Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- From: Jim Davis <sky.dancer1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 11:32:30 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 1, 12:05 pm, mag3 <zmpmag3-...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 08:40:23 -0800 (PST), Jim Davis <sky.danc...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Excuse me, but I'm entitled to my fair share of that space as much asI'm just looking at this from a different point of view. Maybe I'm
anyone else. And yes, the rule *was* enforced becuse the bag wasn't
allowed on! That's the rule! "Not enforced" means that the bag would have
been permitted on, making it not necessary for me to substitute with a different,
less protective, less secure container but one which *did* satisfy the rule!
I did what I did in order to protect and keep control of my personal property....
I wouldn't have had to do that if the rule wasn't enforced, or if the rule was
more consistent with "reality."
getting "picky", but it's just for the sake of discussion. (not
intended to be an argument)
You stated that you unpacked, and split them up. After the split, how
many pieces did you have. If you had more than two, it was beyond the
one carry-on + one personal item rule.
It resulted in two pieces. But remember, this was an Australian based airline flying
under Australian domestic rules (not even international). The 1+1 rule started as a US
based rule which may now be replicated by other world wide airlines for consistency (hopefully).
I'm not sure if 1+1 was in effect in Australia at the time. I think the greater concern was, "can
it fit either under the seat or in the bin?" The rule that *was* enforced was that any carryon
(no matter the qty) had to fit in the "sizing" box both at check in and at the gate or it could not
be carried on. The sizing box clearly was built for a max length of 20", not 22". After getting on
board (an Airbus A320), I'm certain my carryon (a standard 9-14-22" Samsonite hard shelled
Rollaboard) would have easily fit in the overhead bin. But that didn't matter. The length exceeded
20" and therefore, it was disallowed. I should have seen this coming as I was waiting the terminal
at CNS. The check in agent strongly advised me to check it. As I was in the waiting area, I saw that
no one else had any carryon that long. All that I saw were under 20" max length.
Point being, all of these carry on regulations need to be standardized "internationally" so that
everyone is on the same page and knows what the limits are. That said, the "standard" should
allow for the max. convenience of each pax. while being fair to all pax. Ideally, I'd like to see a
"1 carryon" in the bin per seat (45" linear max), and then allow any/all other personal items that
will correctly fit under the seat. If that's 2 or 3 or 4 items, that's fine, as long as the all properly
fit under the seat....
____________________________________________
Regards,
Arnold- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
100% agreed that the rules should be standardized, but when a single
airline cannot standardize the rules within their own system, the
future looks pretty dim.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- From: mag3
- Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- From: Jim Davis
- Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- From: mag3
- Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- From: Jim Davis
- Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- From: mag3
- Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- Prev by Date: Re: BA to offer more connections to Africa
- Next by Date: Re: BA to offer more connections to Africa
- Previous by thread: Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- Next by thread: Re: Official vs actual carry-on luggage dimensions (USA)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading