base428 1 #1 May 29, 2003 Now that the good old US Government is putting the squeeze on airlines, forcing them to lower their baggage weight limits from 70 down to 50 lbs, does anyone have any suggestions on a lightweight, rugged, wheeled travel case? My Pelican 1650 cases weigh over 25 lbs to start with, so just add a rig and I'm nearing 50 lbs already. This really sucks. I just flew over Memorial Day weekend and practically had NOTHING in my Pelican case and they made me swap things around between bags because one was 58 lbs. What a joke. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Cya.(c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. <==For the media only Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dterrick 0 #2 May 29, 2003 The weight limit, as far as I know (travelled in March) is only the maximum "free" weight. Individual airlines have different policies on overweight goods - NW will take up to 100 lb pieces ($$$$) or 75 lb pieces for only extra ($$) You could also UPS your stuff Dave Life is very short and there's no time for fussing and fighting my friend (Lennon/McCartney) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base428 1 #3 May 29, 2003 I'm really not into paying extra $$$ to the airlines. I fly 3-4 times a year, minimum, so paying extra cash each time ain't worth it. That's why my post specified that I'm looking for a lightweight container that meets stringent airline standards. It should not exceed 62" cumulative (l+w+h) and ideally below 15 lbs empty.(c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. <==For the media only Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dterrick 0 #4 May 29, 2003 Sorry I missed that bit Jason. I DO know however that a "big" Samsonite is nearly 25 pounds also. I wound up carrying my gear onboard (a different sort of hassle). I presume three smaller cases (and the extra piece fee) is also out of the question? QuoteThat's why my post specified that I'm looking for a lightweight container Dave PS: I'm not convinced that the feds have anything to do with the weight restrictions. We all know from jumping that weight in the plane = fuel cost and with the airline industry collectively on the verge of bankrupcy I doubt that they're going to reverse their positions anytime soon. The option might be higher fares for everyone. Just something to consider. Life is very short and there's no time for fussing and fighting my friend (Lennon/McCartney) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #5 May 29, 2003 I use a hardside Samsonite with the pull wheels/handle in the 31" size. I was able to get my Mirage, sidewinder helmet, birdman suit, and camera accessories all in on one side of the case. A few pieces of clothing placed strategically helped with padding and the other side was free for a change of underwear, t-shirts, IV fluids and a few spare body parts I had lying around the house "It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base428 1 #6 May 29, 2003 Last weekend, I was told directly by a gov't baggage scanning guru that the feds are pressuring the airline industry to lower baggage weight maximums ever since that overweight US Airways jet crashed not long ago. Of course, the airlines aren't complaining too much over it. And since I travel as a BASE jumper more than a skydiver, I usually have 2 or 3 rigs, plus tons of camera gear. Quote I'm not convinced that the feds have anything to do with the weight restrictions. (c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #7 May 29, 2003 The feds made the airlines bump up the figures that they use to estimate the average passenger weight by like 20 pounds per person recently. That 20 pounds of body weight per person has to come out of the luggage weight now. I got around it by putting two bags on the scale at the same time and the agent did'nt want to remove one to weigh them sepertly.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dterrick 0 #8 May 29, 2003 A unique situation, Jason. I envy you, me being a poor skydiver who can only afford one rig and an old one at that. Maybe I should dispense with the jump tickets and join you in BASE (I know, you pay "REAL" airlines to get to the cool places...) But, not to hijack your thread, an overweight aircraft has NOTHING to do with the feds - at the heart of the matter -and EVERYTHING to do with the airlines trying to squeeze the last dollar out of each run. If Boeing, for example, says plane X is good for Y thousand pounds and the airlines have been exceeding these limits in the past I would put it to you that we have been "lucky" (in more ways than one) to have had the generaous allowances in the past. Maybe "we" are all getting fat(ter?) and the airlines are allowed to work with a fixed 'pounds per seat' allowance hence the problem? Perhaps at some time they will start weighing us? Something tells me that at the heart of your comment about the feds (of which I was unaware) that there is an inherent flaw in the system dating back to the days when seats were large enough that you did not need to know your seat-mate on an intimate basis . I'm not a "big" guy, but at 5'11" 180 +/- I gotta tell you that I'm only "just" comfortable on a modern jet. Seomwhere, somehow, there's 25-50 lbs per seat for which the airline is trying to account. I'd agree that you have as much right to a 'total onboard weight' as anyone else ... and ultimately that is the factor that most determines ticket prices. I'm also guessing that my 'onboard weight including passenger' theory would be challenged in the Supreme court as discrimination against "large people" so I doubt you'll ever see it happen. I wish you the best of luck in your search for a light gear bag and suitable baggage insurance coverage (another 'problem' I had with international travel) Dave Life is very short and there's no time for fussing and fighting my friend (Lennon/McCartney) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
