Smaller carryon bags?

Whew, I don't need to buy a different carry-on even if this is implemented! I needed to comply with both Delta's & Air France's requirements on previous trips. My Eddie Bauer Travex Expedition Medium Rolling Duffel Bag has actual dimensions of 21.5 X 13.5, and the depth is very flexible depending on how much is packed.

Lee, I know you hate wheeled luggage. : )

"I know you hate wheeled luggage."

For myself, I absolutely prefer a non-wheeled bag for good reasons (mainly weight). My girlfriend uses a wheelie when flying domestically, and I find it a Royal PITA.

For others, I'm fine with rollers as long as they check them. What I hate is the way they fill up the overhead bins and the way people roll them down the concourses, out at their sides, under normal line-of-vision, tripping people who want to pass them.

Philosophically, I'm against roller bags because they facilitate over-packing.

I have used a RS 21" roller bag ever since they came out while going to Europe every year and taking 12 RS tours, one each year, and have never had a problem with using it. I do check it since it has some things in it that the TSA does not allow in carry-ons. I have a skeleton problem that does not allow me to put a pack on my back. I do fly often and often see folks bringing things onto the plane that are twice the acceptable/legal size. If the airlines are worried about not having enough room for everyone in the overhead bins, all they have to do is start making everyone put their carry-on into that wire rack at the gate to see if it is the correct size. I also have suggested that they let folks check bags for free and charge for carry-ons but that will never fly.

I took four flights last week. For fun, I counted how many people took full-sized (like the size of a RS Convertible CarryOn) non-wheeled bags on board.

I counted a total of............none. There were a few backpacks but they would pass as personal items.

I'm sorry to tell you Lee but the airlines are not going to do away with wheeled carry-ons. Let's face it, you buty the cheapest tickets. The airlines best customers buy full priced tickets. and in most cases have full sized wheeled carry ons. Who do you think they want to please?

This just seems like another ploy for the airlines to squeeze more money out of already suffering passengers. Most people won't go out and buy new luggage to meet the new standards (at least, not right away), so they'll be forced to check at additional cost. As the article stated, "Once again, the airlines find a way to make their problem the passenger's problem." No doubt both the airlines and luggage manufacturers will be salivating at the thought of the increased revenue resulting from this move.

The airlines are apparently trying to address the problem of bin capacity by redesigning them, according to this article from April......

http://qz.com/385423/boeings-new-overhead-bins-will-hold-50-more-bags/

It would be nice if the IATA could take a stand and regulate the luggage sizes across all airlines so there'd be some consistency. Unfortunately, I doubt that will ever happen.

My husband still uses the RS convertible carry-on we got in 2009. Trust me, he can stuff it to capacity and it is bigger and heavier than my Lipault 22" spinner. Both are soft-sided.

According to the article, both our bags are too big in at least one dimension for the 21.5x13.5x7.5 recommendation. The RS store says his is 21x14x9. The Lipault store says the maximum dimensions for mine are 21.5x14x8.

So close and yet so far...

If these recommendations are implemented, perhaps the RS designers can come up with some kind of "shapewear" for that bag to suck it in. Lipault already has a smaller 2-wheeled bag which is tempting at 19x13x6, but the drop in cubic inches makes it seem a little too small.

I'm sure many bag manufacturers will come up with designs that mirror the new size as more and more airlines implement it, which I hope they do, along with enforcing the size limits they say they have.

We carry lots of luggage and check most of it. I love wheeled carry-on luggage (wheeled luggage in general) since I don't have to carry it. In first class air, everyone has wheelies. I like soft-sided bags as they are stretchable and squishable.

Cursing as I just invested in a new RS bag. Well, hopefully this takes awhile to implement. After purchasing a few carry on bags and facing increasing shrinkage, I'll just have to say the hell with it and check it if this comes to pass with the airlines I fly with. Not buying another carry on until mine falls apart.

