IATA new standard for the carry on bags

[Songyun]

So the recent news have IATA to set new standard for carry on bags as 55cmX35cmX20cm.

I for one hate this move, I have elite status with UA, so check-in my bag is not a problem for me. However, when I travel with cameras, I really don't want to put them in check-in bags due to possible theft or damage.

What's your opinion?

[koh303]

So the recent news have IATA to set new standard for carry on bags as 55cmX35cmX20cm.

I for one hate this move, I have elite status with UA, so check-in my bag is not a problem for me. However, when I travel with cameras, I really don't want to put them in check-in bags due to possible theft or damage.

What's your opinion?

you are carrying too much gear, or if you shoot 8X10 with which you travel, invest in a good air case.

Reading all the news can also be good:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/upshot/your-giant-carry-on-bag-is-safe-for-now.html?abt=0002&abg=0

[Sal Santamaura]

...What's your opinion?My opinion is that commercial air travel is an obnoxious, dehumanizing experience to be avoided at almost any possible cost. It was headed in that direction before 9-11-2001 and took the final step soon after. If one cannot escape this mess, the only photographic equipment even worth consideration is small, expendable and digital. A large format sheet film system deserves more respect than to be run through this gauntlet.

Recently, I capitulated to undertaking a trip from Los Angeles to Adelaide, Sydney and Fiordland National Park with my wife. The cost of refusing (divorce? :) ) was greater than I wanted to pay. Although US carry-on size limits applied to the international segments, there was one domestic-only leg (Adelaide to Sydney) where Virgin Australia's maximum dimensions, which already reflect the new IATA standard, were in force. My wife tried every possible approach to get around that, but couldn't. Unwilling to purchase yet another set of luggage, which would have not been much larger anyway, we were stuck carrying on only the smaller half of our usual cabin bags, loading checked luggage right up to the maximum 50 lb. per bag limit. It was a real nuisance.

All this sunny commentary from someone who's a retiree of the United States' airliner manufacturer. :D I think even my wife has now seen the light, i.e. if one can't drive somewhere, don't go.

[koh303]

I think even my wife has now seen the light, i.e. if one can't drive somewhere, don't go.
It's called Amtrak... :)

[Ari]

I'm with Sal on this one, I've grown to despise air travel.
What I've found, surprisingly, is that I really love a road trip, be it anywhere; I say surprising because I'd assumed that as I got older, I'd just want to get there as quickly as possible.
But the longer, slower route is the one I now prefer.

[StoneNYC]

This is scary, and upsetting, in a financial way, if they implement this, I will have to buy multiple new bags for my travel system, new expensive pelican cases that now won't fit my camera gear as well as new luggage, at least $800 invested in specific Cary-On sizes that now don't qualify... This is bogus!

[koh303]

This is scary, and upsetting, in a financial way, if they implement this, I will have to buy multiple new bags for my travel system, new expensive pelican cases that now won't fit my camera gear as well as new luggage, at least $800 invested in specific Cary-On sizes that now don't qualify... This is bogus!

you have nothing to worry about, read the link i posted above.
If you travel and shoot LF, 800$ is small money. Be prepared to spend that anyways when the cases break/lost/not work/all of the above.

[HMG]

I think even my wife has now seen the light, i.e. if one can't drive somewhere, don't go.


It's called Amtrak... :)

Not Amtrak. In Sal's case, an Amphicar (http://www.amphicar.com/).

[biedron]

What's your opinion?

It sucks. Big time.

[Pete Roody]

Well you don't have to worry about it if the airline has a larger baggage allowance. Some airlines have already adopted the small size. I am traveling to Italy in July with my Graflex SLR on Emirates. They have adopted the smaller size carry-on. My pilots case that i use to carry this camera and accessories is bigger. The camera controls the dimension of the case so checking accessories won't help. The problem is the 8" thickness limit. And Emirates doesn't allow a second smaller bag in cabin according to their website. I will probably go with a backpack and hand hold the camera if they give me a problem. The pilots case I have is not collapsible. A backpack can be compressed to fit in a test slot.

I also traveled to Paris recently and they weighed my backpack. This is becoming more common and that can be a problem with photo gear even if your case is the right size. Especially if you take a computer, etc.


you have nothing to worry about, read the link i posted above.
If you travel and shoot LF, 800$ is small money. Be prepared to spend that anyways when the cases break/lost/not work/all of the above.

[BrianShaw]

Its about time. Many folks and their humongous carry-on bags are out-of-control.

[William Whitaker]

My opinion is that commercial air travel is an obnoxious, dehumanizing experience to be avoided at almost any possible cost. It was headed in that direction before 9-11-2001 and took the final step soon after. If one cannot escape this mess, the only photographic equipment even worth consideration is small, expendable and digital. A large format sheet film system deserves more respect than to be run through this gauntlet.

