# Delta tightens carry on enforcement



## derb (Nov 18, 2009)

I got nailed by delta for 2 bags that just barely couldnt fit in the sizing box on a flight from fll/atl/las.  They were screening everyone very closely and only those that arrived just before the doors closed were let on with oversized bags, all others were sent back to the ticket counter at the gate.

Are all airlines now sticking strictly to the 9x14x22 rules?


----------



## LAX Mom (Nov 18, 2009)

derb said:


> I got nailed by delta for 2 bags that just barely couldnt fit in the sizing box on a flight from fll/atl/las.  They were screening everyone very closely and only those that arrived just before the doors closed were let on with oversized bags, all others were sent back to the ticket counter at the gate.
> 
> Are all airlines now sticking strictly to the 9x14x22 rules?


Last time I flew the announcement was made that the airline would be enforcing the 2 carry-on bags per person. If they were too large we were told to check them before boarding. Mine was within the size limits so I don't know if they actually enforced this policy. 

It can be a big problem on full flights. I've seen people trying to carry-on some very large bags! It makes a difficult situation for everyone.  The passengers & crew are delayed during boarding as people try to find places to stow their oversize bags.

derb, I don't intend to be critical of your post or flight experience. It's just that in the past I've experienced flights where this was a problem.  Several were brought on board and there was no place to store them. It took some time as the crew handled the extra bags.


----------



## Aussiedog (Nov 18, 2009)

*Get ready for more enforcement*

The holidays are the primo time for carry-on enforcement.  

Everyone is adding wrapped presents, ski boots, mega parkas, etc, to their carry-ons and then they try and stuff everything into the overheads - already jammed with the crew's luggage, shopping bags, presents, parkas, etc.

It's a nightmare and holds up departures.

Ann


----------



## falmouth3 (Nov 18, 2009)

I purposely bought a suitcase that met the requirements while something a  little larger would have been more useful to me.  But I wanted to be sure I would be allowed to bring my roll aboard on the plane.  It burns my butt to see people with big bags muscling them onto the plane and then taking up space that two legal bags would have fit into.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Nov 18, 2009)

This had to happen sooner or later; I'm surprised it hasn't happened sooner.  A bunch of reasons.

First, people are overstuffing carryons to avoid the bag check fee.  By being lax the airlines have been foregoing revenue.

Second, people stowing those overstuffed bags is a major slowdown in boarding. I've seen people totally block an aisle for three or four minutes trying to cram a bag into an overhead bin.  If three or four people do that there's almost no way the plane is going to take off on time.

Third, those overstuffed bags are often too big to fit under a seat so a person with two such bags puts them both in the overhead bins.  That means the bins fill up early and later boarders who have complied with the rules don't have overhead space for their bags.

Finally, at its root the airline business is about selling space and weight.  The pricing changes that airlines have been doing reflect that reality.  Those who travel light pay less.  Those who want to bring more stuff along have to pay for that added stuff.

****

Of course the related issue is lost and damaged checked luggage.  If airlines are going to drive people to check bags, and charge them for doing so, they need to do a better job of ensuring that customers who pay for that service are satisfied with the service they receive.

And I suspect the next pricing "enhancement" will be a "premium" bag check service.  Pay an extra $10 and your bags will be the first ones loaded on the plane (so they won't be manhandled to stuff them into place) and they will be the first ones on the carousel.


----------



## Jimster (Nov 18, 2009)

*Delta*

I agree with the limitation of oversized bags, but it is also worth noting that the airline is DELTA.  If there is an airline that can squeeze an extra dollar or two from their customers, it is DELTA.  Which is why I dont fly DELTA (also because I am a 1K with United and entitled to 3 bags checked for free).  Carolinian is right with his signature: Driving Every Loyal Traveler Away


----------



## Judy (Nov 18, 2009)

derb said:


> I got nailed by delta for 2 bags that just barely couldnt fit in the sizing box on a flight from fll/atl/las.  They were screening everyone very closely and only those that arrived just before the doors closed were let on with oversized bags, all others were sent back to the ticket counter at the gate.
> 
> Are all airlines now sticking strictly to the 9x14x22 rules?


I recently flew out of LAX on Delta while carrying on the 9x14x22 rollaboard I'd purchased specifically to meet airline sizing requirements.  I'd stuffed my jacket into the bag, just to avoid having to keep track of one more item, so the bag was bulging a bit. I was pulled out of the security line and required to fit my bag into the sizing box.  It barely fit and I thought I was going to have to pull my jacket out and put it on to avoid having to return to check-in.  As it was, I lost my place in line.

By the way, for the same flight, the Delta check-in clerk attempted to charge us for checked bags that we weren't supposed to pay for.

Because of the NWA/Delta merger most of my frequent flier miles are now on Delta


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 18, 2009)

derb said:


> I got nailed by delta for 2 bags that just barely couldnt fit in the sizing box on a flight from fll/atl/las.  They were screening everyone very closely and only those that arrived just before the doors closed were let on with oversized bags, all others were sent back to the ticket counter at the gate.
> 
> Are all airlines now sticking strictly to the 9x14x22 rules?



We just got off a Delta flight last week. They didn't check anyone. I've found that enforcement of the rules on a plane is very much hit and miss.......mostly miss when it comes to carry on's.  

Personally, I'd applaud them for doing this. On our flight to Barcelona last month they ran out of overhead space about 1/3 of the way into boarding. Everyone had oversized bags that had to go in sideways taking up to much room for one bag.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 18, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> .....And I suspect the next pricing "enhancement" will be a "premium" bag check service.  Pay an extra $10 and your bags will be the first ones loaded on the plane (so they won't be manhandled to stuff them into place) and they will be the first ones on the carousel.



With baggage, first on often = last off. Besides, it's not which bag comes out of the plane first or last. It's how it's sorted and transfered after it's come off. I suppose if they were tagged as special the baggage handlers could identify those bags when it came time to unload them from the carts to be placed on the belt.

I read an article where the fed's were looking closely at the extra fee's. It seems the airlines haven't been having to pay the same airport taxes on these fee's and it's costing the fed's millions of dollars in lost tax revenue.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 18, 2009)

Jimster said:


> I agree with the limitation of oversized bags, but it is also worth noting that the airline is DELTA.  If there is an airline that can squeeze an extra dollar or two from their customers, it is DELTA.  Which is why I dont fly DELTA (also because I am a 1K with United and entitled to 3 bags checked for free).  Carolinian is right with his signature: Driving Every Loyal Traveler Away



USAirways has been pretty good at squeezing dollars out of passengers as well.


----------



## Jimster (Nov 18, 2009)

*US*

Yes, I agree Doug- US AIR is in the same category.  After all, they did eliminate free beverages for a while.  I still give the nod to Delta but only because they could better afford to treat their customers better than US AIR which I think is poorer than Delta.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Nov 18, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> With baggage, first on often = last off. Besides, it's not which bag comes out of the plane first or last. It's how it's sorted and transfered after it's come off. I suppose if they were tagged as special the baggage handlers could identify those bags when it came time to unload them from the carts to be placed on the belt.
> 
> I read an article where the fed's were looking closely at the extra fee's. It seems the airlines haven't been having to pay the same airport taxes on these fee's and it's costing the fed's millions of dollars in lost tax revenue.



Right now it tends to arbitrary and chaotic as to the order in which bags appear.  But if it became in item of attention and management, the first bags loaded into the plane, would be the last bags taken off the plane.  Those bags would then be on the tops of the luggage piles int he carts, which would make it easy to place them first on the conveyer belts leading to the carousel.