As a small older (70) woman, I need to defend the wheeled luggage. It has been several years since my upper body strength allowed me to carry a backpack the distances in modern airports. Add to that all the fees for checking luggage and I have been using a great small RS bag that I pack as my only bag no matter how long my trip. I have seen the new size. It is really small. I hope Rick comes up with some clever packing tricks to make this work so the airlines can cram more of us in the plane.

I have been using my Eagle Creek carry on for 18 years and never had a problem. It makes me so mad that they are cracking down and making the bag requirement smaller when if they just stuck to the size they require now. But every time we get on a plane any where people are trying to bring on these huge bags. Why would you make the requirements smaller when you are not even holding people to the standard you have now?

It would be nice if the IATA could take a stand and regulate the luggage sizes across all airlines so there'd be some consistency. Unfortunately, I doubt that will ever happen.

Here, here! I would love to see standardization across the board, and for a visible, universal tag which is applied by luggage manufacturers which identifies such bags as within compliance. Or maybe those could also be obtained at check-in if using any old duffel or whatever? Gate staff could tell at a glance what bags are and are not within guidelines.

Or something like that.

The actual size IATA proposes is 55 x 35 x 20 cm. The Denver post article has converted comprehensible metric units into incomprehensible Fred Flintstone units :-)

The proposal is to replace the current confusing system of different limits for different airlines with the same limits for all airlines. BBC has an article on this ( http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33076492 ) which compares the proposed standardised limits with the current limits for some airlines.

Airline can not consistently enforce their current rules now so I doubt this will help at all. It would be better to move to one carry on only than try and enforce new size rules. Making the carry on luggage smaller will only make people's personal item bag larger.

DJ

" Why would you make the requirements smaller when you are not even holding people to the standard you have now?"

Amen. On my last flights, with United, they did have a sizing box next to the gate desk, and they repeatedly announced about making sure your bag fit, but I didn't see many people using it, and many still brought on board bags that obviously wouldn't have fit. But maybe this is just a preliminary round, getting people used to the idea, so when they do enforce it, no one can act surprised.

I really think the complaint about upper body strength (Josommmers) is a moot one if you don't over-pack. When I bought the eBags bag, I looked forward to the sternum strap because I'm forever holding the shoulder straps together to keep them from slipping off my shoulders (or feeling like they will), but I never imagined that the waist belt would be so effective. I trial packed it with what I normally take with me to Europe and walked around. I fastened the waist belt and was able to completely loosen the shoulder straps so that the weren't carrying any weight at all.

DJ, "Making the carry on luggage smaller will only make people's personal item bag larger.". Many budget airlines in Europe do not allow a "personal item bag". It is one item, PERIOD. No extra handbags, laptops or anything.

Except, they do allow items bought from a shop in that airport. They make money on that. Now, if they were truly to enforce the one bag limit, then there should be no exemption for purchases.

Theoretically, current guidelines could result in an overage of 20 carry-ons if all passangers brought maximum-sized bags. That could easily be addressed by increasing bin sizes (or, in a fantasy world of kinder airlines, removing 20 seats). The new guidelines' small dimension of 7.5 in -- an inch smaller than the width of a letter-sized sheet of paper -- removes all current full-size carry-ons & restricts fliers to what are currently classed as "day bags." Nearly all passengers will be forced to check bags.

"Nearly all passengers will be forced to check bags."

Not me. Actually, the height (or thickness) dimension is the easiest one with which to comply. Just don't try to stuff 9 inches of clothes into your bag. Most bags, particularly soft ones, will squeeze down to 7½ inches if not full. In particular, avoid bags that have a pocket on the back side that comprises only a small part of the back area (or avoid using it). There pockets add to the thickness without significantly adding to the volume.

I saw another article yesterday that says that Boeing is thinking of redesigning the bins so the height is 14 inches. Then rigid bags could go in on their sides and only take 9 inches of width instead of the current 14 inches.

"Many budget airlines in Europe do not allow a "personal item bag". It is one item, PERIOD. No extra handbags, laptops or anything."

