Carry-ons (Opinions?)

In article , me says...

Banty wrote in message
...
In article , me says...
[snip]
Not so much flames, just a comment that it is usually considered
"smart" not to intentionally set oneself up for failure. If you
can do things to avoid risks which are significant to you, it
is considered wise to do so. So we allow extra time to get to the
airport which we know can be crowded. We don't carry stuff in our
pockets that we know will be confiscated by the TSA. We carry
around extra credit cards, duplicate ID's, extra cash, all manner
of things to try to handle "contingencies". If someone is bothered
by the wait, is concerned about not having something upon arrival,
or needs to leave the airport as soon as practical, carrying on
their luggage is a wise decision. It might also be wise however
to only try to carry on what is permitted under the rules.

Which is how I think - in terms of contingencies. Like packing what's needed for
the next day or so in a carryon, and/or wearing on the flight what would be
passable for one's activities the next day.

In many of my longer trips, I couldn't possibly pack enough in a carry-on
to achieve this, especially if the delay in luggage would be more than
24 hours. As it is I merely carry on the most expensive things to replace.

Then carry what you'll need for the next 48 hours or so! Instead, you choose to
contingency-plan against your pocketbook in case of total loss - are you that
concerned about comletely losing luggage? Then don't bring your ermines...

The worst case scenario is when I'll be changing locations each day.

Are you talking about cases where you may be running ahead of your luggage?
Plan it with the airline for delivery to the *next* destination.



It's contingency planning which go to violating rules and imposing
on pax which folks resent here.


Actually, if you review portions of this thread, you'll see that folks
complain that folks carry on too much, permissible or not.

As I interpret it, there's some wondering why folks even bring the max legal,
but I haven't seen *resentment* expressed about it. All the shoved-down
overhead bin stuff has to do with more than the legal carryons (cumulatively).
There have been a couple of folks very defensive about even legal carry ons;
that sort of thing can lead to the impression they were reacting to something
real. But, for example, when I say I sometimes dress in business attire to not
be affected by possible baggage delivery delays, I'm not saying "hey everyone
gotsta do it just like me!".

Cheers,
Banty

"Banty" wrote in message
...

snip

As I interpret it, there's some wondering why folks even bring the max
legal,
but I haven't seen *resentment* expressed about it. All the shoved-down
overhead bin stuff has to do with more than the legal carryons
(cumulatively).
There have been a couple of folks very defensive about even legal carry
ons;
that sort of thing can lead to the impression they were reacting to
something
real. But, for example, when I say I sometimes dress in business attire
to not
be affected by possible baggage delivery delays, I'm not saying "hey
everyone
gotsta do it just like me!".

If you do a google search, you'll see that when this topic is dicussed here,
there are always a few people who say, "Ban all carryon -- I don't need it
when I travel so neither does anyone else." Only a couple of months ago,
someone did a protracted series of posts on why cellphone chargers shouldn't
be carried on business trips. When I read your original posts to this
thread, I thought that's what you were saying. My apologies for misreading
you.


Cheers,
Banty

Banty wrote in message ...
In article , me says...

Banty wrote in message
...
[snip]
In many of my longer trips, I couldn't possibly pack enough in a carry-on
to achieve this, especially if the delay in luggage would be more than
24 hours. As it is I merely carry on the most expensive things to replace.

Then carry what you'll need for the next 48 hours or so!

As I said, I couldn't do this on some of my trips. There is too
much, some is too big, and some is too sharp.

Instead, you choose to
contingency-plan against your pocketbook in case of total loss - are you that
concerned about comletely losing luggage? Then don't bring your ermines...

Anything I can't afford to lose doesn't come along. The truely expensive
stuff stays with me. But as I said, there are some things I'll need with in
the first 48 hours that can't be carried on and the sum total of all
of these categories is more than I could carry on.


The worst case scenario is when I'll be changing locations each day.

Are you talking about cases where you may be running ahead of your luggage?
Plan it with the airline for delivery to the *next* destination.

But you have to know which day they'll deliver it and every day
that passes is potentially another day it will require to arrive.
They can't/don't tell you when it will be delivered so it becomes
a guessing game about how far ahead of yourself to have it delivered.
Typically, I advise folks that aren't staying in the city of arrival
that they might want to consider coming back/staying at the airport
of arrival.

In article , PTRAVEL says...


"Banty" wrote in message
...

snip

As I interpret it, there's some wondering why folks even bring the max
legal,
but I haven't seen *resentment* expressed about it. All the shoved-down
overhead bin stuff has to do with more than the legal carryons
(cumulatively).
There have been a couple of folks very defensive about even legal carry
ons;
that sort of thing can lead to the impression they were reacting to
something
real. But, for example, when I say I sometimes dress in business attire
to not
be affected by possible baggage delivery delays, I'm not saying "hey
everyone
gotsta do it just like me!".