But if the airlines start charging fees for premium luggage handling, I imagine the premium bags would all be placed in one area of the hold.  Those bags would then be segregated for whatever special attention was mandated.


----------



## california-bighorn (Nov 18, 2009)

*Glad to see policy enforced*

Two months ago in San Francisco, Alaska Airlines was turning back those who were violating the policy of 1 carry on along with 1 personal item.  
It kind of started when one woman was trying to carry on 3 large bags and got caught.  She raised a big stink, so they had to enforce the policy for the rest of the boarding passengers.
Like most have mentioned above, there are good reasons for carry on baggage regulations and I'm glad to see they are finally starting to be enforced.


----------



## Timeshare Von (Nov 18, 2009)

Frankly, it's about time!  I took two weekend trips last month and the amount of stuff people were carrying on was absurd.  And if they get to the plane with an oversized bag, they will check it at the door of the plane and the flier skirts the charge.  If I were running Delta (or any other airline) I would charge double for those son-of-a-guns who hold up the whole works by trying to avoid the checked bag fees.


----------



## derb (Nov 18, 2009)

LAX Mom said:


> Last time I flew the announcement was made that the airline would be enforcing the 2 carry-on bags per person. If they were too large we were told to check them before boarding. Mine was within the size limits so I don't know if they actually enforced this policy.
> 
> It can be a big problem on full flights. I've seen people trying to carry-on some very large bags! It makes a difficult situation for everyone.  The passengers & crew are delayed during boarding as people try to find places to stow their oversize bags.
> 
> derb, I don't intend to be critical of your post or flight experience. It's just that in the past I've experienced flights where this was a problem.  Several were brought on board and there was no place to store them. It took some time as the crew handled the extra bags.



I am with you on this, we fly about 8 times a year and dislike  people who abuse the baggage policy.  Our bags, one each, were just barely unable to fit in.  Now I have two expensive bags that can no longer be used as carry ons.


----------



## Jbart74 (Nov 18, 2009)

Timeshare Von said:


> Frankly, it's about time!  I took two weekend trips last month and the amount of stuff people were carrying on was absurd.  And if they get to the plane with an oversized bag, they will check it at the door of the plane and the flier skirts the charge.  If I were running Delta (or any other airline) I would charge double for those son-of-a-guns who hold up the whole works by trying to avoid the checked bag fees.



If I ran Delta, or any other airline (except SouthWest) I would charge for Carry-On baggage as opposed to Checked Baggage.  This would speed up the embarkation (boarding) and debarkation (unboarding, if you will) and get planes out on time with plenty of room for everyones laptops, cameras, and fragile items.  Why don't they get smart instead of getting greedy and ruining the process at the same time?

2 cents.... etc....


----------



## amanven (Nov 18, 2009)

Although the checked baggage fee is probably at the root of the carryon problem,  stories hitting the news about baggage handlers being caught stealing from luggage and travel discussion forums lamenting the airlines sometimes abismal handling of lost, misdirected, or damaged luggage don't exactly inspire the flying publics confidence in the baggage handling practices of most airlines.
Passengers who have the window seats during boarding aren't watching the baggage handlers because they find the process interesting.  They are watching to see if their own bags are being loaded onto the plane they are on.
It's not just a coincidence Southwest is now running tv commercials promoting the quality of and "0" cost of their baggage handling services.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Nov 18, 2009)

Jbart74 said:


> If I ran Delta, or any other airline (except SouthWest) I would charge for Carry-On baggage as opposed to Checked Baggage.  This would speed up the embarkation (boarding) and debarkation (unboarding, if you will) and get planes out on time with plenty of room for everyones laptops, cameras, and fragile items.  Why don't they get smart instead of getting greedy and ruining the process at the same time?
> 
> 2 cents.... etc....


The problem with that is that is, as I noted above, what airlines really sell is space and weight, not on-time departure.  Checked luggage consumes more of both; ergo that is where the first applied charges.

****

IMHO - what this really represents is the last stages of the unraveling of the price-fixing that was government sanctioned under the old CAB regulation scheme. 

When the government set prices for fares that were high enough to enable even the most inefficient carriers to survive, the airlines competed by offering amenities.  That included meals, free checked luggage, stewardess strip shows in the air, legroom, etc.  

As that system has been dismantled air lines have been competing on price.  That is simply evolving to it's logical endpoint - airlines sell space and weight.  The more of either that you consume, the more you are going to pay.  

*****

Passengers who travel light - who don't check luggage and who don't have excessive carry-ons -cost less to fly. They take up less space, they have less weight, and they board and disembark easier.  It only makes sense that those passengers should pay less.


----------



## silverfox82 (Nov 19, 2009)

I am a dedicated carry on flier, always well within the rules, so would welcome more enforcement. Perhaps a little education by the airlines when ticketing and establish a standard for CO luggage such as that the roll aboards have to fit in the overhead wheels in/handle out rather than sideways. Limit the overhead to 1 piece, 2nd goes under the seat no exceptions. I currently don't fly any airline routes that uses MD 80 equipment but their overheads are much smaller than other aircraft so that should be kept in mind. I carry a laptop bag which goes under the seat. It has a book, headphones, snacks, camera and anything I might need enroute. It kills me watching people who have to keep pulling their bag out of the overhead to retrieve something they want mid flight, often more than once. You plan a trip for months, plan your flight also, we will all benefit.


----------



## Talent312 (Nov 19, 2009)

Thank the Powers-That-Be, that someone is enforcing the size-limits, at least some of the time. I'm tired of sitting in my seat (or trying to get to it), while peeps are going from bin to bin looking for room for their oversized bags. I recently saw a guy carry-on a guitar and try to put in an overhead bin. I understand why he wouldn't check it, but dude... buy a second-seat and strap it in, or take a train.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Nov 19, 2009)

Flying all winter in/out of Ft Lauderdale (next to Port Everglades), it is totally amusing to find at the Southwest checkin counter, the cruisers who have disembark and are trying to fly home.  Trying to avoid being overweight with their 2 free bags and repacking their suitcases *OR* pulling their RUM bottles out of carryon. 

AND still the overheads are jammed full of oversized bags!


----------



## Judy (Nov 19, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Passengers who travel light - who don't check luggage and who don't have excessive carry-ons -cost less to fly. They take up less space, they have less weight, and they board and disembark easier.  It only makes sense that those passengers should pay less.


Alright then, the airlines should charge big-heavy passengers more than small-light ones.  I'll take my small person discount and use it to check a bag


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> ........When the government set prices for fares that were high enough to enable even the most inefficient carriers to survive, the airlines competed by offering amenities.  That included meals, free checked luggage,* stewardess strip shows in the air*, legroom, etc......



Dang it! I must have missed the golden age of flying if they use to have stewardess strip show in the air.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

Judy said:


> Alright then, the airlines should charge big-heavy passengers more than small-light ones.  I'll take my small person discount and use it to check a bag



They've tried that. Remember they said they'd start charging people for two seats if they can't fit into one seat with the armrest down.


----------



## geekette (Nov 19, 2009)

I also welcome enforcement, and the practice of sending hte offenders back to the ticket counter.  Gate-check should for strollers, wheel chairs, that kind of thing, not bags that people are trying to sneak on.  It's cheating.


----------



## thheath (Nov 19, 2009)

Jbart74 said:


> If I ran Delta, or any other airline (except SouthWest) I would charge for Carry-On baggage as opposed to Checked Baggage.  This would speed up the embarkation (boarding) and debarkation (unboarding, if you will) and get planes out on time with plenty of room for everyones laptops, cameras, and fragile items.  Why don't they get smart instead of getting greedy and ruining the process at the same time?
> 
> 2 cents.... etc....



