Airlines Are Coming for Your Carry-Ons 277
Carriers have gotten stricter about how many items you can take on board, no matter how small they are. From a report: Fanny packs. Cross-body bags. Shopping bags. Pillows and blankets. The Southwest Airlines gate agent rattled off so many items that counted toward the two carry-on bag limit on my flight to Baltimore, I thought it might be a playful jab at Spirit and Frontier and their rigid carry-on policing to collect more fees. But this was no joke. Southwest quietly began cracking down on carry-on bags on Feb. 22, ahead of the spring and summer travel rush, advising gate agents of the changes in a memo. This crackdown isn't about bag size. It is about how many bags you have.
Southwest isn't alone in putting passengers' personal items in its crosshairs as a way to save precious bin space and speed up boarding. Delta and United agents have also recently asked me to stuff my small Lululemon bag in my backpack. One American Airlines frequent flier told me he watched gate agents in Sacramento, Calif., and Dallas list a litany of items that count as a personal item on weekend flights to Nashville, Tenn., last month. Carting all your stuff to the gate can save you time and often saves money, especially with some airlines' new, higher checked-baggage fees. Delta joined the club on Tuesday, announcing prices of $35 for your first bag and $45 for your second. But testing airlines' carry-on limits is now more likely to backfire, and lose you precious time as airlines make you consolidate items or check a bag at the gate.
Southwest isn't alone in putting passengers' personal items in its crosshairs as a way to save precious bin space and speed up boarding. Delta and United agents have also recently asked me to stuff my small Lululemon bag in my backpack. One American Airlines frequent flier told me he watched gate agents in Sacramento, Calif., and Dallas list a litany of items that count as a personal item on weekend flights to Nashville, Tenn., last month. Carting all your stuff to the gate can save you time and often saves money, especially with some airlines' new, higher checked-baggage fees. Delta joined the club on Tuesday, announcing prices of $35 for your first bag and $45 for your second. But testing airlines' carry-on limits is now more likely to backfire, and lose you precious time as airlines make you consolidate items or check a bag at the gate.
They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:4, Insightful)
Some people really have trouble counting. Two carry on items (one large, one small) is two, not three or four or five.
Did they not watch enough Sesame Street? The Count would soon help them learn how to count successfully.
Meanwhile, this has been entirely standard on European low cost airlines for quite some time.
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Interesting)
yes but!
Should some dude be able the throw on baggy cargo pants and load up his pockets; while someone else in an ordinary pair of jeans in denied a hip-pack?
You can say the policy is the policy but its hardly good customer service when anyone can see it makes little sense.
Honestly they should just start weighing everyone - and telling people if they are 'over' something the can generally resolve by checking some luggage, and have another little booth to walkthru, if you + your items don't fit, you are over volume.
The what and how many don't matter.
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, yes....since that is someone carrying stuff on his person per the rules.
I mean, do they penalize someone that carries a fat wallet vs a money clip?
I'd generally agree with you on this....BUT, geez, you'd get clobbered by social media, etc for "fat shaming".
Hell, you already see behemoth fat women on TikTok actually getting sympathy from some, for not getting "fair treatment" because they charge them extra for 2 seats they can fit and, while complaining they can't hardly fit down the aisles.....
But by weight would be the most fair, since that is what costs fuel.
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Informative)
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Insightful)
You can say the policy is the policy but its hardly good customer service when anyone can see it makes little sense.
Same thing if you have an ultralight large rucksack packed in your "fanny pack" (you have no idea how difficult I, as a Brit, find that to write).
The idea is nothing to do with luggage and is about charging more for people who don't know the rules and less for the kind of people that would know when to switch to a different airline for a cheaper flight. Once you understand that it's price gouging against the under-informed it all makes total sense.
Re: They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:2)
If the guy with cargo pants isn't blocking the boarding for 2 minutes trying to pack everything into the overhead bin then I don't care. Actually maybe everyone should be required to wear cargo pants and only bring a single item.
