Anecdotally, I find flights on airlines that don't charge money for checked bags are more likely to at least board on time than those that don't.

However, I'm wondering if there is data to confirm or refute this observation. And, if so, how could a statistion properly isolate relevant variables?

I apologize in advance if this thread topic is trivial even by travel buzz standards.

​​​​

OTP = on-time performance

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On-time_performance

It's long been my hypothesis that allowing passengers to check even one bag would help operational performance, purely anecdotal watching so many bags get gate-checked on U.S. carriers. To me, that appears to be critical path workflow with no slack - if they're tagging bags on the jetway when the door could be closed, it's lost time.

But I know nothing about the regular checked-bag workflow and how often it becomes critical path. Every once in a while, the captain will say something like "just a few more minutes while we load the last bags", but it's never specific whether those are originating bags, connecting bags, cargo, etc.

The test case in the U.S. would be Southwest Airlines. They used to have fantastic operations - I flew them in part because of how reliable they were. But in the past few years it's gotten vastly worse, and they have not changed their baggage policies. So that isn't the variable in this case...

They certainly seem to board quicker. I flew a 739 on DL and a Max 8 on WN. Both full flights. WN boarded in 30 minutes, DL boarded in 40. Not as many people bringing everything into the cabin since they were able to check bags for free. Anecdotally I also believe the deplaning goes faster on WN than on DL. But that's just my feeling.

Not really, if you are then just sitting at the gate waiting for your ATC slot. So many times I have sat on a fully boarded AA/DL flight 15 min before departure, with doors closed, only to wait for push back. The larger problem with checking bags in the US is that the risk of them getting banged up is pretty high and delivery taking long at times. So if there is no trust that my bag will make it quickly and safely to the belt, I won't check it - even if I have three bags allowance.

I was wondering what Bucharest had to do with luggage fees.

What's wild to me is that WN used to board planes much faster. The "10 minute turn" is part of WN lore. While that is no longer possible (in part due to modern FAA rules), they still used to finish the basic boarding process in 10-15 minutes...even in my regular-travel years that started in the 90's. I get that a fully loaded Max is going to take longer, but even the old 143-seaters seem to take forever to board these days.

I believe allowing passengers to check one bag could improve operational performance based on my observations of gate-checked bags on U.S. carriers. This process seems to be a critical path workflow with no slack. However, I lack knowledge about the standard checked-bag workflow and its impact on operational efficiency. Southwest Airlines' decline in operations in recent years, despite unchanged baggage policies, serves as a case study in this regard.

I'm actually not a fan of forcing people to guess at obscure acronyms (apart from airport codes because those are sort of in our DNA), but I also try my best to come up with thread titles that fit nicely within the suggested field length. And, I was hopeful that I could sufficiently explain my acronym in the body of the OP. Still, now that you've called me out, it has occurred to me that thread titles probably should be self-explanatory. As such, I apologize for the acronym.

Yeah, I was actually tempted to introduce the "WN as a test case" topic in my OP, but I don't have enough personal experience with their process to really comment. I just know that most people in China check and/or bring really tiny bags on board, and people do get on and off planes quickly (there isn't even much zone talk in many cases). However, it's unfair to compare that to the US or Europe and a lot of my flights in China still end up delayed.

Building on my previous sentence, maybe boarding speed just isn't such an important variable in the grand scheme.

But, as you intimate here, even if boarding speed isn't important, there probably is a correlation between letting people check bags for free and boarding efficiency. But, I want to introduce the idea that some people avoid checking bags because they fear they'll end up waiting for them on the back end, or worse...

I personally don't mind longish waits at baggage claim (I figure it's an acceptable price to pay for not having to lug my stuff through security and to/from gates), but I get it, and some airports really suck at baggage handling. Meanwhile, my bag does seem to miss connections in airports like CLT, IAH, or ATL a pretty high percentage of the time. As such, I always assume that it could happen when decided whether or not to check. I actually do roll those dice most of the time because I've been quite pleased with recovery (e.g. reasonably fast delivery to my home or hotel and a blank check to replenish essentials), but this fear is well justified. So, on flights from unimportant spokes to hubs, allowing a free checked bag might not have much of an impact.

Which I was told can also have to do with military use of airspace for which domestic flights are grounded/held whereas international flights are not delayed? Only hearsay though.

But let me introduce another example: Japan (and for the sake I'm going to stick with legacy carriers NH/JL). Most people check a bag (usually 20kg, however many bags allowance). Roughly 50% have a legitimate carry on, the rest are personal item only. Boarding for a 777 in high density configuration commences no more than 20 minutes before scheduled departure, most flights are on time (within 10 min, and most delays that I experienced are due to weather/routing/taxi at the destination). Now, the reason boarding is smooth and they can board a full 777 in less than 20 minutes is that anyone who gets on the plane, immediately puts whatever belongings they are carrying into the overhead bin and sits down, not to inconvenience anyone else. No shuffling through the bag to find the favorite book you wanted to read, no slowly taking off your jackets or sorts.

Then again, like you said - if you regularly experience delays in push back regardless of boarding speed, it doesn't really matter.

Had to look it up. DNA is Kadena which is supposedly the busiest U.S.A.F. base in east Asia.

On this point, WN some 20-30 years ago would allow different boarding/disembarkation cycle times at different airports because (in their words to the effect), pax in different parts of the U.S. would take longer or shorter times to disembark and embark. Been about that long since I last flew on WN so have no idea what their punctuality is like today.

One airline which I have been impressed with punctuality is Vietnam Airlines. Only one delayed flight (due to delayed incoming) but certainly made up for it with block time allowance.

Those military games don't really happen much along trunk routes or near major cities anymore. Chinese ATC is still inefficient compared to Western countries', but it seems to be getting better, albeit slowly.

Yeah, there's certainly people that are packing above the limit on carry ons to avoid fees but from an individual passengers perspective it's hard to know how much is from that and how much is from people that don't want to deal with the time, hassle, and risks of bag checking even if they could check for no additional cost. I wonder if any airlines have made any attempt to gain insight on that.