Cabin Crew Luggage
Why not? If every one buts their bags in "end on" in the overhard bins and the rest goes under the seats in front of them then it should all fit, no?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: .
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. Simple maths.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if everybody has only 1 standard size carry on
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: .
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I agree this is wrong. That is down to rigid enforcement of hand baggage policy at the gate which - as you say - often does not happen. The point I was making is that if hand baggage policy was rigedly enforced it is possible for everyone to have one piece of carry on luggage.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: .
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mine does on an A3xx and it's about the max size: 37x52x21 cm 
I thought that was the point of a standard size - it fits under a standard aircraft seat. If it does not then it's not standard size and we're back to enforcement at the gate again.
I thought that was the point of a standard size - it fits under a standard aircraft seat. If it does not then it's not standard size and we're back to enforcement at the gate again.
If it does not then it's not standard size
A standard IATA cabin bag is up to 22" x 18" x 10" (56 x 45 x 25 cm). You wouldn't be allowed to stow one of those under the seat with the long dimension fore-and-aft because it would obstruct adjacent passengers' access, so the only permitted way would be cross-wise.
The Boeing 737 has an internal cross-section of 139" (actually slightly less at floor level, but we'll ignore that for simplicity). A triple seat unit with enough width to accommodate 3 cross-wise 22" cabin bags as above would therefore need to be at least 66" wide, which would leave a 7" aisle between them.
In practice, of course, economy seat units on a 6-abreast narrow-body are typically around 60" wide overall, so even without allowing for the seat legs being where you don't want them to be, there's no way your 3 x 22" bags are going to fit underneath.
Same on Airbus narrow-bodies - although they have about 7" additional cabin width, the seats aren't appreciably wider because the circular fuselage cross-section means that the sidewalls curve more.
What it is needed is proper cabin design, not hopeless optimism on the part of operators. They must provide proper storage for cabin crew.
FWIW similar happens on the other side of the flight deck door - whenever the manufacturers kindly builds in storage space for crew bags somebody in the company seems to say: " Oh, empty space, I'll have that"
My present type has a purpose built and nicely labelled stowage for 2 X wheelies/small suitcases on the flight deck. Sadly somebody in the company decided that said space should be used to house a oversized but usually half full holdall containing manuals. As a result Flight crew bags end up jammed in the bottom of the wardrobe or fighting for space with other items elsewhere on the Flight Deck.
I rather suspect similar has happened over the years in the cabin.
Last edited by wiggy; 9th Jan 2013 at 14:15.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: .
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You wouldn't be allowed to stow one of those under the seat with the long dimension fore-and-aft because it would obstruct adjacent passengers' access, so the only permitted way would be cross-wise.
Last edited by t1grm; 9th Jan 2013 at 14:42.
We'll have to agree to differ.
I, like you, have often stowed my carry-on bag under the seat in front, particularly if I'm in the centre seat, between the seat tracks. But then my bag, like yours, is less than two-thirds of the IATA size limit for carry-ons.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: .
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fine except the main thrust of your argument about not putting a full size carry on under the seat in front of you is that it is too long so would have to go sideways. If 52 cm fits lengthways (as it does in my case) then 56 cm will also fit so volume is irrelevant. But this is all getting a bit silly now.
Sorry, I'm an engineer, I'm used to thinking in 3 dimensions.
But you've lost me completely now:
Make up your mind. You've already told us that your 52cm case fits exactly flush with the back of the seat (as per FAA regulations), so the only way that a 56cm case "fits" is if the cabin crew ignore the aforesaid regulations. Presumably there is some size at which you would deem a bag not to fit, either legally or practically ?
Agreed.
But you've lost me completely now:
If 52 cm fits lengthways (as it does in my case) then 56 cm will also fit
But this is all getting a bit silly now.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Confoederatio Helvetica
Age: 69
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IATA standard is no longer a standard. The European Commission, and US DOT to a lessor degree, felt that airlines agreeing a standard was anticompetitive. So the standard is now only a recommendation.
The result, no airline provides more and quite a few provide less. But the consumer is better off, really!
The result, no airline provides more and quite a few provide less. But the consumer is better off, really!
The result, no airline provides more and quite a few provide less.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 35,000ft
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if the over-head stowages above you are full, then why not take a look further down the cabin for space or even ask?
A little known fact for some passengers is that all over-head stowages go to the same destination that said passenger is flying to. Some people are so precious that the space above them belongs to them and only them.
A little known fact for some passengers is that all over-head stowages go to the same destination that said passenger is flying to. Some people are so precious that the space above them belongs to them and only them.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: .
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done Sherlock. Obviously that's a given. I don’t think anyone here has mentioned the requirement to have the space above their seat reserved. In this case all the bins the entire length of the aircraft were full so under the seat in front of me was the only option. I don’t think anyone’s that daft and if they are they deserve to sit with their bag under the seat in front of them.
In this case all the bins the entire length of the aircraft were full so under the seat in front of me was the only option. I don’t think anyone’s that daft and if they are they deserve to sit with their bag under the seat in front of them.
A little known fact for some passengers is that all over-head stowages go to the same destination that said passenger is flying to. Some people are so precious that the space above them belongs to them and only them.
Loved the show, by the way