Programs: UA-1k, HH Silver, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & now a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 10,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSORon
Folks, I can honestly say that this is something I hope never comes to pass. We get enough grief with the liquids ban and other policies we are required to enforce, not to mention that there will be the inevitable exceptions to the rule (Strollers come to mind) that are going to require hand screening.
If the airlines want this, they can use the bag sizer’s (sp) that each one has right next to the ticket counters. We have all seen them, the “If your bag does not fit in here you cant take it onboard” chrome tube steel contraptions. Congress is going to do what they like, after all the TSA is a government agency, but I hope they put this back on the airlines and not on the checkpoint.
hey ron-guess what....we agree on something . but seriously-you are absolutely 100% correct. but this is an airline and/or faa issue. if the airlines and/or faa say it's xxx size then that's it-you folks should not have to deal with ma and pa kettle trying to bring a steamer trunk on board as a carry-on item
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
I don't see it happening. Prior to TSA, the airlines owned the checkpoint and owned airport security screening.
Size of bags is strictly an airline problem. We (TSA) are only concerned about what's inside the bag not the size of the bag.
Then again, with a Democrat-dominant Congress, who knows, eh, Snake?
agreed as i mentioned above tho it's not a red/blue issue as where kapinski happens to be blue, it could just as easily be a "red guy/gal" who could not get any overhead space the next time, right?
__________________
just my humble opinion but i used to try and stop hockey pucks so what do i know . Nighthawks fans are everywhere
I sat with a friend a few weeks ago who owns a company that makes trays, bins, and storage containers for the food and travel industries. He was about to head to a meeting in Texas to bid on baggage bins to measure carry on luggage that were 2" smaller than the current bins.
Frankly, I wouldn't mind this. Some 22" bags just won't go in the overhead wheels first. Then these bags end up taking up the space that two or three wheels-first bags would. It seems like lowering the carryon size to 20" would solve a lot of the problems they have now with being forced to gate check some people's legitimately sized carry-ons simply because there isn't enough space.
Personally, I think the airlines need to grow a pair and enforce the rules they already have in place. I'm sure they'd love to see the TSA do the job for them so they don't get yelled at by their customer base, but if they set the limits, they need to enforce them.
My most recent favorite was the guy who had a 22" roll aboard and had then slung a 18" or 19" duffle bag over his shoulder. Just because you can sling a bag over your shoulder doesn't make it a "personal item."
RyanAir's CEO is actually proposing something that makes sense (for a change): get rid of bag check in at the land side check in counter. Make pax drag their bags to gate where they will be gate checked if they don't fit in the overhead.
Maybe I misunderstand the proposal, but wouldn't that mean taking all bags through security screening, including ones you intend to check? Wouldn't the screeners have to search that many more (and larger) bags? What happens to the evil liquids and Swiss Army knives in the (not yet) checked bags?
__________________ When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty. - George Bernard Shaw
Maybe I misunderstand the proposal, but wouldn't that mean taking all bags through security screening, including ones you intend to check? Wouldn't the screeners have to search that many more (and larger) bags? What happens to the evil liquids and Swiss Army knives in the (not yet) checked bags?
Well, maybe they could lock the cockpit door? That would make the airplanes safer than anything the TSA has ever done.
Maybe I misunderstand the proposal, but wouldn't that mean taking all bags through security screening, including ones you intend to check? Wouldn't the screeners have to search that many more (and larger) bags? What happens to the evil liquids and Swiss Army knives in the (not yet) checked bags?
Yes it would mean all that. As for screeners searching more bags what's the difference if they search checked bags or carryons ... both types of luggage are getting checked? This way, there would be much less theft.
I haven't checked a bag in over a year, so it wouldn't affect me.
People who have to have their pocket knives would not fly RyanAir.
__________________
Robert Crandall on American Airlines: it's a great company that does important work. But airlines are not an investment.
Yes it would mean all that. As for screeners searching more bags what's the difference if they search checked bags or carryons ... both types of luggage are getting checked? This way, there would be much less theft.
I haven't checked a bag in over a year, so it wouldn't affect me.
People who have to have their pocket knives would not fly RyanAir.
to having both checked bags and carryons screened in front of passengers, but my main question was what happens to things which are currently allowed in checked bags but not carryons - not just liquids but some sporting goods, tools, etc. Maybe RyanAir has a specific enough client base that it doesn't matter, but it's hard to see it becoming a widespread solution.
