Be sure to book a window seat if you want to use the car seat. I was always required to put the car seat in the window seat so that it did not block the aisle.

I always purchased a ticket for my children and took their car seat with us on the plane. This gave us more control during the flight and we had what we knew to be a reliable car seat for the rental car. How will you transport your child when you arrive at your destination? Car rental agencies will rent you a car seat but you wont know much about it. Anytime you are even in a fender bender you should discard the car seat and get a new one because the hairline fractures possibly suffered in a car accident can affect the safety of the car seat.

It is possible to check the car seat at the end of the jetway if you find you will not have a seat for your child. They will stow it for you and return it to you at the door when you leave the plane. They do this with strollers too. Whenever we did this the airline staff was incredibly helpful and friendly. One time the pilot saw us and retrieved the stroller for us.

The post asked for advice about bringing a car seat on a plane. Those of you who are being critical and implying harm may come from not purchasing a ticket for a 13mos old are very insensitive and out of line since this was not the question. One of the articles quoted mentions
"restraints" - a mother's arms are indeed restraints. Have I ever tried holding a child in a straight back chair for hours? Why yes, I not only hold my child for hours but carry her around all day. I also carried her inside for 9 months. Unless a tornado enters our plane, I really can't imagine her being "ripped from my arms." Oh, and I don't think I'd have any trouble holding on to a bowling ball either. Get off your high horse - especially those of you without kids!

A parents arms are not a restraint. That's why you are advised not to hold a child in a car. The natural reaction in an emergency is to attempt to brace yourself, which you cannot do with a child in your arms. Therefore, either the parent is hurt or a child can be hurt when the parent lets go. How much more information do you need to be convinced of this?

I have yet to see any convincing information. Oh, and by the way, Mike, we're talking about airplanes, not cars. I don't know what sort of emergency one might encounter on a plane in which a car seat is going to be of any further benefit than my arms. If anything, I can sheild and protect my child better in my arms than I can if she is sitting in the seat next to me. I can also get her out of harms way more quickly if she is in my arms.

The airplane hits turbulence, which jolts your forward. You put your hands out to protect yourself and the child falls onto the floor. Or, you are lunged forward and you are able to hold the child. Of course, while hold the child, you force your weight against the child and crush them against the seat in front of you.

In contrast, a child who is restrained in a car seat properly is not going to be tossed around or crushed against the seat in front of them because the restraints are strong enough.

Snowrooster, I agree that it isn't nice to condemn others for choices that are not necessarily the ones you yourself might make, but you're wrong about the tornado thing.

Let me ask you to picture yourself holding a baby on a roller coaster, with no add'l belt or bar to help restrain the child. Could you hang on? Would you ever want to be put to that test? Sitting in a straight-backed chair on solid ground isn't analogous from a safety perspective. A plane can move in 3 directions, and one of them is vertical. At full cruising speed, if the engines suddenly cut out, the plane will drop like a cannonball, still moving forward at around 100 mph, but also falling at the speed of gravity. It is just like a roller coaster, but faster. Under those circumstances, g-forces will pull the baby upward, not forward. Unless you happen to be sitting with your arms straight down and locked down on either side of the child's neck, that child is going to slip your grip and go airborne.

A lightning strike can cause a momentary power loss, just long enough for the engines to hiccough a couple of times. In those few seconds, the plane can easily drop 200-300 feet. Turbulence usually doesn't cause drops as bad as with a power loss, but you're still riding a coaster to some extent. They require restraints on coasters for a reason.

Just a couple of weeks ago, an AA flight from Tulsa to St. Louis cleared a cloud bank and discovered 4 F-15's right in front of it. The pilot had no choice but to dive about 100 ft. immediately. One of the passengers described himself as suddenly being "on the roof of the airplane." http://www.kolr10.com/Global/story.a...p;nav=0RXJI32x

Fly your baby as a lap child if you want to, it is your right to make that choice under current law. However, you should not delude yourself that people who advise against doing so are lying about the dangers of turbulence; they are not.

Snowrooster, if that were true, (that your arms are a restraint), then why have a car seat at all. At 60 mph, a child cannot effectively be restrained by a parent. At 600 mph,does it get any better? Planes can loose altitude quickly in turbulance, be tossed around, etc. It isn't about convenience, its about restraint. Why do you think you wear a seatbelt on the plane?

Since I did provide an answer to the original psoter I"d just like to respond to snowrooster. There may be no warning for turbulance and the grip you have on the baby may not be firm enough at the time it hits. Most advice from experts is that children should have their own seats. http://www.babycenter.com/expert/bab...avel/7297.html
http://www.cpsafety.com/articles/airplanetravel.aspx
http://www.drspock.com/article/0,1510,5998,00.html
http://saferidenews.com/html/Airplane_Eng.html
andon and on......

Why would I put my hands out to protect myself? Is there an object flying towards me (if there are flying objects I'd rather have my child in my arms!)? That makes no sense at all. Given that I will be wearing a seat belt, I'm not really sure how I'd find myself on the roof of the plane. If we hit turbulence, clearly my arms will be around my child - I could even buckle my seat belt over her lap as well.

