[confirmed] UA to strictly enforce carry-on size starting 1-Mar-2014
Feb 3, 2014, 11:40 am
#196
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
You are purposely ignoring the argument and lose credibility with statements like this. Personally I'm not sure where I stand on all this (other than wanting to see grossly oversized stuff stopped). But really there are 3 dimensions in play for a bag in the bin. The most critical is the big number - if the door won't close then the bag gets turned sideways and takes up unfair space. The 2nd biggest number is less critical but still of some concern since that width, if larger than it should be, does detract from other's space. The third dimension (the height) is irrelevant as long as it doesn't limit the bag from going all the way into the bin and thus causing the door not to close. The reality is that most 9" high bags could be 11" or maybe even more and nothing would change about the bin capacity. The "issue" is that with soft sided bags the middle of the bag (which is the least significant in terms of fitting in the bin) often bulges if at all overpacked. Again - there is NO impact on anyone else if it does this and still fits in the overhead in the correct manner. However, if we wind up with GAs using bulge as a criteria for forcing checking I think we are in trouble. If the bag is the correct dimensions it should be of - who is now going to be the judge of how hard one is allowed to push to get the bag in the sizer if it is bulging. Am I allowed to use 10 pounds of force, 50?, can I sit on it? For me it isn't the "dimensions" that is the issue. It is the bulge and if that becomes the criteria I predict chaos.
Feb 3, 2014, 11:42 am
#197
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: ECP
Programs: DL Diamond
Posts: 1,658
This is ridiculous.
People only try to bring large carry on bags because checking bags is a nightmare, which is a problem created by the airlines. If my bag arrived un-damaged and within 30 minutes of landing, I would have all the disincentive I needed from bringing a large rollaboard.
United is attempting to charge for passengers' natural reactions to their own inexcusable shortcomings.
People only try to bring large carry on bags because checking bags is a nightmare, which is a problem created by the airlines. If my bag arrived un-damaged and within 30 minutes of landing, I would have all the disincentive I needed from bringing a large rollaboard.
United is attempting to charge for passengers' natural reactions to their own inexcusable shortcomings.
Feb 3, 2014, 11:44 am
#198
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,914
This is ridiculous.
People only try to bring large carry on bags because checking bags is a nightmare, which is a problem created by the airlines. If my bag arrived un-damaged and within 30 minutes of landing, I would have all the disincentive I needed from bringing a large rollaboard.
United is attempting to charge for passengers' natural reactions to their own inexcusable shortcomings.
People only try to bring large carry on bags because checking bags is a nightmare, which is a problem created by the airlines. If my bag arrived un-damaged and within 30 minutes of landing, I would have all the disincentive I needed from bringing a large rollaboard.
United is attempting to charge for passengers' natural reactions to their own inexcusable shortcomings.
Feb 3, 2014, 11:47 am
#199
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,875
I have heard that UA will begin to "strictly" enforce the carry-on size, personal item size, and the number of items being carried onboard beginning March 1. Word on the street is it will be enforced regardless of cabin or status.
Also, they are going to charge the appropriate fees at the gate for checking oversize carryons or extra bags if you try to carry too many.
I kind of like this, your thoughts?
Also, they are going to charge the appropriate fees at the gate for checking oversize carryons or extra bags if you try to carry too many.
I kind of like this, your thoughts?
Feb 3, 2014, 11:54 am
#200
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K 2006-2013
Posts: 334
I'd argue you're losing credibility as well with your argument. The third dimension is completely relevant, as it allows other items to be loaded in the overhead bins.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:02 pm
#201
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: AADULtArer
Posts: 5,796
How is checking bags a "nightmare"? I've been checking bags for 20 years. Only 3 have been delayed. Never one lost. I think the longest I ever waited for a bag at the carousel was 45 minutes. If the priority tags actually worked it would be in the first half of bags on the carousel. I just don't buy all the negativity of the airline always loses my bag. Sure it happens but no where near to the extent some here would try and make us believe.
