sideways whichever way you are facing. Depends what the aircraft is doing around the seat.”

Thats true, but the fact remains you are garanteed to sustain serious injurys in an impact where your body is off to the side of a rearward facing seat. You wont in a forward facing seat.

“Theres also the issue of debree flying forward at impact at hitting peoples faces during impact. “

“Doesn’t matter whether an unsecured bag hits you in the face or the back of the head it will probably kill you just as dead. The placement of seating is only going to be of benefit in landing and take off accidents. If the a/c falls apart at FL350 it won’t matter a damn where you’re sitting.”

It wont hit you in the back off the head in a high g impact because your body will be thrown forward or you should already be in the torso forward postion anyways to prepare for an impact.

I regularly get to fly in Tristars and VC10’s and I must say I prefer the forward facing seating of the Tristar.

Having said that, have you ever been flying and seen something on the ground that you just had to take a piccie of only by the time you’ve got the camera ready, you’ve flown past it ?.

Rearward facing seat’s tend to do away with this problem…unless you are sat nest to the wing window seat and you cant see diddly squat either backward or forwards!!

Gotta say tho’ the VC10 sounds a lot better than the Timmy when when Roger Ramjet firewalls the loud levers !!!…but I digress !.

Well summarised Kev.

Mixtec.

“Backward facing seats are not used because they are dangerous.”

So why are they used in rail and coach travel?

“In a high speed collision a persons back could be broken by the force of their body pressing against the seat.”

As opposed to being crushed from behind when seats break away and are hurled forward anyway?

“A persons body could be turned to the side by high G forces putting their body off to one side of the seat and again breaking their back/neck.”

Surely the body can be turned sideways whichever way you are facing. Depends what the aircraft is doing around the seat.

“Theres also the issue of debree flying forward at impact at hitting peoples faces during impact. “

Doesn’t matter whether an unsecured bag hits you in the face or the back of the head it will probably kill you just as dead. The placement of seating is only going to be of benefit in landing and take off accidents. If the a/c falls apart at FL350 it won’t matter a damn where you’re sitting.

Regards,

kev35

Originally posted by wysiwyg
The answer to this is consumer led.

true…..but i read somewhere that backward facing seats dangerously expose a persons spinal-column to the pressure….which can be very harmful.

The answer to this is consumer led.

Backward facing seats are not used because they are dangerous. In a high speed collision a persons back could be broken by the force of their body pressing against the seat. A persons body could be turned to the side by high G forces putting their body off to one side of the seat and again breaking their back/neck. Theres also the issue of debree flying forward at impact at hitting peoples faces during impact.

the bottom line is guys, the pax do not like rear facing seats!

It’s not the seatbelt, Mongu. Your abdominal muscles would be the ones used, to force your torso back into the seat, if it tilting forward due to the gravity going that way.

The abdominal pain sounds like being due to the seatbelt?

Existing seatbelts are clearly designed for forward facing seats – I suppose they ought to be redesigned if seats face the other way.

Southwest has a number of backward facing seats in their 737 classics (not sure if the NG’s do or not). A friend of mine who flew Southwest and was ‘forced’ to sit in one of the backward facing seats, found it to be extremely uncomfortable on the takeoff, as he had to force himself back into the seat to combat the tendency to lean forward. He had some abdominal pains afterwards from having to do this.

The safety benefits seem clear. Does anyone disagree on that point?

How about boarding – with rearward facing seats, should we now board from the rear instead of the front?

Incidentally, I agree about the BA Club seats. Some face forward and some backward. It can be socially awkward (we are British, after all!) to stare at a stranger for 12 hours. I suspect the main issue is down to that, rather than facing backward per se. I also don’t fancy trying to sleep flat with my head opposite someone’s feet, plastic privacy guard or not!

Has anyone experienced the flat bed biz class seats on other airlines (Cathay?) I wonder if they all face the same way or are staggered like BA.

The ‘old’ standard seating arrangment for troop movements in the VC10 c1 were for 150 troops / passengers which were all in a rearward facing config. It has been proved that it provides an extra safty feature, which arilines refuse to adapt, even today.
For freight all of the seats can be quickly taken out. I flew back from Singapore back in the 70’s, my old man was RAF but I was only 2, so I cant remember if I enjoyed it.

The plan also always sits back at a 5 degree pitch

I know from friends that fly longhaul at BA that pax really object to the rear facing seats in the new Club World cabin.

As stated above i’d RATHER fly backwards – much much safer in the event of a rapid decleration in case of a nosewheel collapse or something along those lines – i know the BAC1-11 had a number of rear facing seats, and i hear the ATR42/72 may have had some?

OK thanks very much. The only point’s she could remember was that it had backwards facing seats, was empty, and she hated every minute of it!

Mongu.

Yes, the Lancastrian was the standard Lancaster fuselage without the turrets I suspect. The York fuselage was of a much wider cross section which would have enabled seats to be fitted across the width of the cabin.

Regards,

kev35

Maybe – the Avro Lancastrians had sideways seats.