yyznomad

I believe such a thing is called an "FT non sequitur."

AStarr

OMG I've started doing this with my boyfriend. I rarely travel with people. It's only become a thing in this most recent year of my life. I've travelled solo for the majority of my life and I have to pack a fair amount of stuff (chronic illness, gotta carry a lot of meds). But with the boyfriend? So many extra little things end up coming with me that I would never bring because somehow - despite his magic overpacking skills (boy brings twice as much clothing as I do, wears 3 outfits a day) - he still needs a bunch of random stuff that he doesn't bring.

Guess it's good practice for when the tiny humans come into our lives...?

Athena53

When our son was little, my Ex would bring only his eminent self on the plane, and on top of that would make fun of all the stuff I brought in my carry-on. Then if DS needed a bottle, a diaper change, entertainment, he'd just expect me to take care of it all. (This is one of many reasons he ended up being my Ex.)

I'd start "training" your family, especially the kids who may at some point travel on their own. The first thing I'd do is pack a few cloth shopping bags and hand them to those who bought books and local weaving, if they've got only one carry-on. Everybody gets a personal item. They can carry their own if there's no room in the suitcase. I might also check the kids' cases before departure and make sure the essentials were there- e.g., a full bottle of sunscreen. Finally, apply the test I always do after a trip: what did I use of what I packed? If there was something I never wore, I overdid it.

As DH got older and his health problems got worse, I also learned to make sure he had enough of his prescriptions, after having to be the one to scramble to get more Hydroxyurea in a remote area of the Great Smokies.

mules

The kids are grown up people now and manage to go around the world on their own and with friends. For the most they do pretty well. The one that never gets sick always carries an assortment of OTC medications. The one that gets sick and doesn't seem to learn from the past has friends trained to run to the pharmacy for her. My mom is in her 80s and is so grateful to be going somewhere with us and the grandkids - she would feel like she was inconvenient and think she should stay home if she thought she was in any way affecting the group. And after 30+ years together, if this is the worst thing that I can say about my husband, I have it pretty good.

I however do not have the intensive business travel life that so many on FT do. I am strictly a leisure travel in business class person.

Basically the moral of the thread should be "You do you; I'll do me. In the big picture it is all good."

AStarr

Experience hunting down a prescription inhaler whilst in transit one day has taught me to make sure I have a minimum of 7 days extra of every medication I need on hand in case I get stuck somewhere. Forget packing extra undies as I was taught - I can wash what I have. The meds are absolute essentials and sometimes impossible to locate and potentially dangerous to run out of. It's just unfortunate that they take up so much space and international travel requires original bottles and prescriptions (though only with one medication have I had to go through the paperwork - but that was a very unusual scenario).

dulciusexasperis

Please explain to me why anyone would want to carry more weight, rather than less weight. Travelling 'light' is only about weight.

I think you are confusing someone wanting to carry more items rather than less items. If it were, you would have to say something like, 'I carry 87 items which weigh a total of X pounds. I do not want to carry 87 items which weigh X-10 lbs.'

Travelling light does not mean you must give up taking any item you consider it necessary for you to take. It simply means you find the lightest weight example of whatever item you decide you need to take. So for example, if you decide you need to take a t-shirt, you can take one that weighs 6 ozs. or one that weighs 4 ozs. It's that simple LondonElite. Do you understand the logic now?

dulciusexasperis

Mules, you are talking about how many items someone carries, not about how much each item they carry weighs. Again, travelling light is not about getting somewhere and finding you should have brought something that you chose not to. Ideally, what anyone wants to happen is that they use every item they took with them and didn't find they could have used an item they didn't take. That's just about packing the right items, it has nothing to do with the weight of the items. If you need to pack a caridan, then you pack one but the question is which one do you pack? The answer is the lightest weight one that will suit your needs. See the difference? It's about more or less weight, not more or less items.

