Nov 23, 2014, 3:59 pm
Last edit by: Cloudship
Carry-on Bags and Personal Items that have been tested to fit in the New Sizers
Published carry-on limit: 9"x14"x22"
Actual sizer dimensions: 10"x15"x23"
Published personal item limit: 9"x10"x17"
Actual sizer dimensions: 9"x11"x18"
Bags that Fit Carry-On Sizer
Published personal item limit: 9"x10"x17"
Actual sizer dimensions: 9"x11"x18"
Bags that Fit Personal Item Sizer
Bags that Do Not Fit Sizers
Official size as per Rule 23.B.2, Baggage, Contract of Carriage:
Under the 2013 contract of carriage, which is still valid for various tickets outstanding, the cabin baggage rule states a maximum of 45 linear inches combined for the LHW dimensions with no given side exceeding 22 inches. For such tickets, the cabin bag sizers are not lawfully applicable if the LHW combined linear inches don't exceed 45 linear inches and no side of the bag exceeds 22 inches. In other words for tickets issued last year, some bags allowed under the contract of carriage don't fit in the sizer without sticking out on at least one side.
Published carry-on limit: 9"x14"x22"
Actual sizer dimensions: 10"x15"x23"
Published personal item limit: 9"x10"x17"
Actual sizer dimensions: 9"x11"x18"
Bags that Fit Carry-On Sizer
Code:
Bag Manufacturer Model Date Test Location Comment Briggs & Riley Baseline 20" 03/2014 IAH boraxo Briggs & Riley Torq 01/2014 CLE lordhamster Briggs & Riley Transcend TU220XW-4 03/2014 COS mre5765. 311 bag had to be removed from outer pouch. Two weeks of clothes. Briggs & Riley U122CX 01/2014 SNA sakaike Briggs & Riley BU119 (BRX 19 upright) 05/2014 SMF PV_Premier, snug in 10" dimension even when packed lightly - bag fits in any mainline OH however :rolleyes: Brookstone Dash Office 01/2014 DSM Fits OH E145/C200 Eagle Creek Hovercraft 22" 03/2014 CLT Not stuffed full eBags TLS Mini 21"EB2146-21W 04/2014 swco-not overstuffed, just fit Heys Xcase 12/2013 LAX abaheti Int'l Paper Safeway Grocery 02/2014 IAH IAH-OIL-TRASH Kirkland Signature 21.5 12/2013 SFO Red Oxx Air Boss 02/2014 SFO N1120A (loaded) Red Oxx Sky Train 01/2014 SFO N1120A (loaded) Ricardo of BevHills Dash 20inch Dual 01/2014 Fredd Wheel Spinner Costco @ $50-expandable Rick Steves Backpack 12/2013 LAX LaserSailor Rimowa Limbo Cabin IATA 02/2014 SEA MSY-MSP Rimowa Salsa Deluxe IATA 02/2014 SEA MSY-MSP Samsonite Aspire Lite 03/2014 DEN Samsonite Short-Lite 2-wheeled 12/2013 ORD Lightest bag out there Samsonite Silhouette Sphere 21" 05/2014 BOS Fits perfectly but very snugly Tom Bihn Aeronaut 03/2014 Uncle Dave - fits every dimension with room to spare Travelite Delite v 2.0 02/2014 ORD exbayern (bag full) TravelPro Crew 4 22" 08/2014 SFO Not stuffed full TravelPro Crew 7 20" 12/2013 KWI full - not expanded FriendlySkies TravelPro Crew 8 22" 11/2013 DFW Not stuffed full TravelPro Crew 9 21" spinner 02/2014 ORD ilovesprint not stuffed TravelPro FlightCrew3 22" 02/2014 BOS Not stuffed full. Very snug fit CDKing TravelPro FlightCrew4 20" various Not stuffed TravelPro Maxlite2 20in 12/2013 SFO Expandable too TravelPro Maxlite2 22in 03/2014 Snug fit not stuffed TravelPro Maxlite3 