Re: (Score:3)
Except it does not work that way. Dude isnt spending the next 3 hours with all that stuff crammed in his pants while he crams into a tiny airline seat.
Nope he is going to stand up half way out of seat unloading his pockets into the seat back and under seat storage for 2 min while the rest of his row can't sit down, and they stand and block everyone else.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly they should just start weighing everyone - and telling people if they are 'over' something the can generally resolve by checking some luggage, and have another little booth to walkthru, if you + your items don't fit, you are over volume.
... and presto, the check-in process for each flight is an hour longer than it was previously. Congratulations, the airport is now 33% more crowded than before - with the same number of passengers and flights.
Re: (Score:3)
Honestly they should just start weighing everyone
This has nothing to do about weight. It's about space on the plane. Ever since baggage started to not be included by default people have absolutely maximised their carry on allowance (and in many cases gone way over which this story seems to be about). Planes were never designed for every passenger to bring the maximum carry on allowance on.
Honestly they should tie baggage all together. Allow 1 person to bring 1 item into the cabin, and allow people who did check bags to bring 2 items. The overhead bin was
Re: (Score:3)
It's not just about the cost. When heading to vacation last year I was denied boarding on a connection because even though I made it to the gate on time, my checked bag was not going to make it (my first flight was late), and they wouldn't let us fly without our bags. We ended up stuck in a wintery city instead of flying down to Mexico for 2 full days, losing 1/3 of our vacation time. So yeah, I'll pack everything I can into carry on now unless it's TRULY not an option.
Not to mention that anyone who flie
Re: (Score:3)
>can generally resolve by checking some luggage,
thighs, extra chins, miscellaneous rolls of fat . . . :)
hawk
Re: (Score:2)
From the description it sounds as if there is ambiguity in some cases as to what counts as a carry on item and what counts as "on your person."
A fanny pack is one such grey area. It is worn on the person, so a traveller might consider it as being part of clothing or like having stuff in your pockets, but the airlines might disagree and consider it more like a bag / carry-on item.
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Interesting)
A fanny pack is one such grey area. It is worn on the person, so a traveller might consider it as being part of clothing or like having stuff in your pockets, but the airlines might disagree and consider it more like a bag / carry-on item.
This one is important to me because I'm a diabetic. When I'm local I typically only carry my insulin pen in my pocket and a Freestyle Libre 2 sensor on my phone, but when I travel I wear a small fanny pack containing my diabetic supplies because I can't just rush home in an emergency to get what I need. I could put it into one of my two carry ons but airlines tend to get snarky when you start rifling through your carry on during the flight, so if they count it as a carry on I'm kinda screwed.
I can see the person with the monster fanny pack that might as well be a small backpack, but I'd be curious to know what their size limits are for things like this so I could better plan trips.
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Informative)
Medical equipment is exempt. Your diabetic kit, a CPAP, etc. do not count towards your items.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A fanny pack is one such grey area. It is worn on the person, so a traveller might consider it as being part of clothing or like having stuff in your pockets, but the airlines might disagree and consider it more like a bag / carry-on item.
This one is important to me because I'm a diabetic. When I'm local I typically only carry my insulin pen in my pocket and a Freestyle Libre 2 sensor on my phone, but when I travel I wear a small fanny pack containing my diabetic supplies because I can't just rush home in an emergency to get what I need. I could put it into one of my two carry ons but airlines tend to get snarky when you start rifling through your carry on during the flight, so if they count it as a carry on I'm kinda screwed.
I can see the person with the monster fanny pack that might as well be a small backpack, but I'd be curious to know what their size limits are for things like this so I could better plan trips.
5 such devices on a 180 pax A320/B737 isn't really an issue and as has been mentioned, medical devices are exempt.