+1.
Commercial air travel is deplorable enough without taking ANY camera. 20 years ago I was shipping things ahead via FedEx. That was a good policy then and even better now. My last flight, last week, 4 1/2 hours cross-country, was without any carry-on at all. Nice to be unfettered, but it still was an absolutely miserable experience with last minute gate changes that required changing concourses and rushing to get to the new gate on time. Can't imagine that while dragging a LF camera and all its associated flotsam.


It's called Amtrak... :)

I wish. A couple of years ago I looked into Amtrak for a cross-country trip and checked baggage was not allowed, which made no sense at all to me. It was further complicated by the fact that there was not an Amtrak station near my destination and I would have to transfer to a bus to get where I wanted to go. Sounded like it was just asking for trouble! I wish the trains would come back. I've used them for shorter regional trips and generally enjoyed the ride. But baggage/cargo management with them is at least as bad as with the airlines. That leaves driving...

[jp]

I traveled recently on virgin-atlantic and the limits were pretty close to this. I took a Rolleiflex instead of LF. With my clothes, tablet, camera, film, footwear, backpack, it all weighed 18 pounds which is acceptable.

I protected the camera/film with a Cabela's IK-218724 ammo box which the US TSA/Customs took great interest in, but their counterparts in England had no concept of Cabelas.

Dealing with checked baggage is a deal breaker for me, so I will bring what I'm able to carry on. I have mailed stuff ahead to avoid that in the past.

For shorter trips, the bus is an option. They are used to people bringing huge travel bags and they fill the whole belly of the bus with them.

[StoneNYC]

Its about time. Many folks and their humongous carry-on bags are out-of-control.

I agree with you only in that people were ignoring the current size limits and airlines weren't enforcing the current bag size, so people were sneaking on larger bags, that's where things got tough, and then often the bags are too long, and have to be stored long ways, taking up two spots, that was the major issue, if people followed the current rules the crowding wouldn't be an issue.

But that's people for you.

[Sal Santamaura]

Not Amtrak. In Sal's case, an Amphicar (http://www.amphicar.com/).I really haven't any desire to cross bodies of water, so no Amphicar is needed either.

Side note. The last few years of high school (roughly 1969 through 1971) I walked to school rather than ride the bus. Along the way was an Amphicar dealer, so I've inspected them "in the flesh." They weren't tempting then and aren't now. :)

[Ari]

The flip-flop came sooner than expected: http://www.citynews.ca/2015/06/17/iata-pauses-voluntary-plan-to-shrink-the-size-of-permitted-carry-on-luggage/#__federated=1

[BrianShaw]

I agree with you only in that people were ignoring the current size limits and airlines weren't enforcing the current bag size, so people were sneaking on larger bags, that's where things got tough, and then often the bags are too long, and have to be stored long ways, taking up two spots, that was the major issue, if people followed the current rules the crowding wouldn't be an issue.

But that's people for you.

That's a lot of the problem, Stone. But the rest of the problem is that the NUMBER of carry-on bags often exceeds the capacity simply because EVERYBODY want to carry aboard a bag. I suspect that even if they are legal size the problem will persist because of this.

But as you say, that's people for you.

[StoneNYC]

That's a lot of the problem, Stone. But the rest of the problem is that the NUMBER of carry-on bags often exceeds the capacity simply because EVERYBODY want to carry aboard a bag. I suspect that even if they are legal size the problem will persist because of this.

But as you say, that's people for you.

People, can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em...

[HMG]

Carry-ons are a problem the airlines created. First with long waits for baggage plus the possibility of lost baggage, then with expensive (and profitable) fees for checking bags.

Do I get annoyed with oversized carry-ons (mine are not)? Sure. But it's a predictable response to airline fees.

[knjkrock]

Sitting at the Amtrak Station in Salt Lake waiting on the eastbound California Zephyr. Due in at 3 AM and now two hrs late. One has to have a lot of flexibility and patience to travel by train in the states. Still a great way to travel.

[SergeiR]

Well.. IATA is but a "guideline". Some carriers already had tiny sizes for domestic sizes (in case of regionals it was kinda right - i mean some of them won't feet backpack with laptop, let alone any backpack with gear). Invest in other means to carry stuff. I remember i had to hand-carry Technika IV through Singapore Air check-in three years ago, b/c they kept saying how overweight my carry-on was (it was weight of camera, yes, but ...). I gave up on idea of air travel with 8x10 some time ago :( (funny enough Russia domestic flights in most cases would be absolutely fine with that size of a bag, if you ask nicely)

[StoneNYC]

Well.. IATA is but a "guideline". Some carriers already had tiny sizes for domestic sizes (in case of regionals it was kinda right - i mean some of them won't feet backpack with laptop, let alone any backpack with gear). Invest in other means to carry stuff. I remember i had to hand-carry Technika IV through Singapore Air check-in three years ago, b/c they kept saying how overweight my carry-on was (it was weight of camera, yes, but ...). I gave up on idea of air travel with 8x10 some time ago :( (funny enough Russia domestic flights in most cases would be absolutely fine with that size of a bag, if you ask nicely)

Does "asking nicely" involve a little cash in your palm (or should I say, theirs)?