21" 04/2014 EWR EmileG - full, outside compartment empty TravelPro Walkabout Spinners2 21" 04/2014 EWR EmileG - full, outside compartment empty TravelPro Walkabout Lite 4 03/2014 IND United747 - pretty empty bag to start with TUMI Alpha 22922 Many FLL DelrayChris TUMI Alpha 28251 lw Continental 03/2014 EWR lensman TUMI Alpha 2 22021 Continental 04/2014 EWR suzy1K - fit perfectly. Bag full, not expanded TUMI Alpha International 20" 022020DH 04/2014 SFO Snug if front pocket used, easy fit on 22/23" dimension by 1" TUMI T-Tech Int'l Carryon 04/2014 jeremiahsullivan Victorinox Avolve 22" 02/2014 SFO MrOCTeckels - only with front pocket empty Victorinox Mobilizer NXT 5.0 20" 03/2014 ORD gobluetwo - not expanded, every dimension fits with room to spare Victorinox WT 4.0 Duffel 21" 03/2014 ORD gobluetwo - packed for 3 days, squeezed sides easily into sizer
Published personal item limit: 9"x10"x17"
Actual sizer dimensions: 9"x11"x18"
Bags that Fit Personal Item Sizer
Code:
Bag Manufacturer Model Date Test Location Comment
Briggs & Riley Verb VB414-4 03/2014 COS mre5765. Easy fit despite being stuffed with sleeved 13 inch lap top, ipad mini, kindle paperwhite, pills, papers, chargers, ...
Case Logic 14" ZLCS-214 04/2014 EWR Fly5x
eBags TLS Pro Slim Laptop 04/2014
Backpack EB2146-16
Everki Versa Premium Backpack 07/2014 ORD gobluetwo
Skooba Satchel v3 02/2014 ORD ilovesprint
Tom Bihn Co-Pilot 03/2014 SFO frankmu
Tom Bihn Super Ego 03/2014 GRR LufthansaFlyer
Tom Binh Western Flyer 01/2014 DSM when packed "right"
Waterfield Cargo Large 01/2014 SFO MrOCTeckels
LL Bean North Ridge Backpack 04/2014 LAX fgirard Works with a 13" MackBook, Asus Transformer packed inside
Code:
Bag Manufacturer Model Date Test Location Comment Eagle Creek Tarmac 20 wide 03/3014 AUS Curvature on back increases width Eagle Creek Tarmac ES 22 03/2014 1/2 inch too tall Gregory Cache 22 03/2014 BOS Cloudship Timbuk2 Checkpoint Roller 12/2014 BOS Cloudship Tumi Alpha Backpack 03/2014 SEA Full bag, fit length and height, 1/2" too tall when laying on side in personal sizer.
https://www.united.com/web/format/pd...f_Carriage.pdf
Carry-on Baggage must not exceed the Maximum Outside Linear Dimensions of 9 inches (22 cm) x 14 inches (35 cm) x 22 inches (56 cm), which includes its wheels and handles.
Personal items must not exceed 9 inches (22 cm) x 10 inches (25 cm) x 17 inches (43 cm), which includes any wheels and handles.
A personal item that exceeds these maximum linear dimensions but is not greater than 9 inches (22 cm) x 14 inches (35 cm) x 22 inches (56 cm) will be considered as Carry-on Baggage. Carry-on Baggage or personal items suspected of being oversized may require being placed into a sizing unit to determine acceptability. Carry-on Baggage that exceeds the Maximum Linear Dimensions allowed or that exceeds the Carry-on Free Baggage Allowance will be considered as Checked Baggage and is subject to Checked Baggage service charges.
Carry-on Baggage must not exceed the Maximum Outside Linear Dimensions of 9 inches (22 cm) x 14 inches (35 cm) x 22 inches (56 cm), which includes its wheels and handles.