I also guarantee no-one is looking as your small soft case carrying a medical device or even a laptop bag carried by a suited man attached to his phone. What people are looking at are the gormless fuckwits wheeling two clearly oversized hardshell suitcases that are too large to be stored on their side in a standard overhead locker and take up half a full locker each. They're the problem, not
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:5, Informative)
Re:They need to watch more Sesame Street (Score:4, Insightful)
Tell that to the people at the "10 items or less" checkout line...
Re: (Score:3)
Sure (Score:3)
But what about people who weigh way more than all the stuff that I'm carrying times 100? Why are not airlines addressing this "minor" issue as more weight means more fuel? Or it's not about it? If it's not about weight then what?
There are people who are overweight/obese due to medical issues (or even pregnancy), but the vast majority simply eat too much or eat junk food. Maybe extra body mass could be actually addressed first.
Re: (Score:2)
The airlines have basically been informed, repeatedly, that they shouldn't even try, because they'd be infringing on people's rights.
Don't try to be rational about it - there's too many people who have political effort in place.
Re: (Score:3)
If it's not about weight then what?
Jesus Christ it's right there in the summary: Southwest isn't alone in putting passengers' personal items in its crosshairs as a way to save precious bin space and speed up boarding.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, it's about money.
They can't charge more for obese people, and in America, that means well over half the population. Average weight of an American has gone up significantly since the advent of commercial flight - not just due to us getting significantly taller, but because of obesity. This is even more true in the past 4 or so years: obesity has gone through the roof.
(Ironically, it seems that those who fly tend to be less likely to be obese than the general public by a significant margin, but I've def
Re: (Score:3)
Lawsuit for discrimination of fat people in 5, 4, 3...
Oh, America (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Class warfare (Score:3, Insightful)
This is late-stage capitalism working as intended. Carry on.
Why is it so difficult? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not carrying water for the Airlines here, as it's their policies and fees have been pushing this behavior. But seriously, people? One carry on, one personal item. It's not like these are new rules.
One of my last flights I watched a "lovely" old lady absolutely cursing out a gate agent because she had to consolidate her two carry-on bags into one. Watching the gate agent patiently explaining that her second full-size carry-on bag was not, in fact, a "personal item". I guess the point I'm trying to make: Flying already sucks. Bending the rules, and getting pissy when you get called out on it isn't going to make it any better.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
This was inevitable... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Southwest doesn't charge for your first 2x checked bags.
If other airlines are charging for this...switch airlines, no?
Good and bad here. (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been flying a good bit recently and I do have to say I'm a bit glad they're cracking down on people bringing ridiculous amounts of stuff onto the planes as carry-ons thus creating scenarios where others getting on after cant bring anything on because all the storage space is taken by people who feel that rules dont apply to them.
The bad here is that the whole reason many are trying to do this is because of high baggage check fees and horrible reliability ratings on the part of the airlines getting checked bags onto the proper plane so this behavior is being heavily driven by the airline's own actions. This means we have more tantrums by flyers holding up boarding lines to look forward to as the same person who doesnt think rules apply to them is the type to throw a fit over being told "no".
Re:Good and bad here. (Score:5, Interesting)
I get upset when told no - when they change the rules on the fly or on a case-by-case basis. I have my carry-on and a small personal item that fits the notional "rules". I pay for that and expect to get the space for it, and I will not be oversize.
If some "gate agent" then changes those rules on the spot, after I am already trapped into the system, that is abuse of power. They know they can get away with it because there are always all sorts of other plans that will also get destroyed and there will be no reasonable compensation for my time and money spent elsewhere.
I have had this happen several times, including flying my *checked* crate all the way across the country with no problem, then refusing to send it back on the return flight. You are at the airport, you are 2500 miles from home, your irreplacable custom item that was no problem last thursday is completely unacceptable on the same airplane and the same airline on a Sunday afternoon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh, never once had the rules changed on me at the gate.
Also, the people you're upset at are very likely only implementing rules that they are required to by their employer so if you're chewing out the people at the gate all you're doing is chewing out working class people just doing their job rather than the ones actually responsibly for your issues. Never mind the waste of time it is for everyone waiting for you to finish.