Never thought of that, interesting idea...might work.


----------



## Jimster (Nov 19, 2009)

*checked luggage*

As an added benefit, the baggage handlers would now have some of the finest cameras, computers and other digital devises.   No one is going to put their valuables in checked luggage!  Not to mention their medicines, change of clothes and other valuables.  They will still want to carry on the same amount of items.   Also you don't think for one minute that a charge for carry ons would REPLACE the charge for checked luggage.  It would be in ADDITION to the charge for checked luggage.  The airlines are making Billions off this charge.  Just enforce the current rules and we will be fine.


----------



## derb (Nov 19, 2009)

*It was TSA who check the sizing*

I just remembered that we were sized before entering security at FLL.  I doubt delta had the entire terminal 2 so was it TSA that sized the bag?  Delta shares the terminal with air canada.


----------



## california-bighorn (Nov 19, 2009)

derb said:


> I just remembered that we were sized before entering security at FLL.  I doubt delta had the entire terminal 2 so was it TSA that sized the bag?  Delta shares the terminal with air canada.



In Denver there was a x-ray that all carry ons passed thru on a conveyor belt and the opening to the x-ray device was sized so that only permitted sized carry ons could pass thru.  This was in an area before you got to the gates.


----------



## derb (Nov 19, 2009)

california-bighorn said:


> In Denver there was a x-ray that all carry ons passed thru on a conveyor belt and the opening to the x-ray device was sized so that only permitted sized carry ons could pass thru.  This was in an area before you got to the gates.



I wonder if TSA is testing pre-sizing (new word, look out webster) of carry ons.


----------



## JeffW (Nov 19, 2009)

I've heard a lot of talk about trying to move the 'sizers' out to pre-security, so it doesn't become an individual issue at every gate / on every plane.  While there's some good logic to that, security lines are so backed up as they are now, that it would be a pain to have further delays.\

Since there's usually a hallway / steps you need to go thru / up to get from the checkin counter to security, an ideal option might be to setup an airline (or non-security) run sizing area there, with basically every bag going thru some type of sizer.  That way, for bags that are an issue, it's not that far a walk to go back to the checkin counter, and take care of them.  Let's be honest, if you are are a gate, unless an agent is threatening denying you boarding to the plane, there is no way you are going back to the checkin counter.  

Jeff


----------



## Darlene (Nov 19, 2009)

Our last trip to Hawaii, the four of us took one carry-on bag that fit within the requirements. We used Denise's packing list, but modified it to our needs.  We checked one bag that had our snorkel gear, and other big items.  It was great.  I didn't miss all that stuff I usually pack.  
I am glad that the airlines are enforcing the size limits to get rid of all the oversized bags that take up all the overhead storage so that no one else can store their bags :annoyed:


----------



## beejaybeeohio (Nov 19, 2009)

*AA experience*

DH had to gate-check the standard 9x14x21 since the first leg of his flight to ABQ was on a regional jet.  Out of Dallas, he was asked to squeeze it into the metal sizing grid and it barely missed, so it was placed in the hold at no charge. Meanwhile I breezed thru with the same size bag.  Enroute home on AA, he wasn't hassled at all and the carryon fit just fine in the overhead.  The gentleman seated next to me, noticed my under the seat bag and complained that he was turned away from boarding out of Philly for his bag that seemed smaller than mine!

No consistency anywhere!  On my flight back from ABQ which was on Continental, the lady next to me had a huge carryon, a huge 2nd personal item, a large blanket, and pillow.  It took her 5 minutes to stow all, and then after she & I were settled, she had to get out of her middle seat to get an item she had left in her bag in the overhead!  Thanks to no baggage charge for CO affinity card holders, I checked my bag on this flight.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

silverfox82 said:


> Limit the overhead to 1 piece, 2nd goes under the seat no exceptions.



This is unreasonable. Some of us taller people simply cannot sit in the seat without at least a little room for our legs to go under the seat in front.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

Timeshare Von said:


> Frankly, it's about time!  I took two weekend trips last month and the amount of stuff people were carrying on was absurd.  And if they get to the plane with an oversized bag, they will check it at the door of the plane and the flier skirts the charge.  If I were running Delta (or any other airline) I would charge double for those son-of-a-guns who hold up the whole works by trying to avoid the checked bag fees.



This makes a lot of sense to me!


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> They've tried that. Remember they said they'd start charging people for two seats if they can't fit into one seat with the armrest down.



I wish they actually enforced this. On my last flight (MIA-LAX) I had an aisle seat and this rather large man showed up and claimed the middle seat. Suffice to say that for most of the 6+ hours I was on the plane I was leaning into the aisle. Of course, this means I get hit at least once by a speeding drink cart (my shoulder is getting used to it). And, now that every plane feels almost full this type of cattle car feel is getting routine. I am almost at the point where I am considering purchasing two coach seats for myself just to guarantee an empty seat next to me for the long flights.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> This is unreasonable. Some of us taller people simply cannot sit in the seat without at least a little room for our legs to go under the seat in front.



So, just because you're tall means I am limited to one item I can put under my seat? That doesn't seem fair either.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> I wish they actually enforced this. On my last flight (MIA-LAX) I had an aisle seat and this rather large man showed up and claimed the middle seat. Suffice to say that for most of the 6+ hours I was on the plane I was leaning into the aisle. Of course, this means I get hit at least once by a speeding drink cart (my shoulder is getting used to it). And, now that every plane feels almost full this type of cattle car feel is getting routine. I am almost at the point where I am considering purchasing two coach seats for myself just to guarantee an empty seat next to me for the long flights.



It should be an interesting flight when they try to give away the extra seat you paid for to a standby passenger or, in an oversold situation, attempt to put someone in that seat rather than bump them off the flight. 

I'm not saying that the airlines will do that. But it wouldn't surprise me if they did.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Nov 19, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> On my last flight (MIA-LAX) I had an aisle seat and this rather large man showed up and claimed the middle seat.



That's why I always take an aisle seat.  Then you can at least lean into the aisle.  If you're in the window you've got no place to go.  And it's even worse if you're in the middle seat and you get a large person on both sides of you.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> So, just because you're tall means I am limited to one item I can put under my seat? That doesn't seem fair either.



Huh? All you need to do is get a seat that permits you to board in the first half of passengers and you're all but guaranteed enough overhead storage for your bag(s). Why are you blaming tall people for your inability to plan?

Sometimes one can adjust to a given situation. Height is rather difficult to change just for a flight. Personally, my doctor has instructed me to walk around the cabin every hour and perform leg exercises while on long flights. Not having room to move my feet forward would prevent me from doing so. There are other medical reasons why I, and many others who fly regularly, need to be able to have at least some of the space below the seat in front available.

It's too bad the airline industry is screwed. I really enjoyed the days of AA having "More Room" on many flights. These days I try to get an exit row whenever possible, and I even upgrade to first class when it's not an outrageous amount.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> It should be an interesting flight when they try to give away the extra seat you paid for to a standby passenger or, in an oversold situation, attempt to put someone in that seat rather than bump them off the flight.
> 
> I'm not saying that the airlines will do that. But it wouldn't surprise me if they did.



Obviously. And they would be prevented from doing so if I check in for both seats.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> That's why I always take an aisle seat.  Then you can at least lean into the aisle.  If you're in the window you've got no place to go.  And it's even worse if you're in the middle seat and you get a large person on both sides of you.



