Airlines shrink carry-on bag size

[IronMac]

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.

[max]

GuyGene wrote:
Most of my flying is international. No matter what, I only take wha' I wear, then 3 more days (3 shirts, 3 underwear each, 3 socks, and only 2 more pants. Done.) in me luggage. Hey, ye have to do laundry! Simple - just don't take enough to last the entire trip without having to have laundry done.

Exactly, but then I have a backpack with all the electronics, close to 50 lbs. I all years of flying I never had my carryon weighted.
OTOH I was pulled out of line in a Chinese railroad station and given a pink slip for overweight luggage, a carry on and a backpack, weighted together, while being passed by passengers towing suitcases size of a sauna....

[OWC Jamie]

Paul F. wrote:
I wonder when the first modern trans-atlantic and trans-pacific liners are going to be built... Not a "cruise ship" with lots of luxury, but a passenger ship that will cost less than a business class seat with a gazillion dollars in luggage, rules, taking off your shoes at the airport, etc...
I'd be up for a trip across the atlantic that takes 5 days, if I can bring a reasonable about a luggage for a 20 day trip!

Just kind of an idle thought...

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.

[Speedy]

Obviously it is all about the $$$ and nothing else.

[mrlynn]

Does that include the wheels?

Another reason I hate air travel. Rollie suitcase that doesn't quite fit overhead, backpack on the floor with no room for my feet, cramped seats. . .

Whenever I can, I take the train.

/Mr Lynn

[IronMac]

I assume that it would include the wheels.

[OWC Jamie]

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.

[C(-)ris]

billb wrote:
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. The rules for what can and cannot go on the plane should also be standard. Weights should be standard as well for bags across all Airlines. Maybe a different set of rules for International vs. Domestic.

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.

You just have to get all the entitled aholes to stop flying.

[GuyGene]

Speaking of flying, I'd drive to Japan if I could. I hate flying.

[N-OS X-tasy!]

GuyGene wrote:
Speaking of flying, I'd drive to Japan if I could. I hate flying.

Two weeks vs. fourteen hours... assuming driving to Japan was even possible.