Personal items must not exceed 9 inches (22 cm) x 10 inches (25 cm) x 17 inches (43 cm), which includes any wheels and handles.
A personal item that exceeds these maximum linear dimensions but is not greater than 9 inches (22 cm) x 14 inches (35 cm) x 22 inches (56 cm) will be considered as Carry-on Baggage. Carry-on Baggage or personal items suspected of being oversized may require being placed into a sizing unit to determine acceptability. Carry-on Baggage that exceeds the Maximum Linear Dimensions allowed or that exceeds the Carry-on Free Baggage Allowance will be considered as Checked Baggage and is subject to Checked Baggage service charges.
Carry-on Items That Meets United's Sizer Box? Enforcement? [ARCHIVE]
Mar 21, 2014, 4:25 pm
#1606
Join Date: Jun 2013
Programs: UA 1/MM SPG gold, CEO: Grandmother of 4
Posts: 557
Boarded Flight from IAH to BZX on a Emraer RJ145 with a Tumi Super Leger International that I bought several years ago and used all over Europe and US......never a problem fitting in overhead bin. No problem with GA and no problem with overhead bin, room for other pax things. FA saw it, no problem, then looked again at the 1/4 inch wheels, whipped it out and said in a nasty tone......"what did you do with green tag?", which of course, I never got, then said its a FAA rule if it has wheels it can not be in overhead bin. I asked (very politely,) is it a FAA rule or a United rule......she went a little crazed and said "are you calling me a liar"? I let it go because she was in such a rage......something was clearly not right! She also, dozed on take off and landing and after the beverage service......I took pictures! Grandma Bea
Mar 21, 2014, 4:42 pm
#1607
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,326
... FA ...said in a nasty tone......"what did you do with green tag?".....she went a little crazed and said "are you calling me a liar"? ....she was in such a rage......something was clearly not right! She also, dozed on take off and landing and after the beverage service....
Mar 21, 2014, 4:46 pm
#1608
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA LT Plat 2MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 67,066
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...y-refused.html
Sometime miles does not make one an expert on all the individual rules.
Mar 21, 2014, 4:47 pm
#1609
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
Some of the UAX carriers have policies that bar rollers from the bins.
If you believe that the FA misrepresented this as obligatory government mandate, you should report it to the DOT as a violation of the rule barring unfair competition.
Just because something has taken on the effect of a rule enforceable by the FAA doesn't make it accurate to play the game if saying the FAA made the rule, which is a disgusting, deceptive practice.
If you believe that the FA misrepresented this as obligatory government mandate, you should report it to the DOT as a violation of the rule barring unfair competition.
if a particular UX (and one has) places the restricting in their FARs, that makes it a FAA rule. Most of the UX carriers do not have this rule but a few do. Note the UX carriers rules can be and are different from the UA mainlines rules.
Sometime miles does not make one an expert on all the individual rules.
Sometime miles does not make one an expert on all the individual rules.
Last edited by iluv2fly; Mar 21, 2014 at 4:55 pm Reason: merge
Mar 21, 2014, 4:55 pm
#1610
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA LT Plat 2MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 67,066
To the FA there is no difference, they are required to enforce it and are told by their employers that they could be subject to penalties from the FAA. Does the FA really care how it become a rule?
Mar 21, 2014, 4:55 pm
#1611
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,326
if a particular UX (and one has) places the restricting in their FARs, that makes it a FAA rule. Most of the UX carriers do not have this rule but a few do. Note the UX carriers rules can be and are different from the UA mainlines rules.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...y-refused.html
Sometime miles does not make one an expert on all the individual rules.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...y-refused.html
Sometime miles does not make one an expert on all the individual rules.
"Oh sir, I'm very sorry. Unfortunately <insert name of UX carrier> does not permit wheeled bags in the overhead compartments. Would it be possible to take out what you need for the flight and I will be happy to have it checked for you and available to claim planeside at arrival?. If you have anything valuable, I will get a plastic bag we can use to keep the items together in the overhead. I'm sorry for the inconvenience and hope you understand."
