Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Products
Reload this Page >

Carry on bag for small regional jets - that don't want to gate check

Carry on bag for small regional jets - that don't want to gate check

Reply

Old Sep 28, 15, 11:21 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: DFW
Programs: AA Lifetime Gold, Admirals Club, Global Entry
Posts: 1,004
So if a bag is that small, why mess with wheels at all? They add perhaps 4 or 5 pounds and cost you perhaps something like one fifth of your packing volume, I believe.

For a big bag? Ok. But for a little briefcase-sized carryon?

There's obviously something here that I'm not getting.
FallenPlat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 15, 11:34 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Programs: DL Silver, AS MVP, UA Silver, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Plat, SPG Plat, National Exec Elite
Posts: 3,877
I almost always fly with a sports coat or suit jacket on. Even when folded and stowed overhead (if hanging isn't an option), I get less wrinkles than when packed (excluding a rolling garment bag with dry-cleaner's plastic). Shoulder bags and backpacks induce wrinkles on the shoulders and, in the case of backpacks, the back of the jacket as well. As such, I greatly prefer a wheeled bag. I can still pack for 3 nights easily in a wheeled tote with a netbook/ultrabook size briefcase riding on top and never have a strap touch the shoulder of my jacket.
IsleOfMan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 15, 11:09 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 240
Originally Posted by FallenPlat View Post
So if a bag is that small, why mess with wheels at all? They add perhaps 4 or 5 pounds and cost you perhaps something like one fifth of your packing volume, I believe.

For a big bag? Ok. But for a little briefcase-sized carryon?

There's obviously something here that I'm not getting.
The little bag provides a base for the larger non-wheeled carry on to travel through the airport. When you have arthritis in your back, shoulders and wrist, carrying that weight through an airport is really painful.
Megn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 5, 15, 11:50 am
  #19  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Somewhere between N.A. and S.E.A.
Programs: HHonors / UA M+ / TK M&S Elite
Posts: 190
Originally Posted by FallenPlat View Post
So if a bag is that small, why mess with wheels at all? They add perhaps 4 or 5 pounds and cost you perhaps something like one fifth of your packing volume, I believe.

For a big bag? Ok. But for a little briefcase-sized carryon?

There's obviously something here that I'm not getting.
The space lost to wheels is nominally less in a small bag and greater in a big bag. Also smaller bags will weigh less than big bags when packed, so the extra weight of wheels is more manageable.
TPACjv is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 8, 15, 2:12 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: DFW
Programs: AA-EXP SPG-Plat 100/LTG. HHonors-Gold
Posts: 39
FWIW, I have successfully fit the B&R rolling cabin bag (U116) under the seat of both the Embraer & Canadair regional jets ( with 4 days of business clothes + 2 iPads). As previously mentioned, I carry it through the gate area to avoid agent checks, but it certainly beats the pants off shoulder carrying overnight bag when wearing a jacket. Also it provides a wheeled base for laptop bag or anything else's you happen to have.

Last edited by Chapdaddy; Oct 8, 15 at 2:14 pm Reason: Correct typo
Chapdaddy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 9, 15, 12:07 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Suburban Philadelphia
Programs: UA Gold, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold, IHG Gold
Posts: 3,384
I've had great luck with this - I know it fits under the seat of a Q200. Of course in STL once I got in an argument with the GA/baggage police who wanted to gate check it on a CRJ flight. I was rolling it and should have known better. And yes, it fit under the seat when I got it on.