[Paul Ewins]

If you want to travel with a 4x5 camera - even a Graflex SLR - my suggestion would be to find the smallest bag possible that will fit just the camera. After having gear stolen on a train because the bag was too big to sit on my knees or at my feet I stopped taking a big backpack when I travel and switched to a small bag with one SLR and two lenses. Most airlines allow you to carry a camera as well as a carry on bag and I have never had staff even mention my camera bag. It is around the same size as many womens' handbags and will fit happily under the seat in front of me. That bag would have enough space for a folding 4x5, a few grafmatics and maybe an extra lens or two. I don't think it attracts attention because it doesn't look large or heavy. Mind you, I never travel on the ultra budget airlines ( "You want oxygen? That will be extra") so things may be different there.

[Pete Roody]

I am taking a 4x5 Graflex SLR to Italy and will follow your advice. The narrowest dimension of the camera is 7.5" so an 8" bag should work. I can fit the camera, several grafmatics, a few lenses and film in a case that meets the requirements for Emirates ( 22 x 15 x 8 inches (55 x 38 x 20cm) and must weigh no more than 15lb (7kg)). The weight my go over but I will weigh it first to be sure. I shoot allot of film with grafmatics so the film will add bulk. At least I can take LF gear. There is no way I see traveling with my 8x10 camera with these restrictions.


If you want to travel with a 4x5 camera - even a Graflex SLR - my suggestion would be to find the smallest bag possible that will fit just the camera. After having gear stolen on a train because the bag was too big to sit on my knees or at my feet I stopped taking a big backpack when I travel and switched to a small bag with one SLR and two lenses. Most airlines allow you to carry a camera as well as a carry on bag and I have never had staff even mention my camera bag. It is around the same size as many womens' handbags and will fit happily under the seat in front of me. That bag would have enough space for a folding 4x5, a few grafmatics and maybe an extra lens or two. I don't think it attracts attention because it doesn't look large or heavy. Mind you, I never travel on the ultra budget airlines ( "You want oxygen? That will be extra") so things may be different there.

[HMG]

Get a vest or jacket with cargo pockets. Doesn't need to be a "photographer's vest", but that's the type I'm talking about. They may weigh your bag, but they don't weigh you. Just make sure it's not too bulky, you don't want it looking like a bomb vest.



I am taking a 4x5 Graflex SLR to Italy and will follow your advice. The narrowest dimension of the camera is 7.5" so an 8" bag should work. I can fit the camera, several grafmatics, a few lenses and film in a case that meets the requirements for Emirates ( 22 x 15 x 8 inches (55 x 38 x 20cm) and must weigh no more than 15lb (7kg)). The weight my go over but I will weigh it first to be sure. I shoot allot of film with grafmatics so the film will add bulk. At least I can take LF gear. There is no way I see traveling with my 8x10 camera with these restrictions.

[koh303]

you don't want it looking like a bomb vest.
How can you tell the difference? :)

[Drew Wiley]

After these recent recommendations for tightened TSA guidelines, I suspect layered vests will be given a hard look. I don't think I'd have much problem getting
my 8x10, some holders, and a changing tent into a legal carry-on. My suitable CF tripod wouldn't quite fit. But I see people bringing on guitars and golf bags in
slipcases, and simply leaving them near the front of the cabin, so figure that would work for a compacted tripod too (certainly not a big Ries). With 4x5, everything including a CF tripod easily fits in a regulation carry-on. Then I have a little kangaroo pouch for a book, glasses, travel papers, etc which zippers to the outside of that for wheeling around, then removes and has an integral shoulder strap for getting thru the inspection line and having handy during the flight while the main bag is overhead. I'd never ever ever have anything of real value go thru checked baggage. A whole ring of baggage handlers recently got arrested here.

[Pete Roody]

I like to carry everything in the bag (backpack or rolling bag) that I would use on the trip. Companies make bags/backpacks that fit the size allocation so that is not a problem. But the weight can be an issue. 15 lbs is not much when you subtract the bag weight. For instance the Think Tank airport rollers meet the size requirement but weigh 9.5 lbs. empty. I agree that an 8x10 system can meet the size requirement. You just have to hope they don't weigh your bag. My backpack was weighed on my way back from Paris. It was bulky but I wasn't carrying a camera so it met the weight limit. They weighed it because they saw it was stuffed. Luckily a pillow doesn't weigh that much.