That would have taken as much time and far less effort than the frothing-at-the-mouth rabid outburst she levied at the OP.
Mar 21, 2014, 5:09 pm
#1612
Join Date: Jun 2013
Programs: UA 1/MM SPG gold, CEO: Grandmother of 4
Posts: 557
Perhaps the OP wouldn't need to post their unhappy experience if the FA in question had said the following:
"Oh sir, I'm very sorry. Unfortunately <insert name of UX carrier> does not permit wheeled bags in the overhead compartments. Would it be possible to take out what you need for the flight and I will be happy to have it checked for you and available to claim planeside at arrival?. If you have anything valuable, I will get a plastic bag we can use to keep the items together in the overhead. I'm sorry for the inconvenience and hope you understand."
That would have taken as much time and far less effort than the frothing-at-the-mouth rabid outburst she levied at the OP.
"Oh sir, I'm very sorry. Unfortunately <insert name of UX carrier> does not permit wheeled bags in the overhead compartments. Would it be possible to take out what you need for the flight and I will be happy to have it checked for you and available to claim planeside at arrival?. If you have anything valuable, I will get a plastic bag we can use to keep the items together in the overhead. I'm sorry for the inconvenience and hope you understand."
That would have taken as much time and far less effort than the frothing-at-the-mouth rabid outburst she levied at the OP.
Mar 21, 2014, 9:30 pm
#1613
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Programs: AA Exec Plat / DL-Silver / Hyatt - Glob / Hilton-Gold
Posts: 1,577
Some of the UAX carriers have policies that bar rollers from the bins.
If you believe that the FA misrepresented this as obligatory government mandate, you should report it to the DOT as a violation of the rule barring unfair competition.
Just because something has taken on the effect of a rule enforceable by the FAA doesn't make it accurate to play the game if saying the FAA made the rule, which is a disgusting, deceptive practice.
If you believe that the FA misrepresented this as obligatory government mandate, you should report it to the DOT as a violation of the rule barring unfair competition.
Just because something has taken on the effect of a rule enforceable by the FAA doesn't make it accurate to play the game if saying the FAA made the rule, which is a disgusting, deceptive practice.
It also stipulates that each airline develop an Operations Manual that specifies the procedures the airline will use to ensure the regulations are met. This Ops Manual is approved by the FAA page by page.
Once approved, the Ops Manual becomes an extension of FAR121 specific to that airline.
If airline X states (that to meet FARs requiring airlines to scan carry-on baggage for count/size) they will not allow red bags as carry-on (and the FAA approves such a silly application of the reg) then the FA that states you can not bring your red bag on-board because "it's against FAA regs" is 100% correct. The fact that airline Y allows red bags is irrelevant.
Mar 21, 2014, 9:36 pm
#1614
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orygun
Posts: 462
I love my TravelPro Crew 7 22". I have done at least 400K with it since I bought it and have only ever checked it when it was expanded.
I got hassled about my beloved bag on my last UA trip in late Feb but was allowed to board even though the GA told me it looked too big to carry on.
Just booked my 3rd AS trip in the last week. The purchase confirmation screen reminds one that AS' stated carry-on dimensions are 10 x 17 x 24 so not only do I actually get treated with some respect as a Gold (same status on UA and not sure I get treated with any respect on UA) I don't have to worry about being accosted about having a bag that fits in 737NG and A320 bins easily on AS.
Flyer friendly? NOT!!
I got hassled about my beloved bag on my last UA trip in late Feb but was allowed to board even though the GA told me it looked too big to carry on.
Just booked my 3rd AS trip in the last week. The purchase confirmation screen reminds one that AS' stated carry-on dimensions are 10 x 17 x 24 so not only do I actually get treated with some respect as a Gold (same status on UA and not sure I get treated with any respect on UA) I don't have to worry about being accosted about having a bag that fits in 737NG and A320 bins easily on AS.