Personally I dont think much of such people so I hope you keep your being "upset" to
Re: (Score:3)
I am a grownup and donâ(TM)t pitch hissy fits about it, but I am angry about it. I am following established rules and they make it up as they go because they know they can get away with it.
Big business goal is to extract every (Score:3)
Overnight Your Bag (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
do any hotels change an fee for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a good trick, but the tricky part is getting it shipped home. You can ship it to remote destination early since you still have your home stuff, but you need your bag there up to the last day.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... yeah, but I don't need it right when I arrive home. I can drop it off at the mail carrier on my way to the airport and it will come in a day or two after I'm back home.
Re:Overnight Your Bag (Score:5, Interesting)
Or just overnight yourself, on a train.
Not kidding here. It's often by no means more expensive, but more comfortable. Instead of being crammed into a flying tube with a couple hundred other pieces of freight, after a humiliating cavity search process that not only strips you of any dignity but also of everything they'd like to sell to you at inflated prices again, you arrive at your train the night before, travel in a pretty decent sleeping arrangement to your destination, you can work or play on your computer if you're not inclined to sleep right away (WiFi included for free), get a decent breakfast the next morning and ample time to get dressed and presentable, then arrive at your destination and usually way closer to the town that you try to get to than you would be at an airport.
Yes, that only applies to destinations that are roughly 1000 miles from your point of origin and mostly works for Europe, but guess why our airlines tend to be a lot more ... agreeable.
Re:Overnight Your Bag (Score:4, Informative)
European-like typing detected.
Rail travel in the USA is extremely limiting outside the northeastern USA. Boston to Washington DC, OK, fine. Do you want to go west of that? I hope you wanted to go through Chicago or New Orleans.
There are some states in the continental USA that are barely or not served at all by Amtrak (Kentucky, Idaho, Kentucky, (east) Tennessee, South Dakota and Wyoming) and there may not be any rail services that connect to metropolitan local light rail. In some place, such as Las Vegas, the "Amtrak Stop" is a bus depot that takes travelers to a completely different state before they get on a train.
I lbought an ORD to LGA round trip flight for $60, inclusive of fees, yesterday. The flight takes an hour and a half. Amtrak wants ~$170 and needs 19 hours to go one way. If I were to try to take Amtrak from relatively close South Bend, Indiana and Kalamazoo, Michigan, I'd need more than 12 hours for what is at most a 90 minute drive.
The USA screwed up by not prioritizing rail as a way to travel. I'd love to take trains more places. But trains tend not to go places Americans need them or on anything like a desirable schedule.
Re:Overnight Your Bag (Score:4, Informative)
No it doesn't. It typically takes 83 hours 9 minutes on Amtrack - less than four days (if you choose the right time, you can do it in 68 hours 47 minutes on Amtrak, less than three days). That's less than half the time you claimed. And that's with US rail infrastructure that's stuck in the 19th century with freight having priority over passenger services. If the US had invested in the rail network it would be even faster.
Re: (Score:2)
I fly Spirit. Yes, on purpose. (Score:3)
I fly Spirit around a dozen times a year. I'm single and it's easy enough for me to get on a train that takes me to O'Hare and just go. Spirit flights are cheap enough that I can spend under $100 to do 36 hours in New Orleans or Tampa on a whim.
Spirit charges for everything, so I've just gotten good at fitting every single thing I need in a carry-on. Since I mostly travel domestically within the USA, there's really no place I could go that I can't buy anything that isn't in my bag or can't have the same day I get to my hotel or aribnb. I've been known to pack for two weeks, including my mirrorless camera and lens and a notebook PC, in just my carry on. I can stop by a UPS location if I need to ship something home. Not a big deal.
I understand that it's a little different for someone whose wardrobe needs involve multiple pairs of shoes or something, but it still stuns me to see people wheeling in multiple bags specifically for a Spirit flight.
I pretty much figured that everyone else would wind up in this same place sooner or later. I have stuck with Spirit because its planes are generally newer and in point of fact I've never been on a flight with a mechanical delay.
