Legroom fight diverts flight

Roger Roger said:
I'm fairly certain the federales frown on the use of a device that would impede use of the exit by (at least from the looks of it) preventing the tray table from being closed.
Click to expand...

Good point. Is a logbook sign-off good enough?

It does come with this Knee Defender Courtesy Card.
PxLdf.gif


 
Most U.S. airlines, per company policies, do not allow the use of these devices. The FAA has nothing to say about them, because they're specifically noted NOT for use during taxi, takeoff or landing, when seats are already required per FAA regulations to be fully upright anyway.

Can't we all just be decent human beings, and recline our seats slowly, and only as much as needed? Without SLAMMING the seat back onto someone? And being understanding if the person behind us happens to be extremely tall? And being understanding if the person in front of us needs to recline due to back issues?

Someone who's arrogant enough to use this type of device probably wouldn't hesitate to grab the seat in front of them and shake it mercilessly, using it as a full body support as they hoist their weak butt up out of their seat instead of using their LEGS and the armrest, which isn't attached to a seat someone else is sitting in. I've had my hair grabbed and PULLED, HARD by someone behind me using my seat as a crutch to heft themselves up out of their seat. I was not happy. They were clueless that they were hurting me til I yelped and told them to stop pulling my hair. They were surprised that their actions affected someone else. Idiot.
 
MQAAord said:
Most U.S. airlines, per company policies, do not allow the use of these devices. The FAA has nothing to say about them, because they're specifically noted NOT for use during taxi, takeoff or landing, when seats are already required per FAA regulations to be fully upright anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm not a buff on acft certification but seems to me that in the case of this device you are installing something on an acft that is not in the original TC, STC, whatever.

I'm not seeing this as legal.

If it came up on my plane I would ask(require) the PAX to remove it in no uncertain terms.
 
hcaeborev said:
I'm not a buff on acft certification but seems to me that in the case of this device you are installing something on an acft that is not in the original TC, STC, whatever.

I'm not seeing this as legal.

If it came up on my plane I would ask(require) the PAX to remove it in no uncertain terms.
Click to expand...


It isn't a permanent change to the original design. It would be like using one of those clip-on mounts that Sporty's sells to mount your GPS to the yoke. No STC required.

That being said, anybody who uses a knee defender is a huge delta-bravo.
 
Apophis said:
It isn't a permanent change to the original design. It would be like using one of those clip-on mounts that Sporty's sells to mount your GPS to the yoke. No STC required.

That being said, anybody who uses a knee defender is a huge delta-bravo.
Click to expand...

Yea like I said, I'm no buff. I'm sure you are correct.

I was thinking 121 would be different. As an example: We don't have Ipads at my carrier yet but talking to some guys that do they tell me that only certain mounts are approved for use.

Whenever I have a question my theory is that if it doesn't specifically say you CAN do it in a company manual, then you can't do it.
 
Well, the passenger paid for a seat which happens to recline, the other passenger brought a "seat defender" in anticipation of restricting another passenger from fully enjoying the product the passenger in front of him paid for.

They're not even allowed on SouthernJets, as per policy, so it would be a moot point. Follow the uniformed cabin crews instruction to remove it and if the passenger fails to do so, divert, drop the non-compliant passenger off and have legal prepare the bill — and they will! ;)
 
An interesting idea from the NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/u...-can-pay-me.html?smid=fb-share&abt=0002&abg=1
Obviously, it’s improper to throw water at another passenger on a flight, even if he deserves it. But I’ve seen a distressing amount of sympathy for Mr. Knee Defender, who wasn’t just instigating a fight but usurping his fellow passenger’s property rights. When you buy an airline ticket, one of the things you’re buying is the right to use your seat’s reclining function. If this passenger so badly wanted the passenger in front of him not to recline, he should have paid her to give up that right.
Click to expand...
 
Wouldn't be surprised to see airlines include a bit about the knee defender not being allowed for use in their safety briefing. They're not allowed for use on any U.S. airline. And failure to remove the device when told is failure to comply with crew member instructions.
 
MQAAord said:
Wouldn't be surprised to see airlines include a bit about the knee defender not being allowed for use in their safety briefing. They're not allowed for use on any U.S. airline. And failure to remove the device when told is failure to comply with crew member instructions.
Click to expand...
+1. AA banned them in 2004
 
My knee defender is my knees, as they are typically pinned up against the seat in front of me without it reclining, making it really hard for someone to recline their seat, try as they might. That being said, it is also the reason I pony up the extra bucks to either go in an exit row, first row, or first class.
 
Huh. I gotta say, I'm just a hair surprised here. I get the idea of "you pay for the seat and you get the recline" but it sorta smacks of entitlement, doesn't it? How about just a hair of courtesy for your fellow pax?

The Knee Defender is a bit of passive-aggressive social terrorism, and it's clearly designed for people who don't have the stones to say, "Excuse me - I'm sorry to be a bother, but for this flight could you recline less or not at all? The seat hits my knees and it can be painful."

People are nice when you give them a chance to be - especially in close quarters where they can be shamed among their peers. Goes a long way.
 
killbilly said:
Huh. I gotta say, I'm just a hair surprised here. I get the idea of "you pay for the seat and you get the recline" but it sorta smacks of entitlement, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Not at all. The "Sense of entitlement" displayed here was the passenger who thought he had a right to dictate to another paying passenger whether or not that other passenger should be allowed to recline. If he was going to restrict that paying passenger's seating, he should have reimbursed her the cost of her fare. Absent that, he had no "entitlement" to restrict her seating because he didn't pay for it
 
RDoug said:
Not at all. The "Sense of entitlement" displayed here was the passenger who thought he had a right to dictate to another paying passenger whether or not that other passenger should be allowed to recline. If he was going to restrict that paying passenger's seating, he should have reimbursed her the cost of her fare. Absent that, he had no "entitlement" to restrict her seating because he didn't pay for it
Click to expand...

Ah. The 'entitlement' I was speaking of referred to the passenger in front. I absolutely agree with what you said above - the point I was making (badly, it seems) is that the idea that "I am going to recline my seat come hell or high water because I paid for it!" is a terrible attitude for someone to take, particularly if it really causes discomfort for the poor guy behind me.

I'm a tallish person. I've got a 34" inseam, and my company will not pay for economy plus, first class or business class. Which sucks, but it's the way it is. When that seat comes flying backward on some airplanes, it hurts. And I see lots of guys (and a few woman) taller than I am for whom its worse.

That's what I mean about courtesy.

The knee defender is just an • device of discord.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top