Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ccvaxa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece
From: preece@ccvaxa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.auto
Subject: Re: Auto Occupant Positions
Message-ID: <4900042@ccvaxa.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 24-Jan-85 18:05:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ccvaxa.4900042
Posted: Thu Jan 24 18:05:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Jan-85 06:22:56 EST
References: <60@ucbcad.UUCP>
Lines: 13
Nf-ID: #R:ucbcad:-6000:ccvaxa:4900042:000:553
Nf-From: ccvaxa!preece    Jan 24 17:05:00 1985

>	I heard that rear-facing seats were once proposed for airplanes  to
>	keep the passengers safer in the event of, how do the flight atten-
>	dants put it? An unscheduled landing?  But that the idea was vetoed
>	because the public would refuse to ride backwards!
----------
Thee was a European-built commercial airliner with rear-facing seats.
They were in service about 15 years ago.  I think they stopped for the
reason suggested above. (It may have been the BAC-111, but that could
also be totally wrong...)

scott preece
ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece