Please sign in to post.

Carry-on restrictions at Heathrow

I've been reading that Heathrow is especially strict about carry-on baggage size. The limit is 22x17x10 inches, but by that they mean absolute exterior dimensions, including wheels, handles and external pockets.

I visited a luggage store and a department store today with a tape measure, and was amazed that every bag and pack I found that was nominally 20 or 21 inches was actually more than 22 inches. The other dimensions were not usually a problem.

Has anyone found a bag or pack with good capacity that is truly less than 22 inches? The 18- and 19-inch bags I've found have been pretty small.

Posted by
32351 posts

James,

Are you interested in a wheeled bag or other types? a few suggestions.....

You might have a look at Rick's luggage collection. Click the "Travel Store" link at the top of the page.

The extreme "travel light" crowd tend to use products either from Red Oxx or Tom Bihn. Check both websites to see if any of their products will fit your needs. Both firms have products designed for Heathrow, which is often called "the toughest airport in the world" (for baggage limits).

You might also have a look at www.onebag.com for suggestions.

Cheers!

Posted by
16278 posts

Remember 22 x 17 x 10 is Heathrow's carry-on maximum limits. Many airlines will be even stricter.

And yes, those dimensions include wheels, handles, etc.

To stay under 22 inches you need to look for a bag advertised at no more than say 20 inches. All rolling bags give their dimensions as per the bag only and not including wheels and handles.

Ricks' 21" rolling bag is actually closer to 23" with wheels. The only store in your area that carries Rick's luggage is The Globetrotter in Raleigh. (Call first to make sure they have it in stock.) Sharon Luggage has a decent selection of mid to high priced rolling luggage.)

Posted by
2349 posts

Out of the four of us, only one suitcase got challenged at Heathrow. It fit their box, so we were ok. The suitcase was a little boxier than the others, but it was also red rather than black or navy. I think that brighter color made it look bigger. Another reason to go for dark colors.

Posted by
810 posts

We flew back from Heathrow in August [on United] with 2 RS bags, the wheeled carryon and the convertible carryon. The agent checked both our bags - first time that has happened. However, she didn't seem to care that the wheeled bag could not fit entirely into the sizer box. The convertible didn't really fit either, but that we could fix by rearranging stuff inside.

It may depend on how full the flight is, or how the agent feels that day, or who knows what. I'm usually less concerned for the flight home - are you connecting in LHR or is are you worried about the return flight?

I see that RS now has a smaller wheeled bag, the Autobahn, that he says is an inch smaller than the rollaboard [hence 20 inches, I guess] and guaranteed to fit in the sizer boxes. Has anyone tried it yet?

Posted by
3 posts

Ken, I'm looking for a roller for my wife and a backpack or combo for myself.

Red Oxx looks promising. Does anyone have the Sky Train and can speak to the real dimensions?

Kathleen, we're connecting through LHR and don't want to have to loop out through immigration and security if we can't take the bags on board the BA flight. (We may check baggage on the return and use a compressible Eagle Creek duffel to carry on stuff we tend to buy.)

Yes, the Autobahn looks good for the roller, if it fits.

Thanks.

Posted by
32351 posts

James,

I don't have any experience with the Sky Train as I bought the Air Boss. In a recent review of the Air Boss, one traveller commented "then U.K ( thru Heathrow customs whilst the First Class Passengers were still looking for the baggage Carousal.).. ". The Sky Train seems very similar in design to the RS Convertible Backpack, although probably somewhat more robust.

The Tom Bihn Tri-Star has a slightly smaller capacity than the Air Boss but also has Backpack capability. However, you'd want to pack light as, a short pack won't be designed to transfer the weight off the shoulders and onto the hips via a waist belt. Fitting for proper torso length is normally an issue with Backpacks, however not as much of a problem with smaller packs that are only used for a short time.

Frank II would be able to provide more specific information on the Tri Star. I haven't had an occasion to take a trip with the Air Boss yet, but I'm sure it will work well. When I first had a look at it, I was very impressed by the quality of construction and attention to detail.

