var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
Megalomania
June 20, 2009 10:09 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

Maybe the TSA could do something about the ridiculous checked luggage fees that make the size of one's carry on luggage an actual issue.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
Ian MacAllen
June 20, 2009 11:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Megalomania:

Maybe instead Airlines should allow checked luggage for free, and charge instead for carry on bags, since after all everyone wants to bring a carry on, and no one wants to check luggage if they can avoid it. Then charge fees for oversized carry on bags, third and fourth carry on bags, ect, meaning if you are willing to pay extra to skip the baggage carousel you can, and it will discourage people from having extra carry on bags.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Amish Undercover
June 21, 2009 12:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Ian MacAllen: What you are suggesting seems backwards: you want airlines to charge for something that they don't do anything for and then not charge for something that requires personnel.

It would also make the system more inefficient since it would take (even) longer to load/unload bags from the aircraft, making everyone wait longer.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Alys Brangwin: Future grad student
June 20, 2009 10:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Megalomania: I'm sorry, sir. Your bag is too big. Now you must pay $50 and hope it gets to your destination at the same time you do. Have a nice flight!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|*
June 20, 2009 11:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Alys Brangwin: Future grad student:

I'm sorry, sir. Your bag is too big. Now you must pay $50 and hope it gets to the same destination, at the same time you do. Have a nice flight!

there, i fixed it for you.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Michael Belisle
June 21, 2009 12:10 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gStein: An important distinction!

There was a time I gamed the system by booking a ticket with an unnecessary leg because ti was cheaper to do it that way (that is, I booked PHX-IAH-AUS, but ended the trip at IAH). When boarding at PHX, for the first time in my experience, the gate agent announced \"Even though there are plenty of seats on this flight, we're going to enforce the luggage limits today.\"

My bag was 22\"x14\"x~11\", so the agent checked it without even letting me try to put it in the template. At first I didn't think much of it, until I noticed \"AUS\" on the claim ticket. I rushed back to the gate, split my bag into two so that it fit in the template, and the attempt by Continental Gods to punish me for my creative booking was averted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Powerlurker
June 21, 2009 6:33 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Michael Belisle:

That's called \"Hidden City\" booking and is technically a violation of your contract of carriage. Nowadays if the airlines catch you doing it too often they can do a number of things to make you regret it, such as forfeiture of frequent flyer miles or charging you the difference between the fares.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Michael Belisle
June 21, 2009 1:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Powerlurker: I didn't know that's what it was called. I see it was in court in 2003. I don't doubt that it is a violation, but when I queried the Continental representative about the pricing, she didn't tell booking the reservation like I was asking would be against the rules.

I went into it thinking of all the ways it could go wrong. Being forced to gate check luggage wasn't one I thought of beforehand.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
June 20, 2009 10:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I've already had a computer damaged by those kind folks who haphazardly jam their exploding-at-the-seams carry-on luggage into the overhead bin. I'd say bags are already large enough as it is, given the available space on most planes.

That said, I'm a big fan of plane-side baggage checking. None of the TSA man-handling, and none of the epic games of Tetris trying to fit it into the overhead bins.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
johnva
June 21, 2009 9:11 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: That is exactly why I always put my laptop under the seat in front of me instead of in the overhead bin. I've seen the way people tend to jam their stuff in there, and it's only getting worse with the checked luggage fees.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TechnoDestructo
June 21, 2009 2:47 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@WiglyWorm:

Well, since they aren't actually doing much to help security, they might as well do something useful.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SnehalDemophon
June 20, 2009 10:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: Agreed: Gate checking is awesome. Other advantages:

1) There's often no fee like there would be if you checked at the counter or curb,

2) Your bag is likely to be last in the hold, and therefore first out at the destination,

3) You get to skip the line at the counter, assuming you pre-print your boarding pass.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|*
June 20, 2009 11:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SnehalDemophon: i'm a fan of curbside checking, because they don't weigh it (at least, they didn't the past several times i've flown out of TPA and CLT)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Coles_Law
June 20, 2009 10:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Isn't the size of carry-on bags restricted by the geometry of the plane? Are all planes going to modify their seats to allow the larger bags to fit?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Michael Belisle
June 20, 2009 11:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Coles_Law: Yes, but the current limits are more restrictive than I've found necessary. I have a carry on that is exactly 22\" x 14\" x 9\". Note that this will already not fit underneath a seat, so it has to go in the overhead (or be checked if there's no overhead space left).

