Aircrash Whiplash Injuries?

Question

On watching a documentary on the effects of whiplash injuries of people who do not adopt brace position and end up having there upper body violently thrown forward, i was struck as to why passenger seats don't face rearward, a person seated normally but facing backward would have the forward momentum absorbed over a far greater area of the seat and into the seat (assuming seat remains bolted in position) as opposed to all the force being tranferred through seat beat, does anyone know if this was considered by designers or safety boards, and if so why they ruled it out. it seems a very simple solution to improve safety.

Answer 1

Well, you are right, that would make very good sense, but there is one other factor and that is passenger comfort. For most people it is not comfortable facing reaward during the acceleration at takeoff and the steep deck angle during climb. Some people actually become airsick more easily while seated facing aft because it feels so strange. Some airlines offer club seating with a few aft-facting seats and they do not tend to be popular except with groups of seasoned fliers traveling together.

Answer 2

The brace position also protects passengers from falling objects or loose objects being thrown forwards.

Rear facing seats therefore wouldn't be safer

Answer 3

In many of the military passenger planes the seats do face aft.  

Facing aft was resisted by the airlines early on.  Airlines  wanted the passengers to feel as if they were on a bus or train, and didn't want to call attention to the consequences of crashing.

Answer 4

You are totally correct.

Most private Jets do have rear-facing seats.

The reason most big airline companies don't do this is:

1) There isn't enough crashes resulting in whiplash to make the changes worthwhile

2) It creates a very wierd sensation for the passenger, usually making them feel very sick.