Well, you are flying on Southwest (Score:2)
I thought it might be a playful jab at Spirit and Frontier and their rigid carry-on policing to collect more fees.
Playful jab? Southwest is the original Spirit and Frontier, only with much slicker marketing. They practically invented the "cattle car" model for air travel (other airlines roasted them for it [youtube.com]), so of course they were eventually going to crack the whip on cheaters. Expecting anything more than the cattle car travel experience from Southwest is like shopping at Target to get better quality pr
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair - they are the one US airline that does not charge for checking your bags. So the excuse of carrying excess stuff on is harder to justify on them then on others.
Re: (Score:2)
Just use Sendmybag.com (Score:3)
Your baggage will be in your hotel room at arrival, no more waiting at your destination, no schlepping.
People in the 19th century had people handling their baggage, why wouldn't we in the 21st?
I have a solution for all this! (Score:4, Funny)
Passengers also need brsins (Score:2)
Seriously, how hard is it: you may carry on two items. Two. Yes, ma'am, your purse is an item. Your duty free shopping bag is an item. Your other shopping bag is also an item. That great honking travel case, which probably exceeds size limits, is an item.
Some years ago, a bunch of teenage girls were in the waiting are with way too much stuff. The gate attendant talked to them. It was hilarious: in order to get down to two bags each, they had to take out a lot of clothes. Which they then had to wear. Probab
Good (Score:3)
Do you know what happens when people get to their seats with all their doodads and such? They shove them in the overhead bin, fucking everyone who is later than them in the seating cycle. Suddenly your normal sized, totally appropriate backpack has to be "checked", except it has all the things that can't be checked, like your lithium ion batteries, or should never be checked, like your company proprietary laptop. Now you are in some negotiation with a flight attendant to try to get some weird family to be willing to part with whatever wad of padding and bullshit they hammered into the space above your seat.
This isn't some ploy to fuck consumers, this is definitely something that helps travelers.
Not like it's ever been super-clear (Score:2)
What's a purse? A BIG purse? A personal item or a carry-on? Does it take less space because it's a "purse"? What about a laptop? Still a personal item nowadays? What if it's a 10 year-old laptop vs a macbook air or iPad?
Fund Amtrak (Score:4, Insightful)
Good! (Score:5, Interesting)
A careful packer can get 3 days of clothes, toiletries, a notebook and some assorted other goods in 1 backpack. If they also need a CPAP, that’s two pieces, that will comfortably fit above the seat.
Re:Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:5, Insightful)
In reply, I would like to start with:
Fuck you, you selfish prick.
How the fuck do you dare advocate that parents with small children should be denied travel? If anything, they should get priority, as traveling with a small child is difficult, and slower forms of travel prolong this difficulty.
For the simple reason that you can't handle being around a child in public for a few hours. That you don't want to hear what you once were. That your "experience" while traveling is diminished because of some of them.
It's only some of them, and rarely does it last more than a few minutes. Sometimes it's worse, but a baby could fly dozens of times without a sound, then on flight 37 freak out. The parents aren't intentionally bringing a crying kid in the flight just to piss you off.
And, not that it's any business of yours, but you have no idea why they are flying. Under your proposed ban, should the parents of a young child be forced to skip their own parent's funeral in California because they live in New York?
It's a few hours at most. Deal with it. Or drive yourself. But stop advocating this assholic opinion that kids should not be allowed in public because you need to be coddled every second of every day.
And no, I don't have kids, and yes, I do fly a lot so this is based on experience.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:3)
You can't seriously advocate that any other paying passenger has to put up with the product of someone fucking that had a rubber break!!
I am reading your post, so yes.
Re:Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:4, Informative)
Children have as much a right to fly as you.
Please chill like an adult.
Re: (Score:2)
Stroller for under age 5. Car seat per kid up to age 8 depending upon US state (not sure about overseas). If you're trying to avoid checking luggage, these common requirements pose challenges.
