Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Forced to gate check rollerboard on ERJ-145

Forced to gate check rollerboard on ERJ-145

Old Dec 19, 2016, 8:30 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Suburban Philadelphia
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Plat, IHG Gold
Posts: 3,392
Originally Posted by Wayside
Per the FAA the ONLY items allowed to be carried in the cabin of ExpressJet ERJ are personal items. They utilize a lower average passenger weight that doesn't account for bags carried into the cabin. On say a CRJ-700 or 900 operated by ExpressJet (be it in the Delta world) the average passenger weights are higher because carry-on bags are allowed in the cabin on those aircraft for ExpressJet. It all has to do with how the carrier develops its approved weight and balance program within the Operations Specifications. Because the weight of a carry-on is NOT included in the passenger weight on a 145, they must be gate checked. This ensures their weight is accounted for separately. Consistent enforcement is difficult BUT if it's not a personal item it should not be brought into the cabin. Consider that the weight and balance of the aircraft is contingent on proper adherence to this policy.
I've had FA's (mercifully this only happened once) try to refuse to let me carry on my "personal item" simply because it has wheels. Yes, it fits in the smaller sizer.

If I have doubts (GA looks to be on a mission, etc.) I will carry it on by the handle instead of rolling it.
Cargojon is offline  
Old Dec 19, 2016, 8:38 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: LAX
Programs: UAL 1K MM, Marriott Ambassador
Posts: 438
Originally Posted by AirbusFan2B
E145 hands down awful aircraft. This carry-on thing, which I have also experienced, only adds. 18B is tolerable but that's it.
#worstplaneever

Nothing good ever comes of flying this ac
Lani1 is offline  
Old Dec 19, 2016, 8:51 pm
  #18  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,761
Its better than the CR2 at least.
entropy is offline  
Old Dec 19, 2016, 8:56 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Programs: UA 1k, HH Diamond
Posts: 146
Originally Posted by mduell
Are you being punished? Who did you piss off?
Lol - that's the life flying out of and in to regional airports all the time in the midwest
sosptuba is offline  
Old Dec 19, 2016, 11:05 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Telluride, CO
Posts: 180
Yes, flame me for being the grammar alt-write, but there is no such thing as a rollerboard.

Unless you are talking about one of these: http://www.comparestoreprices.co.uk/...ller-board.jpg
bmustaf is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 5:50 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New Jersey
Programs: UA MM 1K, AA MM Gold, Marriott LT Platinum
Posts: 3,235
If you have 18C and D to yourself, a full sized rollerboard will fit sideways easily under the seats. I've managed that only on some very light load flights.

Problem with the "if it has wheels it gets gate-checked" policy is that I've seen duffle bags larger than the smallest rollerboard that were allowed on.

If you're really intent on bringing your bag on, your odds are better if you're not one of the first few on the plane.
tarheelnj is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 6:26 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: STL
Programs: UA Platinum, AA Platinum Pro, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 1,429
Originally Posted by Gimlei
I've taken the puddle jumper from EWR to DCA and back every week for the last few months. I have a small rollerboard that is just narrow enough to fit into the overhead bin of the ERJ 145, and so I always take it on board with me. Today, however, the flight attendant refused to allow me on board with it, even though I explained that it does fit, that I do it every week, and there was a ton of space as I was one of the first to board. She would have none of it and said that rollerboards were not allowed on board. I am wondering, is this an actual policy of United Express that's just very rarely enforced, or an overzealous employee? Does anyone know?
Not a specific dig at you....but IME anytime "I've done this before" or "there is plenty of space" are used with airline personnel, the conversation is usually shut down and there is no point in trying to get a point across.

Common sense typically is overridden with either strict (overzealous) enforcement of policy because if they bend the rules for one, they figure they have to do it for everyone else.

And its incredibly frustrating especially if you are in a situation where you are in a bind....case in point delayed ERJ flight IADEWR with a connection from A to C reduced from 60+ mins to 30 mins. Before we boarded I asked the FA if I could stow my carry-on in the closet because I had a tight connection and waiting on arrival for the carry-on would surely make me miss my connection....the response was "no". Not even a "how about checking it" but a firm "no". So we land at EWR, pull up to gate but no rampers...so 10 mins pass we finally deplane, wait for carryon, take the silly bus from A to C, and end up at gate at T-5 but they closed the door.