Yeah... that happened to me earlier in the year. I was squished. And, they both wanted to raise the armrests... I had to politely insist they stay down. It didn't really matter that much, as they...well...(how to say this politely?)... still took more of my personal space than they are entitled to. 

As America grows (wider) this problem will occur to more people.


----------



## thheath (Nov 19, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> This is unreasonable. Some of us taller people simply cannot sit in the seat without at least a little room for our legs to go under the seat in front.



No problem just bring one piece of carry-on for the overhead...


----------



## Talent312 (Nov 19, 2009)

If I had my druthers:
I'd travel with just one change of underwear, and have JCPenney, Target or Wal-Mart waiting for me upon arrival... and I'd let DW haul her own lead-weighted suitcases. <sigh>


----------



## california-bighorn (Nov 19, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> Yeah... that happened to me earlier in the year. I was squished. And, they both wanted to raise the armrests... I had to politely insist they stay down. It didn't really matter that much, as they...well...(how to say this politely?)... still took more of my personal space than they are entitled to.
> 
> As America grows (wider) this problem will occur to more people.



First I'll state I'm not a big person.  On a recent flight, A large guy raised the armrest to get into the seat next to me.  I politely lowered the armrest after he sat down and noticed a large part of his bottom side was still in my seat.  He was so wedged in he didn't need a seat belt for that flight.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Nov 19, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> That's why I always take an aisle seat.  Then you can at least lean into the aisle.  If you're in the window you've got no place to go.  And it's even worse if you're in the middle seat and you get a large person on both sides of you.





Ken555 said:


> Yeah... that happened to me earlier in the year. I was squished. And, they both wanted to raise the armrests... I had to politely insist they stay down. It didn't really matter that much, as they...well...(how to say this politely?)... still took more of my personal space than they are entitled to.
> 
> As America grows (wider) this problem will occur to more people.





california-bighorn said:


> First I'll state I'm not a big person.  On a recent flight, A large guy raised the armrest to get into the seat next to me.  I politely lowered the armrest after he sat down and noticed a large part of his bottom side was still in my seat.  He was so wedged in he didn't need a seat belt for that flight.



One of the big reasons why I do *all *of my flying on Alaska (and partners) is so I can maintain my elite status and get preferred seating. I always take aisle seat, exit row, and preferably the second aisle row so I get a reclining seat.  When I'm traveling with DW, she likes the window so I give her the window and take the aisle seat, and hope that no one takes the middle seat. If they do, I just offer them the aisle seat instead and they will always take it.

 I'll gladly pay a bit more for flights (though with Alaska I usually don't have to pay more) to stay with Alaska and partners to maintain elite status.  It's just worth it just to avoid that kind of seating agony.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> Huh? All you need to do is get a seat that permits you to board in the first half of passengers and you're all but guaranteed enough overhead storage for your bag(s). Why are you blaming tall people for your inability to plan?
> 
> Sometimes one can adjust to a given situation. Height is rather difficult to change just for a flight. Personally, my doctor has instructed me to walk around the cabin every hour and perform leg exercises while on long flights. Not having room to move my feet forward would prevent me from doing so. There are other medical reasons why I, and many others who fly regularly, need to be able to have at least some of the space below the seat in front available.
> 
> It's too bad the airline industry is screwed. I really enjoyed the days of AA having "More Room" on many flights. These days I try to get an exit row whenever possible, and I even upgrade to first class when it's not an outrageous amount.



I always put one up and one under my seat. I never put my coat in the overhead bin space, saving that room for others. But, if others put more than one carry on in the overhead bin and anything else, then I have to gate check my one regulation size bag because others feel they need to put everything in the overhead bin?

I'm sorry your height is an issue for flying onboard a plane but, I don't see a persons height as an excuse to not follow the same rules as everyone else. If height is an issue and, if one case in the overhead bin and one under the seat is a personal issue, then the solution IMHO isn't to disregard the rule but to only carry one item that goes in the overhead bin and nothing under the seat. 

Like you I prefer the extra room under my seat. If I want that space, I pack everything except for my camera equipement and my netbook which will go in the overhead leaving the space beneath the seat to stretch out. If I feel the need for two bags, then I deal with the loss of the leg room so that others may have some space in the overhead bins for their stuff. 

Getting on first should not be an excuse to hog bin space. Those that get on last should at least have a shot at getting regulation size carry on in the bins just like those who get on first. Even with height one can adjust to a give situation. That adjustment is to only carry on one item so that you have the leg room you need.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> One of the big reasons why I do *all *of my flying on Alaska (and partners) is so I can maintain my elite status and get preferred seating. I always take aisle seat, exit row, and preferably the second aisle row so I get a reclining seat.  When I'm traveling with DW, she likes the window so I give her the window and take the aisle seat, and hope that no one takes the middle seat. If they do, I just offer them the aisle seat instead and they will always take it.
> 
> I'll gladly pay a bit more for flights (though with Alaska I usually don't have to pay more) to stay with Alaska and partners to maintain elite status.  It's just worth it just to avoid that kind of seating agony.



I miss having the elite status I would earn when I was flying to work. Getting on first eliminated the anxiety I have about the bin hogs taking up all the space with oversized bags. The problem is we live in the midwest and take, at most, six flights per year.

Living in the midwest there are very few flights that are over 1,500 mile. 3,000 mile round trip flights X six is only 18,000 miles. Hardly enough for elite status on any airline unless Frontier still has their first tier at 15,000. Frontier has limited destinations and has never been an option for every flight we've taken in a year. 

Add to this the fact we are starting to look to vacation destinations that don't require flying and those miles get even fewer. In 2010, two of our six vacations will be drive-to destinations, so the milage we earn will be closer to 12,000 miles. For 2011 I'm seriously considering three drive-to vacations out of six. Between inconsiderate passengers, the extra fee's and the overall inconvenience that has become flying, I really hate to go to the airport anymore.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> If height is an issue and, if one case in the overhead bin and one under the seat is a personal issue, then the solution IMHO isn't to disregard the rule but to only carry one item that goes in the overhead bin and nothing under the seat.



Disregard the rule? Who are you kidding? I've been on a lot of flights this year and I can speak from my own observation that though lots of people try to bring more than they should on a plane, almost all of them are accommodated in some fashion. Very few have had to check their bags due to no room left overhead. And, by and large, those few had to check their bags because they were late to the flight (it's usually the ones who enter long after everyone else who have this particular problem of not finding available space overhead). And, no one has *ever* said (in my presence) that there is a "rule" about the second bag placement. The airline may *suggest* where you should place it, but that's all it is. Am I wrong about this?

Every passenger is paying for their seat and the opportunity to carry one personal bag and one carry-on onto the plane. If they elect to place both overhead and there is room to do so, then it is up to them where to place the bags. I agree with you that it would be preferable if everyone placed one of those bags under the seat in front, but my entire point of posting here is to say that there are valid and substantial reasons not to do so for certain people. You either respect those reasons or you don't, but there's absolutely no reason for you to insist there's only one way to do this.

In any case, I haven't said this before on purpose, but I suppose it's time for me to admit that I only carry one bag on a plane for almost all my flights. Only the very short flights will I consider not checking a bag. I disputed the earlier statement about second bag under the seat on principle. I take responsibility for my actions and, again, almost always (95%+ of the time) only take one bag on a plane with me (and a plastic bag with a salad and bottle of water ). In fact, I've even checked my bag on my last couple of short-haul flights since I really dislike dealing with more than one bag through security.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 19, 2009)

Keep in mind that nothing is personal. I just don't find height to be an acceptable excuse for anyone to place two items in the overhead bin. It appears we have the same value for allowing others the right to space in the overheads. We both only place one item in the overhead and, if we want more leg room, we don't carry a second item onboard that should be stowed under the seat. 