http://shop.samsonite.com/samsonite-...googleshopping
Cargojon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 2, 15, 12:41 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Portland
Programs: UA 1K, AK Gold 75K, etc. etc.
Posts: 1,658
I use my Patagonia MLC for this purpose (no wheels)....I never have to gate check. I love it.
mikel51 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 15, 8:24 pm
  #23  
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 6
Every time I travel I use Briggs & Riley and it's very working and both fit on overhead bins even on small planes. I never used any other brand of luggage but only this since I found it perfect for any kind of travel.
Stanley Chan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 15, 1:33 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: MYF/CMA/SAN/YYZ/YKF
Programs: COdbaUA 1K, AA EXP, Bonbon Plat, Omni Black, Hertz PC, NEXUS and GE
Posts: 5,422
Originally Posted by LordHamster View Post
I've had small rolling totes rejected due to the wheels. I generally travel with a Tom Bihn Aeronaut, a RedOxx AirBoss, or a Patagonia MLC. All of which fit every bit as much as a full size carry on, fit in the barbie jets, and never get rejected.
I have an Air Boss and a Sky Train. Both fit on RJs pretty easily.
N1120A is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 15, 2:50 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 86
Originally Posted by jalm1 View Post
I have been running into a similar issue as OP, and am looking for a non-whelled bag for the smaller RJ's. I've heard good things about the tom bihn tri-star and western flyer, However, i am a little worried about an excess of organizational pockets. I have been looking at the Tumi 22126D2, however i haven't heard how it works (if at all) in RJ overheards. Anyone have any experience with this bag?
I have a Tom Bihn Tri-Star that I have used for up to 4-week trips when packing correctly. One thing I have noticed is that this kind of bag packs much better if you use the TB cubes. Otherwise, with the design of the compartments it is hard to find things once they are all crammed in the bag. In addition, the cubes help the soft-sided design to keep it's shape better.

I use the small commuters all the time (all sizes) and have never had to gate check my Tri-Star. It fits in the really small RJ overheads and in a pinch, you can also stuff it under your seat.
augkor is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 17, 15, 11:22 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by augkor View Post
I have a Tom Bihn Tri-Star that I have used for up to 4-week trips when packing correctly. One thing I have noticed is that this kind of bag packs much better if you use the TB cubes.
I also travel frequently with the Tom Bihn Tri-Star as I mentioned further up in this thread. As Augkor mentioned, cubes are a great accessory for this, or any other bag, to make best use of the space. In addition, I find the 18" / mid sized Eagle Creek Folder absolutely vital to pack items like shirts and pants. Not only does it keep things from getting wrinkled, it compresses the clothing making best use of space. It fits perfectly in the Tri-Star.
OnTheRoad99 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 15, 12:34 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 427


I'm a big Briggs & Riley fan and am considering the U116 Baseline for times when I have an overnight trip on a tiny regional jet and want to use the overhead bin.

I believe the U116 comes in the 2-wheel and 'spinner' varieties. Does it matter which wheel configuration I choose as far as fitting in the smallest overhead bin? I prefer the 2-wheel (above) I'm not a spinner guy, but fitting in the smallest overhead bin is the priority, not sure if wheel configuration makes a difference.

TIA

BJ
boltjames is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Nov 18, 15, 1:31 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 620
I travel in quite a few CRJ900 and CRJ700 and use the Tumi Vapor hardside (I will have to check if it is the international or continental model when i get back to the hotel room tonight). Its not perfect, but it was free from Delta for sitting my butt in a seat for a million miles. But it does fit like a glove int he bin.

That said, it is sometimes a tight fit depending on how stuffed I have it. But so far I have not had to valet it and that has been a lifesaver when I am running close on my connection.
ross123 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 15, 1:26 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 17
Originally Posted by Jumpseat123 View Post
I take single overnight trips and often fly on smaller planes, often the RJ145 or Q200. I want a carry on bag that I can take on the plane and not have to gate check. (When they take the bag away when you get on the plane and give it back when you get off). What do you think about the TUMI: 28704TGTNA or 26624D2? I just need a briefcase on wheels with room for my laptop and a single change of clothes.
I recommend either the Tom Bihn Tri-Star or Western Flyer.
Spindifferent is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 15, 2:40 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: gggrrrovvveee (ORD)
Programs: UA silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,010
Pretty much any soft-sided bag (i.e. duffel) of a reasonable size should be fine. I have an older model Victorinox duffel bag which I've never had an issue carrying on or fitting. The newer model is a bit narrower, so should be even easier to fit.

Any of the above mentioned (Patagonia MLC, Tom Bihn Tristar, RedOxx Air Boss, etc.) will also all work. Depends on what you want from look, price, durability, warranty perspectives.

The problem, imo, with many wheeled briefs/duffels is that the wheel/handle mechanism adds width, making them more inflexible and difficult to squeeze into smaller bins, as on the ERJ145. Not familiar with the 2 bags you mentioned, but something to be aware of. I have seen people have to go back out to gate check these bags on occasion.
gobluetwo is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread