|Quoting EHHO (Thread starter):|
Actually, on a serious note: would investments in lost-luggage-prevention be cost-effective? I mean, would more enhanced luggage operations cost more than $2.5 billion?
Well a disastrous attempt was made at DEN
One often wonders though how package companies, DHL, Fedex, and UPS to name a few move so many packages with so few miscues.
Baggage is different in many respects compared to packages. A package goes from point A to point B with both address attached from a fixed point to a fixed point that does not generally move in a short period of time.
Baggage on the other hand has to follow the passenger, from point to point to point on a moving time frame. Tags might be great to get your baggage to your destination airport or your point of origin if mishandled, I do not think that it will do much to find you unless there is someway to detail your itinerary to the tag. Not to count the amount of computer space or programing required or the information you would have to access, the cost and time involved would cost a considerable amount of money.
Look how long it took bar code luggage tags to be the norm when the technology already existed and even then I do not think many airlines use the bar codes anyway until the bag is lost. With the SITA or similar rf tag the cost of scanning on both ends and transfers would be cost prohibitive.
While the manufacturers of the tags promote the economical cost of the tags, I have heard from 1 cent to 5 cents to make a wonderful argument to some as it is only going to cost the airlines pennies to track the luggage. The real cost is additional time scaning, hardware, software, computer space, administration costs, of course an additional VP
of lost luggage.
Basically until the cost of mishandled luggage exceeds the cost of implimintation of better system then not much will change as airlines are not penalized for the time that luggage is mishandled.