The loss rate of UX gate checked ( plane side) luggage is about 20x lower than hold checked luggage, ROM
Feb 3, 2014, 12:03 pm
#202
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SFO, FRA, BKK
Programs: SIXT Platinum, Hertz Gold, A3 Blue, TK Elite, Krisflyer Elite Silver
Posts: 79
How is checking bags a "nightmare"? I've been checking bags for 20 years. Only 3 have been delayed. Never one lost. I think the longest I ever waited for a bag at the carousel was 45 minutes. If the priority tags actually worked it would be in the first half of bags on the carousel. I just don't buy all the negativity of the airline always loses my bag. Sure it happens but no where near to the extent some here would try and make us believe.
Have you ever experienced theft of content from your luggage?
Probably not, but I have and therefore I only want to check an old bag with content for which I do not need to worry.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:07 pm
#204
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,914
Yes, I have seen how they are treated. No I have not had anything taken. But why would anyone put anything of value in a checked bag? That is stupid. And I did acknowledge that it does happen. but nowhere near to the extent people here are trying to make us believe.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:08 pm
#205
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
Other than a jacket, you're not getting much on top of any bag in the OHB that might be less than a normal height measurement, so I agree with his point completely.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:10 pm
#206
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: South Carolina
Programs: UA LT Gold, American Kettle, Hertz #1 Presidents Circle, Marriott LT Platinum
Posts: 927
Has anybody tried a standard laptop backpack in the personal item sizer?
I measured my laptop backpack and it looks fine for the 17" height, 9" depth. But the width is around 12"-13", while the UA website says only 10" is allowed.
My laptop backpack really is standard size, I'm not sure if I could find something much smaller to fit my 15.6" laptop.
I measured my laptop backpack and it looks fine for the 17" height, 9" depth. But the width is around 12"-13", while the UA website says only 10" is allowed.
My laptop backpack really is standard size, I'm not sure if I could find something much smaller to fit my 15.6" laptop.
Going to be interesting times come March!
Now for another thought, If I refuse to allow my bag to be checked, and am denied boarding as a result is that an IDB situation?
Removal of the linear inches part of rules really makes this a more difficult proposition for all. It forces everyone into a 2 sizes fits all with no wiggle room.
I'd really like to know why the linear part of the rule was discarded?
Cheers,
Feb 3, 2014, 12:14 pm
#207
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,233
I have no objection to enforcement BUT once an item is shown to comply, then that needs to be the end of it. I have seen far too many instances where a passenger puts the item in the sizer at the request of an agent, the bags fits comfortably, and then the agent still wants to argue. Unfortunately , the biggest abusers that I have seen of the one plus one carryon rules are off duty crew members dressed in civilian clothes but with their crew tags displayed.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:16 pm
#208
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K 2006-2013
Posts: 334
These things that fit on top of bags and otherwise would take up room in the bin that could be used for larger bags.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:19 pm
#209
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
Just going back in my mind through things I've taken on flights last year and it's quite a few things(in addition to my backpack which goes under the seat). These include the aforementioned jackets, small shopping bags, camera bag, tripod, microphone kit, murse (for lack of a better term), monitor calibration kit, second laptop.
These things that fit on top of bags and otherwise would take up room in the bin that could be used for larger bags.
These things that fit on top of bags and otherwise would take up room in the bin that could be used for larger bags.
Feb 3, 2014, 12:20 pm
#210
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SEA, OGG(I wish)
Programs: was UA 1K now Gold, cuz UA 1.3 MM; HA,DL,AS (no status in these), Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,238
Laptop Bag Issues!
Way upthread there is a reference to bag size limits as shown on the United Hub website. I'm OK with the rollaboard, my Hartman exactly meets the LxDxW measurements imposed on the photo of an "acceptable" carry-on, but the photo for a "personal item" is a backpack! But what about the (presumably) many who use a shoulder bag rather than a backpack. As for laptop bags, Posts #156, #159, #192 & #206 do address the dimensions issue. That mythical backpack is 17x10x9 (36 linear inches), while my padded Briggs & Reilly so-called brief case is 16x12x6 (34 linear inches). Seems that mine should be confoming & when I tried recently it did fit in a sizer if squished down a bit, but technically it's too tall. Would a zealous GA refuse boarding to anyone who demurred about gate checking a bag containing a laptop? Could happen. So Mr. UA Insider, what about having the bag photos on the web site also show acceptable laptop/brief cases for typical Mac/Dell/whatever laptop computers or just reintroduce the linear inch rule.
Last edited by BH62; Feb 3, 2014 at 12:22 pm Reason: update reference to other posts