Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think nursery shouldn't be outside for eclipse?

42 replies

speedbird17 · 20/03/2015 13:34

Pictures on nursery fb of all the children stood out in the garden to watch the eclipse. Not a one of them wearing eye protection, using a pinhole projector, box or similar.

I am floored that they could think this was responsible in any way!

So glad I didn't send in my DD today as she was feeling a bit under the weather. Do I talk to them about it, raise it as a concern or just let it go?

OP posts:
adsy · 20/03/2015 15:06

I don't understand. Are you saying they took them out specially to watch the eclipse but then said look down ll the time , there were no glasses and no cameras? Or was it just normal playtime outside and happened to be at eclipse time?
I doubt that if a small child wasn't made very aware of it they would bother to try and look at the sun anyway and why would staff make them aware of it only to say but look at the ground? Confused

YNK · 20/03/2015 15:06

Why would they need eye protection?
It was darker than usual fgs!
They were using a pinhole camera, projecting a shadow!

Do you normally blindfold your dc's before you take them out in daylight or something?

adsy · 20/03/2015 15:08

they weren't using cameras: equally, they don't seem to have been looking at the sun!

Pyjamasandwine · 20/03/2015 15:13

Sounds a bit cavalier to me.

It was very sunny here in the midlands and we had a fantastic view.

Guessing it was cloudy in London so that's why the news was telling us all it was disappointing.

Us plebs north of Watford aye!

Original poster
speedbird17 · 20/03/2015 15:26

YNK they were NOT using any sort of pinhole projector. They had NO eye protection at all. Nursery posted pictures of all the kids stood in a line outside in the garden 'to watch the eclipse' and when I messaged asking if it was at the exact time they stated they got all the children to 'look down'.

We are in Somerset it was v bright.

OP posts:
MNpostingbot · 20/03/2015 15:51

Go on then speedbird, how come I'm allowed to make calls now on southwest airlines flights throughout the us?

MNpostingbot · 20/03/2015 15:52

and Virgin and numerous other carriers now I look

Roussette · 20/03/2015 16:01

It was REALLY bright here! And when the sun was covered by the moon, the light that was peeping out was absolutely piercing so I can quite understand how it would damage eyesight. I couldn't look at it with the naked eye even if I wanted to, far too bright. My DCs are much older and I went on and on to them not to look at it.

It's ridiculous to say it wouldn't hurt your eyes. Maybe not in cloudy conditions but v dangerous in clear weather.

YNK · 20/03/2015 16:05

Sorry, I misread your original post speedbird.

Nevertheless, it was marvelous to be able to experience the eerie light of the event.
They have said no child was encouraged to look directly into the sun so they will be absolutely fine.

We don't get upset that there is a sun in the sky any other time so I don't see why this should be different.

Original poster
speedbird17 · 20/03/2015 16:49

MNPostingBot - because they haven't been subjected to the EASA or FCC assessment processes that come into force this year to ensure aircraft systems are not affected by signals from PEDs.

There have not been enough tests nor trials to prove the safety (or lack thereof) of using phones to call or text in flight. It is still prohibited on the airline I work for, and certainly if I caught anyone using their PED on a flight I was operating they would not be joining us for the rest of the journey for breaching airline, CAA and currently EASA rules.

OP posts:
TheFecklessFairy · 20/03/2015 16:52

With all the moaning about the eclipse on MN I am bloody glad that the next one is 2090 in UK and I won't be here! What a load of whingers.

MNpostingbot · 20/03/2015 17:13

That maybe the rule.

It's not the reality. Its illegal to drive at 80, but the car won't crash because it's driven at that speed. If there was a 1 percent chance that using a phone on a plane would cause a crash they simply wouldn't let them on board.

That's simple logic. In this litigious society do you really think BA and Virgin would take the risk of there was one?

Original poster
speedbird17 · 20/03/2015 17:16

One of the airlines you have mentioned certainly don't take the risk. Connecting to onboard wifi is not the same as actively seeking GPRS signals.

OP posts:
MNpostingbot · 20/03/2015 17:17

How come the Americans don't care then?

I guess it's because nobody in the U.S. would sue the airline if it crashes, Americans arent that litigious after all

attheendoftheday · 20/03/2015 17:20

Irresponsible not to have eye protection, but I'm surprised that so many nurseries aren't showing this amazing thing to their kids. I would not have wanted my 2 and 3 year olds to miss it.

MNpostingbot · 20/03/2015 17:26

The reference to Virgin and BA was in the context of "if it was a risk they would not let the phone on the plane at all"

Or do you really think they are prepared to rely on each passenger to obey the rules?
You work on planes, you know how stupid / beligerent some passengers are. Again, if it was a real danger, would it be left to the public sticking to the rule

Lufthansa, aa, southwest all couldn't care less if I'm on the phone during take off!

Those crazy risk taking Germans again......

Artandco · 20/03/2015 17:40

I have def used my phone on planes recently. I think lufhansa, Emirates and Norwegian air recently ( as in since Christmas)

New posts on this thread. Refresh page