Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Europeanwide Limits On Hand Luggage.  
User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4930 times:

Europeanwide limits on handluggage:

1 bag only - no execeptions for laptops either!, but unfortunately for instruments! YES, I have been waiting for this for ages.

Max size: 56*45*25cm which is big enough for a decent camerabag with room for a change of clothes.

Unfortunately they will still allow DF's bought inside security to be taken onboard.

Why not just introduce duty free arrivals shopping like in say KEF and OSL, would also save on fuel as the airlines wouldn't have to carry fuel to carry all the DF's

Great not having to strugle with all the rollerboards and suitbags that people insist on bringing onboard.

[Edited 2006-10-05 18:27:10]

[Edited 2006-10-05 18:28:04]

56 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIFEMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4924 times:

This is good news for the frequent traveller. Hopefully the US will adopt a similar policy. I was completely AMAZED at how quickly a fully loaded BA 744 from LAX to LHR boarded a few weeks ago. I was the last person on the plane for the purposes of observing the new rules. 25 minutes from the pre-boarding call to the moment I sat in my seat. And I didn't have to struggle to find overheard space for my laptop. Brilliant.

User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 693 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4911 times:

Until they lose your checked bag that you would have been able to carry on before. Plus they have to have a higher number of baggage people and this will increase costs.

I think a reasonable carry on is one bag that fits in the overhead and one small computer type bag. I can live for weeks with that and am not at the mercy of the airline in getting my bag to me.


User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3130 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4844 times:

Sorry to strike an unpleasant note, but you should have thought twice before referring to "Terrorism hype".....what happened on 9/11 was very real and a lot of people suffered then.....as also in subsequent terrorist activities in different parts of the world......

While some of the measures being taken to prevent such activities may seem out of proportion, let's not be calling it "hype", for gods sake....


User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4799 times:

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 3):
let's not be calling it "hype", for gods sake

You have your opinion - I have mine. Lets just leave it at that.


User currently offlineRobsawatsky From Canada, joined Dec 2003, 597 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4686 times:

Quoting 747400F (Reply 4):
Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 3):
let's not be calling it "hype", for gods sake

You have your opinion - I have mine. Lets just leave it at that.

Hype is too kind, propaganda is more appropriate.

And, I'm not talking about the tragic results of terrorism but the opportunistic and politically motivated media, government and corporate reactions to these events.


User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3130 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4636 times:

Quoting Robsawatsky (Reply 5):
Hype is too kind, propaganda is more appropriate.

And, I'm not talking about the tragic results of terrorism but the opportunistic and politically motivated media, government and corporate reactions to these events.

Well, you're right about that....but the thread poster and myself too, were referring to airport security measures.....


User currently offlineThetuna From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 140 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4599 times:

I think they should ban ALL carry ons. I feel safe when that is done.


He just ate the big one! Hog!...get away from that thing!! Just get away from it!
User currently offlineCMHSRQ From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 999 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4575 times:

Quoting Thetuna (Reply 7):
I think they should ban ALL carry ons. I feel safe when that is done.

might as well ban people too



The voice of moderation
User currently offline757lgw From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 152 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4540 times:

i think the limitations are stupid, if you can carry it and it fits into overhead lockers or under your seat then a couple of bags should be fine.
i love being able to travel with just hand luggage , on arrival i can land , and 10 miniutes later i will be on the train , if i had to wait for baggae reclaim and run the chances that the airline loose all my stuff then i wud think twice about flying where possible and get a train insted.


User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4429 times:

Less handluggage in the cabin = Less time at security
Less handluggage in the cabin = Quicker boarding/deborading
Less handluggage in the cabin = less flying debris in cabin in turbulence (think of the UA 747 that hit turbulence over Pacific, resulting in several killed passengers due to flying handluggage)
Less handluggage in the cabin = more comfortable flight
Less handluggage in the cabin = more checked luggage = more correct weight/balance as the correct weight for what's in the holds is used


but yes also:
Less handluggage in the cabin = more time spend at luggage carrousels. I my opinion a small price to pay for all of the above


User currently offlineIkarus2006 From Netherlands, joined Apr 2006, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4380 times:

747400F,

I am also happy to see that there will be some restrictions on hand luggage with all the good consequences for easier and quicker security checks, boarding, saved fuel etc.