22\" is the depth limit of the overhead, as long as you put the wheels in first like you're supposed to. In this configuration, of course it doesn't matter if your bag is 14\" or 18\" wide. As for the 9\" part (the height of the compartment), I have found that to be overly stingy. My bag frequently bulges to 11 or 12 inches and I have no problem getting it in the compartment. Only once has a gate agent tried to make me check it, so I just took out my garment bag and it fit in the box. I put the bag back in in the jetway and I was good to go.

So, in short, the TSA-proposed dimensions are fine in my experience.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
June 21, 2009 9:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Michael Belisle: Depends on what kind of plane. The bigger the plane, the bigger the overhead compartments. On some really small turboprop planes I've had trouble getting even a very small bag in there, much less a full-sized roll-on bag.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
mkguitar
June 20, 2009 10:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm guessing bill sponsor owns a bag that is about oh \" 22 inches by 18 inches by 10 inches\"

TSA has enough on their plate as actors is a secure feeling dramady

MK

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
arcticJKL
June 20, 2009 10:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

They should pass a law making all checked bags free and go back the old way of just charging you more for your ticket.
They we could get a quick way to compare total prices.

BTW, under this new law how would TSA check strollers, carseats and walkers and crutches, most of which are free?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Powerlurker
June 21, 2009 6:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@arcticJKL:

In order to make that happen, you'd have to get Congress to repeal those asinine 3.4oz carry-on liquid restrictions. One of the big reasons that the airlines started charging coach passengers for the first checked bag is that the carry-on restrictions for liquids caused more people to check bags, overwhelming their baggage handling infrastructure.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
arcticJKL
June 21, 2009 10:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Powerlurker: Hey they told me it was because of the fuel costs!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
liz.lemonade
June 20, 2009 10:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

YAY! Now the overhead bins will be packed with even bigger bags, leaving the rest of us with reasonably-sized bags (that fit in the measuring box thingy with several inches to spare) to be forced to check them at the gate (and then have to wait an hour at baggage claim when we land) because there isn't enough room even though we arrived to board on time and just happen to have a seat at the front of the plane where people in the back stuffed their bags because they didn't want to carry them all the way back, and when we complain about how freakin' unfair this is, the flight attendants will threaten to kick us off the plane!

Yeah. I've been there.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
p012382
June 21, 2009 4:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@liz.lemonade: this reminded me of the movie meet the parents! I am finished with the checking of the bags conversation!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
cc82
June 20, 2009 11:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@liz.lemonade:
I think the point is all those huge bags that take up the overhead now are technically not within the current size limit, but it is not enforced. Now they'll allow a reasonable sized bag (I assume it would be able to fit in the overhead) and strictly enforce that limit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Cant_stop_the_rock
June 21, 2009 2:34 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@cc82:

If only they'd enforce the limit of one bag + one personal item per person, and make you keep the personal item under the seat in front of you. Every time I've been on a weekday morning or afternoon flight, most of the business travelers have a carry-on bag, a garment bag, and an oversized laptop bag/briefcase. All three go in the overhead bin, meaning if you don't get on the plane early you're screwed.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Cant_stop_the_rock
June 21, 2009 2:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Cant_stop_the_rock:

The problem is exacerbated by the idiots who put their bags in the bin sideways, then close the door so the flight attendants assume the bin is full when really it could fit more bags.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SlappyWhite
June 20, 2009 11:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@liz.lemonade:

Wow, now that really blows. I never even thought of that, I always take my carry on with me, I'm too worried something will happen to it if its not close by.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
dougp26364
June 20, 2009 10:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Congress might want to attempt to force airlines to allow larger carry on bags but, those overhead compartments will only take so much and, there are already laws on the books that require anything placed under the seat to actually fit under the seat. Other than forcing the TSA to enforce a size limit, but in the end, if to many people are gate checking the larger bags, they're just inviting a new baggage fee for the airlines to charge customers.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Michael Belisle
June 20, 2009 11:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dougp26364: Carey and Tripso both missed a key part of the legislation:

An air carrier may establish smaller size limits for carry-on baggage and a personal item than the limits set forth in this section.

So unless the airline at 45\" actively increases their limit to 50\" after the law passes, nothing changes. I'm more concerned about the times when larger sizes are allowable, as shown in the story photo. I don't see any reason why that allowable size be arbitrarily decreased when it's not an issue on the particular aircraft.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
krispykrink
June 20, 2009 10:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The TSA? May as well take it a step further and hand these gene-pool rejects the keys to the plane.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
WiglyWorm must cease and decist
June 20, 2009 10:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why is the TSA in charge of enforcing the size of my carry on?