Re:Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are you avoiding checking luggage...those things you listed are EXACTLY the type things you should be checking not bringing into the cabin for travel...?
Re: (Score:3)
Why are you avoiding checking luggage.
Cost, generally.
Re: Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:5, Insightful)
But, they need to be OLD enough to behave themselves when on a plane or in a restaurant before you inflict them on other people out there.
Sometimes you need to transport babies. It's often annoying for other people, but waiting for years isn't always an option.
No one owes you a baby-free flight, Karen (Score:4, Insightful)
But, they need to be OLD enough to behave themselves when on a plane or in a restaurant before you inflict them on other people out there.
You don't like kids...hot take, brother. If you convince a woman to reproduce with you, someday, it'll be your problem. Pretty much no one takes babies on getaways. It's to see their family. When you see a baby on a flight, I will wager it's to see a grandparent or extended family, not for a resort getaway.
You may have unilaterally decided the world owes you a baby-free flight. However, there is no law regulating that...because it would be shitty. It's also shitty for the environment to have 100 relatives fly to a baby's city of birth to see it rather than the baby flying to wherever the parent is from.
Put more effort into getting laid with a woman who likes you enough to have your baby and you'll be put in the same situation. I promise you, babies are a lot less annoying if you have one of your own (assuming you actually spend time with it and not ignore it because you think it's a woman's job to interact with children). I don't LIKE crying babies on a flight..but they're 1000x preferable to sky-Karen's....which frankly you sound like in this conversation. It's an old hack-ey joke to complain about crying babies along with mother-in-laws and hospital food, but to most adults anyone who does just sounds like an asshole.
I DESPERATELY wish I had a life as nice as yours....that a crying baby is infuriating enough for you to write about days after the fact. I've flown next to some horrible babies and never once were they the worst part of my day. Maybe you need to discover noise-canceling headphones or up the dose on your medication.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes that'd be swell if suddenly on their 6th birthday they just magically became aware standards of behavior in various social and commercial settings!
Do parents need to disipline their kids - absolutely. If little Timmy is making a scene parents should be when possible ready and prepared to remove Timmy (where possible on an airplane it obviously isnt) or be doing what they can to get them to stop. Upto and include corporal punishment.
That said children learn by being present and included. Other people for
Re: (Score:3)
Don't they fit in the overhead bins - at least if you don't overfeed them?
Re: (Score:3)
Timmy's parents should book flights only on Boeing 737 MAX 9s and make sure to sit near a plugged exit to simplify removing Timmy midflight.
Re: (Score:3)
Car seat, because putting kids in carseats on the plane is the best move until they are, again, over age 5 or so. Airplane seats are too big to hold kids securely, so there's nowhere for them to lean and they just squirm everywhere. If you put the kids in their usual carseat they are are used to, they are much more likely to fall asleep, which benefits everyone. The
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If you have kids that are smaller than that (babies), for God's sake, PLEASE stay home and don't bring those screaming puke machines onboard a tightly packed flight and ruin everyone else's experience.
Yeah, make sure those parents stay locked up in their house and don't travel until their kids meet our specific behavior standards, am I right? I also prefer that they have all their groceries, meals, and purchases delivered to their homes so I don't have to see or hear their awful children while I am out running errands and living my own life.
Now me, personally, if we could just eliminate coach/economy entirely and replace it with all First Class, it would make flying so much more pleasant. All those peopl
Re:Geez, how much STUFF do you need? (Score:5, Interesting)
Alright, I'm trying to figure out WTF stuff people are trying to take on flights with them.
Are people trying to carry half their homes with them to destination?
Well, I can't blame them for trying to max out the carry-on policies as airlines are actively discouraging checking a bag with high fees and long waiting time for drop of and retrieval. (ok, second is mostly the airport, but having a checked bag included or not is their decision.
I'd ban wheels. If it has wheels, it's not CARRY on.
Re: (Score:3)
I primarily fly Southwest. You get 2x free checked bags.
