Maybe it's just me, but I don't think many business travelers will take to the highway to drive from Austin to Boston because the airplane has no overhead bins. And I would store all those things the same place I do now, in my backpack under the seat in front of me. I'll admit I didn't bring much jewelry on my current two month job on Oahu...

How did these people ever travel when planes had open overhead racks? Up until sometime in the seventies, just about all narrowbodies, including the DC-9s, 727s, and 737s, had open overhead racks. The only things that flight attendants would allow passengers to put up there were hats and coats.

He did indeed partially hit it, but in a different way than you think. His first point first was free, the second was speedy. If you would be able to check a bag for free and you got it back within minutes of arriving at the carrousel, you'd probably check bags more often than you do now already. I posit a third point: if the likelyhood of bags going missing or being pillaged by TSA (I think baggage handlers are more trustworthy to be honest) is reduced to zero, even more hesitation would be gone.

But in reality, for leisure travellers, only the 'free' part is really of importance. They don't care if they have to wait a bit and in the pillaging thing really isn't all that frequent (it's never happened to me), but those extra few dollars really make a difference in people's willingness to check their bags. If stuffing it all in a carryon allows people to save $15, they will!

Which is why we in Europe (I love starting sentences with this) don't really have this problem of people bringing in the kitchen sink to stick in the overhead bins: Only LCCs charge for checked baggage and in those cases it's mostly accepted (and I believe thus often paid, though it must be said I avoid LCCs like the plague) because 'well, it's low-cost so that is to be expected'. Not so of full-service carriers; if KL started to charge a baggage fee (beyond the first bag), I'm positive the exact same would happen.

My point is that airlines already have the 'free' part down for a lot of travelers, even leisure, via frequent flyer memberships, whereas they don't have the speed part figured out. Until they do, behavior will not change regardless if you pay, not pay, or get paid to check your luggage. Charging for bags is actually a recent occurrence, whereas oversized carry-ons, and lots of them, has been an issue for many years. This behavior was driven by lack of on-time performance (time waiting at the carousel), not a cost decision.

I don't think they do.

I know around here it seems like everyone and their dog is at least gold or equivalent and we keep ourselves out of the know by hiding in lounges where one wouldn't often find non-elites with the exception of the occasional splurger.

But really most leisure travellers have no status at all, and aren't even a member of an ffp at all. Depending on the season, this is easily many an airline's largest customer base. Around here we know them as kettles, and there are lots of them.

These are the people these charges were designed for: they want lower prices, or they just won't fly (they'll go somewhere closer instead). Of course they then didn't figure out that that money had to come from somewhere.

Indeed, the actual frequent flyers still get that free bag as part of their elite benefits. But that isn't most people on the plane. Most people on the plane have to pay the charge. And don't want to. So they cram it all in their carry-on to avoid it. And everyone else suffers for it.

I won't say the problem will go away completely just with a 'free' first bag (paid for in the ticket, of course). You're right: reclaiming baggage needs to be sped up for that, too. The process needs to be as effortless for the pax as possible. But I truly believe that a 'free' first bag will relieve a large part of the strain on many flights.

I'm 6'5" and need the leg room..

Could I put my personal belongings under my seat? That will impede leg room and storage of the passenger behind..

Okay...I'll bite. You "need" the leg room or you "want" the leg room? I'm 6'4" with a 36" inseam and I can do a transcon in a Y seat. I'd rather not, but that makes it a choice, not a requirement.

It would be difficult for me to sit and have my legs up to my chest.. whether its a need or want.. I think I'll take the leg room as it gives me an inch of give to adjust a little bit once in awhile in flight..

1. There were fewer people wanting to carry valuable electronics etc - people didn't really carry laptops and such. Your valuables would be your wallet and keys in your pocket and that's about it. Anything else could go in a checked bag.

2. Fewer people flying = less crowded airports = quicker retrieval of checked baggage and less chance of loss etc. I'm still happy to check a bag when flying to/from a smaller airport, e.g. Luton, because I know it will always be retrieved quickly. Not when flying to/from a big one, as I'll be standing around for ages waiting for it to be checked in / retrieved.

3. They didn't charge for checked baggage. I still think this particular fee was a mistake.

Neil

I'll add another one to this list- the seats were bigger. If you had a briefcase, you could slide it under the seat in front of you and you still had some leg room. Take a look at scenes inside airplanes in 1960s and 1970s movies. Coach seats look almost like current Business Class seats.

I would gladly take my side of the bet in that it would have little effect until they get the delivery performance under control. The concept of baggage fees is a very recent event, just within the last 3-4 years. This problem long pre-dated these fees, so won't go away even if they do. Until the airlines turn an inconvenience into a convenience, "free" is just a marginal incentive to some.

And WN still has free checked bags, and they still have the crowded overhead bin issues, and they still often have to gate check items. I agree with the idea that the current rules should be enforced. There are far too many people (both leisure and business travellers) who seem to think that the carry on rules don't apply to them.

However, I also think that there should be a size check as part of security process. If you carry on bag doesn't fit in the size guide at security then you asked to check the bag. And I also think that there need to be size guidelines about the personal item. I think providing specific dimensions for the personal item (like they do with the carryon item) and then enforcing those dimensions would help significantly. Because I've seen plenty of people carry huge purses or bring on a bag as a personal item that can not really be put in the seat in front of them.

They tried this at IAD a few years ago. All the xray machines had templates that blocked anything over the size allowed by UA for carryons. A number of the other airlines sued to have it removed and they prevailed. I think at that point TSA washed their hands of it and in effect said it's the airlines problem.

The airlines don't really seem to care about the issue as they either get extra revenue out of baggage fees or use the extra space in the in cargo compartment to fly cargo. They keep their premium passengers happy by waving the fees and allowing priority boarding, giving them first access to the overheads. And yes I am very happy they do this. I'm only 5'6" but I like my leg room too!

Perhaps we should come up with a fix that Shirley Jackson might be proud of.

Take all the passengers who have bags that are too large to fit in the overhead bins or who take more items on board then entitled to; line them up and have one chosen at random to be stoned to death.

I would not have this apply to those who have bags that conform, only to find there is no room for said bags. Depending on how this works, I'd consider lining up those who are sitting in Row 37, but put their bags in the bins above Row 9.

Due to the fact that airlines are "unbundling" their prices, and that unbundling is here to stay, I do not believe we will see free checked bags on the legacy airlines any time in the near future. Even elites with free checked bags still bring carryon, due to their desire to be 100% sure their bag arrives with them at the destination and their desire to save otherwise wasted time at the baggage carousel.

Non-elites who have to pay for checked bags will bring on more carryon. The probem existed before the baggage fees were invented; it is even worse now that there is an incentive for non-elites to carry their luggage on board.

My solution is two-fold. First, the airlines should get serious about enforcing the existing carryon rules at the gate. This might mean going to a "double" gate, where the passengers first go through a carryon baggage checkpoint then through the gate itself. (One sees this sort of thing in some international airports, such as LHR. There is a line to get into to the gate and a waiting area inside the gate for boarding the aircraft.) With a double gate, there would be time to identify non-conforming luggage for a gate check, and require appropriate payment from the passenger.

Second, if airlines plan to continue checked luggage fees for the indefinite future (and I see no evidence of the contrary), they should configure new aircraft to have larger overhead bins. If X% more bags are brought on board as carryon, due to the baggage check fees, then it would be really smart to plan on X% more carryon space in the overheads to accomodate the additional need.

What we have, now, is chaos. Existing airlines were designed under the assumption that the average passenger with two suitcases would be willing to check those two suitcases in the cargo hold. That assumption is no longer valid.