Shouldn't that, you know, kinda be up to the airlines?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Powerlurker
June 21, 2009 6:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@WiglyWorm:

It's not like the airlines have been terribly diligent at enforcing their own carry-on size restrictions.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
HiPwr
June 21, 2009 1:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@WiglyWorm: The government can do it better. They do everything better.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TCama
June 20, 2009 10:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Baby on the carry-on size thing is cute. Cat on the carry-on size thing would be far cuter.

At first, I thought this was a good way to save us money. If they can't tell the airlines to charge fees for baggage, they can force them to allow bigger carry-ons, so it'd be easier for flyers to avoid the fees.

But then I realized ... if they can force the airline to take bigger carry-ons, why can't the force them to stop the baggage fees?

On a related note, would this bill stop airlines from charging fees to have carry-ons? Or maybe fees for carry-ons above the airline's preferred size but still under the TSA's size?

As for the TSA enforcing the rule, I don't mind. I trust the government more than I trust a money-hungry corporation out to nickel-and-dime me.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
arcticJKL
June 21, 2009 10:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: I would like to make the TSA in charge of security only. If you want some nanny state troopers enforcing airline policy get someone new.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 21, 2009 3:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama:

You trust the government not to nickel and dime you only because you've already acquiesced to the government reaching into your pocket with effective tax rates of 50 percent on every single nickel you make. I predict this TSA vs. luggage bill will never make it out of committee, but the government's going to continue to rob us all blind anyway.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
oldgraygeek
June 20, 2009 10:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just flew from PHL to Tulsa with only a regulation carry-on and a laptop. The trip out on Delta took two flights, both on two-engine jets; they took our carry-on sized bags away on the tarmac and loaded them into the forward baggage compartment. We were able to pick them up at planeside, so it wasn't so bad.
Flying back, I went with American Airlines, mostly to get onto a real airliner. Because of bad weather, one of the flights was packed. The gate attendant announced that only bags that would fit end-on into the overhead bin could be carried on board. This would leave my regulation carry-on bag in the hold again, so I 'splained it to her:
'Ma'am, there is three thousand dollars worth of medical equipment in this bag, and I am not to be separated from it. If you insist on checking it, I'll go over there to the business center and print up an invoice for you to sign.\"

I carried it on...

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
hills
June 20, 2009 10:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@oldgraygeek: FYI if the medical equipment is for your personal use it does not count towards your carry on baggage limit...

Also, I go against all advice and usually check my medical equipment for a variety of reasons - 1. I don't have to lug it around and unpack it at security and have them wipe it down, 2. If it's checked, the airline is liable if it breaks, but if I carry it on and it breaks it's my bad, 3. it's free (though many agents need to be educated about personal assistive devices/medical equipment).... and, 4. I have back-ups of everything.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nycdesigner
June 21, 2009 4:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@hillsrovey: There is no way the airline is going to cover several thousands of dollars of medical equipment if they damage it. They have clear limits of liability.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
hills
June 21, 2009 3:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nycdesigner: Sorry - you're wrong - I have a letter from USAIR saying that if you declare the medical equipment is it fully covered and exempt from their limits. I've hard such a hard time with gate agents wanting to charge me to check medical equipment that the executive office gave me a letter to travel with - helps a lot! It's part of the law for people traveling with disabilities.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Justin Larson
June 20, 2009 10:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm pretty sure that the TSA is too busy making sure bags don't have water in them.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Mr_Mantastic
June 21, 2009 8:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Justin Larson: Or large amounts of cash, because we all know that someone with $4700 in cash could take over the plane.

[www.cnn.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
digitalgimpus
June 20, 2009 11:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Doesn't physics declare this unlawful?

As it is, most planes don't have the space for all the passengers carry-ons. It's normal to have to force the last several people to board the plane to put their \"carry on\" in the hold.

How does changing the law improve the amount of mass that fits in the overhead and under the seats?

The sizes weren't arbitrary... they were established based on the average bin and underseat space. While there is now more bin space, there is also higher capacity on planes, making the average per person, the same, if not less.

This seems moronic at best.

While we're at it, why don't we just outlaw AIDS and other diseases? Seems more practical than funding research.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Michael Belisle
June 20, 2009 11:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This makes perfect sense to me for two reasons:

1) I imagine they see it as a security issue. Why should you be allowed to carry bags through security that are larger than you are allowed take on the airplane?