I still carry one rollaboard bag and my camera case but, I've spent a lot of time and money getting it to the point where that one case that goes under the seat can fit in such a way as to allow me the leg room I want. My camera bag holds the camera body, 4 lenses, the netbook, the external hard drive and a few other things yet, can be turned sideways under the seat in most aircraft giving me enough room to stretch out a little. On regional jets the rollaboard gets gate checked, even if I can fit in in the overhead space. 

Basically, we seem to be on the same page.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 19, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> Basically, we seem to be on the same page.



I'll take this to mean that you agree that there really isn't any rule about bag placement, as well. If you find verifiable information to the contrary, I would be very interested in seeing it.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 20, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> I'll take this to mean that you agree that there really isn't any rule about bag placement, as well. If you find verifiable information to the contrary, I would be very interested in seeing it.



I'm not certain that there is a rule so much as following flight attendents instructions when boarding. Is there a written rule? I doubt it and, if there is, I can't say that I've ever seen it. I can say that I've always been asked that if I have two items to place the smaller item under the seat so as to leave room in the overhead bin for other passengers. To date I have always complied with the flight attendents request to do so.


----------



## Talent312 (Nov 20, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> Basically, we seem to be on the same page.



Actually, we're on three pages (so far).  : ducking :


----------



## camachinist (Nov 20, 2009)

I've noticed the same in recent weeks on UA. I flew about 26,000 miles a couple weeks ago and saw consistent announcement and gate enforcement at all stations I flew through, both domestic and foreign. 

Since I often fly bulkhead and/or exit row, there sometimes is not an underseat stowage for my personal item (computer brief) so it must also go into the overhead in those instances. I use a smaller rollaboard that will go wheels in/out in every mainline aircraft UA flies. 

Regarding height and legroom, I'm about 6'0" and what I do is put my computer bag under the seat (if possible) in front of me for takeoff and landing and then move it back to my seat during the flight, opening up the space under the seat in front of me for my legs. Works pretty well. Standing it up, I can even get out of my seat normally.

I don't have to deal with checked bag fees and generally board first so always have access to overhead space but I generally don't check bags since I like to have flexibility for standby and VDB. It also saves time when going through customs since I don't have to wait for bags to come off the belt before queueing to clear.

I would expect this trend to continue, as airlines unbundle their services further. I did note, on one of the flights I flew during that recent trip, ORD-BOS, on a A319, that at least the last 20 people had to gate-check as they got onboard, simply because the bins were full. The GA announced more than once that they'd be happy to check bags, in advance, to BOS or wherever the pax was going, for free. 

Welcome to the new world of airline travel 

Pat


----------



## grest (Nov 20, 2009)

Personally, it makes me nuts when I fly and I have to remove my small carry-ons and put them under my seat so that the overly large pieces can be placed in the bins.  I agree with enforcing the limits.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Nov 20, 2009)

I fly with a checked bag and a small computer wheeled bag in the cabin.  When I board and seats are unassigned, I move to the back and place my computer bag in the overheard above my seat.  I have had people with the "should have been checked bags" try to move my bag to another bin (NOT) and the flight attendants try to get me to put my bag on the floor where my feet go (I stand 5'10"-NOT).

I can't tell you the number of times my softsided computer bag gets slammed or crushed by the oversized or too many bagged fellow passengers. I too sit in the aisle seat and watch as boarding and takeoff is delayed as the overhead space hunt occurs. All this 'on time' departures statistics then force the flight attendants to _RUSH_ thru safety annoucements and safety checks of passengers & their possessions. 

I also love the persons UNABLE to lift their own bag up into the overhead bin - another reason that bag should have been checked, as I really believe a 50-80lb falling bag will hurt my head seriously. Many of these "can't lift" people are younger than 30yo.

And I fly on an airline which allows the first 2 bags to be checked for FREE.


----------



## beejaybeeohio (Nov 20, 2009)

*Emergency Exit Row*

Re: Personal Items stowed under the seat in front of one

It seems that flight attendants vary in their vigilance over enforcing the rule that personal items must fit entirely under the seat in front of one.

Earlier this month on a CO flight to Orlando, DH & I were in opposite exit row aisle seats.  The 2 folk next to him had their large personal items well into their foot space.  One was a hard-sided square case.  I hate to think the problems these items would have caused had the plane needed evacuation ala last January's Hudson River landing!

Also, all of the other people in our exit rows, including the 2 described above, were either frail or obese and elderly (70+). IMHO, none of them looked capable of handling the removal of the exit door! 

There is a rule about no person under a certain age being allowed in an exit row and there probably needs to be a rule about people over a certain age sitting in exit rows as well!


----------



## Judy (Nov 20, 2009)

*Solution*

Here's a solution that would be fair to everyone:

At check-in, every passenger and all of his/her luggage will have their weight and volume measured. They would be charged accordingly and the airline would allocate them and their luggage appropriate space.

No more competition among passengers for limited resources.  Everyone gets what they pay for and we don't have to argue about this issue for 3+ pages


----------



## Twinkstarr (Nov 20, 2009)

beejaybeeohio said:


> Re: Personal Items stowed under the seat in front of one
> 
> It seems that flight attendants vary in their vigilance over enforcing the rule that personal items must fit entirely under the seat in front of one.
> 
> ...



I usually look at the people in the exit rows, sometimes you have to wonder . 

Flew Delta out of Detroit a month ago, seems like they were more concerned with getting the NWA crowd there on how to board when row numbers were called. It was a tad of a cluster. 

No checking bag sizes by Delta either outbound or inbound of Detroit.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 20, 2009)

Judy said:


> Here's a solution that would be fair to everyone:
> 
> At check-in, every passenger and all of his/her luggage will have their weight and volume measured. They would be charged accordingly and the airline would allocate them and their luggage appropriate space.
> 
> No more competition among passengers for limited resources.  Everyone gets what they pay for and we don't have to argue about this issue for 3+ pages



But debating is fun!  

I agree that it would probably be easier if it was taken care of at the ticketing counter when checking in. Granted it would cause some disagreements and slow down the check in procedure but it would be handled early on, the oversized bags would be checked and it would be done with. I don't see an issue with doing things this way but apparently the airlines do or I've overlooked something.

In the end I think it will end up being a three pronged attack. First at the ticketing counter, then at the TSA check in with size appropriate templates for the x-ray machines and then again at the gates. Unfortunately, the only ones I see that might enforce things on a semi-regular basis will be the TSA. I suppose that will be fine because most travelers love to hate the TSA anyway.


----------



## falmouth3 (Nov 20, 2009)

I bypass the ticketing counter by checking in online at home and I say I have no bags to check.  At one airport, I saw the TSA x-ray cutout on the conveyer was quite small.  If your bag didn't fit, you couldn't take it through.  I wish they'd all do that.

Sue


----------



## JeffW (Nov 20, 2009)

I compare this to speeding:

- speeds are posted on all roads
- a lot of people exceed the speed limit
- if it was THAT much of an issue, you'd have a cop on every major road / highway, writing tickets.  I'm sure the revenue could easily cover the cost of their salaries.

Airlines have everything else down to the last detail (ie: $5 to reserve a seat, $10 for seat in front, $20 for aisle, $30 for exit row, etc) that if this was REALLY an issue, they'd implement.  US Airways flight attendents used to distribute sodas for free, then they started to charge for them (f/a's collected money).  [Fortunately they rolled back that change.].  I'm sure if the airlines say, "ENFORCE carryon baggage", they will.