Flyer friendly? NOT!!
Mar 21, 2014, 9:39 pm
#1615
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,209
Mar 21, 2014, 9:45 pm
#1616
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Orygun
Posts: 462
Unfortunately, the TravelPro Crew 7 22" is about 23.5" in length and doesn't quite fit the sizer even thought it fits fine in bins (except the DEF side of F in 737s).
Mar 21, 2014, 9:57 pm
#1617
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NJ EWR
Programs: UA*S GE
Posts: 23
After extensive research, looking for a nice carry on, (as close to 22" as possible and style) and fit in UA sizer, I found 2 that I like and are affordable. First one is Travelpro crew 8 22" in black. No luck (discontinued), I found one in a green/spruce but no black and there are few in 20" length... I don't want a used one or a returned item (there are couple of them out there as well). By reading this forum, I know that crew 8 22" fits in UA sizer and l like the style, both handle straps and the skid bars on the back side. In short, I'm sold on crew 8 22". I did look at the crew 9 22" but totally hate that plastic handle strap on the 22" end...the one on the side is ok (go figure, the one very seldom used is a good one)...I even measured to see if I could switch them (front and side handles), to my dismay, the bolt pattern is different. That handle strap (on crew 9) has such a low profile and its so close the the add a bag bracket (hurt my finger just playing with it), I will not deal with it. Not to mention that is hard and stiff. GRRRRRR!!! I did spend some time at a luggage store (luggage factory in Flemington/Ringoes, NJ) picking it up and putting it down (as I would on the plane, shuttle bus, car etc....) That strap handle alone eliminates crew 9 22" from my choices (even if it would fit in the sizer ITS OUT!).
My second choice was Platinum Magna 22", awesome carry on, handles wheels, style, warranty and more.... there was not one little thing I did not like about it.
So after falling in love with the bag, I called Travelpro customer service (this afternoon) just to see if it will comply with UA's sizer (don't want buy it and find out that I have to check it in). Spoke with a very helpful, cordial and pleasant young lady named Crystal. But she could not assure me that this 22" Platinum Magna carryon bag will comply with UA sizer.
Why aren't they (manufactures of bags) being proactive and advise their customers/potential customers on a simple thing like 'these models will fit in UA sizer and these won't'.... Couldn't they make a sizer to UA's specs or buy one from UA?
Is is possible that they want us to be in the dark intentionally??
Can you imagine one of them saying "hey Mr. Customer our xyz 22" cary-on will not comply with the carryon policy for UA so don't buy it, if you do you will have to check it in."
I'm sure some rep from bag manufacture will come up with a spin like they are waiting for all airlines to come up with one standard or some other (bleep) excuse like that.
As LufthansaFlyer said "105 threads of..........".
I will keep on looking and not make a purchase until I can find a bag that is as stylish as Travelpro Platnium Magna, compliant with UA and is as close as possible to the 22"/actual sizer dim. (I know that 20" will fit the sizer but I don't want to give up over 200 cubic inches of space.
Oh...spinners are out...not for me. (Crystal asked if I would consider 21" spinner)
Please forgive me for venting my frustration and my grammar. English is my second language.
Mar 22, 2014, 12:26 am
#1618
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
FAA Regulations (FARs) Part 121 (sked air carriers) lays out the groundwork regulations.
It also stipulates that each airline develop an Operations Manual that specifies the procedures the airline will use to ensure the regulations are met. This Ops Manual is approved by the FAA page by page.
Once approved, the Ops Manual becomes an extension of FAR121 specific to that airline.
If airline X states (that to meet FARs requiring airlines to scan carry-on baggage for count/size) they will not allow red bags as carry-on (and the FAA approves such a silly application of the reg) then the FA that states you can not bring your red bag on-board because "it's against FAA regs" is 100% correct. The fact that airline Y allows red bags is irrelevant.