One review that I found interesting was tacticalgearhead.com/?p=361 (quite an impressive list of countries with just one bag!).

Cheers!

Posted by
16278 posts

James...

Should BA decide they want to check your bag on a connection, you won't have to go out through immigration. They'll take it from you at the gate. (Ask if they can gate check, then you'll get it back at the gate when you land rather than at baggage claim.)

With non-rolling luggage, the dimensions given are for the bag. Since there are no hard handles or wheels sticking out, the bag size is the actual size. (Most handles are soft and can be pushed down flat.)

I don't have a Skytrain. I didn't buy it for two reasons: too many people complained that the backpack straps were not comfortable, and the material had a tendency to bulge outwards.

I do have a Tom Bihn Tri-Star. This is an amazing bag. Extremely well made, will fit in any overhead--including regional jets. Comfortable backpack straps and you can get an optional waist belt. It is costly but will last forever. And if not, Tom Bihn will fix it for free. Packing a three compartment bag is slightly different than packing a one compartment bag but easily doable.

For a rolling bag, check the 19 & 20" line from Travelpro. They seem to get decent reviews online.

Posted by
632 posts

I would point out that the RS Classic back door bag is 9"x21"x14", weighs just 2 lbs, and can be loaded with up to 2,500 cu inches of stuff, and only costs $80, as opposed to the smaller (2,000 cu in), heavier (3.4 lbs), and more expensive (although probably better made) Tom Bihn Tri-Star at $240. Also note that I have put my RS Classic back door bag in the overhead of all but the smallest of regional jets. Much as I appreciate well made luggage (we have some nice Victorinox bags that we no longer use), I appreaciate light weight and not having to worry about the abuse the bag might take over time (for $240, I can replace the bag 4 times). Since this is an RS site, I thought it was only fair to give recognition to the RS products that warrant such recognition.

Posted by
16278 posts

Bill, I have both the Tri-Star and the two RS bags--the original back door bag from the early 1990's and a newer convertible bag from a couple of years ago. So, I can speak from experience.

The quality of the bags are extremely different. The Tri-Star is top of the line. The bag is indestructible, the quality is amazing, and the bag is made in the USA. Lifetime warranty means you never have to replace it.

The original back door bag is good although much less quality of the Tri-Star.

The newest convertible bag is the cheapest feeling and looking. It's now made of polyester.

All three bags will get the job done. The difference is how much you want to spend. If the $80 bag is good enough for you, then go with it. (Although I've seen the zippers go on these bags). If you only take one or two trips a year, then the RS bags should be fine. I prefer to spend a little more and get quality I can count on--especially since I travel a great deal.

Posted by
3428 posts

I have used the same RS bag for over 20 years (more than 40 trips) It still looks new. Light, holds more than enough and classy.

Posted by
632 posts

Frank, I have already conceded that the Tom Bihn bag is of a higher quality, my point is that it may not be necessary for the job at hand. As noted by Toni above and by others on the site previously, the bags hold up reasonably well, and yes I use my bag at least 6 times a year for business trips and at least 2 or 3 times a year for either short or extended periods for vacations and long weekends. I admit I have had my bag for several years, so I don't have the latest edition...the fact that it is now made of polyester is not the issue, what needs to be determined is how well it stands up to rigors of travel as envisioned by RS. I sincerely doubt that he would sell something he knew to be inferior and unacceptable for the intended purpose.

Posted by
16278 posts

Bill,

If you need to get from Point A to Point B, both a Chevy Aveo and a Mercedes S Class will take you there. The Chevy will take care of the job at hand yet you'll see Mercedes driving the same route.

If traveling "RS style," the $30 Essentials Carry-on bag takes care of the job at hand," so you could reason why spend more than that. But many do.

It's all personal choice as to what will tackle the "job at hand."

In fact, on some trips (leisure only) I still take the RS bag. (That's until Tom Bihn comes out with a one compartment the size of the Tri-Star.)

