Why aren’t car-like 3 point seatbelts used in planes?
In: 444
People think plane crash is a jet crashing into the ground at 600 mph and exploding.
And yes, in that scenario, no seatbelt is going to help. It’s the deceleration that kills you, and going from 600mph to zero in no time at all is definitely going to do that.
However there are a lot of other more survivable types of plane crashes. Such as runway overruns. And these types of accident are much more common. They don’t involve as rapid a deceleration as a car accident, in the main, and there’s often warning that it’s going to happen – for example, an aircraft with hydraulic problems returning to the airport might overrun the runway due to poor braking performance.
Because there’s warning, you can go into the brace position, and brace against the seat in front. And if you don’t, the seat in front is designed to fold forwards as you hit it to minimise the damage.
Unless you’re in certain types of business class or first class seats, especially the angled types. These seats often have shoulder belts, like in a car, because there isn’t a proper brace position you can take.
It’s also worth pointing out that adding the structural weight to have a car-like seatbelt to every seat would be pretty significant, but not really help many people survive a crash, given how rare a plane crash is.
People think plane crash is a jet crashing into the ground at 600 mph and exploding.
And yes, in that scenario, no seatbelt is going to help. It’s the deceleration that kills you, and going from 600mph to zero in no time at all is definitely going to do that.
However there are a lot of other more survivable types of plane crashes. Such as runway overruns. And these types of accident are much more common. They don’t involve as rapid a deceleration as a car accident, in the main, and there’s often warning that it’s going to happen – for example, an aircraft with hydraulic problems returning to the airport might overrun the runway due to poor braking performance.
Because there’s warning, you can go into the brace position, and brace against the seat in front. And if you don’t, the seat in front is designed to fold forwards as you hit it to minimise the damage.
Unless you’re in certain types of business class or first class seats, especially the angled types. These seats often have shoulder belts, like in a car, because there isn’t a proper brace position you can take.
It’s also worth pointing out that adding the structural weight to have a car-like seatbelt to every seat would be pretty significant, but not really help many people survive a crash, given how rare a plane crash is.
Other commenters are right that plane seat belts are more for turbulence than crashes, though there’s a little more to it. There’s got to be a cost-benefit analysis: 3 point seatbelts probably would improve outcomes in a plane crash, *but* plane crashes are very rare, and it’s not going to be nearly as effective as it is in a car crash; so there’s really not much benefit.
Now for the “cost”. That’s not just monetary cost, but also comfort, convenience, and other consequences. 3 point seatbelts are much more complex, they need to retract under normal use then lock and pre-tension in a crash to be effective. This added complexity means malfunctions, which is either dangerous or puts the seat out of action. 3 point seatbelts are also less comfortable, we certainly don’t need more discomfort on planes; that might also lead to lower adherence to the rules, and actually *increase* the risk. They also take longer to get on and off, and inconvenience most of the time, but could be dangerous when a lot of people need to leave as quickly as possible.
Other commenters are right that plane seat belts are more for turbulence than crashes, though there’s a little more to it. There’s got to be a cost-benefit analysis: 3 point seatbelts probably would improve outcomes in a plane crash, *but* plane crashes are very rare, and it’s not going to be nearly as effective as it is in a car crash; so there’s really not much benefit.
Now for the “cost”. That’s not just monetary cost, but also comfort, convenience, and other consequences. 3 point seatbelts are much more complex, they need to retract under normal use then lock and pre-tension in a crash to be effective. This added complexity means malfunctions, which is either dangerous or puts the seat out of action. 3 point seatbelts are also less comfortable, we certainly don’t need more discomfort on planes; that might also lead to lower adherence to the rules, and actually *increase* the risk. They also take longer to get on and off, and inconvenience most of the time, but could be dangerous when a lot of people need to leave as quickly as possible.
Other commenters are right that plane seat belts are more for turbulence than crashes, though there’s a little more to it. There’s got to be a cost-benefit analysis: 3 point seatbelts probably would improve outcomes in a plane crash, *but* plane crashes are very rare, and it’s not going to be nearly as effective as it is in a car crash; so there’s really not much benefit.
Now for the “cost”. That’s not just monetary cost, but also comfort, convenience, and other consequences. 3 point seatbelts are much more complex, they need to retract under normal use then lock and pre-tension in a crash to be effective. This added complexity means malfunctions, which is either dangerous or puts the seat out of action. 3 point seatbelts are also less comfortable, we certainly don’t need more discomfort on planes; that might also lead to lower adherence to the rules, and actually *increase* the risk. They also take longer to get on and off, and inconvenience most of the time, but could be dangerous when a lot of people need to leave as quickly as possible.
Believe it or not the lean forward/brace position is the best at increasing your survival rate: a three point seatbelt wouldn’t allow you to do that.
Believe it or not the lean forward/brace position is the best at increasing your survival rate: a three point seatbelt wouldn’t allow you to do that.
Believe it or not the lean forward/brace position is the best at increasing your survival rate: a three point seatbelt wouldn’t allow you to do that.
There are 2 most important consideration about seat belt connected to specific dangers:
1) when plane crushing passenger can fly up and break they neck, thus passenger should be stick in place with belt
2) non fixed objects can fly into head and cause. Sever and even lethal outcome, thus passenger must have ability to duck on they place (which also noted in instruction for emergency). Therefore 3 point seatbelt cannot be used as it greatly slows down ducking.
Edit:
On very smal aircafts where potentially heavy luggage is not expected to be in same room as people, passengers commonly have 3 point seatbelt and pilots 4-5point searbelt
There are 2 most important consideration about seat belt connected to specific dangers:
1) when plane crushing passenger can fly up and break they neck, thus passenger should be stick in place with belt
2) non fixed objects can fly into head and cause. Sever and even lethal outcome, thus passenger must have ability to duck on they place (which also noted in instruction for emergency). Therefore 3 point seatbelt cannot be used as it greatly slows down ducking.
Edit:
On very smal aircafts where potentially heavy luggage is not expected to be in same room as people, passengers commonly have 3 point seatbelt and pilots 4-5point searbelt
Latest Answers