2) I think TSA is better positioned to evaluate the size of carry-ons than the gate agents, especially if the machinery physically won't admit bags larger than the limit. The gate agents and flight attended rather laxly enforce the current limits in my experience, so having TSA do it would probably increase the compliance. It think this would increase in more overhead space rather than less, despite the larger limit.

The only concern I have is that right now some airlines (as the story picture shows) allow larger bags than the proposed limit. If I was flying on an A320, I'd have check my previously acceptable bag.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
I Love New Jersey
June 20, 2009 11:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sounds like a bad idea.
1. Forces incompetent government employees to do something else.
2. Someone is going to make some money off the new standards and given it is coming from a representative of the most corrupt state in the union. . .

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
kepler11
June 20, 2009 11:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is a classic case of someone in government having a hammer, and as a result believing that everything is a nail.

Just because you have the TSA doesn't make it right for you to believe that they should expand their duties and begin to enforce everything under the sun. Carry-on size has nothing to do with security, and this would be significantly expanding the authority of these morons. And by the way, I'm not exactly an anti-government type, for your information.

And think about this -- this idiot representative must think it's just free for the TSA to do this, because they're there already. But who's going to pay for the extra time/materials/complaints that would result from such a policy?

There are clearly things that fall into the realm of being sorted out outside of government interference. Certainly the minutiae of carry-on baggage size is such a thing.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
JayG508
June 21, 2009 4:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kepler11: I agree. Bag restrictions should be set by each individual airline, not the government. Let the airline that can manage this policy in the best manner be the most successful.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Shivved
June 21, 2009 3:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@kepler11: I work for the TSA, and while I don't agree with you denigrating me and my co-workers by calling us morons, everything else is spot-on. DHS is already expanding our duties in a way that sometimes stretches us too thin in the checkpoint. To have to enforce bag sizes would be a monumental task. My airport only has 2500 passengers a day and I can't imagine having to check the size of every single bag during our busiest period.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
June 21, 2009 9:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shivved: In theory it could be done automatically as the bags pass through the X-ray machine. Just have some type of optical sensors to measure the dimensions in there, and have it flag any that are too big.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Smailtronic
June 21, 2009 7:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@johnva: Optical sensors? What do you think this is, the 21st century?

They would simply mount a 22x18x10 plastic frame to the front of the X-Ray machine. Anything bigger than the frame can't fit through.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Shivved
June 21, 2009 1:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@johnva: In theory, that sounds great. In practice, a slightly miscalibrated sensor would flag every bag that is exactly the right size, forcing us to measure each one by hand.

Also, as kepler said, there are other factors at work. Every time someone had an oversized bag, we would be forced to take an officer off the floor to walk them to the exit. That's in addition to the time that the officer would have to maintain control of the bag while the passenger gathers the rest of his belongings.

On 6 out of 7 days at my airport we barely have enough people to handle our peak loads. Adding another useless task to our duties would require an increase in manpower at a time when they're trying to cut us back even more.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Ouze
June 21, 2009 12:01 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

this is very nearly the definition of mission creep

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
mgy
June 21, 2009 12:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

All of my international travel has occurred with solely a carry-on hiking backpack which carries about 55L. There's no other way to go about it, if you ask me. Sure, your stuff MIGHT meet you at your destination - but if it doesn't, how far up the creek are you?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
veronykah
June 21, 2009 6:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mgy: I was just thinking that. I used to date a pilot, so all my travel was done on standby, you don't want to check bags when you fly standby.
With the exception of being MADE to check a bag, I haven't checked anything in years.
I just got back from 3 weeks in Thailand. I brought a backpack and a messenger bag. I will never understand why people have to bring so much stuff with them. Checking bags is annoying and now you have to pay for it!
Never again.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Michael Belisle
June 21, 2009 5:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mgy: I was not checking bags before not checking bags was cool. I went to Europe for three months with only a carryon roller and backpack. It was great.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
kathyl
June 21, 2009 12:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ah, a one-size-fits-all solution to a complicated problem. They always insist on scanning the car seat we bring for my daughter to sit in, and if they did this (at great, unnecessary cost of replacing airport scanning equipment) then the seat wouldn't fit through anymore. It barely fits through now. There's other oversized stuff that's perfectly okay to bring through security that gets scanned that wouldn't fit either. What's their plan for that?

What does the House care about carry-on bag sizes? Don't they have anything more important to debate about?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Ben Duffy
June 21, 2009 12:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I love how the picture with the article shows how jetBlue actually has better carry-on standards than what the proposed legislation would bring.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
katknits
June 21, 2009 12:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

When I flew out of SFO a few months ago, I was asked to make sure my luggage fit in the cage that had the measurements, AND I was not allowed to have two other bags (a purse and a laptop bag). I reconfigured all of my carry-ons (swearing loudly), but was eventually allowed to proceed to the security checkpoint. Now - I can't remember if this was a Continental employee regulating or a TSA agent. So everyone's arguments of \"oh, the TSA has enough to do\" are moot if the TSA makes the airlines enforce the new regulations.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Jason Giglio
June 21, 2009 6:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@OneTrickPony: You can always fedex it to yourself. Just make sure to take out the extra insurance (just a few dollars per thousand).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
June 21, 2009 3:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katknits: I didn't think anyone got two other bags in addition to the carry-on. I've flown quite a bit, and I never did. You get a carry-on and one personal item; that can be a purse, a laptop, a briefcase or a camera bag (or something else), but I'm pretty sure you don't get two, unless one of them is a pillow.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
OneTrickPony
June 21, 2009 3:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Clearly, the purpose of this bill is to add violin players to the list of musicians who must either check their instruments in cargo or buy an extra ticket.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
June 21, 2009 3:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@OneTrickPony: I knew I should have taken up the piccolo.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Geekybiker
June 21, 2009 4:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

All they will do if this passes is put a bit of sheet metal on the xray machine. If the bag doesn't fit, you're have people frantically trying to force it through, or spending time re-arranging things so it can squeeze through. In the end it'll probably just make security lines even slower. Fun. The place to check size is probably at the gate. Make each passenger run it through a template and gate check those that don't fit.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 21, 2009 4:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

What happens when you have to take all your crap out of your bag for them to check it, like laptop, and all that jazz, the bag would be smaller to fit through the hole, then you fill it back up after the xray. So just take more out for individual screening. My job makes me carry lots of electronics to the destination so I have to unpack everything otherwise they yell at me, so my bag would easily fit through some hole with everything taken out of it. They would need a secondary hole to put your bag through after you had the chance to reload it.

Kinda lame.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
nycdesigner
June 21, 2009 4:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I always make sure I pack efficiently so that:
a) I can use my Brookstone hardcase carry-on that is a bit smaller than most soft-cased carry-ons
b) not worry about crushing something, like a laptop or camera equip
c) not worry about theft or destination problems.

Most of time people just pack way too much to begin with. Like my wife...and each and every time she doesn't even wear 1/3 of the stuff she brought, or that bulky pair of shoes she thought she'd need, just in case.

When you travel, try NOT to act like you're at home and think you must have those boots you're used to instead of a more efficient-to-pack shoe. Or wear them, and pack the sneakers. Make smaller-sized bottles of lotions-and-potions. Learn to make wrinkle-resistant bundles so clothes take up less room.

Just pack less, and force any kids to as well. It'll be a lesson well worth learning!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
yevarechecha
June 21, 2009 5:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

The guy right in front of me going through security at DCA last week had a carry-on that got stuck in the x-ray machine. I have never seen this happen before. It just stuck in there, and my backpack got stuck behind it. They had to go fetch a special pole to get it out. The guy was trying to make a flight that left three minutes later (why he thought he had a prayer of making this, I don't know; it was probably already gone at the time) and was about to melt down. He missed the flight, of course, and I later saw him crying near his gate. I don't know what the situation was that a grown man would cry about missing a flight, but it was very awkward. I didn't even know luggage could get stuck in the x-ray. I'm sure the people on his new flight just loved the entire bin being taken up with his junk.

How are they planning on enforcing this at security? If your bag is too big, will there be someone there to take it to be checked on your flight? Will you be allowed to keep it, but it gets stuck with a gate-check tag? Will you have to get out of line and go back to the check-in counter and go through security again? This seems like a mess waiting to happen.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
arstal
June 21, 2009 6:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

We'd be better off just abolishing the TSA altogether.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Powerlurker
June 21, 2009 6:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wouldn't be surprised if the airlines supported having the TSA enforce the carry-on restrictions so they aren't put in the position of being the \"bad guy\" when telling a customer to check his bag.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
FLConsumer
June 21, 2009 10:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Get it right -- The TSA is there to make us FEEL safe, not actually provide any real security whatsoever. Unfortunately, their presence makes me feel terribly insecure about the safety of the skies. Fast food rejects pawing through my bags and carrying out The War Against Water bottles isn't security.