If you do a google search, you'll see that when this topic is dicussed here,
there are always a few people who say, "Ban all carryon -- I don't need it
when I travel so neither does anyone else." Only a couple of months ago,
someone did a protracted series of posts on why cellphone chargers shouldn't
be carried on business trips. When I read your original posts to this
thread, I thought that's what you were saying. My apologies for misreading
you.

Well, thanks, Paul, apologies accepted.

I'm on your side more often than you may think ('though not always...;-)

Cheers,
Banty

"PTRAVEL" wrote in message ...
"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , Evelyn C.
Leeper
says...

Mark Hewitt wrote:

"Icono Clast" wrote in message
om...

"Jim Davis Sr." wrote:


I don't understand why people burden themselves on the long walks to
and from the gangways and then trouble their fellow passengers by
blocking an aisle. I just don't get it. When they're a bit early have
have to go to the toilet, they ask strangers to "watch my bag" not
knowing whether that stranger is going to disappear with it. I just
don't get it.


Because quite often I've had to wait in excess of 40 minutes after the
plane
has landed, before my bag actually shows up. If I could get away with
just
hang baggage when I go on a flight. I would do that!

If you're on a business trip and the time is critical - then pack lighter.
Wear
clothing passable for your business in case there is a problem. If you're
moving or have acquired some largish items, ship stuff. If you're
travelling on
pleasure, the first step to pleasure would be to learn how to relax and
stop
counting minutes at the baggage carousel.


Or because twice the airlines have failed to send my luggage on the same
flight as me.

Twice out of how many flights? And did they or did they not get the bags
to you
within a day?

I mean, good grief. These complaints are just control-phreaky "I demand a
glitch-free life and I wanna be first" stuff. The large number of
self-appointed carry-on exceptions (and the resultant scrable for
overhead,
underfoot, and garment bag space) *is* impacting other pax. PDA's,
music
players, and cameras fit in largish purses and soft briefcases (for the
latter,
with laptop). Medicine and magazines too. One more of carry-on size
handles a
weekend's worth of stuff (say - how 'bout packing one of those such that
you're
covered for a baggage-loading disaster and checking the rest!).

Spoken like a true non-business traveler. Why in the world should anyone
risk their enterprise and forgo their _legal_ carryon because you don't
approve?

I have to wear suits for my business and, no, I won't spend hours in plane
wearing one because you don't like carryons. I, personally, have had my
bags delayed -- 4+ days in each case -- twice out of the four times I
checked bags on a business trip. I also carry a laptop (with associated
electronics), PDA, cellphone and charger, plus critical documents that I
need when I get there.

It absolutely amazes me that you would be criticize someone who falls within
the _airline_determined_ requirement for carryon, which inconveniences no
one except, perhaps, your personal sense of aesthetics.

It is not the person within the guidelines of a 21 inch rollaboard (51
inch total dimension) and a SINGLE personal item (briefcase, purse, OR
- not and - SMALL backpack).

The 24 inch rollaboard plus the computer case, plus the small duffle
plus the purse is NOT within the guidelines. A rollaboard plus a
computer plus a purse is not. A rollaboard plus a garment bag plus a
briefcase is NOT. A rollaboard plus a purse plus a Macy's shopping
bag plus a computer bag is NOT.

These observations were made last Friday on a Continental flight in
first class.

Added to that - there was little evidence of the one above, one below
etiquette.

js

In article ,
Jenn wrote:

you are apparently oblivious to the fact that the infamous bomb shoes
were sneakers

sneakers would be the easiest type shoe to rig with explosives given
their large size and goofy appearance

Don't tell me, tell the TSA authorities. You may have a good point
there, but be that as it may; they still do not search shoes that
lack any metal components such as sneakers.

In article ,
"Frank F. Matthews" wrote:

Me wrote:

In article ,
"Jim Davis Sr." wrote:

I like the Shoe thing. We have to have our shoes inspected because some
nimrod had explosives in his shoes. Think of what will happen if they find
a guy with a stick of dynamite up his ass. (They already have the rubber
gloves)

Actually, only shoes that have metal components are searched. I solved
the problem by wearing sneakers onboard flights. I have never, not once,
had my shoes inspected because they contain no metal at all and I travel
about three times a year on average. My previous flight was about one
month ago and my next one will be in early March with another trip
probably later in March so I am not an infrequent flyer.

