CAPT OF AN MD88 TOOK OFF WHEN A CHILD IN CAR SEAT WAS IN THE ROW OF SEATS IN FRONT OF AN EXIT ROW; CONTRARY TO THE CABIN ATTENDANT'S OPERATING MANUAL.

Date: 2000-05 · Aircraft: MD-88 · Phase: taxi

Anomalies: aircraft-equipment-problem-less-severe|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|other-child-seat-near-exit-r

Synopsis

CAPT OF AN MD88 TOOK OFF WHEN A CHILD IN CAR SEAT WAS IN THE ROW OF SEATS IN FRONT OF AN EXIT ROW; CONTRARY TO THE CABIN ATTENDANT'S OPERATING MANUAL.

Narrative

NORMAL TAXI TO RWY 9L IN ATL. WHEN #4 FOR TKOF; TWR ADVISED ACFT TO PREPARE FOR EXPEDITED DEP; BECAUSE DEPS WOULD SOON BE HELD FOR AN INBOUND MEDICAL EMER. WHEN #2 FOR TKOF; FO ADVISED THE FLT ATTENDANTS TO PREPARE THE CABIN FOR DEP. THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT CAME TO RPT CABIN READY FOR TKOF JUST AS WE WERE CLRED ONTO THE ACTIVE RWY. SHE RPTED THAT THERE WAS A CHILD CAR SEAT LOCATED IN THE ROW AHEAD OF THE EMER EXIT ROW. SHE ASKED IF SHE SHOULD MOVE IT NOW OR AFTER TKOF. WE WERE ANTICIPATING AN IMMEDIATE TKOF CLRNC. ADDITIONALLY; I THOUGHT RESTRS ON CHILD SEATS APPLIED ONLY TO THE EXIT ROWS. I TOLD THE FLT ATTENDANT TO MAKE THE CHANGE AFTER TKOF; AND WE DEPARTED. I ASKED THE FLT ATTENDANT ABOUT THE CHILD SEAT RESTRS AFTER WE LANDED. SHE POINTED OUT THE REF IN HER ONBOARD MANUAL THAT PROHIBITS CHILD SEATS IN THE ROWS AHEAD AND BEHIND EMER EXIT ROWS. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 1) THE PAX SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BOARDED WITH A CHILD SEAT IN THAT ROW IN THE FIRST PLACE. 2) THE SEATING ERROR SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED/CORRECTED PRIOR TO PUSHBACK. 3) OUR FLC MANUAL CONTAINS NO GUIDANCE ON THIS TOPIC; OTHER THAN SAYING THAT INFO CAN BE FOUND IN THE ONBOARD MANUAL. 4) BEING A FAIRLY NEW CAPT; I WAS NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE SEATING POLICIES AS I SHOULD HAVE BEEN. FURTHERMORE; I SHOULD HAVE ASKED THE FLT ATTENDANT SPECIFICALLY WHAT THE RULE WAS WHEN SHE FIRST RPTED THE SIT.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.