Maybe the TSA could do something about the ridiculous checked luggage fees that make the size of one's carry on luggage an actual issue.

I've already had a computer damaged by those kind folks who haphazardly jam their exploding-at-the-seams carry-on luggage into the overhead bin. I'd say bags are already large enough as it is, given the available space on most planes.

That said, I'm a big fan of plane-side baggage checking. None of the TSA man-handling, and none of the epic games of Tetris trying to fit it into the overhead bins.

Isn't the size of carry-on bags restricted by the geometry of the plane? Are all planes going to modify their seats to allow the larger bags to fit?

I'm guessing bill sponsor owns a bag that is about oh " 22 inches by 18 inches by 10 inches"

TSA has enough on their plate as actors is a secure feeling dramady

MK

They should pass a law making all checked bags free and go back the old way of just charging you more for your ticket.
They we could get a quick way to compare total prices.

BTW, under this new law how would TSA check strollers, carseats and walkers and crutches, most of which are free?

YAY! Now the overhead bins will be packed with even bigger bags, leaving the rest of us with reasonably-sized bags (that fit in the measuring box thingy with several inches to spare) to be forced to check them at the gate (and then have to wait an hour at baggage claim when we land) because there isn't enough room even though we arrived to board on time and just happen to have a seat at the front of the plane where people in the back stuffed their bags because they didn't want to carry them all the way back, and when we complain about how freakin' unfair this is, the flight attendants will threaten to kick us off the plane!

Yeah. I've been there.

@Megalomania: I'm sorry, sir. Your bag is too big. Now you must pay $50 and hope it gets to your destination at the same time you do. Have a nice flight!

Congress might want to attempt to force airlines to allow larger carry on bags but, those overhead compartments will only take so much and, there are already laws on the books that require anything placed under the seat to actually fit under the seat. Other than forcing the TSA to enforce a size limit, but in the end, if to many people are gate checking the larger bags, they're just inviting a new baggage fee for the airlines to charge customers.

@supercereal: Agreed: Gate checking is awesome. Other advantages:

1) There's often no fee like there would be if you checked at the counter or curb,

2) Your bag is likely to be last in the hold, and therefore first out at the destination,

3) You get to skip the line at the counter, assuming you pre-print your boarding pass.

The TSA? May as well take it a step further and hand these gene-pool rejects the keys to the plane.

Why is the TSA in charge of enforcing the size of my carry on?

Shouldn't that, you know, kinda be up to the airlines?

Baby on the carry-on size thing is cute. Cat on the carry-on size thing would be far cuter.

At first, I thought this was a good way to save us money. If they can't tell the airlines to charge fees for baggage, they can force them to allow bigger carry-ons, so it'd be easier for flyers to avoid the fees.

But then I realized ... if they can force the airline to take bigger carry-ons, why can't the force them to stop the baggage fees?

On a related note, would this bill stop airlines from charging fees to have carry-ons? Or maybe fees for carry-ons above the airline's preferred size but still under the TSA's size?

As for the TSA enforcing the rule, I don't mind. I trust the government more than I trust a money-hungry corporation out to nickel-and-dime me.

I just flew from PHL to Tulsa with only a regulation carry-on and a laptop. The trip out on Delta took two flights, both on two-engine jets; they took our carry-on sized bags away on the tarmac and loaded them into the forward baggage compartment. We were able to pick them up at planeside, so it wasn't so bad.
Flying back, I went with American Airlines, mostly to get onto a real airliner. Because of bad weather, one of the flights was packed. The gate attendant announced that only bags that would fit end-on into the overhead bin could be carried on board. This would leave my regulation carry-on bag in the hold again, so I 'splained it to her:
'Ma'am, there is three thousand dollars worth of medical equipment in this bag, and I am not to be separated from it. If you insist on checking it, I'll go over there to the business center and print up an invoice for you to sign."

I carried it on...

@oldgraygeek: FYI if the medical equipment is for your personal use it does not count towards your carry on baggage limit...

Also, I go against all advice and usually check my medical equipment for a variety of reasons - 1. I don't have to lug it around and unpack it at security and have them wipe it down, 2. If it's checked, the airline is liable if it breaks, but if I carry it on and it breaks it's my bad, 3. it's free (though many agents need to be educated about personal assistive devices/medical equipment).... and, 4. I have back-ups of everything.

I'm pretty sure that the TSA is too busy making sure bags don't have water in them.

Doesn't physics declare this unlawful?

As it is, most planes don't have the space for all the passengers carry-ons. It's normal to have to force the last several people to board the plane to put their "carry on" in the hold.

How does changing the law improve the amount of mass that fits in the overhead and under the seats?

The sizes weren't arbitrary... they were established based on the average bin and underseat space. While there is now more bin space, there is also higher capacity on planes, making the average per person, the same, if not less.

This seems moronic at best.

While we're at it, why don't we just outlaw AIDS and other diseases? Seems more practical than funding research.

