Global Airline Group Scraps Idea Of Smaller Carry-on Luggage

[brooklynite]

Source: Airport Business

TORONTO (AP) — A global airline association said Wednesday that it was scrapping its recommendation to reduce the size of carry-on bags for air travelers after an "intense" response in North America.

The International Air Transportation Association, a Montreal-headquartered trade group whose members represent nearly 85 percent of total air traffic, said that it is canceling its proposal after "significant concerns" were raised in North America.

"This is clearly an issue that is close to the heart of travelers. We need to get it right," IATA senior vice-president Tom Windmuller said.

Read more: http://www.aviationpros.com/news/14011130/global-airline-group-scraps-idea-of-smaller-carry-on-luggage?utm_source=AIRB+E-Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AVVDB150612003

[hobbit709]

1. I bet the response was "intense", I'd throw in a few other words too.

[tblue37]

4. Have you seen the seating design Airbus was looking to patent some months ago?

[christx30]

2. Bah. Stack 'em like cordwood. n/t

[Matariki]

3. Maybe IF airlines stop losing luggage and charging for checked bags

otherwise many people opt for carry-on only. Anyway, what did they think was going to happen when they started charging for checking bags?

[Dopers_Greed]

5. People need to learn to travel lighter

I can fit enough stuff for a week's vacation into a duffle bag or small suitcase. No need to check bags and risk the airline losing my stuff. The people that take multiple giant suitcases and try to carry on as much as possible are ruining it for everyone.

[frazzled]

7. No one tries to take multiple giant suitcases on

Nothing larger than 24 inches will even fit in a bin (and 22 inches is all that is currently allowed). And you're only allowed to take one piece of luggage plus a purse or briefcase. People aren't trying to carry on giant 32-inch suitcases. They wouldn't even get past security. So that's not the issue. The issue is about airlines trying to cash in on those extra $25 fees by reducing the legal size by 1/2 inch. That screws everyone who dutifully invested in a 22-inch regulation bag, which easily fits in any overhead bin.

They should just charge more for tickets and let everyone check bags who wishes to.

[Gormy Cuss]

9. No, the airlines charging for first checked bags ruined it for everyone.

and I say that as someone who travels light. Trying to reduce carry-on sizes was a naked attempt to get more checked baggage fees.

[cab67]

12. The problem isn't just a matter of traveling light.

Because US airlines charge for checked bags, no one wants to check a bag. Which means that even when each and every passenger travels light, the overhead bins fill about two-thirds of the way through the boarding process. This is makes boarding a flight even more of a pain in the ass than it was before - it takes longer (more people are trying to shoehorn something into the overhead bins) and people who board late in the process (which often includes me, as I usually request an aisle seat) are left to either wander the cabin looking for a space in which to squeeze their roll-aboard or have them checked anyway.

Every solution has a cost.

[frazzled]

6. Ya think?

Less than 2 years ago I put my beloved Travelpro Platinum roll-aboard to rest--not just because it was getting old but because it exceeded the new 22" standard by an inch or so.

So I invested in a good-quality new piece (it was damned hard to find another one with a fold-out suiter to hang things on) ... and now I'm told that it's 1/2 inch too tall? Hundreds of dollars down the drain. Damn sure I was mad to hear that.

I can only imagine what the public response was.

[SoapBox]

8. And the fucking chaos of luggage in the cabin continues...

Such spineless jellyfish...but it's easier for U.S. airline management to ride the asses of the Flight Attendants, to not only fill absolutely every square inch of space in the cabin but to do it in accord with Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs)...AND have the cabin ready to have the boarding door closed at least 3 minutes before scheduled departure time.

And that doesn't even begin to include the arguing with passengers over where the bag is stowed in the cabin (get real traveling public idiots...3 people with a minimum of 2 items each, canNOT fit all that shit into one overhead bin) nor the MONSTEROUS 27" roll aboard type bags that make it through TSA, past the Gate Agents but Flight Attendants have to stop them when they have stepped into the aircraft.

Changing the size, which was really minuscule, would have begun to help.

Oops, forgot to mention...all those new style spinner bags...most do not fit. Why? The dumbass manufacturers have mounted the frame for the wheel to the corners of the bag, so the plastic frame sticks out...also, the wheels are not hidden up inside the bag, so they too are causing the bags to not fit "wheels first or handle first" into the bins. Brand new style bins that "pull down, push up" won't shut unless the bags are turned long-ways...and we're back to the same old problem as before.

[yeoman6987]

10. Another thing is airlines need to start from back to front

It's ridiculous to have to crawl over everyone trying to get to a seat. I just experienced this on Sunday. Totally dumb to go from front to back.

[cab67]

13. They should also limit the number of people who get to board early.

It makes absolute sense for passengers who genuinely need more time, but these days, people in all sorts of frequent-flyer categories are given the same privilege. Or you can pay to be put in a better boarding group. I've been on flights were about one-third of the passengers were in one or more of these categories. At that point, boarding back-to-front would make no difference at all.

[yeoman6987]

14. I agree a million percent!

[dbackjon]

11. No - it would not have changed ANYTHING other than making people buy new luggage

Those that try to carry on would still carry on.

If larger bags are making it through, then this would not change

[Psephos]

15. Do you also support 1.5 quart half-gallons of ice cream?

Or 15 ounce jars of peanut butter?

I don't. For the same reason I don't support this.

[Nihil]

16. If it needs wheels, it is not "hand-luggage".

Nothing with wheels attached should ever be counted as "hand" luggage.

The only things with wheels on that need to go into the cabin with a passenger
are wheelchairs (for the elderly or infirm) or pushchairs (for infants) and they
get stowed in specific areas.