It also stipulates that each airline develop an Operations Manual that specifies the procedures the airline will use to ensure the regulations are met. This Ops Manual is approved by the FAA page by page.
Once approved, the Ops Manual becomes an extension of FAR121 specific to that airline.
If airline X states (that to meet FARs requiring airlines to scan carry-on baggage for count/size) they will not allow red bags as carry-on (and the FAA approves such a silly application of the reg) then the FA that states you can not bring your red bag on-board because "it's against FAA regs" is 100% correct. The fact that airline Y allows red bags is irrelevant.
Last edited by mgcsinc; Mar 22, 2014 at 12:33 am
Mar 22, 2014, 2:25 am
#1619
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Programs: AA Exec Plat / DL-Silver / Hyatt - Glob / Hilton-Gold
Posts: 1,577
But the reverse is also true. To an FA working for Airline X, their Ops Manual is the FAA regs. Stating that the airlines policy is "FAA made me do it" is not always a lie.
If that policy is written into their Ops Manual, then it IS an FAA mandate that they comply with that policy.
So it's also remarkable that people who claim to understand the regulatory framework would offer the following advice ...
Some of the UAX carriers have policies that bar rollers from the bins.
If you believe that the FA misrepresented this as obligatory government mandate, you should report it to the DOT as a violation of the rule barring unfair competition.
Just because something has taken on the effect of a rule enforceable by the FAA doesn't make it accurate to play the game if saying the FAA made the rule, which is a disgusting, deceptive practice.
If you believe that the FA misrepresented this as obligatory government mandate, you should report it to the DOT as a violation of the rule barring unfair competition.
Just because something has taken on the effect of a rule enforceable by the FAA doesn't make it accurate to play the game if saying the FAA made the rule, which is a disgusting, deceptive practice.
Yes, I believe a lot of airline employees use the "deceptive and disgusting practice" you describe. But I also know that most airline passengers don't fully understand the concept that legal application of FAA regs does in fact vary from one airline to the next. I'd rather educate them that it may/may not be a lie than direct them to file a DOT complaint.
Mar 22, 2014, 5:40 am
#1620
Join Date: Mar 2009
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 422
I'm new at this forum. The major reason I've registered in, is because I'm looking for new carry on as I was notified by UA about the "crackdown". I travel with carry on only even though with UA *S I can check one bag for free. My cheapo/department store Protocol 21" roller-board served me well over the years but its on its last leg and its border line in the in the 21" dim. (23"+a fraction with wheels and tel. handle). I will test it on Friday morning the 28th at EWR.
After extensive research, looking for a nice carry on, (as close to 22" as possible and style) and fit in UA sizer, I found 2 that I like and are affordable. First one is Travelpro crew 8 22" in black. No luck (discontinued), I found one in a green/spruce but no black and there are few in 20" length... I don't want a used one or a returned item (there are couple of them out there as well). By reading this forum, I know that crew 8 22" fits in UA sizer and l like the style, both handle straps and the skid bars on the back side. In short, I'm sold on crew 8 22". I did look at the crew 9 22" but totally hate that plastic handle strap on the 22" end...the one on the side is ok (go figure, the one very seldom used is a good one)...I even measured to see if I could switch them (front and side handles), to my dismay, the bolt pattern is different. That handle strap (on crew 9) has such a low profile and its so close the the add a bag bracket (hurt my finger just playing with it), I will not deal with it. Not to mention that is hard and stiff. GRRRRRR!!! I did spend some time at a luggage store (luggage factory in Flemington/Ringoes, NJ) picking it up and putting it down (as I would on the plane, shuttle bus, car etc....) That strap handle alone eliminates crew 9 22" from my choices (even if it would fit in the sizer ITS OUT!).
My second choice was Platinum Magna 22", awesome carry on, handles wheels, style, warranty and more.... there was not one little thing I did not like about it.
So after falling in love with the bag, I called Travelpro customer service (this afternoon) just to see if it will comply with UA's sizer (don't want buy it and find out that I have to check it in). Spoke with a very helpful, cordial and pleasant young lady named Crystal. But she could not assure me that this 22" Platinum Magna carryon bag will comply with UA sizer.
Why aren't they (manufactures of bags) being proactive and advise their customers/potential customers on a simple thing like 'these models will fit in UA sizer and these won't'.... Couldn't they make a sizer to UA's specs or buy one from UA?
Is is possible that they want us to be in the dark intentionally??
Can you imagine one of them saying "hey Mr. Customer our xyz 22" cary-on will not comply with the carryon policy for UA so don't buy it, if you do you will have to check it in."
I'm sure some rep from bag manufacture will come up with a spin like they are waiting for all airlines to come up with one standard or some other (bleep) excuse like that.
As LufthansaFlyer said "105 threads of..........".
I will keep on looking and not make a purchase until I can find a bag that is as stylish as Travelpro Platnium Magna, compliant with UA and is as close as possible to the 22"/actual sizer dim. (I know that 20" will fit the sizer but I don't want to give up over 200 cubic inches of space.
Oh...spinners are out...not for me. (Crystal asked if I would consider 21" spinner)
Please forgive me for venting my frustration and my grammar. English is my second language.
After extensive research, looking for a nice carry on, (as close to 22" as possible and style) and fit in UA sizer, I found 2 that I like and are affordable. First one is Travelpro crew 8 22" in black. No luck (discontinued), I found one in a green/spruce but no black and there are few in 20" length... I don't want a used one or a returned item (there are couple of them out there as well). By reading this forum, I know that crew 8 22" fits in UA sizer and l like the style, both handle straps and the skid bars on the back side. In short, I'm sold on crew 8 22". I did look at the crew 9 22" but totally hate that plastic handle strap on the 22" end...the one on the side is ok (go figure, the one very seldom used is a good one)...I even measured to see if I could switch them (front and side handles), to my dismay, the bolt pattern is different. That handle strap (on crew 9) has such a low profile and its so close the the add a bag bracket (hurt my finger just playing with it), I will not deal with it. Not to mention that is hard and stiff. GRRRRRR!!! I did spend some time at a luggage store (luggage factory in Flemington/Ringoes, NJ) picking it up and putting it down (as I would on the plane, shuttle bus, car etc....) That strap handle alone eliminates crew 9 22" from my choices (even if it would fit in the sizer ITS OUT!).
My second choice was Platinum Magna 22", awesome carry on, handles wheels, style, warranty and more.... there was not one little thing I did not like about it.
So after falling in love with the bag, I called Travelpro customer service (this afternoon) just to see if it will comply with UA's sizer (don't want buy it and find out that I have to check it in). Spoke with a very helpful, cordial and pleasant young lady named Crystal. But she could not assure me that this 22" Platinum Magna carryon bag will comply with UA sizer.
Why aren't they (manufactures of bags) being proactive and advise their customers/potential customers on a simple thing like 'these models will fit in UA sizer and these won't'.... Couldn't they make a sizer to UA's specs or buy one from UA?
Is is possible that they want us to be in the dark intentionally??
Can you imagine one of them saying "hey Mr. Customer our xyz 22" cary-on will not comply with the carryon policy for UA so don't buy it, if you do you will have to check it in."
I'm sure some rep from bag manufacture will come up with a spin like they are waiting for all airlines to come up with one standard or some other (bleep) excuse like that.
As LufthansaFlyer said "105 threads of..........".
I will keep on looking and not make a purchase until I can find a bag that is as stylish as Travelpro Platnium Magna, compliant with UA and is as close as possible to the 22"/actual sizer dim. (I know that 20" will fit the sizer but I don't want to give up over 200 cubic inches of space.
Oh...spinners are out...not for me. (Crystal asked if I would consider 21" spinner)
Please forgive me for venting my frustration and my grammar. English is my second language.