Exactly, these airline have figured it out and low and behold they didn't loose their customer base either. Easy Jet is the one that come to my mind.

We just purchased the RS Rolling Carryon, it did not arrive yet. The measurements are 13.5x20x9 with a hard shell for the back part. Does anyone have this and know if it can be kept to 7" if not packed full? The front is soft, not a shell. This is for my wife, I have the Classic bag and I can keep mine small enough to fit since it is soft sided.

I wish my husband and I were sturdy enough to not need to used wheeled luggage - but for a lot of people it is a fact of life. I've been almost unable to sit/stand up a few times because of back issues (for about 4-5 days each time - at least the 2nd time I was able to go to the Dr within a day or two - the first time I suffered thru it - I couldn't even pick up my new puppy at the time and he was all of 10 lbs). Schlepping a 20 lb backpack thru an airport - especially somewhere like Heathrow where it can be a 10-15 min walk to the gate - just isn't going to cut it.

My husband has had issues with his hands and feet going on 5-6 yrs now, since he was about 45 (2 specialists - still don't know why - not arthritis or carpel tunnel) and for him to have to carry luggage is not easy at times - even wheeling the carry on can make his hands hurt.

So don't denigrate the wheely bag!

I don't understand why everyone is defending their use of a wheeled bag.

Just because one person here believes what's right for him is right for everyone, and attacks those who do different, doesn't mean people have to defend themselves for doing something different.

It's your trip, your life, your money. Live it the way you want. Take whatever bag makes you happy.

I run a website that promotes light travel. I help people to learn how to travel lighter. And you know what, that doesn't necessarily mean the lightest possible. It means lighter than what you have been taking if you want to do that. And wheeled bags can be a part of it. Even I've been using a wheeled bag lately. Especially in summer when it's hot and I'm changing planes at a huge airport.

And if that person wants to attack saying that the lightest is the best, let me remind him he has recently upgraded to a heavier bag because he likes the features. And no one attacked him.

Actually would like to see a sizing chair. If you don't fit, you don't fly.

So then Frank, how do we keep the obnoxious people off the plane?

Excellent suggestion, Frank.

What do we do if they don't fit the sizing chair? Make them buy 1st class tickets? Or two economy tickets? Put them in the hold with checked luggage? Maybe set up folding chairs on the wing?

Frank II: We were discussing what the airlines are going to do about the problem created by people bringing on large carryons. The problem has been exacerbated by rigid wheeled bags. People might be bringing on wheeled bags because they have a physical problem (and can't make themselves pack only what they can carry), or just because they think rolling bags are neat, but the fact remains that it is because of rolling bags that we have this space problem in the overhead bins.

I can't tell people here what they can do, but the airlines can, and probably will, eventually. Last year we flew on a regional carrier with small bins. Before boarding they made an announcement that ALL wheeled luggage would have to be gate-checked, and they stood right there on the Jetway and wouldn't allow anyone to take a wheeled bag onto the plane.

" but the fact remains that it is because of rolling bags that we have this space problem in the overhead bins."

Actually I beg to differ with you on that. The bin space problem is caused more by: 1. people who are allowed to bring on one (and sometimes two) bags that are oversized according to the airlines' own regs that are not enforced. My wheeled bag is squishable and meets airline regs so is NOT the problem. 2. airlines squeezing more seats on the planes without increasing bin space.

According to the Boeing article, today's bins have room for four regulation (ie, 14" wide) bags. A regulation sized (22x14x9) bag occupies 2772 cu inches, so the bin can hold 11,088 cu inches (or more). Each bin spans 2 rows of three seats, so if it is to hold 6 bags, they can only be 1848 cu in. (a little smaller than Rick's Rolling Backpack), and they had better be no more than 9.3" wide or squishable. If Boeing can make a 14" high bin, then 6 bags will fit in.

