plnelson, you're not being realistic. The reality is that we have to carry our stuff on board. The Lowe-Pros are advertised as being airline compliant, even the next size up. If it fits under the seat, how the hell does it affect you? I've flown all over the country many times and have never crowded anyone out of overhead baggage space, but plenty of times I've tucked that under the seat in front and had to wedge my size 12's in there somewhere. You're also not being realistic about the airlines letting you put the gate checked bags in the hold yourself. That ain't ever going to happen. Hell, it's likely not even legal for you to be in the vicinity - safety and insurance regs I'm sure.
The best solution when you can do it, of course, is to Fedex Ground ship you gear ahead, which is cheaper than the new baggage charges too. Fifty lb. strobe cases came back from Bozeman in three days for $22 per, and nothing is ever tampered with.
Peter Figen wrote:
You're also not being realistic about the airlines letting you put the gate checked bags in the hold yourself. That ain't ever going to happen. Hell, it's likely not even legal for you to be in the vicinity - safety and insurance regs I'm sure.
Seriously! That may fly (no pun intended) at a municipal airport with 9-passenger planes, but I'm flying in and out of major international airports on major airlines that might be code-sharing with regional carriers. If an airline employee says something won't fit in the overhead and insists I gate-check it, I only have two options: comply or don't board the plane. Given that I don't generally have the option of not arriving at the job I'm being paid to do, let alone arriving late, I don't see what choices I have beyond preparing my gear to be gate-checked with the least impact to me possible.
Also, it's great to suggest that things CAN be stolen through the baggage handling process, but have you ever had anything stolen from you? This is an area where second-hand anecdotes don't carry a ton of weight for me. I'm going on my 7th straight year of flying an average 80+ segments/year and I've never had a single thing stolen from my baggage or a single piece of baggage go missing for more than 24 hours. This as someone who regularly checks $5,000+ of lighting equipment when flying and has checked high-risk items like laptop computers without incident.
Peter Figen wrote:
The Lowe-Pros are advertised as being airline compliant,
Where do they advertise that?
The 45 linear inch rule is pretty standard across the entire industry. A few airlines, e.g., Alaska, allow slightly bigger carry-ons (I think they allow 51") . So I don't see any possible way they can advertise a bag with those dimensions being airline carry-on compliant.
Craig Gillette wrote:
I had the fun of watching a string quartet try to get accomodated on a small comuter plane one time. Bass viols/fiddles don't fit well and they are plenty fragile, even in their cases. Glad it wasn't my flight. Kept the rest of us at the windows though.
Lots of my friends are musicans and they have the same problems we have - fragile, expensive (much more expensive than photo...) gear and capricious rule enforcement. In general, clarinet, violin and viola cases can be carried on board, and some airlines let cello players buy a ticket for their instrument and bring it onboard.
But musicians have one thing we haven't got - a UNION! Recently one of the musician's unions organized a boycott of Delta and they actually managed to extract concessions from them!
shatterkiss wrote:
Also, it's great to suggest that things CAN be stolen through the baggage handling process, but have you ever had anything stolen from you?
I never give them the opportunity.
Look, baggage theft is widely reported; it's a story that's been heavily covered, we've had plenty of links to such stories here on FM, and the thefts have not only involved baggage handlers but also TSA employees. If you haven't been a victim you're lucky but why tempt fate?
I've never been robbed at gunpoint or knifepoint in the city, either, but I also stay out of certain parts of town to reduce the risk.
The bottom line is that the airlines have clear rules about what's allowed to be carried-on and it IS possible to carry-on most gear and still stay within their limits if it's carefully packed. So why advocate that people bring packs like the big Lowe Pro mentioned above which just gives them an excuse to gate-check it?
It's hypocritical of people here to complain when they see other passengers stretching the rules if they do so, themselves.
Just took my Computrekker Plus as a carry on on a CRJ. No problems. The Flight was not even full but it tucked away nicely. I did 'gate' check my cary on bag with clothes in it but they actually checked plane side and not at the gate its self. you could stand there and watch the guy/gal load it into the hold if you wanted to. So my .02 are...
1. the flight might not even be full, plenty of room onboard.
2. checking plane-side is not that bad of an option if possible but pack it well as the CRJ are bumpy quite often.