relyon 0 #9 May 29, 2003 QuoteThis really sucks. I just flew over Memorial Day weekend and practically had NOTHING in my Pelican case and they made me swap things around between bags because one was 58 lbs. What a joke. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Cya. It also shows how stupid the policy is. Shifting stuff between bags doesn't change how much you and your belongings add to the gross takeoff weight. Now if everything (passenger and baggage) is weighed together at check-in and is subject to a per-pound surcharge for everything over a certain amount, it might actually make sense. But noooooooo, that would be "mass" descrimination and we can't have that or it's lawsuit time! Between this and TSA goons, the government and the airlines have IMO turned commercial air travel from an enjoyable experience to a dreadful one. Maybe if a few major carriers go under they'll get a clue; then again, probably not. Bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LouDiamond 1 #10 May 29, 2003 QuoteI'm also guessing that my 'onboard weight including passenger' theory would be challenged in the Supreme court as discrimination against "large people" so I doubt you'll ever see it happen. Not trying to hi- jack here but this came up on my last trip from VA to perris on a full, non stop flight. I had the middle seat and since I had gotten to the row first I lifted the arm rests so I could set my gear down and allow people to pass while I stowed it over head. Before the door closed two very large people got on board. One of them saty next to me in the window seat. If the arm rest had'nt been up , he wouldn't of been able to sit down. Since it was , he overflowed half way into my seat(no lie). It was a tight fit to say the least. I've been on C-130 Mas-Tacs with gear that were less tight than this seating arrangement. Needless to say, after the seat belt sign was turned off I decided to stretch my legs and stand by the bathrooms. The flight attendents must of understood since they didn't say anything to me the whole 3 1/2 hours I stood by and played bathroom monitor and read magazines. So basically, I sat down for take off and landing because I had to. Now, I understand fat people have some issues, be it genetic or whatever but when I pay for the same seat as everyone else and I have to stand because your ass is too fat for your one seat then I have an issue. I think that if you take up 2 seats you should pay for two seats, it's only fair. If on the other hand this is deemed discrimination of some kind I move that airlines create a row that accomodates handicapped and fat people so that the remainder of the passengers aren't infringed on. Call it a handicapped row, a extra room section or call it a fat fuck row, i don't care but do some thing. I thought about complaining to the flight attendants but there was nothing thay could do for me since the flight was already full, saying something to the guy wouldn't do any good since he knew he was fat and it wouldn't of changed anything. I contemplated writing the airlines and complaining but having dealt with airlines before I know after a lot of my time and energy I would of ended up with a handfull of coupons for free drinks or 10% off a flight to bum fuck egypt. Again, this brings us back to the fact that if your ass is too big to fit in the seat or that your girth causes your neighbor to be inconvienced then you should pay for two seats until this is settled in a court, as I hear it is being considered."It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required" Some people dream about flying, I live my dream SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #11 May 29, 2003 i raise major hell everytime that happens..you paid for your little tiny bit of space, and he paid for his. he isnt paying for your ticket so....its gotten me moved (and upgraded on that flight or a later one) when i do..it sucks to have to be an ass about it but damn i REALLY dont like someone elses lard in my lap..on the occasions when i have to sit there i make sure fat ass is as uncomfortable as he can possible be.. (i have boney elbows)..____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #12 May 29, 2003 QuoteI'm really not into paying extra $$$ to the airlines. I fly 3-4 times a year, minimum, so paying extra cash each time ain't worth it. That's why my post specified that I'm looking for a lightweight container that meets stringent airline standards. It should not exceed 62" cumulative (l+w+h) and ideally below 15 lbs empty. It's 50lb per bag and you're usually allowed 2 bags. Last time I flew it was 51lbs. They let me slide and just said get another small bag and move some of the stuff into it if I want to avoid paying a fee on the way back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #13 May 30, 2003 "they made me swap things around between bags because one was 58 lbs. What a joke. " Calm down, calm down everybody..... My guess is this limit is concerned with protecting baggage handlers. We have had a 20kg (about 45 lbs) baggage weight limit on our offshore chopper flights for a couple of years. This to save the loaders from busting their backs trying to lift heavy bags. Back injury and lifting strains being a major element of industrial injuries. If I stuffed my back up lifting an awkward suitcase at work, I would probably expect some compensation (or at least paid leave) from my employers. Who pays for this beano? You and I, via our ticket prices. And remember, once your back is stuffed, its stuffed for good, so its an easy industrial claim to make.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SanDiegoRW 0 #14 May 30, 2003 I flew Continental recently, round trip. The way to my destination they didn't even weigh my check in bags. Lucky me. On the way back they did weigh it, 73lbs, it cost me $25. Oh well, I didn't want to pull 23lbs out of it and carry it. So... yeah -Kenny Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dixieskydiver 0 #15 May 30, 2003 A note considering airlines and overweight people buying two seats: At least one airline, Southwest has begun charging people who take up two seats for two seats. We can only hope that the other airlines pick up the trend, though I'm sure they're waiting to see if a lawsuit comes crashing down on SW. Dixie HISPA #56 Facil Rodriguez "Scientific research has shown that 60% of the time, it works every time." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