I have long believed that bin space should be allocated just like cubbies in a Kinder classroom. Each seat gets one bin slot. Anything else goes under the seat or gets checked. On my most recent flights it hasn't been the wheeled bags that created a bin space problem, it was the gigantic overstuffed backpacks. There was nothing "squishy" about them, and because of their irregular size they encroached upon bin space more than the hard-sided bags.

Praise be to Air Canada (and West Jet) who is my carrier over to Europe and back...I will be able to use my new RS bag for the foreseeable future :)

Air Canada and WestJet have both said they are not changing their sizes to the recommended 55 x 35 x 20 centimetre dimensions.
"You don't need to be concerned about the size of the bag and whether your airline this week or next month will accept it," says Tom Windmuller, the travel association's senior vice-president, in an online video. "For the airlines, it means faster turnaround because it will mean fewer bags need to be taken down the ramp and put into the hold."

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/business/story/1.3108747

My carry-on is a soft but structured over-night bag, basically, and it has a long strap for shoulder carrying, fits perfectly under the seat so I'm not worried. I always check a wheeled suitcase and my carry-on is mainly for do-or-die stuff, only if boarding is complete do I consider heaving it into the overhead. On my recent trip I noticed far less jockeying for bin space than ever before.

"The height (or thickness) dimension is the easiest one with which to comply."

The fact remains that the new guidelines cut capacity of bags by 40 percent. Despite your sanguinity, no matter which dimension is most reduced, cutting carry-on capacity almost in half is not going to be a trivial matter for most passengers.

"The fact remains that the new guidelines cut capacity of bags by 40 percent."

???

The volume of the current regulation (22" x 14" x 9") is 2772 cu in. The volume of the proposed regulation (21½" x 13½" x 7½") is 2177 cu in. The new bags would be 595 cu in smaller, 21.47% smaller than 2772 cu in. - not 40% smaller.

(For the mono-metric people, the current US regulation, rounded to the nearest cm, is 56x36x23, or 46.368 l. The proposed regulation, 55x35x20 is 38.500 l, 17% less)

If you have a roller with a 14" wheelbase, it isn't going to fit into a 13½" sizer; it the height from wheels to handle is 22", it won't fit in a 21½" sizer. That leaves only reducing the bag thickness to make it fit.

Of course, that's outside dimensions. The inside of the bag is smaller, and the heavier the bag, the more volume the bag itself occupies, therefore the less volume of what you want to carry.

Assuming 0.0412 #/cu in density of nylon and 90% weave density (I'm guessing at this), my 2# 10oz all cloth soft bag probably "costs" me about 70 cu in. A six # roller will cost you more internal volume.

The new, guidelines (not regulations) are silly. They are "the lowest common denominator." Review a current listing of size requirements by airline and you will note that the new guidelines are the smallest measure for the dimension that is a current carrier's limit. Ergo, the Korean Airlines limit of 7.5" depth (sort of) become the new guide.
This is to allow more carry-ons to fit above. Hogwash! The length determines the number of items that can fit above, since the length is the dimension of them butting into each other.

The depth comes into play based upon whether the carry-on will 1) fit above (get into the space) and 2) have the door close. The airlines in the USA have not screened carry-ons for using their current REGULATIONS and the silly passengers with oversize luggage take forever to jam them into the overhead.

*

So then Frank, how do we keep the obnoxious people off the plane?

*
Don't have to, Nancy, since obnoxious people only take up one seat. But it is those that take up a seat and half or two and only play for one.

In a free society, obnoxious people have the same rights to fly as everyone else. Unless you want to make them sign a "No grump" pledge.

In a free society, obnoxious people have the same rights to fly as everyone else. Unless you want to make them sign a "No grump" pledge.

Airlines say they want smaller carry-ons, but they do nothing to police their current carry-ons policy. I just returned from 5 days in Boston and seeing what people were bringing on the the plane as carry on just made me laugh. I actually had one lady ask me to help her put her bag in the overhead. I smiled and said "No".