12kg Cabin baggage enforcement in F at AUH
Sep 17, 2017, 8:24 am
#16
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 116
I can understand EY trying to save money, it is not about space in F but additional weight on flight (thereby increasing fuel consumption). I know - you'll say additional 7-8kg won't make big difference on one flight but add to multiple flights EY takes off daily - it adds up.
Sep 17, 2017, 10:33 am
#17
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Programs: Etihad Gold
Posts: 751
I can understand EY trying to save money, it is not about space in F but additional weight on flight (thereby increasing fuel consumption). I know - you'll say additional 7-8kg won't make big difference on one flight but add to multiple flights EY takes off daily - it adds up.
Sep 17, 2017, 12:22 pm
#18
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: Etihad Guest Platinum; Accor Platinum; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,356
I can understand EY trying to save money, it is not about space in F but additional weight on flight (thereby increasing fuel consumption). I know - you'll say additional 7-8kg won't make big difference on one flight but add to multiple flights EY takes off daily - it adds up.
Sep 17, 2017, 3:26 pm
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
There is no extra charge for overweight carry-on luggage, overweight bags are simply checked into the hold and count against the passenger's piece and weight allowance. That is higher for F.
While the rule has not been strictly enforced, it is now. Not a leg to stand on, so either adapt or fly another carrier.
The reasoning is not simply fuel consumption but passenger safety. Unless you have good medical data which shows that F passengers have thicker skulls and are less susceptible to skull fractures and concussions than those in steerage, there is good reason both to have a uniform rule and for it to be enforced.
Perhaps some passenger was bonked by an 8kg bag and EK had to pay a fortune? All it takes is one staff member somewhere being disciplined and one can imagine the rule being strictly enforced.
While the rule has not been strictly enforced, it is now. Not a leg to stand on, so either adapt or fly another carrier.
The reasoning is not simply fuel consumption but passenger safety. Unless you have good medical data which shows that F passengers have thicker skulls and are less susceptible to skull fractures and concussions than those in steerage, there is good reason both to have a uniform rule and for it to be enforced.
Perhaps some passenger was bonked by an 8kg bag and EK had to pay a fortune? All it takes is one staff member somewhere being disciplined and one can imagine the rule being strictly enforced.
Sep 18, 2017, 12:30 am
#21
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Jeff is Deaf
Posts: 541
A first for me, the rather unhelpful agent insisted I must check in one of my two small carry on items that weighed a total of 20kg.
On asking to speak to a manager I had to wait five minutes, when it was clear one wasn't available she just let me take them on with no pleasantries.
Doesn't seem a very acceptable policy for Gold members in F. Stinks of a way of raising revenue in Y.
On asking to speak to a manager I had to wait five minutes, when it was clear one wasn't available she just let me take them on with no pleasantries.
Doesn't seem a very acceptable policy for Gold members in F. Stinks of a way of raising revenue in Y.
Sep 18, 2017, 12:40 am
#22
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Yorkshire & Bangsaen
Programs: HH Diamond, EY Gold, AY Silver, MR Plat
Posts: 526
Sep 18, 2017, 2:16 am
#23
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: SIN
Programs: EK Blue, EY Guest, AA, QR
Posts: 288
There is no extra charge for overweight carry-on luggage, overweight bags are simply checked into the hold and count against the passenger's piece and weight allowance. That is higher for F.
While the rule has not been strictly enforced, it is now. Not a leg to stand on, so either adapt or fly another carrier.
Perhaps some passenger was bonked by an 8kg bag and EK had to pay a fortune? All it takes is one staff member somewhere being disciplined and one can imagine the rule being strictly enforced
.
While the rule has not been strictly enforced, it is now. Not a leg to stand on, so either adapt or fly another carrier.
Perhaps some passenger was bonked by an 8kg bag and EK had to pay a fortune? All it takes is one staff member somewhere being disciplined and one can imagine the rule being strictly enforced
.
Sep 21, 2017, 4:03 pm
#24
Join Date: Mar 2013
Programs: Etihad Guest Platinum; Accor Platinum; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,356
Sep 26, 2017, 4:02 am
#27
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: UK
Programs: Etihad Gold, Qatar Gold, flying Blue, Falcon, Lufthansa, Eva
Posts: 1,428
Do share the response(s)
Sep 26, 2017, 5:43 am
#28
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: not far from MUC
Posts: 6,620
Sep 26, 2017, 9:59 pm
#29
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: FRA
Programs: EY Guest Platinum; A3 Gold; Delta Platinum, BA Silver, IHG Gold
Posts: 484
I do not get why they call it a security risk. BA doesn't even publish a weight limit for hand luggage. So is it an unsafe airline?
And a pax traveling in F wouldn't have to pay for checked luggage anyways. I just do not get the rule. It is just stupid.
Might make sense in Economy, where the overhead bins are constantly full.
And a pax traveling in F wouldn't have to pay for checked luggage anyways. I just do not get the rule. It is just stupid.
Might make sense in Economy, where the overhead bins are constantly full.