I think throughout all these posts, the main factor is CONSISTENCY.

Jeff


----------



## timeos2 (Nov 20, 2009)

*OH NO - another POINTS system!*



Judy said:


> Here's a solution that would be fair to everyone:
> 
> At check-in, every passenger and all of his/her luggage will have their weight and volume measured. They would be charged accordingly and the airline would allocate them and their luggage appropriate space.
> 
> No more competition among passengers for limited resources.  Everyone gets what they pay for and we don't have to argue about this issue for 3+ pages



Yikes - you want the beloved seat for seat (week for week) system to go to a points (variable weight) system! You are just asking for trouble from the traditionalists who like the free upgrades one for one may offer!  No more free bags! No more excessive use of seat space! Paying the real value for what you get? The old RCI/airlines  would NEVER operate like that


----------



## HatTrick (Nov 20, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> Huh? All you need to do is get a seat that permits you to board in the first half of passengers and you're all but guaranteed enough overhead storage for your bag(s).



That's usually true. Although I've seen early boarders who, on their way to the rear of the plane, place a bag or two in an available bin that's a dozen rows in front of their seat, just in case the overhead storage nearest their seat is already full.


----------



## Talent312 (Nov 20, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> Yikes - you want the beloved seat for seat (week for week) system to go to a points (variable weight) system!



Why not? We have a ready-to-use points system that applies to almost _every_ commodity or service.
I believe its called "money."


----------



## falmouth3 (Nov 20, 2009)

HatTrick said:


> That's usually true. Although I've seen early boarders who, on their way to the rear of the plane, place a bag or two in an available bin that's a dozen rows in front of their seat, just in case the overhead storage nearest their seat is already full.



And I often find the front bins are full with the flight attendent's roll aboards. (Or someone who isn't on the plane yet.)


----------



## camachinist (Nov 20, 2009)

Can't speak for other carriers but, generally, on UA, mainline FA's will stow their bags in one of the closets and/or behind the last row in business or first. I tend to see their bags in the bins more often (identifiable by the 'crew' tags) on RJ's and turboprops where most pax gate-check their rollaboards. The pilots have stowage in or adjacent to the cockpit for their bags.

Carry-on stowage, along with not having checked bag fees, are two of the most obvious and consistent of the perks of being an elite flier with an airline. Boarding first into an empty aircraft gives one a lot of options. Also, it gives one more opportunities to fly in F or C/J, where the FA's either keep bin space open or will put a pax bag in the closet if boarding late. On most airlines, low level elite is pretty easy to achieve. On UA, we can gift it as part of the perks of being a higher level elite. Tell a friend


----------



## jamstew (Nov 20, 2009)

amanven said:


> Passengers who have the window seats during boarding aren't watching the baggage handlers because they find the process interesting.  They are watching to see if their own bags are being loaded onto the plane they are on.



You betcha!


----------



## jamstew (Nov 20, 2009)

vacationhopeful said:


> I also love the persons UNABLE to lift their own bag up into the overhead bin - another reason that bag should have been checked, as I really believe a 50-80lb falling bag will hurt my head seriously. Many of these "can't lift" people are younger than 30yo.



Alas, that's the only thing that keeps me from flying carry-on only  I can easily pack for a week in a carry-on that weighs a maximum of 20 pounds, but because of back issues and the fact that I'm really short, there's no way I can lift it over my head into an overhead bin. I fly Southwest, so cost isn't the issue, but I don't trust any airline not to lose my luggage.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 20, 2009)

vacationhopeful said:


> I also love the persons UNABLE to lift their own bag up into the overhead bin - another reason that bag should have been checked, as I really believe a 50-80lb falling bag will hurt my head seriously. Many of these "can't lift" people are younger than 30yo.
> 
> And I fly on an airline which allows the first 2 bags to be checked for FREE.



Last year my cousin, during the hurry up and wait period just before the door opened to exit the plane, reached out to help a woman with a bag. The bag starting falling precariously and he supported it with one arm until it was down. In so doing, and due to its weight, he terribly damaged his shoulder which has resulted in two surgeries and lots of pain. And did the other passenger even thank him for assistance? Nope. (And this was on the same airline you mention that permits checked bags at no charge).

I was on a flight last year where the compartment above my seat opened during landing. It was an international flight on an airline I will strive not to fly again (they didn't even distribute enough water out on the flight so everyone was upset). While I didn't think a bag would jump out of the compartment, I wasn't pleased with the experience. In this instance, I would guess that a lighter bag would be more likely to fall out. Still, not fun.

I absolutely agree that carry-on bags should be weighed just like checked bags, and regardless of weight the passenger should be required to be able to lift it themselves (unless medical or other obvious reasons prevent being able to do so). This is common sense stuff, yet many passengers do feel that they paid for whatever they can get away with ~ especially true as they remember the "good old days" of flying and its included perks.

And yes, I also think that passengers size should fit the width of the seat you bought. If you don't fit, you should be required to purchase an additional seat or upgrade. There's absolutely no reason why other passengers should be impacted by your width. On planes with three seats, they could sell 1.5 seats to two people and put them in the same row, and everyone else would be happier. As for weight, that's an airline decision, but I suspect it would be a PR disaster for the first airline that starts weighing passengers and charging accordingly (the same is most likely true for width, so I don't expect to see this anytime soon).


----------



## camachinist (Nov 20, 2009)

The only airline I've flown which consistently weighs carry-ons is NZ (Air New Zealand). All bags get weighed at check-in. If it's over 7kg, it goes in the pit with a checked bag tag on it. Doesn't matter what class of service. Certain elite categories are allowed two such bags in the cabin. I'm sure there are other airlines like that. I wouldn't mind, as long as the requirement and procedure are disclosed, as it was on NZ


----------



## vacationhopeful (Nov 20, 2009)

Ken555,
I feel for your cousin and his damaged shoulder. 

I am just a tad under 60, female, and work in construction. If I get hurt, I have a real serious problem working.  It impacts my making a living and the guys with families who work for me.  I just do the zoned out look and look right thru them - which I am sure I get away with because I have a few grey hairs.

jamstew,
Thanks for being a responsible person who knows their limits. I always check my bag with the clothes because I acknowledge it is not reasonable to try to carry everything onboard a flight. Yes, I have had waryward luggage (including an arrival in Eastern Europe). Plus, waiting 10-15 minutes for luggage to arrive at baggage claim is not near as bad as the wait for almost 2 hours to get on the plane at the gate.


----------



## laurac260 (Nov 20, 2009)

personally I think this is great.  My biggest pet peeve when flying are waiting on people who insist on carrying their life on board with them.  I check everything but my purse and a magazine.  If only everyone would do the same, entering/exiting the plane would be SO MUCH quicker and less stressful!

I think airlines should charge fees for carryons, not checked bags.


----------



## djs (Nov 21, 2009)

Timeshare Von said:


> Frankly, it's about time!  I took two weekend trips last month and the amount of stuff people were carrying on was absurd.  And if they get to the plane with an oversized bag, they will check it at the door of the plane and the flier skirts the charge.  If I were running Delta (or any other airline) I would charge double for those son-of-a-guns who hold up the whole works by trying to avoid the checked bag fees.



I couldn't agree more with this.  Another thing airlines need to enforce is that passengers should use the overhead by THEIR seat.  I can't even count the number of times that some jerk sitting in the back of the plane puts their bag in an overhead up front.  Those folks are just too damn lazy to carry their bag back, and don't want to carry them all the way to the front after their flight.