One group of people who through necessity have learned to understand packing light, are wilderness backpackers. They have to literally carry their kitchen stove on their back when they travel. So they have learned that what they want to do is find the lightest weight kitchen stove they can find. While you might have no interest whatsover in wilderness backpacking, take a glance through this article to see just how those who are, agonize over their decision as to which stove to buy. 7 Best Backpacking Stoves of 2018 ? CleverHiker

What's more, they go through this process with each item they plan to carry. In the extreme, the old story is about people who cut half the handle off their plastic toothbrush and then drill holes in the remaining half to reduce the weight of their toothbrush to the absolute minimum. Obviously, not everyone is going to go to such extremes but the principle doesn't change. Find the lightest weight example of each item you need to take, that will meet your needs. So if you decide you need to take a 'little black dress' for dinner at a more upmarket restaurant, fine, take one but find the lightest weight one that you can. And less you think I am joking about cutting toothbrush handles and drilling holes, see here: Go Go Ultra Light Tooth Brush | The Ultralight Backpacking Guide

In wilderness backpacking circles there is a saying, 'the ultimate backpacker is s/he who travels with the most comfort and the least weight.' What that means is the person who gives up no item they will need to be comfortable (and also safe) and yet still manages to carry the least possible weight. That is in fact a very hard goal to achieve. To do so, they will look at the higher cost of a Snow Peak LIteMax stove (weight 1.9 ozs) vs. a MSR PocketRocket 2 (2.6 ozs) and decide if they can afford the LiteMax or not to save 0.7 ozs.

Now you may not take the kitchen stove on your travels mules but if you were more interested in taking a 'little black dress', then the answer to that is here:

http://rohantime.rohan.co.uk/2017/04...ingback-dress/ weighs just 6.7 ozs.
That's called packing light.

Maglev

I have some experience with wilderness backpacking, where I had to carry water (eg., several gallons to hike the south shore of Maui), food, and shelter. One of the more significant items in terms of weight was my tent poles, and I think that has improved a lot in the past thirty years. The weight of fuel was more important than the weight of the stove, per se.

Nowadays when I travel, it's all about luxury.

I prefer to check my suitcase on a plane and not have to worry about fitting it in the overhead bin.

I like to travel by train, and bring along pillows and a cooler for use in the sleeper. The pillows on Amtrak are not very good, and there are not enough of them in the room to comfortably sit up in bed and view the scenery (extras are not always available from the sleeping car attendant). The cooler fits in my carry-on size suitcase (if I pack clothes in it), and while ice is generally available in sleepers, it's good to have somewhere to put ice and beverages rather than just in a bucket.

Athena53

DH used to hike parts of the Appalachian trail (never did the whole thing). He used to unwrap sticks of gum and throw away the wrappings before putting them in his backpack.

84fiero

Plenty of scenarios where someone wants to intentionally bring the maximum weight they can handle and/or are allowed on the airplane...

...bringing personal items to one's adult child or other loved one who has moved away and couldn't take it all with them initially; carrying donations to your destination; moving to a new location and wanting to bring as much as possible on the flight over; bringing back home as much as possible of a favorite type of item; smuggling; someone who just doesn't mind the weight and throws everything in that they want (a co-worker basically does this). And probably other personal situations.

I've done some of the above myself (except smuggling!) and have friends and family who have done others.

LondonElite

I don't understand your obsession with lightweight travel. If you want to travel around the world wearing workout/hiking gear made of polyester which you can launder in the room sink then that's your choice. Please don't tell others that it is illogical to pack more or heavier items if they choose to do so. It has nothing to do with logic.

I don't travel like this:



I can't remember the last time I gave any thought to how much I packed, or how heavy my suitcase was. Sometimes I'll pack and check-in two big suitcases for a week. Two weeks ago I had a seven-stop tour of the US over two weeks and travelled with just a carry-on and briefcase. I'm not doing a 60-km overnight hike with just a rucksack. I don't have a physical handicap and - maybe you didn't get the memo - suitcases have wheels. Most airports have trolleys, and most cars have big places in the back where I can put the suitcases. I pack what I want without any thought to weight at all.

dulciusexasperis

Why do people seem to have such trouble understanding a concept/principle and attempt to argue against something with examples that aren't really rebuttals of the principle?