On one note I would like to raise a question, and it is regarding your sentence:

"Why not just introduce duty free arrivals shopping like in say KEF and OSL, would also save on fuel as the airlines wouldn't have to carry fuel to carry all the DF's".

While I did not fly myself to OSL, I did to KEF and what I saw was a bit "special" - after arrival everybody was walking towards baggage claim and at a certain moment a huge stream of people headed right towards a tiny door instead of left towards the belts.

The door was the access to the arrival duty free and people were coming out of it with bags, in the majority of case, full of alcohol in many shapes and sizes. Now, my point is, isn't this arrival duty free more popular at present for the facts it allows people to get cheap alcohol and not for safety issues? Isn't it not a coincidence that both airports you mentioned are in countries known to have a quite high taxation on alcohol which generates a pressure on inhabitants to run for it whenever they can find it in a cheap form?
In the end, is it a feasible model to export?
Would be interesting to hear about other arrival DF around the world.


This is not supposed to be a Scandinavian bashing post, just a note to openly discuss whether an arrival duty free is really a necessity and a plus for security.

Beside, if I would be flying from say Shanghai to Frankfurt, I would still like to buy my DF stuff in China as it would be definitely cheaper then in FRA. So, even if you create arrival DF you still need to convince the people to buy a product in a place where it costs more - hard task!

Cheers!


User currently offlineFlygirlnz From New Zealand, joined Jul 2006, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4357 times:

Quoting 747400F (Thread starter):
Europeanwide limits on handluggage

It would be great to see int'l consistency. In NZ we are very strict about hand lugguage and we are often complained to by travellers who say, "well I have travelled all round the world and.........." etc.

What they dont realise is that the restrictions are for safety reasons. I would be so p**** off if their 14kg bag dropped out of the overhead locker and hit me on the head. Would'nt you???????


User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4281 times:

Quoting Flygirlnz (Reply 12):
Would'nt you???????

Moset definately. But consistency in all of Europe is a good start. And as a lot of flights from other parts of the world come to Europe, or passengers from other airlines transfer through Europe, the effects would be widespread. To give you an example: The NZ LHR-HKG/LAX-AKL flights will be affected as they depart from Europe, passengers on these flights will only be able to carry one bag, thus only bringing one bag on their connecting AKL-WRE flight. Same goes for the flights from NZ to LHR if the passengers have connections from LHR, as they wouldn't be able to bring ore that one bag onto their connectiong flight ex LHR, so though it may not fully consistant all over the world, the effects will be widespread.

Quoting Ikarus2006 (Reply 11):
Now, my point is, isn't this arrival duty free more popular at present for the facts it allows people to get cheap alcohol and not for safety issues?

Yes I am sure it's popularity is very much due to economics, but that should not stop it from being used as an instrument used to increase safety.
I only used KEF and OSL as examples, as I knew them, not because they are in the Nordic countries (Scandinavia does not include Iceland).

Quoting Ikarus2006 (Reply 11):
if I would be flying from say Shanghai to Frankfurt, I would still like to buy my DF stuff in China as it would be definitely cheaper then in FRA.

I can understand that given the present prices. However the general problem with departure shopping is that if you were to fly say: PVG-FRA-PVG, then the DF's you bought in PVG going to FRA would have to shipped in your checked luggage going back (provided you didn't consume them in Germany!) would like your Chiwas 12 year old Whiskey in your Samsonite with the potential of drenching your Armani suit if broken?

All in all I think there greater advantages to arrival DF shopping if it was adopted universally.

Another discussion of course is weather DF shopping actually serves a broader economic good, but that is another matter all together.


User currently offlineIkarus2006 From Netherlands, joined Apr 2006, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4253 times:

Check! Iceland is not part of the Scandinavian peninsula.

I just wanted to share with you a video I just found and reflects a bit the careless customs of some passenger who bring huge hand luggage in the cabin. Be aware, is just for fun:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxfS5lk98mQ&mode=related&search=

Cheers


User currently offlineCMHSRQ From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 999 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 4188 times:

Quoting 747400F (Reply 10):
Less handluggage in the cabin = Less time at security
Less handluggage in the cabin = Quicker boarding/deborading
Less handluggage in the cabin = less flying debris in cabin in turbulence (think of the UA 747 that hit turbulence over Pacific, resulting in several killed passengers due to flying handluggage)
Less handluggage in the cabin = more comfortable flight
Less handluggage in the cabin = more checked luggage = more correct weight/balance as the correct weight for what's in the holds is used


but yes also:
Less handluggage in the cabin = more time spend at luggage carrousels. I my opinion a small price to pay for all of the above

Less handluggage in the cabin = less business travelers in the cabin.

Business travelers pay the bills

can't pay the bills = less airlines in the sky and less airline employees on the ground.

TSA= morons who react to what might happen instead of being proactive = more hassle and regulations that are simply ineffective and burdensome to everyone.



The voice of moderation
User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4168 times:

Quoting CMHSRQ (Reply 15):
Business travelers pay the bills

Partly correct, business travellers pay (some of the bill), but they still have follow the same regulations as everyone else.

Yes some may choose not to fly for a short while, but when their business starts to suffer, I'm sure we'll see them flying again, even with lesser handluggage to inconvienience other pax.


User currently offlineCMHSRQ From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 999 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4135 times:

Can any yield people or revenue analysts educate 747400F please on where the airlines make money. (no offense intended) It's not the 21 day advance purchase CMH-LGA stay for a week and see the sights for $89 RT traveling once a or twice a year people. It's the $1,100 RT CMH-LGA-CMH (maybe RON 1 night) fares that my wife pays for business trips once or twice a month. She has already cut back on her trips because of the hassles of flying. So now if she can't go out and back in the same day she doesn't go at all. Before she would fly out and stay in a hotel then fly back the next day. So you can also say that the idiots at the TSA probably have hurt hotel business as well. It's a whole trickle down effect.


The voice of moderation
User currently offlineOHLHD From Finland, joined Dec 2004, 3962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4107 times:

Quoting 747400F (Reply 10):
Less handluggage in the cabin = Less time at security
Less handluggage in the cabin = Quicker boarding/deborading
Less handluggage in the cabin = less flying debris in cabin in turbulence (think of the UA 747 that hit turbulence over Pacific, resulting in several killed passengers due to flying handluggage)
Less handluggage in the cabin = more comfortable flight
Less handluggage in the cabin = more checked luggage = more correct weight/balance as the correct weight for what's in the holds is used

Less handbaggage = less discussion for ground handlers  Smile

Quoting CMHSRQ (Reply 15):
Less handluggage in the cabin = less business travelers in the cabin.

what will they do? take the train iso an aircraft?


User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4094 times:

Frankly CMHSRQ if your wife and her company can afford, from a revenue point of view, to have her flying less, then all the better. I mean why bother to travel for more days if it doesn't mean more money earned?

With less items to go through security one should think the hassles (time consumption) would be less ie. her travel would in fact be easier.

and just for the record, drop the patronizing ring of your comment - they don'r make you sound more credible! (to put it mildly) I am aware that business travellers make up a large amount of the revenue and yield, but not everything. Yes business travel is important, but not IMHO important enough to warrant special tratment in the handluggage department.


User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4079 times:

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 3):
Sorry to strike an unpleasant note, but you should have thought twice before referring to "Terrorism hype".....what happened on 9/11 was very real and a lot of people suffered then.....as also in subsequent terrorist activities in different parts of the world......

While some of the measures being taken to prevent such activities may seem out of proportion, let's not be calling it "hype", for gods sake....

Thank you Gr8Circle. "Hype" implies that it's over blown, exaggerated, which it clearly is not. I found the title of this thread very offensive.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineTraveler_7 From Estonia, joined May 2000, 540 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4076 times:

Quoting 747400F (Reply 10):
Less handluggage in the cabin = less flying debris in cabin in turbulence (think of the UA 747 that hit turbulence over Pacific, resulting in several killed passengers due to flying handluggage)

Just lock everything in he overhead. check that overhead is properly locked and you are safe from flying debris.

One more point roll on bag which can be stored securely in overhead would not cause the problem.

On my opinion some bag which is not properly closed could cause much more trouble compare to slightly over weighted luggage which is properly locked and stored in overhead.