Lessons learned:
1) Don't assume airline personnel are going to help
2) If Express to Mainline, build a 2+ hr connection time in EWR; 1+ in IAH
3) If Express to Mainline and anything less than connection times listed above, just check carry-on
qukslvr619 is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 6:59 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ORD
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Platinum/LT Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 5,594
Originally Posted by exerda
Well, at least the C700 has E+ and F seats, both of which IMHO beat the A seats on the E145.
Agreed, I was just comparing the coach seats. I'd still take the E145 A seat over any coach seats on the C series.
JBord is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 10:57 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1
I know i'm in the minority, but I like flying the 145's. Having an A seat with nobody next to me might as well be E+ for all I am concerned.
UTJim80 is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 5:14 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania
Programs: Milege+, SkyMiles, AAdvantage, HHonors Diamond, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,684
Wouldn't gate checking be easier? They usually get the bags off right away. It's not the hell you get waiting for luggage coming off the conveyor belt.
eajusa is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 7:44 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Upstate NY or FL or inbetween
Programs: US former CP Looking for a new airline to love me
Posts: 1,674
Originally Posted by Wayside
Per the FAA the ONLY items allowed to be carried in the cabin of ExpressJet ERJ are personal items. They utilize a lower average passenger weight that doesn't account for bags carried into the cabin. On say a CRJ-700 or 900 operated by ExpressJet (be it in the Delta world) the average passenger weights are higher because carry-on bags are allowed in the cabin on those aircraft for ExpressJet. It all has to do with how the carrier develops its approved weight and balance program within the Operations Specifications. Because the weight of a carry-on is NOT included in the passenger weight on a 145, they must be gate checked. This ensures their weight is accounted for separately. Consistent enforcement is difficult BUT if it's not a personal item it should not be brought into the cabin. Consider that the weight and balance of the aircraft is contingent on proper adherence to this policy.
So the crew bags we see in the overhead are superlight weight, or exempt from FAA regs, or? Do tell...
NY-FLA is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 8:15 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Programs: 1K
Posts: 220
Had a *wonderful* FA named Rodney do this to me on a DRO->DEN TransStates flight recently. I have a small Orvis bag (17") that fits on every plane in the United fleet, as does the Northface 19", yet Rodney was screaming at me and my fiance (#2 and #1 to board) saying it can't come on board if it has wheels. I reluctantly gate checked and when onboard asked him to show us the regulation.

The regulation says nothing about wheels, or weight, but is restricted by linear inches - I recall it being 51", but would have to check my notes. The Orvis bag is 17x8 so 50 total linear inches and complies with the regs as I recall.

All that said, now if I see a ERJ on the tarmac, I pick up my bag by the side handle and carry it onboard without event (haven't seen Rodney again though). The CRJ7 crews from GoJet and Skywest are much more friendly and usually say, with a smile, "that won't fit" and with a smile in return I say, "I'm sure it will ;-)" and it all usually works out fine.

Lastly, someone asked why not just gate check it? I can't count the number of times I've had an hour+ connection in DEN, that got whittled down to 20-30 mins due to weather, de-icing in DRO, or traffic control. Waiting an extra 5 minutes to get a gate checked bag can make all the difference when you have to run down to gate B24 from B90! My Orvis and Northface bags have saved me many a night in Denver... at least there is the Westin now if it happens!
zdog2x is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 8:33 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,178
Originally Posted by NY-FLA
So the crew bags we see in the overhead are superlight weight, or exempt from FAA regs, or? Do tell...
Crew bags are not included in the carry on baggage program.

Crew bags are included in the operating weight of the airplane, along with the weight of the crew, average catering, etc., and their storage location is specified in the flight operations manual.

When I flew CRJs, for example, the stowage location for the crew's bags were in the overhead bins (at specific rows) in the CRJ-200 and CRJ-900, and behind the galley carts in the forward galley on the CRJ-700.

In the 737 the pilot's bag stowage location is on the flight deck. I don't know where the F/As bag stowage locations are.
LarryJ is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 8:56 pm
  #29  
Moderator: United Airlines
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.99MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,765
Originally Posted by zdog2x
.... The regulation says nothing about wheels, or weight, but is restricted by linear inches - I recall it being 51", but would have to check my notes. The Orvis bag is 17x8 so 50 total linear inches and complies with the regs as I recall. ...
True for the generic UA rules BUT as has been reported numerous times, some UX carriers and in particularly the ER-145 have restrictions on wheeled bags. It is not a made up rule, it is real (just not listed on the UA site).

So fit or not is not the issue, but the way the aircraft FARs were filed. And the FA are obliged to enforce them.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Dec 20, 2016 at 9:02 pm Reason: FARs
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Dec 20, 2016, 9:10 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Programs: 1K
Posts: 220
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA
True for the generic UA rules BUT as has been reported numerous times, some UX carriers and in particularly the ER-145 have restrictions on wheeled bags. It is not a made up rule, it is real (just not listed on the UA site).
I could be mis-remembering the specifics, but he pulled up a regulation from TransStates and repeatedly stated it was "his company's" rule. My fiancé and I both read it and the reg related only to size, not structure. Not saying that there may not be a TransStates rule on wheels too, but that's not what he showed us.

Side note. Normally we would have let the whole thing pass, but it was pissing rain and he blocked her from getting on the plane (tarmac/ramp setup) while she was at the top of the ramp and I was at the bottom of ramp with him literally screaming at me, both of us getting soaked.
zdog2x is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.