Posted by
970 posts

I'm flying United to Heathrow in a few weeks. The UAL site shows their carryon limits as 22x14x9, while Heathrow's limit for flights to the U.S. is shown on the airport's site as 22x17.7x10.

I've flown United this year with a bag that's larger than those dimensions, but it's never been challenged. However, I don't expect to be cut any slack at Heathrow.

Posted by
220 posts

My wife and I flew from Heathrow to Dulles on British Airways the day before yesterday. When we checked in, there was a metal size gauge that was supposed to be used to check the size of your carry-on baggage. We didn't see anyone using it, and when we got on the plane, there were literally dozens of passengers with HUGE roller bags huffing and puffing while they strained to lift up those gigantic bags into the overhead bins.

Posted by
3 posts

My wife and I just got back from a long weekend at Wrightsville Beach. It was rainy much of the time, so we drove into nearby Wilmington (NC) and, among other things, we stopped in at The Traveler Store, which happened to have several RS models in the store.

I was impressed by the Convertible Carry-On. It fell safely within the size restrictions, although it will be important not to over-stuff it, since it has no rigidity. The trade-off is that it is very light, just 3 pounds.

I bought it on the spot, and my wife, a die-hard roller user, was tempted. The store did not have an Autobahn (but offered to order one), but after measuring the inch-longer 21-Inch Roll-Aboard, which came in about a half inch too long, I suspect the Autobahn may work.

That said, I had been sorely tempted by the Tri-Star. That definitely looks like a sweet bag, and I may still get one, but I'm thinking that it makes more sense for shorter business trips. Most of my business travel is one- to three-day hauls that are easily handled by my Eddie Bauer EB Guide (which sadly has been discontinued) although three days are a stretch. The Tri-Star would make a worthy, though pricier successor and probably would support a few extra days.

Jim, it sounds as if Heathrow and BA have relaxed a bit, which I guess is good news. We have a perfectly good Eagle Creek convertible and REI rolling backpack that we carried on through Gatwick in 2004 (American Airlines), but in 2007 we had to check them (AA and BA) because they were about an inch over the limit. That may have been the worst it got, as that was during the one-carry-on era.

The beauty of the RS Convertible is that it has more capacity than my old Eagle Creek that was too long.

Posted by
990 posts

I've used the older RS bags and seen the new ones first hand--my daughter bought one. There's no comparison, unfortunately. The new ones are much flimsier in overall construction. Too bad, really, because the old bag was really a lot sturdier.

Myself, I won't be using my old RS bag anymore since I bought a Tri-star. I used it for a five week trip to Europe this summer and it worked fine. As Frank II says, it's remarkably well-made and will last forever. It also has a well-thought-out construction that is ideal when you have to live out of the bag rather than unpack completely into dresser drawers. Since much of my travel involves short stays, I find that the Tri-star works best for me. It also sits more comfortably on my back than does my old RS bag and is tidier as a "suitcase" bag, too.

So, luckily, my daughter will get my old RS bag (though she would really, really like a Tri-star...)

Posted by
421 posts

I leave tonight for heathrow on BA.
I have the tristar and so far I am in love with everythign about this bag....I can not believe what can be packed into it and the atention to detail on this bag not to mention the quality.
Now how it will operate in reality is the test but in the how I have tested it the back pack straps seem comfortable as is the shoulder strap although I got the upgraded strap and I think that would be a necessity.
My bag is weighing in at 9killos (I have to be under 10 killos for a low cost flight witin europe)

Posted by
5678 posts

There are lots of ranges of abuse that a bag can get. I tend to have at least 20 trips a year, and sometimes those trips have multiple legs with layovers. So, I need a bag that can really stand up. I used to buy bags that were durable, but didn't have any guarantees. I was wearing them out in a year or two and buying a new one. About 15 years ago I found Adiamo and then Tumi and have not had to replace a big for wear since. They will even re-do the zipper for reasonable fee and for free if it's faulty materials. So, you need to know how often the bag will be used as you make a decision about your luggage. Pam