Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Consumerist)   Thirty percent drop in checked bags helps airlines to lower amount being mishandled by eight percent   (consumerist.com) divider line 16
    More: Obvious, airlines  
•       •       •

870 clicks; posted to Business » on 13 Feb 2013 at 8:15 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



16 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-13 08:26:17 AM  
The airlines got what they wanted.  Fewer bags meant lower fuel costs.
 
2013-02-13 09:30:20 AM  
What's the increase in carry-on bags, and the extra time (=money) it takes to load/unload the plane, deal with checked-at-gate bags, injury reports due to 'tards unable to handle their oversized bags in cramped quarters, etc?
 
2013-02-13 09:30:49 AM  

UNC_Samurai: The airlines got what they wanted.  Fewer bags meant lower fuel costs.


I doubt there's fewer bags.  Now people just cram whatever they can into the overhead bins.

Or if they're a cheapass like me, they volunteer to check their bag at the gate for free.
 
2013-02-13 10:01:30 AM  

Kyro: UNC_Samurai: The airlines got what they wanted.  Fewer bags meant lower fuel costs.

I doubt there's fewer bags.  Now people just cram whatever they can into the overhead bins.

Or if they're a cheapass like me, they volunteer to check their bag at the gate for free.


But you're still using a carryon sized bag meaning that you're probably bringing less stuff than if you planned to check a bag all along.
 
2013-02-13 10:32:20 AM  

UNC_Samurai: The airlines got what they wanted.  Fewer bags meant lower fuel costs.


The planes aren't actually flying any lighter.  However, fewer bags means they can get an extra pallet of FedEx, USPS, fresh fruit, or whatever in the cargo hold, and that will pay hundreds of dollars or more.
 
2013-02-13 10:41:06 AM  

UNC_Samurai: The airlines got what they wanted.  Fewer bags meant lower fuel costs.


Is the reduction in checked bags in another article somewhere, because that seems to just be speculation that the number has reduced as far as I can tell - after all it is not as if last year everyone thought airlines did a great job and have only recently discovered the problem, so such a dramatic drop that it seems like the subby has invented seems fairly unlikely.
 
2013-02-13 10:50:14 AM  
<img data-cke-saved-src="http://cdn" alt="http://cdnwww.airliners.net" alt="www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/4/8/0178842.jpg">">

L10-11 from back in the day when everyone checked their bags.
 
2013-02-13 11:15:01 AM  

Rapmaster2000: <img data-cke-saved-src="http://cdn" alt="http://cdn[www.airliners.net image 640x492]" alt="www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/4/8/0178842.jpg">">

L10-11 from back in the day when everyone checked their bags.


What's the picture supposed to prove or mean? 

The plane is empty, there would be no hand luggage, regardless of whether it was taken during, or after, the checked-in bags era.
 
2013-02-13 11:25:06 AM  

Cormee: Rapmaster2000: <img data-cke-saved-src="http://cdn" alt="http://cdn[www.airliners.net image 640x492]" alt="www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/4/8/0178842.jpg">">

L10-11 from back in the day when everyone checked their bags.

What's the picture supposed to prove or mean? 

The plane is empty, there would be no hand luggage, regardless of whether it was taken during, or after, the checked-in bags era.


I think he is pointing out the lack of overhead storage for the 5 seats in the center of the plane.
 
2013-02-13 11:54:03 AM  

Cormee: Rapmaster2000: <img data-cke-saved-src="http://cdn" alt="http://cdn[www.airliners.net image 640x492]" alt="www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/2/4/8/0178842.jpg">">

L10-11 from back in the day when everyone checked their bags.

What's the picture supposed to prove or mean? 

The plane is empty, there would be no hand luggage, regardless of whether it was taken during, or after, the checked-in bags era.


Note that there are five seats across the middle and no overhead bins.  There was no place for the current standard of two carry-ons per person.  All of that space was fantastic. Compare it with a modern widebody arrangement, and you get to thinking about how the economics of the business have changed the inflight experience.

This isn't really a point of argument just reminiscing on how spacious those DC-10s and L-1011 of the olden days were.
 
2013-02-13 12:23:00 PM  
OK, I understand now. Thanks.
 
2013-02-13 01:27:06 PM  
The one that gets me is the amazing number of people that put their luggage in the overhead compartments sideways. For no reason at all, because it's a normal sized carry-on. Not to sound all psycho or anything, but if every single one of them died of a complete body shutdown due to idiocy, I'd probably crack a smile.
 
2013-02-13 01:39:39 PM  

fustanella: What's the increase in carry-on bags, and the extra time (=money) it takes to load/unload the plane, deal with checked-at-gate bags, injury reports due to 'tards unable to handle their oversized bags in cramped quarters, etc?


I recently discovered that if you pack all of the luggage you would normally check in a shipping box and send it via UPS or FedEx Ground 4-5 business days before you arrive at your destination, flying becomes far less of a hassle.  No checked bags, no baggage claim, and you can take a bus or train to and from the airport without being buried under big luggage bags (I just carried a backpack with a few essentials).  And, of course, you don't have to worry about TSA goons stealing your belongings that way.

That being said, if you're going to do that you should create a UPS or FedEx account and set up the shipments online.  If you go to one of their stores to set up a shipment, the cost nearly doubles.
 
2013-02-13 03:21:16 PM  
Kyro: I doubt there's fewer bags. Now people just cram whatever they can into the overhead bins.

I used to check my bags, when I go to tropical islands, I pack light (all you need is a bunch of t-shirts, shorts, swim trunks and flip flops). The added bonus is that I could put toiletries in there (like regular sized tubes of toothpaste, etc) thus avoiding the 'security theater' at the checkpoint.

Now they want $30 each way for me to check a bag on top of a ticket that I already paid $900 for, fark that.

Now I carry it on, so the damn thing ends up on the plane anyway (and sometimes ends up gate checked), and now I'm ticked because they tried to nickle and dime me, and now I have to drag the suitcase around with me. And if it gets gate checked now I have to get it from baggage claim when I didn't plan on doing that.

So I take some of the $60 that I didn't spend to buy toiletries when I reach my destination (and the rest goes to alcohol to help me relax after dealing with the bullshiat that is modern air travel and the uncertainty of gate checking).

// I show you, the drink of my peoples (my birth island makes rum)
sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-02-13 07:09:13 PM  
The best part about when assholes take their giant bags into the cabin is when you're sitting in an aisle seat and you get a suitcase filled with what feels like bricks dumped on your shoulder.

If you can't afford the baggage fee, either take your business elsewhere or don't fly.
 
2013-02-14 09:46:09 PM  
So . . . most of the bags that are not now being checked were the ones that would have made it though safely.

How did they know?
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report