User currently offlineVegas005 From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4068 times:

Swisstansa (SWISS and Lufthansa) has lost my luggage 4 out of the last 5 trips. 3 within Europe and 1 time DTW to ZRH via Frankfurt. Checking baggage sucks period.

User currently offline747400F From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4022 times:

Quoting Traveler_7 (Reply 21):
check that overhead is properly locked and you are safe from flying debris.

I wish it was that simple. I have on several trips experienced "locked" overhead lockers spring open i flight - luckily only coats fell out - I would hate to have a stuffed rollerboard fall down.

Quoting USAF336TFS (Reply 20):
I found the title of this thread very offensive.

Whatever! You have your opinion, other differ.

But I agree with you: "hype" implies "overreacted" - which is my honest opinion about a lot of the matters that have been introduced to "fight terrorism". But in this case the "hype" IMHO has led to a good thing ie. less handluggage. The fact that people can not bring hairgels and toothpaste is part of the "hype", but I consider that "collateral damage" of the greater good of less handluggage. You of course may choose to differ - afterall it is a free world (or is it? - but that is another discussion!)


User currently offlineCMHSRQ From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 999 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3988 times:

Quoting 747400F (Reply 19):
Frankly CMHSRQ if your wife and her company can afford, from a revenue point of view, to have her flying less, then all the better. I mean why bother to travel for more days if it doesn't mean more money earned?

All the better for her only, not better for the airline, not better for the hotel, not better for her company who prefers to have meetings with clients in person. The hassles of flying are really starting to outweigh the benefits. Which is good for my company.

Quoting 747400F (Reply 19):
With less items to go through security one should think the hassles (time consumption) would be less ie. her travel would in fact be easier.

Unless she is overnighting in NYC, so instead of carrying on a roll aboard she now has to check baggage. Now the TSA gets to go through the bag if they want, stuff could get stolen, the bag lost, etc etc etc.

Quoting 747400F (Reply 19):
and just for the record, drop the patronizing ring of your comment - they don'r make you sound more credible! (to put it mildly) I am aware that business travellers make up a large amount of the revenue and yield, but not everything. Yes business travel is important, but not IMHO important enough to warrant special tratment in the handluggage department.

My apologies, it's a message board, never meant to patronize.
Business travel is the largest generator of revenue for the airlines, nothing else. I wasn't asking for special treatment for business travelers. I'm saying business travelers are being impacted the most as well as the airlines bottom line. I think that the carry on rules should go back to what they were before for everyone. The simple fact is that if a terrorist even makes it to the check point then the system has failed. Spend the money on intelligence were the problem can be stopped before it even starts. Terrorists are smart, if we continue to react and not be proactive then there is no stopping another terrorist attack.

I agree with the Boyd group here

http://www.aviationplanning.com/asrc1.htm

Quoting OHLHD (Reply 18):
what will they do? take the train iso an aircraft?

Trains we ain't got no trains here. Except the DC-NYC-BOS corridor. No the answer is we don't fly.



