Charging for checked-in baggage seems logical to me, as it allows fares to be lower for people that only have hand baggage. Just think about the whole process of flying from one place to another, and compare the difference between flying with only hand baggage and with a checked in bag. If you do the latter, the whole thing becomes much more tedious and there is every chance of your bag being lost. I heard the other day that 300m bags were lost at airports last year!
Also from the airline's point of view, it would much rather pax had no bags to check in, as it would save a lot of time. And with self-service check-in, they could do away with bag drops and the cost that baggage handling entails.
Furthermore, there would be less baggage trucks and trolleys banging into aircraft causing thousands of pound's worth of damage.
It would be wonderful to be able to travel without checking in bags, but, of course, it is not possible. There are many who will have to check in bags. But surely, if you follow the LCC principle, the additional cost of baggage handling should reasonably be borne by those who are checking in bags, and those that aren't should get a lower fare.
As regards the DfT, they may have written to Flybe. They have also written to every other airline in Britain, and Aerodrome Managers, stating that they "recommend" that airport managers do not allow cabin baggage exceeding 45" in overall dimensions to pass through central search.
The point they make is fair enough, but often one has to rush to the gate with one's suitcase because one is either late checking in, or have been on stand-by, and if LHR, in particular, stopped people from taking their suitcases through central search, I can see Willie's policy of Push for Punctuality will ensure that a lot of stand-by pax will fail to get to the BA gate in time.
This circular from TRANSEC is typical of what is going on in the world (and in Britain in particular) today. Rules, rules, rules. They are going to "pay special attention to this issue and monitor compliance to ensure that standards are not compromised" etc etc. Has a very nasty ring about it.