@Megalomania:

Maybe instead Airlines should allow checked luggage for free, and charge instead for carry on bags, since after all everyone wants to bring a carry on, and no one wants to check luggage if they can avoid it. Then charge fees for oversized carry on bags, third and fourth carry on bags, ect, meaning if you are willing to pay extra to skip the baggage carousel you can, and it will discourage people from having extra carry on bags.

@Coles_Law: Yes, but the current limits are more restrictive than I've found necessary. I have a carry on that is exactly 22" x 14" x 9". Note that this will already not fit underneath a seat, so it has to go in the overhead (or be checked if there's no overhead space left).

22" is the depth limit of the overhead, as long as you put the wheels in first like you're supposed to. In this configuration, of course it doesn't matter if your bag is 14" or 18" wide. As for the 9" part (the height of the compartment), I have found that to be overly stingy. My bag frequently bulges to 11 or 12 inches and I have no problem getting it in the compartment. Only once has a gate agent tried to make me check it, so I just took out my garment bag and it fit in the box. I put the bag back in in the jetway and I was good to go.

So, in short, the TSA-proposed dimensions are fine in my experience.

@Alys Brangwin: Future grad student:

I'm sorry, sir. Your bag is too big. Now you must pay $50 and hope it gets to the same destination, at the same time you do. Have a nice flight!

there, i fixed it for you.

@SnehalDemophon: i'm a fan of curbside checking, because they don't weigh it (at least, they didn't the past several times i've flown out of TPA and CLT)

@liz.lemonade:

Wow, now that really blows. I never even thought of that, I always take my carry on with me, I'm too worried something will happen to it if its not close by.

This makes perfect sense to me for two reasons:

1) I imagine they see it as a security issue. Why should you be allowed to carry bags through security that are larger than you are allowed take on the airplane?

2) I think TSA is better positioned to evaluate the size of carry-ons than the gate agents, especially if the machinery physically won't admit bags larger than the limit. The gate agents and flight attended rather laxly enforce the current limits in my experience, so having TSA do it would probably increase the compliance. It think this would increase in more overhead space rather than less, despite the larger limit.

The only concern I have is that right now some airlines (as the story picture shows) allow larger bags than the proposed limit. If I was flying on an A320, I'd have check my previously acceptable bag.

@liz.lemonade:
I think the point is all those huge bags that take up the overhead now are technically not within the current size limit, but it is not enforced. Now they'll allow a reasonable sized bag (I assume it would be able to fit in the overhead) and strictly enforce that limit.

Sounds like a bad idea.
1. Forces incompetent government employees to do something else.
2. Someone is going to make some money off the new standards and given it is coming from a representative of the most corrupt state in the union. . .

@dougp26364: Carey and Tripso both missed a key part of the legislation:

An air carrier may establish smaller size limits for carry-on baggage and a personal item than the limits set forth in this section.

So unless the airline at 45" actively increases their limit to 50" after the law passes, nothing changes. I'm more concerned about the times when larger sizes are allowable, as shown in the story photo. I don't see any reason why that allowable size be arbitrarily decreased when it's not an issue on the particular aircraft.

This is a classic case of someone in government having a hammer, and as a result believing that everything is a nail.

Just because you have the TSA doesn't make it right for you to believe that they should expand their duties and begin to enforce everything under the sun. Carry-on size has nothing to do with security, and this would be significantly expanding the authority of these morons. And by the way, I'm not exactly an anti-government type, for your information.

And think about this -- this idiot representative must think it's just free for the TSA to do this, because they're there already. But who's going to pay for the extra time/materials/complaints that would result from such a policy?

There are clearly things that fall into the realm of being sorted out outside of government interference. Certainly the minutiae of carry-on baggage size is such a thing.

@Ian MacAllen: What you are suggesting seems backwards: you want airlines to charge for something that they don't do anything for and then not charge for something that requires personnel.

It would also make the system more inefficient since it would take (even) longer to load/unload bags from the aircraft, making everyone wait longer.

this is very nearly the definition of mission creep

@gStein: An important distinction!

There was a time I gamed the system by booking a ticket with an unnecessary leg because ti was cheaper to do it that way (that is, I booked PHX-IAH-AUS, but ended the trip at IAH). When boarding at PHX, for the first time in my experience, the gate agent announced "Even though there are plenty of seats on this flight, we're going to enforce the luggage limits today."

My bag was 22"x14"x~11", so the agent checked it without even letting me try to put it in the template. At first I didn't think much of it, until I noticed "AUS" on the claim ticket. I rushed back to the gate, split my bag into two so that it fit in the template, and the attempt by Continental Gods to punish me for my creative booking was averted.

All of my international travel has occurred with solely a carry-on hiking backpack which carries about 55L. There's no other way to go about it, if you ask me. Sure, your stuff MIGHT meet you at your destination - but if it doesn't, how far up the creek are you?

Ah, a one-size-fits-all solution to a complicated problem. They always insist on scanning the car seat we bring for my daughter to sit in, and if they did this (at great, unnecessary cost of replacing airport scanning equipment) then the seat wouldn't fit through anymore. It barely fits through now. There's other oversized stuff that's perfectly okay to bring through security that gets scanned that wouldn't fit either. What's their plan for that?