I often wonder if the whole boarding/flying experience could be made more efficient by not even having overhead bins.  Those who want to bring a laptop still could as it can fit under a seat.  With no overhead bins, there's nobody standing in the isle for 3-4 minutes trying to jam a suitcase the size of a Buick into the bin.  If someone has to be somewhere 30 minutes after their flight and doesn't think they'll have time to make whatever appointment they're going to then they should take an earlier flight or make a later appointment.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 21, 2009)

timeos2 said:


> Yikes - you want the beloved seat for seat (week for week) system to go to a points (variable weight) system! You are just asking for trouble from the traditionalists who like the free upgrades one for one may offer!  No more free bags! No more excessive use of seat space! Paying the real value for what you get? The old RCI/airlines  would NEVER operate like that



Comparing RCI's broken exchange system (apparently soon to by Wyndham rentals and exchange company) to the airlines really isn't all that realistic. The airlines still manage to deliver what they promise. That is to get you from point A to point B. RCI, on the other hand, has a histroy of failing to deliver on their promised exchange system.

Nice way to twist this from carry on baggage on airlines to a testiment for/against RCI.


----------



## Keitht (Nov 21, 2009)

derb said:


> I got nailed by delta for 2 bags that just barely couldnt fit in the sizing box



If the bags wouldn't fit the sizing box they wouldn't fit the overhead lockers either.  'Just barely' makes no difference if the lockers can't be closed.  Trying to find somewhere to then stow those bags simply delays things.  The simple answer is to use bags that comply with requirements.
I make no apology if that sounds harsh but I, like many others, am getting heartily sick of those who seem to believe that the rules are made for others to comply with and for exceptions to be made for them.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 21, 2009)

laurac260 said:


> personally I think this is great.  My biggest pet peeve when flying are waiting on people who insist on carrying their life on board with them.  I check everything but my purse and a magazine.  If only everyone would do the same, entering/exiting the plane would be SO MUCH quicker and less stressful!
> 
> I think airlines should charge fees for carryons, not checked bags.



I'd love to but, with theft being what it is and the handling of luggage being what it is, I refuse to put expensive camera equipement, a computer or anything fragile into checked luggage. Some camera bodies alone can run upawards of $10,000. I own 4 amature lenses and a camera body but the total sum of those components alone is around $1,600. The tripod I'm looking at is $700, which is actually relatively inexpensive when some I've looked at are close to $1,000 just for the legs (doesn't include the head that holds the camera). 

Couple this with the need for at least a change of clothing and you end up with two carry on bags. I've never had my luggage lost but I have had it misplaced for a day more than once. A friend of ours has had the same luck of having her luggage misplaced and arrived a day later.

Does the luggage really get misplaced? Not always. Airlines make good money delivering freight. If there's a weight issue, your not the only one who can get bumped. Airlines can bump your luggage as well. I know there was a weight issue on our Barcelona Spain flight (heard the gate agent talking about it) and, low and behold our luggage plus a family of fours luggage didn't make the flight. Not one piece missing but every piece was missing. 

It appears you've been fortunate enough to have your luggage arrive the same day you do. Hopefully that luck never runs out. If it does, my bet is you start carrying on at least a little bit of your life's belongings.


----------



## x3 skier (Nov 21, 2009)

I am glad all airlines are checking more closely but on my CVG - SFO flight last night, I did not see any "sizing" of bags. I was in the first two groups boarding so they may have been some later but nobody had to gate check a bag because there was no space.

BTW, I am a great fan of one bag packing. 

Cheers


----------



## "Roger" (Nov 21, 2009)

Just curious ...

What counts as being 9"x14"x22".  The reason I ask is that when I go to a luggage sales area with a tape measure, about 90% of the rolling suitcases being marketed as "carry ons" or "meets most airline standards" when measured standing up are between 24" and 25" high (including wheels and handle).  Common sense tells me that these should not be sold as such and that they will fail to fit into some of the overheads. (Keith, there is quite a variety of overhead bin sizes.) Still, this is what a lot of people are buying (and a lot of what I see in the waiting areas of airports).  Are all these people going to be SOL as airlines get stricter, or, do the luggage manufacturers have it right and it is only the suitcase portion that counts?

By-the-by, I am not asking for myself with regard to what I personally can get away with. My wife and I both have suitcases that meet the stated measurement standards with wheels and handles included.  We recently bought a second suitcase of those dimensions, and, let me tell you, it was hard to find one.  As mentioned, almost all the suitcases on display as rollable carry ons exceeded those dimensions by two to three inches.


----------



## derb (Nov 21, 2009)

I guess I didnt make myself clear, these are bags supposedly made for carry on.  They always fit easily, wheels first, into all overheads in the past.  The length was over by 1/2 inch and width by an inch-inch and a half.  These were not the overstuffed bags that infuriate us all.
If all airlines and tsa get this strict, it will be much easier boarding for us all, but many of us will have to buy new bags.


----------



## camachinist (Nov 21, 2009)

The dimension requirements indicate how large the bag should be when fully packed, inclusive of all attachments (meaning wheels and handles, as appropriate); not all manufacturers follow such guidelines, unfortunately. Some foreign (non-US) carriers have even tighter size/weight restrictions, as I noted about NZ prior. My rollaboard is small by domestic US standards, measuring about 42 lineal inches, but just barely fits on a 744/767/757 wheels-in/out, especially the center-section bins on the wide body aircraft. The length, including wheels and handle, is 20". It fits all sizing boxes I've tried it in, no problem.

I first encountered stringent carry-on policies when flying non-US airlines and adapted my routines to meet those policies. So far, that works pretty well. Very little trouble and never an involuntary gate-check.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 21, 2009)

I agree the luggage manufacturors seem to advertise something as being "regulation" when in fact they are not. I measure from the gound to the highest point, which includes the wheels and handle. The cases we're using now are actually about 1/2 inch under what the airlines say and they barely fit in the extended overhead bins with wheels going in first. 

Still, I can pack 4 changes of clothes in this bag if it's shorts and t-shirts plus a little more. This past trip I had a snorkle and mask in the case and managed to add a hoody I bought on vacation and the case still was not overstuffed and bulging. If I were to pack blue jeans and sweatshirts I could probably get three changes of clothes in the bag and nothing else. 

If it were a vacation using a hotel, it wouldn't work so well. However since we use timeshares and I try to be careful to only book timeshares with laundry facilities, preferably in the unit, it's not big deal. Plus we always will have at least one checked bag due to all the liquid beauty supplies the wife fee's she must take with her.


----------



## Judy (Nov 21, 2009)

There would be no problem with tall people needing enough leg room, big people needing wide seats, and heavy packers needing overhead bin space if the airlines would deliver what they sell.  They don't only sell transportation for a person of any size, but transportation for checked bags (usually at extra cost), one rollaboard/carryon and one personal item.  When everyone shows up with all of those things, it often turns out that the plane isn't big enough and/or can't carry all the weight (as someone mentioned already).  

That's why passengers compete with each other by boarding in the first half, gaining elite status, putting their bags into a bin in the front of the plane when their seats are in the back, sitting in someone else's personal space, putting both bags into the overhead bin, etc. Sadly, all of these techniques benefit some passengers at the expense of others.  None of this behavior would be necessary if the airlines didn't stuff too many seats into their planes.  I think it's time we stopped blaming each other and the luggage manufactures and put the blame where it belongs - on the airlines.


