Airlines want smaller carry-on bags to free up overhead bins

[raccoon]

(Well, excuse me, but they let some people carry steamer trunks onto the plane now. So what's the point of lowering
the guidelines? They aren't enforcing the guidelines now.)

Millions of fliers might soon need to buy new carry-on suitcases.

Global airlines on Tuesday announced new guidelines that would shrink the size of bags allowed on planes, part of an effort to free up space in packed overhead bins.

The move means that many bags now allowed would need to be checked. Fliers would either need to buy smaller suitcases or pay a fee to check their bags, typically $25 each way.

Under the new guidelines set by the airlines' trade group, the International Air Transport Association, bags could be no larger than 21.5 inches tall by 13.5 inches wide by 7.5 inches deep. That's smaller than the current maximum size allowed by U.S. airlines: 22 inches by 14 inches by 9 inches.

Associated Press
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/ct-smaller-carry-on-bags-20150609-story.html

[BeyondGeography]

1. It's just one damn thing after another

Fuck flying.

[yeoman6987]

2. It is a pain flying

But to see travelers trying to stuff a suitcase into an overhead compartment. Travelers will try to get away with as much as possible to the detriment of other travelers who follow the rules and end up getting to connections late waiting for those to get their overhead junk out of the bin. Finally the airlines are waking up to this.

[BeyondGeography]

5. They just want more money

It bothers them that anyone gets off without paying them the extra $25. Right now, they gate-check when they run out of space. They will be taking your credit card before long for that.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

7. Yep

And the reason they run out of room is because they don't enforce the rules about the size and/or quantity of bags allowed on the flight.

[BeyondGeography]

10. It's true...when do they ever put a bag in the metal bag measuring-thingy at the gate?

Basically, nobody's bag fits in that thing. Not a roller, anyway. So we all have to go out and buy new bags that we don't want to buy to take trips we'd rather not take. Yay!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. I was shopping for a carry-on bag a few years back.

I never put it in the overhead compartment; I want it under the seat in front of me so I can get at my stuff while we're aloft.

I check a larger bag.

The stuff I don't want anyone to touch but me goes in the carry-on: my camera, my laptop, my medications. I don't trust anyone but me with those!

And the bag fits under the seat in front of me.

[Iggo]

11. If it don't fit in two backpacks, I don't need it.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

12. That's great for you!

I am older and I need a certain number of things!

[Iggo]

13. I do travel light, it's true.

[enlightenment]

14. Exactly.

The most that I will put in an overhead bin is a coat. Might as well leave the space for all the "I'm too important/paranoid/in a hurry to check a bag" folks.

[Coventina]

4. Of course they do! More people will have to check bags = more $$$ for the airlines.

A pox on all their houses!!!

[Logical]

6. Good, too many idiots taking up 2 spots with bags they should check! nt

[kiva]

15. Check out the diamention change...

half inch on height and width, inch and a half on depth. That will make no real difference in terms of freeing up space, it will just force people to either check their former carryons or buy new bags; passengers get screwed, airlines and baggage manufacturers win.

[DrDan]

8. they are starting to enforce bag size limits - not very quickly, but I have

seen some not accepted as carry-on.

They also need to enforce how many bags are allowed. I regularly see folks with a carry-on, a computer bag, and one other piece. Two of these usually end up overhead.

[NightWatcher]

9. How bout we just shove our luggage up our ass and walk to wherever we need to go?

If I never have to fly, I'll be a happy camper. Damn I gotta fly next month.