+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size (/showthread.php?tid=179947)
Re: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size - N-OS X-tasy! - 06-10-2015
C(-)ris wrote:
Another insane idea. Since everyone has assigned seats have baggage handlers load the cabin as well. The three people in the row have their bags above them.
Southwest doesn't do assigned seating. One other carrier doesn't also, IIRC.
Re: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size - Paul F. - 06-10-2015
billb wrote:
Queen Mary 2 for about $100 a night Transatlantic is the best you can do today. It is after all basically a floating hotel, not a bus.
Right... which is why I'm thinking more along the lines of a faster floating Motel 6 rather than a slow floating Ritz-Carlton.
Cut back on the amenities, get me there in a few days rather than a week and a half, and I'd be interested.
Of course, they have to have a lot more than ME interested before it becomes practical to build or gut-and-refit a ship and operate it. Just sayin' I like the idea...
New York to Amsterdam, 4-5 days, for $700 or so, and it beats the heck out of flying!
Re: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size - Uncle Wig - 06-10-2015
IronMac wrote:
Well, the SS United States was a luxury passenger liner.
You really need someone to build a true passenger ship which does not exist today.
The SSUS was a three-class ship, like others at the time. First class was definitely luxurious, but most accommodations were Cabin or Tourist class, and Tourist was pretty basic. Passengers who used Tourist were often students, immigrants, or folks going to visit relatives in the homeland. It was very much along the lines of what Paul F is wishing for. In 1952, a Tourist class fare to Europe was $165 which in today' money is $1473 - not much different than a coach airline fare. First Class started at a little less than twice the Tourist fare.
Re: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size - max - 06-10-2015
C(-)ris wrote:
[quote=billb]
even a standard size doesn't address the dickwads that insist on putting their personal items and jackets and other myriads of junk up there blaming the airlines and not the airline makers for not making the planes big enough for fat slobs.
It is going to be pretty easy to deal with that. Those overhead compartments are going to be for approved luggage only. Doesn't fit? Check it at the gate. Everything else goes in your lap or under your seat or it gets checked. Have a problem? You can get off the plane.
I am absolutely amazed that it took this long to get a handle on this. It is painfully clear to anyone who doesn't regularly fly that the system is completely messed up. From the beginning there should have been a single set size(or smaller) for carry ons that was standard across the industry. But is is pretty much standard now, despite all the hoopla by the press, if you use the European (continental) dimensions you are covered for 95% of normal airlines in the world, 50cm x 40 cm x 23cm, including wheels, 21.5"x15.5"x9" covers it well. If they shrunk it all by half an inch it would be no problem. I use a 21"x 15" x 9" carry on and I never had a problem. Ever.
The big kicker is going from 9 or 10" to 7.5". It is uncalled for, but a sneaky way to increase revenues...
Re: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size - OWC Jamie - 06-10-2015
hal wrote:
[quote=Kludgy Thingy]
First they charged to check in luggage. Now they shrunk the carry-on size. What next?
I have no problem with a business setting the standard and letting us know. You can always choose an alternative...
What's next? Paying for you tickets not by the numbers of seats you require, but by the combined weight of you and your baggage. That would be the fairest way to do it.
Last time I flew on a full flight, EVERYONE had the maximum sized carry-on and there just wasn't enough room for it all.
Which is why many many airlines will announce over and over and over again that they will check your carry-on for free once you've made it to the gate waiting area. For full flights (which they are maximizing now) Especially with older planes that didn't have very big overheads. For what ? Years ago there were no laptops, phones and electronic devices. You'd bring a book. That might even fit in your back pocket. They fed you well. You didn't pack lunch, And snack after snack after snack after snack because Americans are addicted to high fructose corn syrup and chemical crap and can't stop feeding at the trough except to come up for air every now and then. Or a big gulp. of high fructose corn syrup liquid to wash down the crap.
People shop for the lowest airfare.
Whichever fare comes to the top on an internet search.
They days of brand loyalty are long gone.
The only way to get your plane filled a few months before your competition is slice out all the perks that cost them money and have the lowest fare.
Some don't bother adding the fees and taxes and fuel charges.
Whatever came to the top tonight.
That's the company with full planes.
I'll pay extra for 2x4x2 seating. Because I want a window seat, my partner wants an aisle seat and I don't wan some HFCS fat fuck that sweats like a greased pig between us.
Re: Airlines shrink carry-on bag size - Racer X - 06-10-2015
Buzz wrote:
[quote=Mike Johnson]
Argh. Last year Delta et al went to 22x14x9 inches. They picked that size in part because at 45,000 cm3 it’s in line with what the Europeans require. I’m sure they were hoping it’d catch on. I don’t think they expected this new proposal, amounting to 38,500 cm3, so soon.
I doubt there will ever be a standard size, though. Right now you can have a bag that’s okay with Air France but too big for Air Berlin, and another bag that’s completely arse-versey. And don’t get me started on US airlines that just add up length + width + height. That’s never made any sense.
I’ve had my carry-on luggage weighed plenty of times. At some airlines it’s SOP, all carry-ons get weighed and tagged. Some airlines it’s at the discretion of the employee. If your carry-on looks heavy they’ll weigh it.
They weigh the baggage to help calculate the total weight carried for the flight... some "full" flights will actually have some empty seats due to weight restrictions for that flight... Fuel, cargo, baggage, people, etc. all have to be accounted for, and some flights push the total weight limit. Some "non-stop" flights out of high altitude airports may have to make a fuel stop depending on weather conditions at take off... it really is a balancing act.
==
They have to factor in temp as well. Had a LONG delay in Vegas as the plane was too heavily loaded for the air temp. We needed to wait 2 hours until after sundown. Long runway was shut down for some reason, and the shorter runway had a tailwind for take-off.