<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by NJDavid:
The big deals:
If I bought a ticket that allowed 2 carry-ons, and now I'm only allowed 1, they've changed the rules and I want a partial refund.</font>
You're still allowed 2. Only now they're specifiying that one of them must be a purse/briefcase.
Feel free to write and request a refund; let us know what response you get.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">If I decide to fly (lets say) Northwest to Vegas and connect to America West to LA (specifically using two different tickets to save hundreds on inflated airfare) I would need to leave security, retrieve checked bags, have them inspected again, and likely miss the second flight.</font>
With all due respect, I'd say you're in the minority on this one as far as the general travelling population is concerned (please, let's not have everyone who interlines jump all over me!). It's still your prerogative to do this, only now you'll have to allow more connecting time and it will admittedly become more inconvenient. But then again, air travel as a whole has become more inconvenient--I never had to show up for flights 2+ hours early, but I do now. If I choose to fly, I'll find a way to deal with it.
Besides, with all the schedule/service changes in place these days, I'd guess those pax who interline might be forced to reevaluate intineraries anyway.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">If I do check my bags, and the airline makes a temporary diversion to another airport due to weather or something, I can remove my carry-on bag and make alternate arrangements....
All due respect again, it may be time, then, to reevaluate how you pack your "large" carry-on (and your "briefcase," for that matter): i.e., essential work materials and one or two changes of clothes, and check the rest.Yes, travelling sucks these days, but we're all going to have to adapt whether we like it or not.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">United just lost a case in court where they tried to impose their carry-on limits (this time in size) on other airlines.
IIRC, the UA case applied to the size of all bags, and it was smaller than most other carriers allowed. This is not the same thing. You'll still get to bring one carry-on that you might need a crowbar to stuff into the overhead bin (although getting the crowbar thru security might be a problem).
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">If it is my choice to fly a carrier that allows 2 bigger bags, or if I choose to fly in First class for that benefit, how can the FAA sumarially decide that this free-market factor is no longer to be considered?
Q. Where does an 800-lb. gorilla sit?
A. Anywhere it wants to.
[b]
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">And finally, as almost everyone here really knows THIS IS NOT SECURITY. THIS IS THE ILLUSION OF SECURITY. GUNS, KNIVES, LIQUIDS ARE PASSING THROUGH THE SCREENERS CONSTANTLY. EVERY INDEPENDENT TEST OF THE SYSTEM HAS FAILED. LIMITING CARRY-ONS WILL DO NOTHING FOR SECURITY, IT WILL JUST KEEP MORE PEOPLE OFF PLANES AND FURTHER WORSEN THE ECONOMY. </font>
Couldn't agree with you more.
[This message has been edited by SuperSlug (edited 10-09-2001).]