God I hate when I get stuck on one of these god forsaken aircraft. NONE of the storage bins on the 767, either in the middle or over the windows, are deep enough for a person to stick a rollaboard in lengthwise, as you can on almost every other aircraft flying today. And on the 777, which is their newest and largest airliner, they installed overhead bins over the middle seats that don’t accommodate rollaboards either. So that means that when I board I have to stick it in sideways, thereby blocking storage for the people who board in later groups. Makes me feel like a real asshole.
BTW, I’m talking about a regulation size rollaboard, not one of those giant monstrosities that dicks bring on nowadays that clearly exceed the allowable size.
I hate that my job has me travelling 2 weeks a month but it would be unbearable if I wasn’t in the first boarding group and had to check my carry-on every flight. Thank god for status.
Are you sure your bag is no more than 22x14x9? Most airlines will handle that size. When I bought mine I noticed that some bags are an inch or 2 or 3 larger in any direction and I was glad I checked before purchasing, mine has worked (in proper direction) on every flight (about 20) over the last few years, including 777.
Also, which airline? They do have the option of choosing non-standard bin sizes.
Probably not a Boeing issue in this case based on my own personal experience.
They don’t fit the standard ones if you put them in wheels-first- they’re not deep enough.
My rolling carry-on was bought specifically because it met both the American Airlines and Southwest Airlines carry-on regulations, and it doesn’t fit the 767 or 777 overhead bins if I put it in wheels-first. It does fit in 737 overhead bins wheels-first though.
Unless you bought it from either carrier, or it had their actual stamp of approval on it (did it?) I would not be surprised in the least if your bag doesn’t actually meet the carry on regulations for those airlines
I bought a clear plastic “toiletry bag” that claimed it was 1 quart and approved for TSA carry on restrictions. I measured it when I got home and it is slightly (maybe 5-10%) larger in dimensions than a quart volume.
It’s not that they are necessarily trying to fool you, but, for example, what their definition of 22 inches is may be the inner seam of the suitcase excluding exterior piping, the thickness of the material, multiple layers of fabric, etc. which can add up to a 23-inch suitcase when you’re looking at clearance space on the outside.
Mine is 22" (I just double checked) and I have stowed it in the overhead of a 777 not sideways.
It could be something else about the design of the bag or the specific airline, not sure. I typically fly United, Alaska or American.
I did just google on this topic and I do see conflicting reports, some people don’t have problems with 777 but have probs with others and for some it’s the opposite, not sure what is going on.
One trick I was shown was to flip the rollaboard around so the wheels point out. I’ve found that rollaboards which don’t fit wheels in will often fit wheels out. Seems odd, but it works.
Yeah, I’m kind of with you on this. Especially people with big ass ‘carry on’ suitcases (mainly when they get in my way). But, yeah, I’m rather with Paul in Qatar regarding traveling light myself, it’s less stressful.
That would be because sometimes the wheelbase is significantly wider than the handle end, and the “outboard” end of the overhead bin tapers narrower and the front cover does not close completely flush to the opening. As someone mentioned above, 22 inches is not always 22 inches.
But there is another pitfall: some airlines will define their cary-on specs based on the average aircraft in the fleet… and overheads in many mainline narrowbodies (737, A320) in my experience are often deeper than those in some widebodies. My WAG: (a) Apparently when making the tube wider to accommodate more seats the linear dimensions along the ceiling available to fit bins are *not *increased by the same proportion; and (b) The designer may accept the tradeoff thinking that these airctaft make usually longer-distance flights so more of the people taking them are not on overnight trips and thus will be checking their luggage anyway.
I am guessing will build out a plane to a purchasers specifications and I would think the size of the overhead bins would not be too hard to adjust to have an extra inch or two. It would not surprise me if a carrier has their overheads just a wee bit too small to force checked luggage which they charge for.
Conspiracy theory I know and I have zero proof. Just saying it would not surprise me at all if that were the case.
Since the planes were designed and built years or decades before the airlines started charging for checked luggage, your conspiracy theory just makes you look like a nut.
Not really a conspiracy. Most of the interior dimensions of any commercial jetliner are “build to suit”. I’m not sure whether overhead compartments are one of the things airlines don’t really bother to specify, though.
I recently flew to Florida, and was in the last group to board. With about 25% of the folks still to be seated, they ran out of space in the overhead bins. The FA announced that they’d run out of room in the bins and that everyone waiting to be seated still would have to pink-tag their carry on items.
Which makes me wonder: How much longer until they start charging for overhead space?
The whole boarding and deboarding process would be easier if they checked bags for free and charged a token fee for carry-ons. I wonder why they don’t.