Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Overhead Bins Things Of The Past?  
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6443 times:

With all the talk about 'carry on luggage days behind us', it got me thinking, will airline manufacturers eliminate overhead bins sooner or later? Manufacturer's put too much hype on 'the A330 has bigger bins than the 767 and the 777 has bigger bins than the A340' and stuff like that but it looks like that won't matter anymore if the new TSA rules hold.

What do you guys think? If this holds up, there's no point of putting them up which will be a big weight-saving issue. Maybe now the 772LR can do LHR-SYD without much restriction then!  biggrin . I know, I'm probably getting ahead of myself here.

36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2282 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6432 times:

I was wondering that myself. A bit early to really know, of course, but I can see Ryanair getting excited about selling "baggage class" seats in space formerly taken up by handbags!


Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4037 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6393 times:

This is only temporary. No way will carryon baggage just go away. Besides, only the UK is banning all carryons at the moment I believe. Give it a month or two and things will be back nearly as they were.

User currently offlineDL4EVR From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 641 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6374 times:

Yeah...especially if they're going to try to install X-ray machines at checkpoints that were manufactured AFTER 1975...ones that can detect explosive liquids. I really can't see them banning laptops and cell phones...in this day and age people live off those things!


We Love To Fly And It Shows.
User currently offlineJBo From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 2313 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6281 times:

The ban on carryon luggage is more than likely temporary. I highly doubt it will be permanent for the rest of time.

Thus, we probably won't see overhead bins disappear.



I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6196 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 2):
This is only temporary. No way will carryon baggage just go away. Besides, only the UK is banning all carryons at the moment I believe. Give it a month or two and things will be back nearly as they were.

No, it's the UK leading the way.
I can imagine the UK demanding that all flights into the UK use the same policy, and other countries (under pressure from the industry, the airlines have wanted an excuse to do away with carryon for decades) doing the same thing.
It just takes time for politicians to come up with the idea and/or get sufficiently greased.

Or maybe it will be a ban just for cattleclass, with limited allowances for first and business class passengers only, which would show the real reason for the ban: airline income.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineMax999 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1031 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6169 times:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 5):


Or maybe it will be a ban just for cattleclass, with limited allowances for first and business class passengers only, which would show the real reason for the ban: airline income.

If that happens, they can definitely make more money if they keep the existing checked baggage allowances.



All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening.
User currently offlineTinkerBelle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6102 times:

I honestly think this rule will be here to stay since the airlines will push for it. I sure as hell wouldn't be surprised it it did.

User currently offlineDavidT From Switzerland, joined Oct 2005, 477 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6082 times:

I imagine that elements of the current regulations will remain - but I believe an outright ban on carryons will not materialise. The ban is only in force at the moment because a terrorist plot was planned to occur sometime around now that used hand baggage.

User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4037 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5967 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 7):
I honestly think this rule will be here to stay since the airlines will push for it.

The airlines will not push for it though. Everything about this new rule is a major inconvenience for both passenger and airline employee and can play havoc with load planning and cargo carriage. Once the rules are relaxed, the airlines will be right there to reinstate those carryon allowances.


User currently offlineB4real From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2629 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5958 times:

Quoting TinkerBelle (Thread starter):
looks like that won't matter anymore if the new TSA rules hold.

Not necessarily.....

Quoting TinkerBelle (Reply 7):
I honestly think this rule will be here to stay since the airlines will push for it. I sure as hell wouldn't be surprised it it did.

The TSA in the US would set the rule, not the airlines.



B4REAL, spelled like it sounds
User currently offlineCalAir From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 298 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5871 times:

I say do it! People in reality do not need half the crap they take on board aeroplanes. Think back 30 years. Smaller overhead bins designed to take a coat, maybe a hat,a blanket and a small bag at most. In todays age of AVOD and other IFE enhancements, we simply do not need to take all manner of electronic gizmos on board. And if you happen to be travelling on an airline that just has older IFE with overhead monitors, either deal with it or buy a thick book. No carryons except essentials means less scope for terrorist wannabes to conceal items that could harm airline travellers. It may be an inconvenience but its an excellent way of controlling items that can or cannot be carried on board. If you really dont like it,drive or take the train.


British Caledonian...we never forget, you have a choice
User currently offlineBoeing757/767 From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 2282 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5848 times:

You know, not that I think about it, think about how much time could be saved in boarding if we didn't have to wait for people to stow their crap? On the other hand, think of the wait for checked baggage...


Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
User currently offlineKiramakora From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5833 times:

Quoting CalAir (Reply 11):
No carryons except essentials means less scope for terrorist wannabes to conceal items that could harm airline travellers.