Sorry but you are wrong in some cases. I've had them insist on running
my sandals thru. Not only is there no metal but there isn't much shoe
and not much space to hide anything. FFM

Some sandals do have metal components.

In article ,
Me wrote:

In article ,
Jenn wrote:

you are apparently oblivious to the fact that the infamous bomb shoes
were sneakers

sneakers would be the easiest type shoe to rig with explosives given
their large size and goofy appearance

Don't tell me, tell the TSA authorities. You may have a good point
there, but be that as it may; they still do not search shoes that
lack any metal components such as sneakers.

I have seen them search sneakers and in fact have seen them carefully
examine rubber flip flops

"Jonathan Smith" wrote in message
m...
"PTRAVEL" wrote in message
...
"Banty" wrote in message
...
In article , Evelyn
C.
Leeper
says...

Mark Hewitt wrote:

"Icono Clast" wrote in message
om...

"Jim Davis Sr." wrote:


I don't understand why people burden themselves on the long walks
to
and from the gangways and then trouble their fellow passengers by
blocking an aisle. I just don't get it. When they're a bit early
have
have to go to the toilet, they ask strangers to "watch my bag" not
knowing whether that stranger is going to disappear with it. I just
don't get it.


Because quite often I've had to wait in excess of 40 minutes after
the
plane
has landed, before my bag actually shows up. If I could get away
with
just
hang baggage when I go on a flight. I would do that!

If you're on a business trip and the time is critical - then pack
lighter.
Wear
clothing passable for your business in case there is a problem. If
you're
moving or have acquired some largish items, ship stuff. If you're
travelling on
pleasure, the first step to pleasure would be to learn how to relax
and
stop
counting minutes at the baggage carousel.


Or because twice the airlines have failed to send my luggage on the
same
flight as me.

Twice out of how many flights? And did they or did they not get the
bags
to you
within a day?

I mean, good grief. These complaints are just control-phreaky "I
demand a
glitch-free life and I wanna be first" stuff. The large number of
self-appointed carry-on exceptions (and the resultant scrable for
overhead,
underfoot, and garment bag space) *is* impacting other pax. PDA's,
music
players, and cameras fit in largish purses and soft briefcases (for
the
latter,
with laptop). Medicine and magazines too. One more of carry-on size
handles a
weekend's worth of stuff (say - how 'bout packing one of those such
that
you're
covered for a baggage-loading disaster and checking the rest!).

Spoken like a true non-business traveler. Why in the world should
anyone
risk their enterprise and forgo their _legal_ carryon because you don't
approve?

I have to wear suits for my business and, no, I won't spend hours in
plane
wearing one because you don't like carryons. I, personally, have had my
bags delayed -- 4+ days in each case -- twice out of the four times I
checked bags on a business trip. I also carry a laptop (with associated
electronics), PDA, cellphone and charger, plus critical documents that I
need when I get there.

It absolutely amazes me that you would be criticize someone who falls
within
the _airline_determined_ requirement for carryon, which inconveniences
no
one except, perhaps, your personal sense of aesthetics.

It is not the person within the guidelines of a 21 inch rollaboard (51
inch total dimension)

On some airlines -- different airlines have different restrictions.

and a SINGLE personal item (briefcase, purse, OR
- not and - SMALL backpack).

The 24 inch rollaboard plus the computer case, plus the small duffle
plus the purse is NOT within the guidelines.

I have a 24" Tumi suitcase. There is no way that this could remotely be
considered a carry-on. Standard rollaboards are 21" or 22".

A rollaboard plus a
computer plus a purse is not. A rollaboard plus a garment bag plus a
briefcase is NOT. A rollaboard plus a purse plus a Macy's shopping
bag plus a computer bag is NOT.

Obviously. When did I imply otherwise?


These observations were made last Friday on a Continental flight in
first class.

I rarely, if ever, see business people abuse the carryone restrictions. It
is almost always the casual flyer who either doesn't know, or doesn't care
about, the restrictions on carryon.


Added to that - there was little evidence of the one above, one below
etiquette.

Not quite sure what you're saying here, but since you're respond to my post,
I _never_ violate carryon rules. As I've indicated, in my experience,
casual flyers and, notably, families with young children, are the most
egregious violators.


js

And once again, they may well search shoes without metal components. My
sandals are constantly being searched. FFM

Me wrote:
In article ,
Jenn wrote:

you are apparently oblivious to the fact that the infamous bomb shoes
were sneakers

sneakers would be the easiest type shoe to rig with explosives given
their large size and goofy appearance

Don't tell me, tell the TSA authorities. You may have a good point
there, but be that as it may; they still do not search shoes that
lack any metal components such as sneakers.