Is it more on other airlines?
and as far as waits....I rarely spend more than maybe 5-10 minutes after I get off a flight, walk to the luggage area to wait for my bag.
I've never found it to really be much of an intrusion on my time.
Re: (Score:2)
I primarily fly Southwest. You get 2x free checked bags.
Yes, many airlines charge you even for the first checked bag. I prefer it that way. I pay more if I'm bringing more with me, and less if I'm not. Instead of everyone paying the same regardless of how much weight and space requirements they are adding to the flight.
Re: (Score:2)
and as far as waits....I rarely spend more than maybe 5-10 minutes after I get off a flight, walk to the luggage area to wait for my bag.
I fly into Seattle about 8x a year, half the time with baggage (family travel), half the time without (solo business travel). Waiting for baggage adds an average of 45mins.
Re: (Score:2)
My biggest issue with checking bags nowadays isnt the fee as tickets themselves are quite cheap historically speaking so what's an extra fee? My issue is the fear of my bag getting lost as major airline's reliability with such things is pretty bad nowadays.
I should note though that I'm not one to try to bend or break the rules on carry-ons either. I do check my bags when I know I'm beyond what's allowed to bring on the plane such as an extra large bag for a long international trip.
Re: (Score:2)
Most small suit cases come with wheels on them nowadays and those are definitely allowed as carry-on.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll often put a couple days of clothes in my carry on, for if/when the lose your bag and it takes a couple days to get it. Or if a connection is cancelled or you miss it, and you're stuck in another city overnight with no access to your checked bag. This has happened to me multiple times, so I always pack overnight essentials in my carry on, and any clothes I would need for the next day or two.
Re: (Score:2)
I just go buy some new clothes at destination if that actually happens to me (rare in my case).
Re: (Score:2)
There are certain essentials that airlines and travel agents / guides actually recommend that you carry on in case your checked luggage gets lost. Things like a day or two worth of clothing, some amount of toiletries, all of your medications, travel documents and other essentials that you couldn't go a day or two without in the event that there are issues with reclaiming your checked luggage.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd mentioned I brought meds, and things necessary to get through....but that stuff doesn't take much room.
And as
Re: (Score:2)
People have to much stuff and they're too attached to it.
Just leave it at home. You don't need all that stuff with you when you travel. It will be there when you get back.
All you need is one change of clothes.
I've been doing this for years and it's really a much better way to travel.
Re: (Score:3)
> I'm trying to figure out WTF stuff people are trying to take on flights with them.
Expensive stuff that would get stolen by baggage handlers.
Things with lithium ion batteries, because thems the rules.
Re: (Score:2)
We're indeed getting to the point where it's just plain cheaper to buy clothing wherever you go and dump it instead of bringing it home.
Re: (Score:2)
We're indeed getting to the point where it's just plain cheaper to buy clothing wherever you go and dump it instead of bringing it home.
No we aren't. A checked suitcase is usually around $20-40. That is the about the price of a single shirt. Considering you can fit 50 of those shirts in a suitcase, it would need to cost closer to $1000 to check a bag for it to be cheaper to buy clothing at your destination instead of bringing a portion of your current wardrobe with you. Even if I was just bringing a single outfit, and wasn't allowed a carry-on, it would still be cheaper to bring a suitcase than buy that outfit at my destination.
Re: (Score:2)
Err...what airline does this?
I've never seen it before.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never seen this, but I've dreamed of it.
This is your space - if the bag or bags fit it's yours and yours alone to use. If they don't fit, we check them for you at a great fee for you wasting our time - say $200.
Re: (Score:3)
When it was regulated, flying was EXPENSIVE. Yes, making it expensive again would solve a lot of problems, like riff-raff flying.
SFO-EWR round trip economy class iirc in 1970 was $300. In 2024 dollars,that is about $2400. When Braniff came along it dropped to about $150 if you were lucky, only about $1200 today.
Re: (Score:3)