Yes, http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...templates.html and in 2000, CO sued to have them removed as back when airlines controlled the checkpoints at most airports, they stated that they did not want them and it also impacted their customers. One flaw with thme (if they were to come back) is that now you remove most laptops, and that reduces the final size of the bag to less than what it would be if the laptop was in in (when bag is filled to/near capacity.) http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...A9669C8B63They also only measured (2) of the (3) dimensions. There was a company that made laser sizers that would scan the bag and show actual dimensions, but that never really took off.

Since I never have to pay for checked baggage, there is only one thing that infuriates me: The capricious enforcement evidenced by the treatment of our OP here and the numerous other occasions that I have witnessed or been a victim of such.

I will say that on the 8 CO flights that I have taken so far this year, not one GA has requested that I gate check my bag. So, in that regard, CO is far better than UA since their standards of enforcement are, IME, more consistent.

I, unlike you, don't get upset with the steerage pax trying to bring onboard as much as they can get away with because the majors created this problem when they started charging for the first checked piece. Airline travel is becoming more expensive and who can blame the ordinary Joe/Jane for trying to save money by not checking a bag? WN is very successfully marketing their airline as the reasonable airline that allows free checked baggage with their "Fee Court" commercials where they find major airline executives guilty of gouging. Wall street airline analysts have indicated that this campaign has some traction with the public and WN loads are up. The majors value their elites and, for the most part, treat them very well, but they cannot survive without the non-elite flyers, so they had better be careful that they don't milk the cow dry!

That 12-year old (!) thread is amusing! And I guess the length of the bag is at least as important as the other dimensions - it's what determines whether the bag fits wheels-first or has to be turned sideways.

Virgin American, in addition to their humorous "Your Bag May be Impressive, But..." signs, has an interesting policy - they often let people board first who have only a small under-the-seat bag and no rollerboard. Status means nothing on Virgin as far as boarding, just where you're sitting. I did notice a lot fewer carry-ons than on United flights, so it really didn't matter when I boarded - no problem in finding overhead space.

Unfortunately they probably would simply make you carry on the offending batteries and check the rest of the bag.

Length is the major problem (with width being a distant second), not thickness. I have yet to see a bag so fat that it wouldn't fit in the overhead of a mainline jet, yet I have seen plenty that wouldn't fit lengthwise, thereby reducing the number of bags that could be placed in a bin. Only very rarely have I seen a bag that was wider than normal which could also decrease the number of bags in a bin. What is great about my bag is that it has a very stiff internal hard frame which just barely allows the zippered flap to close, thereby making it impossible to expand the bag beyond the dimensions of the internal frame. This bag even fits well on the CRJs and easily under the seat of the small Embraers because it has a half-moon profile instead of the normal rectangular profile.

+1 on both counts.

Cheers.

I am sympathetic to the OP's problem, and to the attempts of subsequent posters to find creative solutions for passengers to avoid having their bags unnecessarily checked in the future. But please don't make this the fib of choice for FTers looking to keep their carry-on luggage with them. The fact is that there are people, every day, who have the unfortunate task of boarding a plane with cremated remains of a loved one. Perhaps not necessarily in a rollaboard, or going to the Strait of San Juan de Fuca, but it is a real life situation that is tremendously difficult, and sometimes does require an extra measure of accommodation from airline and airport personnel. Accommodation which is going to be harder to come by in the future if "I'm carrying cremated remains" becomes the airline version of "The dog ate my homework."

I realize no harm was intended by the post; just consider this a gentle PSA from someone who's been there, done that.

And I shouldn't complain about airline meals since there are people starving in India...

On Saturday, April 9, I flew on the last flight of the night from ORD to EWR. The GA aggressively gate checked bags. As soon as I turned from the jetway to the boarding aisle, I could immediately tell there were multiple bins completely empty. Not partially empty, mind you. Multiple bins completely empty. The customer in front of me (and me) both tried to grab our bags but they were already down the shoot. We complained to the FAs and they apologized profusely once we were in the air. The FAs even offered us free drinks. They said it was completely up to the GA (even though the GA said that the FA told them the bins were full).

But, the FAs admitted there were four bins that were completely empty and many other bins only partially empty.

Complete disgrace.

A little bit dated, but still appropriately accurate and a good historical perspective. http://www.thetravelinsider.com/trav...allowances.htm

The FAs can't know what they can't see
 

I can believe the FAs honestly thinking the bins were full if it was a flight like my IAD-SFO a few weeks ago, where a number of passengers were placing their bags in the first available bin space and then went back to their seats, at the back of the plane, where there was plenty of empty space. It delayed our departure as passengers boarding who were near the front had to put their bags at the back and then swim against the tide as people were trying to board.

There's no automatic system that tells the FAs there are empty bins in back, and if they see boarding difficulties due to full bins up front, how do you expect them to know there's space? Cut them a bit of slack. They're not intentionally trying to mess up your day and gate check your bags. They're trying to get a plane off the ground as quickly as possible.

And like you said, the FAs even offered you drinks. They likely did so because they felt bad about acting on information that wasn't quite right.

Every flight that I have been on has had FAs traversing the entire plane throughout boarding keeping an eye on the boarding progress as well as the status of the bins.

Contrition, while indicating a guilty conscience, by no means makes their actions any less egregious. Trying to buy someone's complacency with free liquor is unprofessional.

Contrition seems to work for me (at home), but the use of liquor has had mixed results.

Agreed on both points!:D

This happened to me last night in Newark... As I'm boarding with my roll aboard that I always place in the bin, agent singled me out and said the bag had to be checked. I asked if the bins were full already (I'm in boarding group 2) and the agent said no, the bag was just too big. I explained that I always am able to fit the bag into the bin with room to spare, and the agent wouldn't relent. After I argued a little more he said I could try it in the bag sizer and if it fit, I could bring it on... So I try it and it fits perfectly into the sizer and he still said it had to be checked. I thought this was absurd and I brought the bag down the jetway with me, but I tore off the tag and put it up in the bin anyway as usual.

Just curious why the agent would single me out and do this for no reason? Not only did he insist on checking the bag for no apparent reason, but he was quite combative and aggressive about the whole situation. Is there any policy that they are following here?