Chris Crews wrote:
Just took my Computrekker Plus as a carry on on a CRJ. No problems. The Flight was not even full but it tucked away nicely. I did 'gate' check my cary on bag with clothes in it but they actually checked plane side and not at the gate its self. you could stand there and watch the guy/gal load it into the hold if you wanted to. So my .02 are...
1. the flight might not even be full, plenty of room onboard.
2. checking plane-side is not that bad of an option if possible but pack it well as the CRJ are bumpy quite often....Show more →
The Computrekker Plus has external dimensions of 14 x 8.5 x 19.8", so what's the big deal? That's less than 45 linear inches, so it's within most airline limits. And especially considering that the plane wasn't full. So you had a legal bag and the airline let you take it on. I'm not sure what your point is.
Look, I know I sound like a broken record (is anyone here old enough to remember what that means? ), but it's simple:
Know what your airline's rules are and pack to stay within those rules.
This has the advantages of:
1. Reducing the risk of being asked to gate-check your carry-on
2. NOT being one of those people we all see trying to carry stuff on board that's clearly bigger than what's allowed. Somewhere out there, people are complaining about those photographers they see getting on the airplane who think they're better than everyone else and don't have to follow the same rules. Let's set a good example as members of the flying public.
I'm sorry, plnelson, but I haven't seen you once say what you use on these flights. You've denigrated almost everyone else's choices (except for the one above), but have not offered any examples yourself.
I've carried a LowePro Nature Trekker II AW on an ERJ before (I fly American out of O'hare a lot, and ERJ-140/145 are common). I had a "Gate Nazi" tell me I would have to gate-check it, while the two people directly in front of me in line had large--and full--garment bags PLUS a roller. I asked her if she was making them gate-check their garment bags, and she said she wasn't talking to me about them, just my bag. I told her I'd gate check mine if I could take her credit card with me in case I needed to replace my equipment. It went down-hill from there....
In the end, I stuffed it under the seat in front of me after all. Meanwhile, the two "businessmen" (and I use that term loosely, as they had no class) asked other people to relocate their overhead items so they could put in their garment bags. In fact, when one person refused, the guy with the garment bag moved it himself! I was almost ready to get my camera out to capture the scuffle, but, alas, nothing happened.
I'll be flying an ERJ-145 in just a few weeks. Hmm. Maybe it's time to buy a TT AI.
plnelson wrote:
Know what your airline's rules are and pack to stay within those rules.
Honestly, at this point in air travel, an airline's corporate policies don't mean very much in day-to-day practice. Only two things really matter: what the TSA (individual agents, not organization-wide policies) lets you bring through security and whether or not something will fit in the plane's overhead compartments. It really doesn't matter what the policy is as long as the item fits, in reality. Maybe twice in hundreds of flights have I been forced to gate-check something without first being able to try and fit it on the plane...generally I'm allowed to at least attempt it. And never in my life have I been asked to demonstrate the size of a piece of luggage using those silly measuring-boxes at the gates.
The only exceptions to this have been flying internationally, especially in the UK, where carry-ons are scrupulously weighed.
NOT being one of those people we all see trying to carry stuff on board that's clearly bigger than what's allowed. Somewhere out there, people are complaining about those photographers they see getting on the airplane who think they're better than everyone else and don't have to follow the same rules.
I don't get this. How is it even possible to carry-on more than we're allowed? What's allowed is what fits - you'll find that's the acting policy (whether or not it's the documented one) on every airline in service now. It's not like we're getting on the bus, can just sneak things on. If you're told you can't bring something on the plane, you have NO options. If you make too much of a fuss you'll be arrested. Air travel has very, very little leeway these days.
And the reality is that most photographers travel more conscientiously than other people, mostly because we have to more of it. I always put my bags under the seat when possible, mostly because I prefer to have them with me. I always check my clothes and toiletries. When carrying on two items, only one ever goes in the overhead. I don't have a fit when forced to gate-check an item. I also pass through baggage screening faster than almost any other passenger, even when being hand-checked. It's not photographers I see people complaining about, it's Joe Schmoe who has decided to not check a single bag and is trying to wedge a 60lb rolling suitcase in the overhead.
Honestly, how often do you fly? And since you refuse to gate-check or plane-side check (or apparently check equipment whatsoever), what do you travel with and how do you pack it to avoid baggage handling?