What does the House care about carry-on bag sizes? Don't they have anything more important to debate about?

I love how the picture with the article shows how jetBlue actually has better carry-on standards than what the proposed legislation would bring.

@Megalomania: Indeed. No one else sees the connection?

When I flew out of SFO a few months ago, I was asked to make sure my luggage fit in the cage that had the measurements, AND I was not allowed to have two other bags (a purse and a laptop bag). I reconfigured all of my carry-ons (swearing loudly), but was eventually allowed to proceed to the security checkpoint. Now - I can't remember if this was a Continental employee regulating or a TSA agent. So everyone's arguments of "oh, the TSA has enough to do" are moot if the TSA makes the airlines enforce the new regulations.

@WiglyWorm: The government can do it better. They do everything better.

@cc82:

If only they'd enforce the limit of one bag + one personal item per person, and make you keep the personal item under the seat in front of you. Every time I've been on a weekday morning or afternoon flight, most of the business travelers have a carry-on bag, a garment bag, and an oversized laptop bag/briefcase. All three go in the overhead bin, meaning if you don't get on the plane early you're screwed.

@Cant_stop_the_rock:

The problem is exacerbated by the idiots who put their bags in the bin sideways, then close the door so the flight attendants assume the bin is full when really it could fit more bags.

@WiglyWorm:

Well, since they aren't actually doing much to help security, they might as well do something useful.

@kepler11: I work for the TSA, and while I don't agree with you denigrating me and my co-workers by calling us morons, everything else is spot-on. DHS is already expanding our duties in a way that sometimes stretches us too thin in the checkpoint. To have to enforce bag sizes would be a monumental task. My airport only has 2500 passengers a day and I can't imagine having to check the size of every single bag during our busiest period.

Clearly, the purpose of this bill is to add violin players to the list of musicians who must either check their instruments in cargo or buy an extra ticket.

@OneTrickPony: I knew I should have taken up the piccolo.

@katknits: I didn't think anyone got two other bags in addition to the carry-on. I've flown quite a bit, and I never did. You get a carry-on and one personal item; that can be a purse, a laptop, a briefcase or a camera bag (or something else), but I'm pretty sure you don't get two, unless one of them is a pillow.

@TCama:

You trust the government not to nickel and dime you only because you've already acquiesced to the government reaching into your pocket with effective tax rates of 50 percent on every single nickel you make. I predict this TSA vs. luggage bill will never make it out of committee, but the government's going to continue to rob us all blind anyway.

All they will do if this passes is put a bit of sheet metal on the xray machine. If the bag doesn't fit, you're have people frantically trying to force it through, or spending time re-arranging things so it can squeeze through. In the end it'll probably just make security lines even slower. Fun. The place to check size is probably at the gate. Make each passenger run it through a template and gate check those that don't fit.

What happens when you have to take all your crap out of your bag for them to check it, like laptop, and all that jazz, the bag would be smaller to fit through the hole, then you fill it back up after the xray. So just take more out for individual screening. My job makes me carry lots of electronics to the destination so I have to unpack everything otherwise they yell at me, so my bag would easily fit through some hole with everything taken out of it. They would need a secondary hole to put your bag through after you had the chance to reload it.

Kinda lame.

@hillsrovey: There is no way the airline is going to cover several thousands of dollars of medical equipment if they damage it. They have clear limits of liability.

I always make sure I pack efficiently so that:
a) I can use my Brookstone hardcase carry-on that is a bit smaller than most soft-cased carry-ons
b) not worry about crushing something, like a laptop or camera equip
c) not worry about theft or destination problems.

Most of time people just pack way too much to begin with. Like my wife...and each and every time she doesn't even wear 1/3 of the stuff she brought, or that bulky pair of shoes she thought she'd need, just in case.

When you travel, try NOT to act like you're at home and think you must have those boots you're used to instead of a more efficient-to-pack shoe. Or wear them, and pack the sneakers. Make smaller-sized bottles of lotions-and-potions. Learn to make wrinkle-resistant bundles so clothes take up less room.

Just pack less, and force any kids to as well. It'll be a lesson well worth learning!

@liz.lemonade: this reminded me of the movie meet the parents! I am finished with the checking of the bags conversation!

The guy right in front of me going through security at DCA last week had a carry-on that got stuck in the x-ray machine. I have never seen this happen before. It just stuck in there, and my backpack got stuck behind it. They had to go fetch a special pole to get it out. The guy was trying to make a flight that left three minutes later (why he thought he had a prayer of making this, I don't know; it was probably already gone at the time) and was about to melt down. He missed the flight, of course, and I later saw him crying near his gate. I don't know what the situation was that a grown man would cry about missing a flight, but it was very awkward. I didn't even know luggage could get stuck in the x-ray. I'm sure the people on his new flight just loved the entire bin being taken up with his junk.

How are they planning on enforcing this at security? If your bag is too big, will there be someone there to take it to be checked on your flight? Will you be allowed to keep it, but it gets stuck with a gate-check tag? Will you have to get out of line and go back to the check-in counter and go through security again? This seems like a mess waiting to happen.