84fiero, your examples are examples of things people have a reason to need to take for one reason or another. They have nothing whatsoever to do with trying to travel light. If you need to take stuff to a family member, you take it. The question is, what do you take that is for your use when travelling and do you or don't you try to take the lightest weight possible for those items.

LondonElite, where do you come up with the idea that travelling light is an 'obsession'? It is simple logic. The less weight you have to carry, the more comfortable you will be. Nor did anyone suggest anything in terms of what type of clothing someone should pack. As noted already, if someone wants to pack a 'little black dress', then they should pack one but that does not mean they cannot choose to pack the lightest weight one they can find. You say don't tell people not to pack more items. In fact, I've already said, pack as many items as you feel necessary. Nowhere has it been suggested someone pack less items than they feel are necessary. You are simply taking things out of context or twisting them to try and make an argument. Someone can say, 'I need to carry a hair dryer.' All I am saying is carry a lightweight hair dryer.

There is no logical argument anyone can make for carrying more weight than you have to. It would be like someone saying, 'I'm fat and happy but could not be happy if I were not fat.' Really? You want to try and argue that point?

As for not getting the memo about wheels on suitcases, perhaps you should ask Bernard Sadow (I suppose you will need to look up who he is), for his suggestion as to how they will help you lift your suitcase onto a train or lift your bag off a carousel (I laugh watching some people attempting to do that) etc. Or do you only ever travel where you never have to actually lift your bag yourself? You attempt to suggest that examples of where weight doesn't matter to you means there will never be any instances when it does matter to you.

Which do you think makes more sense, the guy with the big dumb grim in the middle or the woman on the left with the little red bag at her feet? Because he can lift it doesn't mean he's smart.

dulciusexasperis

Ah but it is not as simple as just stove weight or fuel weight Maglev, is it. Then you have to factor in time and quantity of fuel used to bring water to a boil. If a given stove uses less fuel to bring water to a boil, then the weight savings on fuel might justify a higher weight on the stove itself. It is not a simple equation at all to figure out when choosing what stove to buy. Then there is fuel availability. If everything points to a canister stove as being the best choice, what if the right type of canisters are not available where you are going? Hmmm, back to the drawing board. That's why some backpackers have several different stoves, using different fuel types in order to fit the specific circumstances they will encounter on a trip. You know water boils at different temperatures by altitude right? So there are also stoves that perform better in terms of fuel/temperature efficiency at different altitudes. Yet another factor in choosing the right stove to meet the need.

If the average traveller going on their annual vacation spend a quarter of the time the average backpacker does, making wise decisions about what to take, the average traveller would be a lot better off.

ctporter

When I check in my pelican tool case I am always surprised at how "light" it is (37.8lbs) because it "feels" like it is much more than that as I lift it in and out of rental car trunks, haul it up a flight of stairs, etc. I do try to pack "light" but the operative word is try - as much as I can given the facts of what I must bring with me on work trips. I don't think I would ever get to the point of using the weight of my clothing to make choices though, but it is food for thought and an entertaining read.

dulciusexasperis

It is quite normal to remove all packaging from items where possible, when backpacking Athena53. What sometimes happens though is someone removes the packaging from some kind of freeze dried or dehydrated food product and transfers it into a ziplock bag, but forgets to cut out the cooking instructions from the package and put them in the ziplock. Comes time to cook the food and 'ummm, now what?' LOL

Of course just like choosing as stove as in my response above, choosing what food to take is not that simple either. The basic equation that has to be wrestled with there is the weight/calories ratio. Less weight and more calories is obviously the preferred answer. But how and what will achieve that while still satisfying the taste factor is the difficult part. Chewing gum will never meet any proposed weight/calories ratio of course but can still be taken only to satisfy the psychological 'enjoyment' factor. It's supposed to be enjoyable, not just endurable.