After these recent recommendations for tightened TSA guidelines, I suspect layered vests will be given a hard look. I don't think I'd have much problem getting
my 8x10, some holders, and a changing tent into a legal carry-on. My suitable CF tripod wouldn't quite fit. But I see people bringing on guitars and golf bags in
slipcases, and simply leaving them near the front of the cabin, so figure that would work for a compacted tripod too (certainly not a big Ries). With 4x5, everything including a CF tripod easily fits in a regulation carry-on. Then I have a little kangaroo pouch for a book, glasses, travel papers, etc which zippers to the outside of that for wheeling around, then removes and has an integral shoulder strap for getting thru the inspection line and having handy during the flight while the main bag is overhead. I'd never ever ever have anything of real value go thru checked baggage. A whole ring of baggage handlers recently got arrested here.

[Bob Salomon]

O
After these recent recommendations for tightened TSA guidelines, I suspect layered vests will be given a hard look. I don't think I'd have much problem getting
my 8x10, some holders, and a changing tent into a legal carry-on. My suitable CF tripod wouldn't quite fit. But I see people bringing on guitars and golf bags in
slipcases, and simply leaving them near the front of the cabin, so figure that would work for a compacted tripod too (certainly not a big Ries). With 4x5, everything including a CF tripod easily fits in a regulation carry-on. Then I have a little kangaroo pouch for a book, glasses, travel papers, etc which zippers to the outside of that for wheeling around, then removes and has an integral shoulder strap for getting thru the inspection line and having handy during the flight while the main bag is overhead. I'd never ever ever have anything of real value go thru checked baggage. A whole ring of baggage handlers recently got arrested here.

You have misunderstood what IATA is. The International Air Transport Association is just that, an international group of travel related companies that can issue suggestions, like the size that they suggest on for a carry on case, but their suggestions and guidelines have no authority with TSA. Or the airlines. Each airline has been setting it's own requirements for carry on sizes and weights as well as the number of cases that you can carry aboard.

From the mid 1980s until they opened their own North American factory and distribution system we were the distributor and importer for Rimowa luggage. Rimowa had an IATA approved carry on from the early 80s on as well as other sized carry on cases. Traveling extensively over the last few decades, mostly on Continental, UAL, although, etc. with regular sized Rimowa carry on trolleys the only time I ran into a size problem was on Czech air flying from Prague to Cologne. Ironically I was going from the Rimowa factory outside Prague to their headquarters in Cologne. But the plane on that route essentially had no overhead storage.
Over the years Continental had probably the most generous carry on requirements and Delta and American the most restrictive. The new UAL has never questioned my carry ones but that might be aided by the fact that I have well over 1,000,000 miles on them so have lifetime elite status for both my wife and myself and am also TSA Pre at check in.

But since IATA has already withdrawn their suggestion for this size and their suggested IATA label the whole topic is now dead.

[Drew Wiley]

I don't know about international flights, but domestically, most airlines have a little box available to see if your bag fits or not. Mine has no trouble with any of them, and I routinely see people going on board with conspicuously bigger bags, so have little to worry about personally. And it would fit beneath the typical jetliner seat. I even got is onto one of those tiny inter-island hopper planes without issue, though that didn't help with the problem of having my knees in my teeth, which is inevitable with or without a bag along. Given the fact that rules tend to tighten rather than get looser, I always select gear conservatively on that very premise. TSA "pre-check" is itself being questioned. But any minor delays we experience hasn't been due to my camera gear, but due to the fact that my wife flies frequently, and due to her medical training, refuses to get X-rayed. But that five minutes or so of delay just gives me time to put my boots back on and make sure my stuff in all together anyway. No big deal. We generally fly out of Oakland, which is fairly efficient with schedules, never out of SFO, which can
be hell.

[Wsufans]

I fly way toooooooooooo Muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch but..... the bag fees have made the cabin a mess and many passengers are such pigs. The airline have actually abetted this with bigger bins. The real deal behind the smaller carry on to me is actually $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Consider all the new bags that would get sold but also more bags get checked as simple as that.

Have Motorhome (actually 2 right now) to travel in so I can take a pretty good kit however the highways are such a mess from lack of maintenance and the skyrocketing number of trucks getting places can be a challenge. But once there it can be pretty nice doing photographic day trips.

[Pete Roody]

Get a vest or jacket with cargo pockets. Doesn't need to be a "photographer's vest", but that's the type I'm talking about. They may weigh your bag, but they don't weigh you. Just make sure it's not too bulky, you don't want it looking like a bomb vest.

I think I found a solution. Wearable luggage!

[StoneNYC]

I think I found a solution. Wearable luggage!

Hahahaha!!!

Until you need to take it all off to run through the x-ray machines... That would be a fun show...