Everyone has a different definition of "eseentials." I travel for work and my laptop is an essential tool for me. Without it, I would rather do a video-conference in or something of that sort. While we need new rules, I do not think we need to necessarily alter our way of life dramatically at every onset. Terrorism - which by definition means to terrorize, would then have prevailed.


User currently offlineTheCheese From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 206 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5833 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CalAir (Reply 11):
And if you happen to be travelling on an airline that just has older IFE with overhead monitors, either deal with it or buy a thick book.

If carryons are banned, how am I supposed to get that "thick book" on the airplane?


User currently offlineBestpilot From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5816 times:

Quoting CalAir (Reply 11):
If you really dont like it,drive or take the train.

I'm actually willing to take on the additional risk of carryon bags just for the sake of my convenience. What was need is better screening/profiling/security at all airports. El Al doesn't have to ban carryon luggage and they are the most secure airline on and above the earth.


User currently offlineStyle From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 263 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5798 times:

Quoting CalAir (Reply 11):
I say do it! People in reality do not need half the crap they take on board aeroplanes

Absolutely, what the carriers and security officials need to focus on is enforcing the carry on limitations. It is amazing the stuff you see people brinigng with them on a plane now a days.

As for a complete ban, it will never happen, the public, the airlines, and common sense way of life would never allow it. This problem needs to be dealt with the same exact way it was handled August 10th. By getting these people BEFORE they even try to step foot in an airport.


User currently offlineTheCheese From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 206 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5798 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CalAir (Reply 11):
If you really dont like it,drive or take the train.

Awesome!

Can you help me find a train schedule that will let me get from Portland, Oregon to Tokyo in two days?

How about driving from New York to Paris? Well, that is a long trip... better take the train, instead.

And whereas I COULD drive from Seattle to Anchorage, it's a five or six day drive... each way.

I think that you need to realistically reassess your comments.


User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2173 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5734 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I doubt there will be a ban on reading material for long, books and newspapers, as long as TSA people can flick through the pages and see that the hard-cover book isn't really a box with a trigger-thingy in the middle...

I won't be surprised if there are bans on electronic gizmoes like iPods and such. If that happens, I will invest a lot of money in companies that make AVOD IFE products, as they will become rich as thieves when all airlines start calling them, asking for PTVs for all the aircraft in their fleet, down to CRJs, as pax will demand to be entertained.

Edited for spelling

[Edited 2006-08-12 00:34:45]

[Edited 2006-08-12 00:35:27]


Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineCalAir From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 298 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5708 times:

Right, as far as not being able to take a book on board, once the retrictions are lifted slightly, im sure they will allow books through, seeing as its im possible to hide any sort of explosive in one without it being discovered, and as for not being able to get the train, well, there you go. Airline transport is not a right. If you do not like the travel conditions imposed upon you, you do not HAVE TO FLY! It is your choice. If its impractical to take another mode of transport, its a bummer but hey, you've just got to live with it. Nobody forces anyone to step foot on a commercial carrier. I am perfectly aware thet you cannot take the train from New York to Paris, I am not simple, you don't have to fly though, yes its the fastest and most likely cheapest option, but you have to accept whatever security measures are imposed if you wish to board an airliner.However, if ALL the worlds airlines and airports were to adopt the same level of security as EL AL, yes, the threat would be very small, but I doubt very much that any airline or airport authority would be quick to invest quite so heavily in such technology until they are forced to do so.


British Caledonian...we never forget, you have a choice
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5682 times:

Quoting CalAir (Reply 11):
I say do it! People in reality do not need half the crap they take on board aeroplanes. Think back 30 years. Smaller overhead bins designed to take a coat, maybe a hat,a blanket and a small bag at most. In todays age of AVOD and other IFE enhancements, we simply do not need to take all manner of electronic gizmos on board.

We work and travel differently today than we did 30 years ago.

There were no laptop computers back in 1975, a basic requirement for every person who travels on work nowadays. In addition, most people don't think twice about catching a flight at 10 AM to LA from New York, doing there work in LA, and taking a red eye back with papers, computer, etc. in tow.

Add to that the airlines don't exactly feed you on a 5 hour flight to the coast, so many folks bring somethign to nosh on, plus water or some refreshments.

Furthermore, many travellers don't want to deal with carousels and lost baggage. We travel lighter, are more casual about the way we dress, and thus taking a carry-on is both convenient and safe.


User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2221 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5619 times:

Quoting CalAir (Reply 19):
Airline transport is not a right. If you do not like the travel conditions imposed upon you, you do not HAVE TO FLY! It is your choice.