I work for an Airline and most of the above is true. The gate checks are usually treated a little better because they are the last thing on and the agents know everyone is watching. Depends on who you are flying on. Some Airlines who use a contract ramp the agents are low paid. Check your gear as soon as they give it back to you.I always carry on main equipment and if I have to checki lenses or flashes and such I make sure I pack it in a way that I would be comfortable tossing the bag 4 or 5 feet or dropping it from my chest. Most of the medium backpacks fit pretty well. You can always ask if you can at least try then check if you have to and remove camera.
Just traveled to the USVI on a smaller regional jet. Didn't have a problem with my 2 carry ons, didn't need to check them. But, be prepared in case you need to gate check them!
I carried my TT Airport Ultralight and ChangeUp. Good combo for now. Contained:
-2x5D
-70-200 2.8
-35L
-17-40L
-85L
-AcuteB 600R Setup (yes the pack and head)
-All my batteries, and extra battery for the AcuteB
-PWs, 580EX, cleaning supplies, CF cards,
Anything I needed for the job (besides clamps and stands) it was on me.
John Patrick wrote:
I'm sorry, plnelson, but I haven't seen you once say what you use on these flights. You've denigrated almost everyone else's choices (except for the one above), but have not offered any examples yourself.
I use a regular Eastern Mountain Sports day-pack with my lenses each in their own lens case, inside, plus usually with a body and lens around my neck and maybe a small lens or TC in a pocket or two. You have to be creative. But there are plenty of camera backpacks by Lowe Pro, Tamrac and other that DO meet the airline reg's - I just don't like their utility as packs.
I've carried a LowePro Nature Trekker II AW on an ERJ before (I fly American out of O'hare a lot, and ERJ-140/145 are common). I had a "Gate Nazi" tell me I would have to gate-check it, while the two people directly in front of me in line had large--and full--garment bags PLUS a roller. The LowePro Nature Trekker II AW is (slightly) bigger than airline regs so you really had no right to complain that she told you to gate check it. And calling her a "Gate Nazi" simply because she's trying to enforce the regs on you is uncalled-for. What if there weren't any people with garment bags in front of you - would you have gate-checked it them?
People like you, who can't be bothered to follow the regulations, and mouth off to airline employees are one of the reasons why air-travel is so unpleasant today. Also, your conduct reflects badly on other photographers.
shatterkiss wrote:
And the reality is that most photographers travel more conscientiously than other people, mostly because we have to more of it.
Read the previous post - he had a camera bag bigger than the airline regs and when the gate agent (who he refers to here as a "Gate Nazi") told him to gate check it, he mouthed-off to her and demanded she give him his credit card.
I don't want to gate-check $7000 worth of camera gear, either, and by strictly following the rules I've never been asked to and I've never made a scene with the agent.
What I've seen repeatedly on FM and other photography discussion forums (and also in conversations with photographers at workshops and conventions) is that many photographers have a sense of entitlement that we should get special treatment. Our equipment is "too valuable" or "too fragile" and we have to travel on assignment a lot so the airlines should make special rules for us. (in fact TSA already modified their rules for photogs, but the airlines didn't follow suit.)
I once talked to a National Geographic photographer who was such a big fan of Kodachrome-25, that when it was being discontinued some years ago he managed to bring an entire wheel-rack of it on a plane to some assignment. I don't remember if he bullied them or had NatGeo make a few phone calls or what but he was very proud of the fact that he got special treatment and all the photogs at dinner with us when he told that story were very approving.
So I disagree that photgs in general are "good citizens" when it comes to flying - I think a lot of photogs, and especially the pro's, think they're special and deserving of bending the rules more than other people.
Honestly, how often do you fly? And since you refuse to gate-check or plane-side check (or apparently check equipment whatsoever), what do you travel with and how do you pack it to avoid baggage handling?
I fly as little as possible, but it's amazing how much you can fit in two 45 "linear inch" bags. I'm going to Yosemite in July and I did a "practice pack" this weekend and I had no trouble fitting two DSLR bodies, a 12-24, 35 f/2, 60 f/2.8, 24-70, 180 f/2.8, 300 f/4 AFS and 1.4 TC, with plenty of room to spare.
plnelson wrote:
The LowePro Nature Trekker II AW is (slightly) bigger than airline regs so you really had no right to complain that she told you to gate check it. And calling her a "Gate Nazi" simply because she's trying to enforce the regs on you is uncalled-for. What if there weren't any people with garment bags in front of you - would you have gate-checked it them?