The voice of moderation
25 Goaliemn : I will say this would also impact flying standby. Alot of the people who fly standby use the rollerboards and such to make sure they have their clothe
26 USAF336TFS : Not to bemoan the subject, nor to criticize you, I was washing dust and pieces of the World Trade Center off my clothes the afternoon of 9/12/01. "Wh
27 Traveler_7 : So just improuve lockers quality.
28 747400F : YES! could not agree more. Pardon me for asking, but how does she get away with it then, if her employer looses money on her not travveling so often?
29 Post contains images Airbazar : Lets just ban planes while we're at it. That ought to keep them from crashing into buildings By the way, I support the 1 bag per passenger policy too
30 CMHSRQ : I never said her company looses money because of reduced travel. Her company pefers to meet with clients in person. It's better then a phone call or
31 OHLHD : Business via Internet?
32 Kellmark : As it is, it has become a dehumanizing experience when one travels on the airlines these days. Take off your shoes, remove your belt, nothing in your
33 MichiganMAN : I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that "whatever" was exactly the attitude Americans had when money was funnelled out of the USA and in
34 NASCARAirforce : I am an American and I can totally agree with you on that... that is the "hype" part I agree with you on... not the banning handluggage part though.
35 3201 : It is nice when it is perfect for you, isn't it? I also want the regulations to perfectly fit exactly what I need, and not be any bigger so no one ca
36 DrDeke : But in my mind, and the minds of many, many aspects of airport "security" (security theater) clearly are both overblown and exaggerated. YOU may thin
37 Post contains images 747400F : That'll do!
38 Elite : The only good thing I can think of is increased security means safer flying (from terrorists). Checked in baggage isn't that easy to lose, I guess jus
39 Post contains images 747400F : Yeas it is - you are absolutely right Good for you! all you need to do then is stay from flights to or from Europe. Piece of cake really!
40 Nzrich : And the most important one Less hand luggage in the cabin= more check baggage= less cargo space in the hold = less profits in cargo so to make it up
41 Singapore_Air : As a comment, limiting to one piece of luggage makes it harder for those who want to bring a lot of luggage, for various reasons (vising relatives in
42 OHLHD : Sure, but I do not think that airlines will raise there baggage allowance! So if there is more checked baggage that will increase the excess baggage
43 747400F : True, in the overall picture is that nessasarily a bad thing? As someone else said, that may result in more excessbagage charge revenue for the airli
44 Singapore_Air : Indeed and I would completely agree with that. I was merely commenting from the certain's passengers point of view. My overwhelming common sense and
45 Post contains images TeamAmerica : No, let's not. You demonstate a very callous attitude towards offending others. Ditto. As do I. I lost loved ones on 9/11. Your thread title IS offen
46 N31029 : I'd like to personally thank you, USAF336TFS, for your selfless service in a very dangerous environment on an emotionally and physically draining day
47 Galapagapop : Problem is, especially in the US, the size of bags some pax bring on are just immense. They can hardly move them in open areas, let alone in a crampe
48 113312 : Yes, the recent bans have had the effect of less carry on baggage and more loaded as checked bags. However, nothing comes without a price. Yes, you ca
49 NASCARAirforce : There is nothing wrong with the title other than "something good comes from", because one handbag will be a problem for the airlines. I agree with the
50 Post contains images TeamAmerica : You have a pitifully short attention span. The American goverment gets a thrill? You actually believe such nonsense? 9/11, but that was five years ag
51 Post contains images 3201 : Sadly, or fortunately, Europeans are some of the people we rely on to pay us money for goods and services. So my company still pays thousands of $$$'
52 Robsawatsky : I think you are misconstruing what many people, including myself are getting at here. It is not callousness towards those that lost family and friend
53 747400F : I feel sorry for you and your loss, please don't think otherwise. But lets face it, 11th of September was not the first nor the last terrorism attack
54 Elite : That was 5 years ago but still the terror that it brought with it still remains, because the terrorists are going to be back at it. August 18th, 2006
55 747400F : oh for crying out load. wish people would stop being so ******* sensitive and get a life! No some people agreed, not lots! anyway I find it rude to c
56 Post contains images TeamAmerica : Fair enough to have differing opinions on this topic, but this discussion simply does not belong in this forum. We could discuss carry-on rules and l
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...
Cameras On Planes, Carry On Or In Hand Luggage? posted Wed Nov 26 2003 23:03:38 by Jkw777
Hand Luggage Weight Limits? posted Wed Nov 29 2000 20:22:04 by IB
EU's New Hand Luggage Rules In Force posted Mon Nov 6 2006 00:52:45 by EHHO
Are Camera's Allowed In Hand Luggage? posted Sat Sep 9 2006 16:40:41 by BAW076
Kitten In Hand Luggage posted Sat Aug 26 2006 07:48:26 by Andz
No Hand Luggage If Traveling From LOndon? posted Thu Aug 10 2006 07:34:46 by Kevin
Heathrow To Impose Hand Luggage Limit posted Mon Jun 19 2006 19:29:19 by ANother
Stealing Items From Hand Luggage While In Flight posted Thu Feb 16 2006 12:28:37 by IsuA380B777
Hawaiian Announces On-Line Luggage Check In posted Wed Nov 23 2005 00:39:36 by HALFA
Hand Luggage - Kilt posted Tue Nov 15 2005 21:12:41 by Kevr757