I still find it ironic that I'm not subjected to any of that bullmanure when entering high security facilities in the United States, just airplanes. Also, security employees at the high security facilities are always courteous, professional, and do their job well -- well enough that they leave me and my civil liberties alone.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
jonmason1977
June 21, 2009 3:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

How about they get rid of checked bag fees for smaller cases and then maybe people could actually only take on the plane what they need while they are on the fracking plane. It was bad enough before with people taking on what are basically full size suitcases for a 1 hour flight.

Am I the only person that only carries a small bag on the plane with a magazine/book, snack and maybe my laptop/mp3 player?

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 21, 2009 4:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Someone should produce a \"bag\" that is a stainless steel box with recessed handles that is exactly the maximum size and take it on a plane.

I'd bet it wouldn't fit in a lot of overhead bins, and it's non-compliant nature would probably mean it would do a lot of damage to other bags while it was in the bin.

XYZ measurements are very stupid criteria by which to sort carry-on luggage. What they are is measurable, so rule-makers like them because they offer an absolute \"pass/fail\" condition.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
vq35de
June 21, 2009 6:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My not-so-modest proposal:

1. Get rid of the overhead bins. Everything you bring on to an airplane has to fit under the seat.

2. Airlines will no longer offer checked luggage. If you have anything that can't/won't fit under said seat, you can either ship it on the airline as cargo at air-cargo rates, use a third-party carrier such as FedEx, or better yet leave it at home.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
johnva
June 21, 2009 10:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@vq35de: Horrible idea. Do you have any idea how little will fit under an airline seat, if you also need that space for your legs (like I do, since I'm 6'1\")?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
DunderMifflin
June 21, 2009 7:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Please God, not TSA. Whatever they touch they mess up. The airline employees refer to them as \"Thousands Standing Around\". As someone who fly's domestically and internationally, I would really hate to see TSA start policing bags, they are for \"security\", don't add more to a plate that they mess up now.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 21, 2009 9:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Personally, I'd like to see the airlines change to combined passenger + baggage weight. Give each passenger, say, a 250 pound weight limit (body and baggage) and charge perhaps a dollar per pound over that limit. I'm 175 pounds and have to pay extra for each suitcase even though my combined weight is less than a 300 pound heavydrop with no baggage.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
grumpygirl
June 28, 2009 6:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SomanshCaninus: This is an excellent idea and because of that, it won't ever be considered.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
arcticJKL
June 21, 2009 10:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Two things I dont understand.
1. Why would you want to give the government more control over our lives. Either by letting them regulate the size of a carry-on or by ordering them to price control airline fees.
2. Why would you have security officers enforce a non-security issue? The TSA is not the god of air travel in charge of everything that happens at an airport.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
zyodei
June 22, 2009 4:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well, seeing how the job of the TSA is safety and preventing hijackings, this makes perfect sense. Because most hijackers bring too big hijacking bags that will attrac as much attention as possible. For instance, last time I hijacked a plane, I took my baseball bat, full size katana, flamethrower, battle axe, klingon death knife, and a bazooka. You gotta be prepared for whatever happens, you see.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
angelzero
June 22, 2009 1:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Should be 1 carry-on and 1 checked bag per person, period. You want more crap to reach your destination? Ship it.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Corporate_guy
June 22, 2009 4:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is extremely bad. I have never seen anyone with a bag that actually fit in the current templates for southwest. The first time I flew I was a little confused at the size of the bags people had. Wasn't sure if I had to check my bag. I just figured it must not be enforced at all. And that turned out to be correct.

Why can't they just make a template that is the actual size of the overhead compartment? The reason why people have bigger bags is because the bigger bags fit.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
valthun
June 22, 2009 4:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So, that means that they have to make larger overhead bins, and raise the seats to fit the bags, thus making your head bump the overhead bin. Sounds stupid.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Michael Plasmeier
June 25, 2009 4:11 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I really like the idea the guy above had for airplanes to charge for carry-on and make checking bags free.

As the people above explain, the cabin is always overfilled with carry-ons and they offer to put it in the hold for free. Why not make the hold bags free and charge for the carry ons? There already is the disincentive that you don't want to lose your bags.

But I agree, this is not for the TSA to decide.

Then again less fees = good, but I think the current system is backwards.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
June 29, 2009 6:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think I could almost promise it would be a simple matter of a plastic/metal cutout in front of the x-ray machine. If it did not get through the cut out, it is too big.

TSA would not have a tape measure on hand, nor would they do any more work (haha) that they do already.

It either fits through the cut out or gets checked.

Reply
");