FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - United Needs to Start Enforcing Carry Ons
Old Oct 11, 2009 | 11:47 am
  #56  
MatthewLAX
FlyerTalk Evangelist
60 Nights
50 Countries Visited
3M
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles / Basel
Programs: UA 1K MM, AA EXP, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 27,379
Originally Posted by ozstamps
\Like with litres . . . you Americans are slowly catching up with the rest of the world. And so it will be with carry on.
Or maybe we still do a few things better than the rest of the world. @:-)



Originally Posted by ozstamps
Yes this is overlooked by many.

I arrived this morning on a UA 747 from LAX-SYD and I do recall there was a weight rating printed for that overhead .. I seem to recall it was 70lbs or thereabout for the entire bin?

Now Matthew LAX above, and others here all seem happy 'their' 30 lb++ bag should be allowed, but if that dropped on the passenger's head underneath in turbulence it literally could kill them. No question whatever about it.

And 3 such "small" rollers at 30 lbs exceeds Boeing's rating for safety. The latches and hinges clearly are not designed or rated to hold 100 lbs of weight.

So if someone gets killed or severely injured as 100 lbs of 3 x Matthew LAX rollers are up there - who is legally liable?

Not Matthew LAX and his 2 other bin bandit buddies most likely, but UNITED for allowing the bin to be overloaded in the first instance - correct?

This is WHY the Aussie and NZ airlines have the 15lb limit per carry on piece.
First, I've never had any problems with carry-on weight in Australia when flying on Virgin Blue, United, or Emirates. It's just been in New Zealand.

Second, my soft duffel bag is much less likely to "kill" someone in the rare instance of heavy turbulence in the even rarer instance of a bin flying open and a still rarer instance of that carry-on bag flying out and an even rarer instance of it hitting someone, and a rarer yet instance that it would hurt someone than would someone's 15lb alloy rolly with a hard shell and sharp corners.

So should we ban those too? What about a 15lb bowling ball or dumbbell?

Just as we don't ban alcohol or impose 45mph speed limits on highways even though it would save thousands of lives per year, there is a utilitarian argument to be made for allowing heavier carry-on bags. The benefits outweigh the risk, providing a greater good to a greater number.

I can appreciate your concern that the overhead bins may not be able to handle the weight, but I believe your fears are misplaced.

United Airlines currently does not impose a weight limit on carry-on bags. American Airlines imposes a 40lb limit for a single carry-on bag. Hopefully U.S. airlines won't start thinking like you do on the subject of weight restrictions.

But your concern about our safety is to be commended. I do believe, though, that we do far too many things in the name of safety. The TSA comes to mind.

Last edited by MatthewLAX; Oct 11, 2009 at 1:30 pm Reason: and his comments weren't?
MatthewLAX is offline