IATA: Carry-On Bag Size to Shrink by 21%

[Steven_Draker]

 

GOOD FOR LUGGAGE MANUFACTURERS, BAD FOR TRAVELERS: CARRY-ON BAG SIZE TO SHRINK BY 21%

 

 

If an influential airline trade association gets their way, flying coach could soon become an even more miserable experience. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) wants to shrink the size of carry-on bags by 21%, which would require hundreds of millions of travelers worldwide to purchase new luggage, slow down boarding time on airplanes, and make paying luggage fees almost mandatory for anything longer than a day trip. According to the trade association, shrinking the bags "will make the best use of cabin storage space."

 

Air China, Avianca, Azul, Cathay Pacific, China Southern, Emirates, Lufthansa, and Qatar airlines have all signed on to the new voluntary carry-on guidelines, which would only allow luggage that is 21.5 inches tall, 13.5 inches wide, and 7.5 inches deep to be bought on board. Currently, most major airlines permit luggage that is 22 inches tall, 14 inches wide, and 9 inches deep. The changes sound small, but in reality they comprise a considerable cut in carry-on size.

 

In a statement, IATA senior vice president for airport, passenger, cargo, and security Tom Windmuller said that "The development of an agreed optimal cabin bag size will bring common sense and order to the problem of differing sizes for carry-on bags. We know the current situation can be frustrating for passengers. This work will help to iron out inconsistencies and lead to an improved passenger experience."

 

This is just the latest indignity airplane travelers have had to put up with in recent years. According to The Wall Street Journal’s Jon Ostrower and Daniel Michaels, major airlines and airplane manufacturers are aggressively shrinking economy-fare seats in order to fit more passengers to increase revenue, and the days of free food on domestic flights ended long ago.

 

Although the IATA’s new guidelines are voluntary, the trade association says several major luggage manufacturers are developing new, smaller carry-on bags that adhere to the guidelines, and bags will be stamped with an "IATA Cabin OK" logo.

[mike carey]

I've travelled too often when all the overhead locker space was full of other passengers' carry on baggage. I usually travel with a backpack that can be stuffed under the seat in front but it can be exasperating. I don't have much sympathy for people who have carry-ons that push the maximum limits of the space available in economy so they can avoid the delay of waiting for checked baggage. I would say give that privilege to Business class passengers - allow them larger carry-ons. I'm not being elitist, economy is cramped, limit carry ons there to make things comfortable for all of the passengers, if you want a large carry on bag, pay for a premium cabin.

[+ azdr0710]

a flight attendant once sidled up to me and said she can always tell if she's in a small, unsophisticated city or a large city and whether it's a weekend or weekday simply by watching the circus of passengers and their carry-ons....

 

passenger-loading happens in seconds flat on a weekday in a large city and can drag on for an hour on a weekend in a small town.....

 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/04/article-2573105-1C09FCC000000578-420_634x424.jpg

[rguer]

They should try enforcing the current rules before adding new ones. Many many people on flights I've been on have had huge duffel bags, backpacks, etc.

[Bosguy]

They should try enforcing the current rules before adding new ones. Many many people on flights I've been on have had huge duffel bags, backpacks, etc.

So true. There seems to be absolutely no consistency to the type, size, or weight of carry on luggage under the current guidelines. The massive sizes of baggage to attempt to be stored overhead causing massive delays in seating and storage for passengers whose rights to store their ONE bag added to the same passengers who store coats and accessories, plus oversized bags, and multi shopping bags.

Lets correct the current mess before we change the policy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Boston Bill

[+ purplekow]

How about just giving the overhead compartment space to the seat below it. How many times have you had to go up the aisles to find an empty overhead and then when the passengers are leaving, someone from the back comes and picks up their bag from over your seat.

Really this is just an income grab by the airlines, as was the pay for baggage scam. One bag per paid seat and one carry on. Anything else gets left at the airport. 'i am fine with that.

[Rudynate]

a flight attendant once sidled up to me and said she can always tell if she's in small, unsophisticated city or a large city and whether it's a weekend or weekday simply by watching the circus of passengers and their carry-ons....

 

passenger-loading happens in seconds flat on a weekday in a large city and can drag on for an hour on a weekend in a small town.....

 

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/03/04/article-2573105-1C09FCC000000578-420_634x424.jpg

 

 

I would be one of the slow ones because I'm fortunate not to have to subject myself to the indignity of air travel very much.

[+ deej]

How about just giving the overhead compartment space to the seat below it.

 

Which one? I don't think I've ever seen an overhead bin with only one seat beneath it. When I do see only one seat across the aisle there typically isn't a bin over it.

 

The current model is whacked. You have to pay to check a bag, but if you can haul that steamer trunk aboard it's free. That's encouragement to carry on a steamer trunk. What they need to do is let passengers check bags for free, but charge $400 for any bag that needs to be gate-checked because the bins are full. That would end the bins full problem.

[Epigonos]

Believe it or not I travel to Puerto Vallarta for a week using a carry-on exactly the proposed new size. What sends me absolutely wild are the people, frequently young, who are allowed to place huge backpacks in the overhead bins

[bobchitown]

Just like the size of porn star dicks when you measure them.

[Steven_Draker]

What they need to do is let passengers check bags for free, but charge $400 for any bag that needs to be gate-checked because the bins are full. That would end the bins full problem.

 

With Southwest Airlines you check 2 bags up to 50 lbs free of charge and I see consistently people bringing heavy bags in the cabin. Each time the flight attendant has to make announcements, bins are full and those who are the last to board the plane (group B 30-60 and group C) don't have space for their luggage. I think people just LOVE to bring their stuff in the main cabin, even if the airline doesn't charge for checked luggage.

 

I love the idea of bringing only the strict minimum.

 

[rvwnsd]

With Southwest Airlines you check 2 bags up to 50 lbs free of charge and I see consistently people bringing heavy bags in the cabin. Each time the flight attendant has to make announcements, bins are full and those who are the last to board the plane (group B 30-60 and group C) don't have space for their luggage. I think people just LOVE to bring their stuff in the main cabin, even if the airline doesn't charge for checked luggage.

 

I love the idea of bringing only the strict minimum.

 

 

You may sit in my row any time.

[Bart]

I don't see what is the problem with a normal sized back pack being in the overhead bin. they are soft, take up less space and can usually pressed to put more items in bin. No hard edges to cause the bin cover not to close. I think just enforcing the current rules which is two carry-ons which means a purse is a carry on, shopping bag is a carry on, etc.

 

The gate attendant should be checking the carry-ons prior to boarding the plane. It would save significant time once on the plane where you can not move around in the aisle. There should be the box size right in front of desk and if it don't fit send them over to the desk to pay for the bag or if Southwest to be checked and sorry you now move to back of line for boarding for wasting our time. Unless it is a military personnel.

 

It would be nice if they charge extra because they did wait until they hit the boarding gate.

 

One item in the article I would say thank god to is the awful free food. International flights have food and I could not eat it. I always bring my own.

[Guest ChrisW]

I am going to rant so bare with me

 

As a frequient flyer (6-8 times a month) I am annoyed by the lack of common curtesy and thought put into flying by passengers.

 

Don't fill up an overhead compartment with your purse for fucks sake!

 

Don't fill up the over head compartment with your coat.

 

Dont put your laptop bag or backpack in the overhead compartment, it can fit under the seat in front of you.

 

If your luggage is to heavy for you to lift up then check it. I have seen people drop there luggage on people after the plane has landed because they didn't have the upper body strength to lift there bag out of the overhead compartment.

 

Its possible for some airlines to check your bag at the gate and it will be waiting for you when you deplane so why not do that?

 

I know airlines are trying to save money and hell even make a buck but these baggage charges are for the birds. The nickel and diming that goes on in the airline industry is atrocious.

[bigvalboy]

Its possible for some airlines to check your bag at the gate and it will be waiting for you when you deplane so why not do that?

 

lol...not necessarily. And that's my rant on the subject. "Once a mistake, twice a fool"

[MiamiLooker]

Don't fill up the over head compartment with your coat.

 

It is funny when a passenger places his coat or jacket lengthwise in the overhead and not expect carry-ons to be placed on top if it.

[Steven_Draker]

If you're among the last people to board the plane and all bins are full they will MAKE you check your large carry-on (whether you like it or not). They won't charge you for the bag. I've seen that happened many times on domestic flights within the US.

[Steven_Draker]

I am going to rant so bare with me.

 

http://cdn.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/MjAxMi03YjFmMjM5OTA1MmVhMzI2.png

[+ Chris Eisenhower]

This is just shameful. It would take five minutes to fix most of the efficiency problems at airports and on airplanes and would make the airlines money in the long run on a permanent basis and improve their reputations, rather than these stupid, pointless "improvements" that accomplish nothing for most passengers. And what are they going to do with planes that have plenty of space for current-size bags, like 777s? It's not like you'll be able to be more efficient with this space—in fact, you'll have to carry multiple bags now, which will take up even more bin area.

 

Why not try this:

1) Passengers with no carry-ons may board at this time, from back to front.

 

2) Passengers with one carryon that will fit under their seat such as a backpack, purse, bag or briefcase may board from back to front.

 

The overhead bins are then opened.

 

3) Passengers with carryons may board from back to front.

 

4) First class may board.

 

5) Passengers needing assistance or families with small children may board.

 

6) All other passengers may board.

 

All non-standard, non-rectangular bags (golf-clubs, guitars, your other weird bullshit you didn't need to pack, etc) must be checked.

 

AND...

The TSA lines should give priority lanes to passengers with no bags and Pre-Check. Disabled passengers and people with children should have their own line, and passengers with bags are last.

 

All airports with those beep-beep disabled/elderly passenger carts should have a "lane" painted down the middle that says: "STAY OUT OF THIS SPACE. IT IS A ROAD. WOULD YOU STAND IN A ROAD AT HOME? NO? WELL DON'T STAND IN THIS ONE EITHER."

 

The same with the power-walks—one side should be painted red with "Stand" painted on it and the other green, with "Walk" painted on it.

[bigvalboy]

I hate back to front boarding....sorry. http://www.boytoy.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/no.gif

[+ deej]

I hate back to front boarding....sorry. http://www.boytoy.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/no.gif

 

Airlines actually have stats, after many years of experimenting with various boarding options.

 

The MOST expeditious is the least palatable to the traveling pubic: board all window seats from back to front, then all middle seats from back to front, and then all aisle seats from back to front. It would make boarding quicker by 30%. BUT it would break up families traveling together, etc.

 

The second most expeditious is Southwest's cattle call boarding. The first to the gate gets the earliest boarding opportunity, but you can sit anywhere there's an empty seat.

 

The rest of the models follow way behind as far as the amount of time it takes to fill the plane.

[bigvalboy]

The MOST expeditious is the least palatable to the traveling pubic:

 

Unfortunately this is true. There are ways around the annoyance, but it cost you more of course, but then at my age, it's worth the price of entry.