Let me ask you: How many people are killed by airplane terrorism every year? In 2001, the figure was around 3,000, but that was an unusually high figure.

Now let me ask you: How many people are killed in car accidents every year? In the US alone, it's around 42,000 per year, while Russia has around 30,000 per year. The total figure for the whole world is probably more than a million.

So what if the governments would say: "It's paramount to reduce the number of fatalities from car accidents. Because of this, we will install speed locks in all cars so that no car (except emergency vehicles) will be able to drive faster than 30 km/h (20 mph). In this way, we will save several hundred thousand lives all over the world every year."



Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineTripleP From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5533 times:

You make a good point Red Chili.

Its rather amazing how many of you are ready to capitulate and give up your way of life, etc. over this weeks' developments. Grow a pair already.

Carry-ons will not be permanently banned. And all talk suggesting such is downright silly.


User currently offlineTsaord From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5483 times:

I wonder how the boarding process went since their were less carry ons? After flying myself and being in ORD on a daily basis some people still dont know what a carry on is and just ignorant to the fact that their carry on is too big! I hope airlines in the future enforce more stringent rules on carry ons!

User currently offlineAntoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1555 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5403 times:

Quoting RedChili (Reply 21):
So what if the governments would say: "It's paramount to reduce the number of fatalities from car accidents. Because of this, we will install speed locks in all cars so that no car (except emergency vehicles) will be able to drive faster than 30 km/h (20 mph). In this way, we will save several hundred thousand lives all over the world every year."

Nah, people would still be stupid and not pay attention to the road. Speed is a contributor to accidents, but only combined with aggressive driving and/or inattentiveness.

Quoting TripleP (Reply 22):
Carry-ons will not be permanently banned.

And if they are you can be damned sure I'll be writing protest letters to every government official I can get contact information for.



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
25 Jwenting : don't give them any ideas... The only reason cars don't have them yet in Europe is the simple fact that speeding tickets form a substantial part of t
26 AA777223 : No one seems to have thought about the fact, that while, yes, no overhead bins would save weight, that savings would more than be lost by the fact tha
27 Geo772 : Once modern up to date x-ray machines are installed at Airports - something that should have happened years ago, but not done because of cost - then t
28 Icaro : Yesterday I boarded a full A-321 at LHR in less than 10 minutes, incredible....
29 Trekster : Very good point there. Whith the national limit in the UK of 70, why do cars get made that can travel faster then that, and often do. Whats the point
30 1stfl94 : If they keep the ban the airlines might just put the cargo in the overhead bins. No point wasting any space which can be sold
31 Mortyman : Well at many airports in Norway, there seems to be good security: EDS (Explosives Detection Systems) ( For checked in luggage ) CEIA metal detector p
32 A380Man : You will keep needing the overhead compartments for at least jackets/coats. Anyway, I don't think the currently very strict policy of some countries
33 Post contains images Lightsaber : And that is what is going to happen in the long run if restrictions became more strict. But as others noted, in US domestic travel, only liquids are
34 Lightsaber : More "dead tree" news from the LA times. f later in the article The pain is hitting the economy. And has anyone looked into a duty free shop lately? O
35 PlanenutzTB : The restrictions or bans on carry on luggage will hurt the airline industry, if they are kept in place. As a frequant business flyer, I travel weekly
36 Dacman : If the overhead bins are eliminated, then where will the Southwest Flight Attendents hide when playing tricks on passengers? Think people think!!! Mik
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Free Seating Soon Be A Thing Of The Past? posted Fri Jun 30 2006 03:12:05 by Joffie
Are Unions A Thing Of The Past posted Sun May 15 2005 14:45:31 by Qxq400
Is The CTO A Thing Of The Past? posted Mon Jun 14 2004 00:11:41 by Usdcaguy
Has Spotting Become A Thing Of The Past? posted Mon Apr 21 2003 19:11:02 by GARUDAROD
Alliances Of The Past posted Sun Jun 30 2002 10:19:15 by OO-VEG
Lost Luggage A Thing Of The Past With New Rules? posted Thu Jan 17 2002 04:36:27 by Bacardi182
Liveries Of The Past posted Tue Aug 22 2000 02:28:20 by Republic
Multi-Stop Flights - A Thing Of The Past? posted Sat Jul 15 2000 21:18:59 by Jet Setter
Fleet Communality - Thing Of The Past posted Thu Feb 17 2000 16:37:51 by Jlb
Check Out The Overhead Bins Here posted Wed Jan 12 2005 04:47:41 by Airplane