----------



## Jimster (Nov 21, 2009)

*let's think about that*

Let's think about that.  It is not the airline's fault.  You are dealing with an airline- not air cargo.  Honestly, I think many people just don't get it.  You buy your ticket to transport you and your luggage, but that doesn't mean you get to take the kitchen sink with you too.  I am amazed at some people and frankly, some luggage makers.  How on earth can someone expect to take a bag over 50" long.  Of course, they don't take them as carry on, but they would if they could I am sure.  Have you seen these pieces of luggage that look like giant behemoths rolling off the conveyers.  Maybe we should do away with airport carts, sky caps and luggage with wheels.  Make these people carry their own luggage. These people just don't know how to pack or can't be bothered about being selective when they pack!   They are also often times the offenders with the carry on luggage too.  They want to take all their worldly possessions with them.  Heaven forbid they go to a destination and bring back souveniers!  Then you see all manner of things in checked luggage and carry on as well.  I realize these people arent the root cause of all the problem but they certainly contribute to it substantially.  What others have said here about wanting to avoid fees in checked luggage is certainly true as well as other reasons but I want to make a special point of including the people that don't pack well.
When I travel (especially overseas) often I will take an extra suitcase for souveniers.  Sometimes I will take old clothes to wear and then leave them there so I have more space in my luggage coming back.  But mainly I realize I can buy many of the items I need when I get there I dont need to take everything with me.  It is mainly the infrequent flyer that is the problem.  The frequent flyer knows how to pack, knows the tricks to minimize his luggage, etc.  Maybe you should have to pass a test about these things before they even let you buy your ticket   I flew over 100,000 miles this year (almost all for pleasure) and never had a problem with the amount of luggage I had in tow.  It can be done but like I said above-some people don't get it.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Nov 22, 2009)

All interesting comments, but I think Judy may be right. The airlines have added seats and made seats smaller in all dimensions, thus making us feel that we have no personal space (and I'm a small person) and requiring more people to stow carry on luggage aboard. Charging for even one checked bag has not helped the carry on problem at all. Airlines should go back to allowing one free checked bag. Then people would not try to avoid that fee by using carry ons and would get back to the original intent of carry ons, electronics, medicines, jewelry and items needed while on the plane or a change of clothes if your luggage is lost.
Liz


----------



## Keitht (Nov 22, 2009)

The number and size of the seats has nothing to do with customers trying to flout the rules about the size of carry on bags.  If an airline states that the maximum size permitted is x by y by z, and the customer chooses to ignore those limits, then there is only one person to blame if they are forced to check the bag into the hold.  That person is not the airline check in staff or the flight attendant it is the person who clearly believes that the rules don't apply to them.
Although going slightly off topic, it's really no different to the person who arrives late after check in has closed and then kicks off about not being allowed to board.  The terms and conditions of carriage are laid out in advance.  If the customer doesn't like them they are free to find alternative methods of travel.


----------



## Talent312 (Nov 22, 2009)

Keitht said:


> The terms and conditions of carriage are laid out in advance.  If the customer doesn't like them they are free to find alternative methods of travel.



If other peeps speed, but you get stopped, too bad.
If you're foot's a 1/2" over the line, you're still out of bounds.
If your lotto ticket is only one digit off, you don't get paid.
Life's full of little rules where "close enuff for jazz" won't cut it.


----------



## "Roger" (Nov 22, 2009)

I would love to blame the airlines for the tiny seats, the lack of footroom, the abomible food, etc., but the honest truth is that the airlines' customer base is more to blame.  Airlines that provide these things and charge just a bit more end up loosing money (even more money than their competitors who are also loosing money).  

Midwest Airlines was one of the last airlines to try the upgrade strategy.  Four across seating, more footroom, etc. (their slogan had been "best care in the air").  All things considered, they were doing this at very little extra cost.  (With enough advance notice, I often found their prices to be the same as the cattle car airlines.)  Midwest Airlines has recently been sold twice (out of financial necessity) and their planes are being sold or converted to just what we all complain about. Airline analyists said that this was the only way that the airline could possibly survive.

Sad, "we have met the enemy and he is us."


----------



## derb (Nov 22, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> Dang it! I must have missed the golden age of flying if they use to have stewardess strip show in the air.



Good news, you can still catch the show on FinAir.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Nov 22, 2009)

"Roger" said:


> I would love to blame the airlines for the tiny seats, the lack of footroom, the abomible food, etc., but the honest truth is that the airlines' customer base is more to blame.  Airlines that provide these things and charge just a bit more end up loosing money (even more money than their competitors who are also loosing money).
> 
> Midwest Airlines was one of the last airlines to try the upgrade strategy.  Four across seating, more footroom, etc. (their slogan had been "best care in the air").  All things considered, they were doing this at very little extra cost.  (With enough advance notice, I often found their prices to be the same as the cattle car airlines.)  Midwest Airlines has recently been sold twice (out of financial necessity) and their planes are being sold or converted to just what we all complain about. Airline analyists said that this was the only way that the airline could possibly survive.
> 
> Sad, "we have met the enemy and he is us."


Exactly the case.  Given a choice between less leg room and 10% higher air fares, the flying public will vote with their pocketbooks for the lower air fare.

Not every one - but there aren't enough people who will pay extra to sustain an airline.

In general, when operating an airline the five most important factors for a successful operation, in no particular order, are low ticket prices, low ticket prices, low ticket prices, low ticket prices, and last (but not least) low ticket prices.


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 22, 2009)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Not every one - but there aren't enough people who will pay extra to sustain an airline.



United's Economy Plus is a great option which hasn't yet been mentioned here. It costs ~$50 extra (or $300 per year for all flights, I believe) and provides about 5" of extra space. Whenever I can get this on UAL I take it - I just don't fly UAL all the time.


----------



## djs (Nov 22, 2009)

Ken555 said:


> United's Economy Plus is a great option which hasn't yet been mentioned here. It costs ~$50 extra (or $300 per year for all flights, I believe) and provides about 5" of extra space. Whenever I can get this on UAL I take it - I just don't fly UAL all the time.



Unfortunately it doesn't provide early boarding and the same overhead problems exist.


----------



## dougp26364 (Nov 22, 2009)

djs said:


> Unfortunately it doesn't provide early boarding and the same overhead problems exist.



Yes, but that extra 5 inches makes a lot of difference as far as putting a bag under the seat in front of you. You can stowe a carry on under the seat and still have enough leg room to be comfortable.


----------



## SuzanneSLO (Nov 23, 2009)

Keitht said:


> If the bags wouldn't fit the sizing box they wouldn't fit the overhead lockers either. . . .



Actually that is not necessarily true.

I have a bag that is 10.5" x 14" x 17", which will not fit in the sizer because the maximum depth is 10".  On the other hand, there is no problem putting it in the bin on a 757, the equivalent of "wheels first."  In fact, it appears so small that one GA refused to let us gate check it on a RJ (it fit under our seat only because we were in an exit row and had room to maneuver it in).

Many have reported on FT that they have taken a carry on out of the bin on a connecting flight only to be denied the right to bring it aboard on the next flight, even though its was the same airline and equipment!  It is for this reason that passengers get frustrated with the sizers. --- Suzanne


----------



## Ken555 (Nov 23, 2009)

dougp26364 said:


> Yes, but that extra 5 inches makes a lot of difference as far as putting a bag under the seat in front of you. You can stowe a carry on under the seat and still have enough leg room to be comfortable.



Exactly. On these flights with more room I don't have any problem putting a bag under the seat in front of me.


----------