Oh, dear Dawn - perhaps you should reread - again, we're talking about AIRPLANES. A car is totally different than an airplane - I'll hold off on pointing out the clear differences as I imagine they are obvious to most people. How about on a boat - do I need a car seat on a boat? What kind of boat? Is it okay not to have a car seat on a cruise ship but required on a speed boat. Who are you to judge? If you feel so strongly about this I suggest you invest your time in lobbying for change and required seats for all children on airplanes. Otherwise, give it a rest.

Geez snowrooster, lose the chip on your shoulder. I did not imply that parents' don't hold their kids on their laps for extended period of time. I used the example of a straight back chair 17" from the wall because that's about all the room you get and comfort from an airplane seat. This example by the way was given to me by a friend of mine who happens to be a flight attendant and a mother. It is very hard to sit in a chair for that long with a child on your lap being that cramped. Heck, I am miserable back in coach. Add a squirming 13 month old on my cramped lap for 3 hours and that is really uncomfortable. And kids are used to being in their car seats. Most kids will be quieter in their car seats than being held on a lap.

As for offering opinions, that is what this board is about.

BTW-I am also a Mother and I travel with my kid extensively since they were a couple of months old.

Snowrooster-You are not allowed to use your own lap belt to secure a child to you. Tje American Association of Pediatrics also recommends car seats.
http://www.aap.org/advocacy/archives/novair.htm, as does the National Safety Institute, and The White House Panel on Aviation Security. Guess they are all wrong huh? :-@

Hey snowrooster, ever been riding in someones car holding a drink and the driver slams on the breaks?

Bingo!

Sorry, I don't mean to pile on, snowrooster, but this is important. I haven't followed this discussion and don't know what's been said, but just read your post and mention of buckling your seatbelt over your child's lap while she sits in yours. Should this opportunity ever arise in a plane, car, or wherever, that's the <i>last</i> thing you want to do. If you are thrown forward in the belt, as momentum will do, all your weight will press against your child, pushing her delicate abdominal/hip area against the resttaint even harder! Auto fatalities have resulted from just such an error.

Quote: &quot;Given that I will be wearing a seat belt, I'm not really sure how I'd find myself on the roof of the plane.&quot;

That's the answer exactly: YOU wouldn't be, but your unrestrained child would be. And no, there is no way in H**L that you would be able to get a quick enough grip over the top of your child's shoulders to prevent it. You might be able to get your grip again as the child's hips slid through your hands, but in most planes, it would be too late at that point: jr's head would have already slammed into the bottom of the overhead bin. You couldn't lean over the child to stop it, either; the g-force would pull your head and shoulders back up.

Your response just proved my point.

Why do you think that the &quot;brace&quot; position for crash preparedness is to put lap babies on the floor at your feet? It is not to protect the child. Horrible as this is, the reason is so that no other adult passenger will be hit and hurt by 20 or so lbs. of flying baby.

These things have been tested using dolls; the effects of the g-forces are crushingly powerful and all too real. Real children have been hurt and killed under these circumstances. It does not happen often, true, but it DOES happen. We are not making this up.

Snowrooster, please just stop--what you don't about physics would fill a library, and now you're the one on a high horse. Ryan tried to explain it to you: g-forces inside a plummeting aircraft would make it impossible to hang on to a baby, in part because the baby would be propelled UP, and in part because that 30 lb baby would exert the pressure (on your arms) of a 150 lb baby--again, due to g forces. You can't argue with this, because although my explanation sort of sucks, the facts are the facts. My bottom line is, I'd never fly without a restraint for a baby, mine or anyone else's.
mxylplik2, I'd like to note that if you have to gate check your car seat, the airline will usually provide their own big plastic bag, I assume b/c they want it to be see-through.

Snowrooster, Of course you can hold your child tightly in your arms as the plane flies at 600 mph and perhaps hits turbulance and drops 200 ft within seconds. Silly me!

I totally agree you should pay for the seat and bring the carseat. If you can't do that, gate check the carseat, never check it with your baggage, because the abuse it may be subject to in the cargo hold could render it unsafe to use. Also, British Airways WILL let you bring an AA approved carseat onboard. I've done it, and their flight attendants also are ruthless about making sure you got it in tight enough.

I think you are all incredibly insensitive. My parents bought tickets for our family to travel via plane for Thanksgiving. My mom told me she bought a ticket for my son but my daughter didn't need one, she could sit on my lap (the flight is @ 2 hours). Why would I question this? Then I read this post from a woman who is to be in the same situation and see negative comments about her not paying for a seat for her child - even though the airlines say there is no need. I was offened. To criticize the decision of a mother when it comes to the safety of her child?

Remember, the original poster had already decided not to buy a seat and this was not her question.

I was thinking pehaps I'll put my daughter in her Baby Bjorn for a little added restraint on my lap, so perhaps something good did come of this all.

Snow, I don't know how pointing out a wealth of substantial evidence confirming safety concerns is insensitive. Lots of people read these posts and therefore it is important to provide information for travellers and therefore it is responsible to point out safety concerns.

As your comments illustrate, a lot of people are unaware of the safety concerns and risks and therefore it is important to point them out. Ultimately, the original poster and you are free to not use a child seat and probably nothing bad will happen. But it is important to point at the risks and let people who are uninformed that they may be taking unnecessary risks.