People like you, who can't be bothered to follow the regulations, and mouth off to airline employees are one of the reasons why air-travel is so unpleasant today. Also, your conduct reflects badly on other photographers. ...Show more →
Do you have a NT AW II? They are carry-on compliant. I know that the LowePro website says the dimensions are 14.6W X 15D X 19.1H in, but it's no-where close to 15 in deep, unless you point the waist-strap straight out and measure to that. I don't have it at hand, but I know that a 1D body barely fits inside, and given padding, means closer to 8-9 in deep. I have easily fit mine in those carry-on cages; it especially helps if it's not completely stuffed. (And I believe that straps and handles do not count toward dimensions--in fact, I'm fairly positive.)
I do follow the regulations, Peter. And you would have also considered her a "Gate Nazi" given everything she was asking people to do; it wasn't solely my opinion that gave her that moniker. And the fact that she insisted I gate-check my only carry-on (my bag with clothes and toiletries were checked) while people with full garment bags AND a roller were not asked to gate-check.... Well, I wasn't reflecting poorly on other photographers, I was standing up for myself and the other passengers. Lucky for almost all of us, shortly before boarding, she left the gate and went to another one, and the other gate agent came by and told me and several other passengers that as long as we were willing to put our bags at our feet, we could take them on. I overheard this other gate agent actually apologize to another passenger about the previous agent's activities.
You, on the other hand, seem to not follow FM.com regulations by insulting others on this public forum. Your condescending attitude and denegrating comments toward others--not only on this thread but on others--makes me feel sorry for how you may treat any friends and family you have.
John Patrick wrote:
Do you have a NT AW II? They are carry-on compliant.
The company's website says they are more than 45 "linear inches", (H+W+D) which is the standard for most US airlines.
You, on the other hand, seem to not follow FM.com regulations by insulting others on this public forum. Your condescending attitude and denegrating comments toward others
I'm just reflecting back what you told us here. You said you demanded her credit card. That's not a polite or adult thing to do at airline counter, and it doesn't reflect well on you or the photographic profession to people witnessing it.
Air travel is stressful for everyone these days and there is nothing to be gained by conducting yourself with anything but dignity and professionalism at the gate. Afterwards you can write to the airline, the regulatory agencies, or your congressperson. Or just vote with your feet and don't fly that airline again. Last year when congress proposed an "airline passenger's bill of rights" following the Jet Blue debacle, did you write to your congressperson in support of it? I did. But too few other people did so nothing happened.
In all the flights I've taken in the last several years, I appear to have been the only photographer on board each of those trips. It sure doesn't seem to me that we're overpopulating the flights, and there's a huge difference between abusing carryon priveliges and being realistic about what fits and what doesn't. If I brought on board something that didn't fit, then there would be a problem. It would seem that according to PLNelson the rules are completely rigid with no room for any leeway whatsoever and he is the most perfect traveler on board.
plnelson wrote:
The company's website says they are more than 45 "linear inches", (H+W+D) which is the standard for most US airlines.
I have one right here. It is not more than 45 linear inches. It is approx 18" tall, 9" deep, and 15" wide, not counting the straps. If I fold the straps down, it adds about 1" to the depth. 18"+10"+15" = 43" and I'm being high on my measurements, if anything. Re-measuring the width is 14", full and sitting on the floor on its side. The item IS within measurements.
As I said, I don't know where LowePro gets the 15" depth measurement.
And as for asking for the credit card, I was much more tactful and considerate than she was.
Please drop your "High and Mighty" attitude; you might actually get people to listen to you.
Come fly on my flights and I'll let you keep it up front in my office for the flight. Anything to help a fellow photog.
I'm typically United Express, however.
You guys who've been getting away with carrying-on bags in the gray-area, size-wise in the past might not find it so easy in the future. The article referenced said that airlines are stepping up rigid enforcement and are considering reinstating those little metal size-boxes. Ain't flying fun
A friend of mine is a musician and a few years ago they managed to twist Delta's arm into a more accomodating policy WRT instruments when musicians' unions organized a boycott of Delta to get their attention. How come photographers can't get themselves organized into an effective organization that can actually go to bat for our interests in a forceful way?
), but it's simple: