Thought some of you would find this article (and the linked report) interesting. It discusses the recommended changes to airline safety regulations as a result of the US Airways flight that was ditched in the Hudson river last year.

NY Times: Ditching of Flight 1549 Leads to 33 Safety Proposals

after following a much of links, finally got to the NTSB PDF

http://s3.amazonaws.com/nytdocs/docs/71/71.pdf

"Ms. Sosa ... said the accident persuaded her that babies should not be permitted on laps — that they needed their own seats and appropriate safety restraints."

Hmmm... an Airbus cruises at about 500 mph, landing speed is about 250 mph. You can't hold a baby on your lap and hold onto him if the car you're in hits something at 35 mph.

The only problem is that parents wouldn't want to pay for a separate seat and a harness. Many of them think because a baby/child is small they should be free, even if they take up as much room as a paying adult passenger.

I guess the only answer is to put them in your checked luggage.

Sue

Heck yeah, I'm all for that!

Lucky there were no pets in the hold.
Over here if a single animal had died all planes would now be banned from flying over any water.

Actually, you can't legally fly 250 kts below 10,000'. Landing speed is roughly 120 kts.

Actually, 250 kts below 10,000 is generally correct. However, there are exceptions (some military aircraft models) and military aircraft in most Military Training Routes and certain phases of flight.