__________________ When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty. - George Bernard Shaw
The Feds are getting in on the act. The TSA wants to expand its powers... check out the Securing Cabin Baggage Act. It calls for TSA enforcement of carry-on size, including the use of sizing templates at the X-ray machine. I don't mind enforcement of the limits, but that is NOT "transportation security" and therefore not within the purview of the TSA. Besides, the TSA couldn't manage a bathroom.
Because Congress doesn't have its hands full enough with real issues... I mean, they can't even properly legislate curbs to abusive credit card issuers, much less even approach things like the US economy, health care, energy policy, etc., so let's waste taxpayer time on legislating carry-on sizes, investigating steroids in pro sports, and other inanities.
At first the bill looks almost harmless.. the airlines will have to follow the rules they set.
But it really bothers me that our government has nothing better to do that worry about a carryon maybe being an inch too big.
I fly carryon only, my suitcase fits the size requirements, I can lift it into the bin all by myself, my purse fits under the seat, I play by the liquids rule.. leave me alone!!!!
Isnt the government busy enough selling cars and managing mortgages? Or is this part of the plan to make more jobs? Retrofit all the belts... that will employ people for maybe a whole 2 weeks at each airport!
to having both checked bags and carryons screened in front of passengers, but my main question was what happens to things which are currently allowed in checked bags but not carryons - not just liquids but some sporting goods, tools, etc. Maybe RyanAir has a specific enough client base that it doesn't matter, but it's hard to see it becoming a widespread solution.
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who routinely flies with items prohibited from the cabin that are necessary for work, so I really don't think that's a workable proposal.
If they have to verify carry-on sizes at security, I'd rather they implement the "sizer" bins mentioned above, rather than templates. I, too, travel with a kid at times and don't want a Tumi in the Back of the Head (henceforth TitBotH) because the stroller or car seat won't fit through the template.
And I recall the frustration of the template days, flying Continental with my "international" sized carry-on that wouldn't fit through the United-spec template.
hey ron-guess what....we agree on something . but seriously-you are absolutely 100% correct. but this is an airline and/or faa issue. if the airlines and/or faa say it's xxx size then that's it-you folks should not have to deal with ma and pa kettle trying to bring a steamer trunk on board as a carry-on item.
G-Man, they already to have it as a requirement, but no one enforces it. The ticket counter folks don’t want to deal with the inevitable arguing they are going to get from the passengers, and TSA has absolutely (me at least, I cant speak for the suits) no business or wish even attempting to enforce it. What a nightmare it would be! As far as I am concerned, the congress critter behind this can eat my shorts!
Programs: UA-1k, HH Silver, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & now a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 10,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSORon
G-Man, they already to have it as a requirement, but no one enforces it. The ticket counter folks don’t want to deal with the inevitable arguing they are going to get from the passengers, and TSA has absolutely (me at least, I cant speak for the suits) no business or wish even attempting to enforce it. What a nightmare it would be! As far as I am concerned, the congress critter behind this can eat my shorts!
bad ron-i told you, i don't work for "the g" ......
but yup, it would be an effing nightmare.
kettle: what do you mean i can't take my steamer trunk on board as a carry-on?
my solution-put the steamer trunk in the o/h bin and the kettle in cargo hold
__________________
just my humble opinion but i used to try and stop hockey pucks so what do i know . Nighthawks fans are everywhere
Personally, I think they should charge 15 dollars per carryon bag - "purse" or "laptop bag" excluded. I think they have it backwards by charging for the first checked bag - it should be free, and the fee should start with checked bag number two (or heck, number three, to really incent people to check their stuff).
Personally, I think they should charge 15 dollars per carryon bag - "purse" or "laptop bag" excluded. I think they have it backwards by charging for the first checked bag - it should be free, and the fee should start with checked bag number two (or heck, number three, to really incent people to check their stuff).
That will solve a lot of carryon problems.
Only if they resolve the checked luggage theft problem first.
__________________
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." Mark Twain
. but seriously-you are absolutely 100% correct. but this is an airline and/or faa issue. if the airlines and/or faa say it's xxx size then that's it-you folks should not have to deal with ma and pa kettle trying to bring a steamer trunk on board as a carry-on item
to having both checked bags and carryons screened in front of passengers, but my main question was what happens to things which are currently allowed in checked bags but not carryons - not just liquids but some sporting goods, tools, etc. Maybe RyanAir has a specific enough client base that it doesn't matter, but it's hard to see it becoming a widespread solution.
......
