The so-called oneworld alliance needs to sort out the issue of how it treats luggage allowance for partner airlines. Recently I had the misfortune to be stung for excess charges by Cathay Pacific ( notoriously stingy for excess), when had I been travelling on Qantas I would have been well within limits. Why can't oneworld have a consistent policy for luggage allowance? It is galling to buy a J ticket as a top tier member and still get hit because of a lack of reciprocity betwen 'partner' airlines. What made it worse was that i had virtually no hand luggage and yet many passengers were dragging everything but the kitchen sink onto the plane and getting away with it. In contrast i have never had even the hint of a problem using star alliance carriers
cheers
paul

With Star Alliance, * Gold-equivalents get extra baggage allowance:

"Extra Baggage Allowance - an additional 20kg (44 pounds) or one additional piece of luggage3 which means you can check in three bags instead of two."

As you noted, Oneworld is not so consistently nice -- or competitive -- in this regard.

I don't see anything to be galled about. Luggage allowance is not an OW benefit, just that if you are a top tier member on QF, QF allows extra allowance; it is not a benefit that QF offers other schemes members

There is no reason to expect to get away with excess luggage

Dave

My point is that it SHOULD be, as with Star Alliance ( or at least SQ PPS). It doesn't make sense to get from Sydney to HK on QF and then be slugged for excess on say CX to SEL. The whole point of the alliance is to make a seemless experience and the current arrangement makes it anything but that. The Star Alliance system works much better. Just a pity that it's sometimes necessary to use the second string airlines such as QF and CX.
cheers

I have found that when you check in use the first class check then they will normally give you the extra with out exception. Problems tend to be when you check in with an agent not the airlines own staff?
But I agree it would make life better if it was standard!
PS Qantas got me for 8kgs at HKG-Mel

It is better than getting slugged for excess baggage for the whole trip ; unless travelling solely on QF I ensure that I stay within the posted limits; just because Star does it, doesn't mean that OW should.

It is pretty seamless, but it is unreasonable to expect that a home airlines extra benefits to be offered by others

Dave

Dave, Why is QF so inflexible regarding weight allowances with its FC PAXs? I found myself having to employ deceptive tactics in order to avoid the QF scale-Nazis. A dozen magazines and a laptop...and suddenly there's no weight allowance left for clothes. What's the problem? Weight and balance? I can't understand it. That, together with QF's refusal to allow early check-ins (even for those with only carry-on...I just don't get it), have left me with little interest in flying this otherwise great carrier.

Welcome to Australia - probably the most anally retentive, rule-based society in the world.

Allow me to ask a question of you. How flexible should QF be regarding weight allowances - don't charge if you are 1kg over, 2kg, 3kg, 7kg, 12kg, 21kg, 38kg...? Should QF have a luggage allowance at all, or should you be able to check whatever you want? If QF should not apply weight limits, where else does it this situation work - buy a pre-paid 5kg box from the post-office and it's reasonable to stuff 7kg into it, go to the duty-free shop pay for 3 bottles of wine, but walk out with 4?

Why not have a limit and enforce it strictly, save for say a 1kg waiver to allow for the fact that all scales are not calibrated perfectly. At least then you know where you stand.

OTOH one of the advantages of xONEx RTW fares is the 2 pieces allowance (23 k each) for all segments on the ENTIRE ticket.

YMMV

WF

Really? I was led to believe I'd be back down to a total of 20Kg when I get to Asia and travel with Cathay (in economy - darn it for not being able to get to Warsaw for a cheap DONE4).

Yep:
http://www.oneworldalliance.com/part...gagepolicy.cfm

Of course I worked that out *after* I left the UK with 2 18kg suitcases .

m

I'm referring to First Class, and my feeling is pretty much that as long as the PAX can carry and lift/store his 2 pieces in the overhead without creating structural (or weight/balance) problems, then permit FULL flexibility (so long as safety requriements are met). As to economy class, I have no problem with whatever safety requirements are necessary. My primary concern/interest is in understanding exactly what safety concerns are behind QF's severe carry-on luggage restrictions on its FC PAXs. I am also befuddled as to why in Heaven's name can't a PAX with no luggage to check in (especially one traveling FC) can't get my blasted boarding pass 5,6,7, etc. hours in advance and wait in the QF lounge at my leisure for a flight. I think Christep's explanation might be the correct answer, but nonetheless the attitude is unfortunate and I believe unnecessary.

I am flying BKK-LHR-CAI tomorrow night. Since I am relocating to CAI, I will have two large suitcases, and one set of golf clubs. I have been on the phone with BA/QF today to anticipate what excess baggage charges will be levied.

Since this is part of a DONE3, I have a two-piece allowance, as long as the two pieces come in at under 64kgs. The debate with QF has been over the golf clubs. I assumed that since I am on a piece allowance, they would charge me a flat rate for the extra piece. But they are insisting on charging by the kg. Then they said that since I am flying QF to LHR and BA to CAI, they will charge seperately- THB 1020 per kg to LHR and THB 900 for the second leg. But BA told me that if I fly BKK-LHR on BA, they would charge a rate of THB 595 per kg. for BKK-CAI. That's a big difference, so I've put myself on the waitlist for BA9 to LHR. Based on my experience today, BA seems to be more flexible on baggage issues than QF.