Posted by Joyce Harman on September 4, 2007 at 5:37 PM
Hi all
i have only posted a couple of times, but plan on joining more regular discussions and posting of photos. I wanted to share my experience this summer that could have been a serious problem. Flew from here to Manchester England, no problem, from Edinburgh (after the bomb threat) to Munich, no problem. Pack wieghed 18kg on the scale in Vienna, Austria with camera bodies, several lenses, etc. Looked big so the agent had it wieghed, told me it had to weigh 12 kg, no more. I talked to the office, same story, told them i was a photographer, no change. Told me i had to put the extra in my checked baggage, no insurance possible.javascript:%20x()
So, i put my bags on the floor down out of sight of the agent, put my biggest lens and body in my small computer bag, which did look small so they did not question it. Put batteries and odd stuff into my checked bag and made wieght. Slung the computer bag over my shoulder as if is weighed nothing and passed the weight. javascript:%20x()
If i had not had space in my small computer bag, or if i could not have gotten out of sight of the agent, i hate to think what would have happened. I have never been weighed with checked baggage. I hope this does not happen to others, but i did notice all the agents at the counters in Vienna were looking at folks' carry on bags. Life is getting worse out there. How are others getting large bags onto the planes?
It's more stringent in Europe, but I've seen it happen in the US when loads are heavy and weights and balance are an issue on some flights.
My solution is always to carry a compact photo vest, putting it on and adding a few items from my camera bags if I see heavy loads for a flight. Large zippered pockets in a jacket or windbreaker help too.
Posted by Fred Stearns on September 4, 2007 at 8:31 PM
I have a friend at work whose wife was determined to take a frozen ham when they visited their children back east. It was an expensive ham. The overweight charge was $80, Denver to Atlanta on Delta. This was in checked baggage and their was no way to put it in carry on baggage at that late date. They are doing everything they can to charge us more, while making flying still seem cheep.
Posted by Kah Kit Yoong on September 4, 2007 at 9:39 PM
I always wear a coat with capacious pockets if it becomes necessary to put a few lenses in.
I have to add, as a Nurse Practitoner, that people are getting heavier and heavier (not US, of course, trekking around with 40# camera bags!) and planes are getting overloaded. Some of the recent airplane crashes were traced to more weight than they should have been carrying.
So - eat less, carry more! :-)
That's my motto - as I just got a big sucker 600 mm lens..
Sandy r
Posted by Vandit Kalia on September 5, 2007 at 7:23 AM
Well, I start by always flying airlines with whom I am a frequent flier of relatively high standing. It is amazing how much more flexible United is, for example, if you are Premier Executive or 100k with them.
I've only been stopped once - by Cathay Pacific leaving Hong Kong. I told them it was all camera gear valued at over $10k - showed it to them and they not only allowed it, but gave me a Priority tag in case security caused problems (they didnt).
Otherwise, carrying a camera vest is a good idea, as Kah mentioned above. Stuff things into it, and put them back in the bag afterwards.
Another strategy is to remove all batteries, chargers, etc and stuff them in your checked bag.
It is absolutely incredible that airlines can force you to check in valuables and not accept any liability for them. It is a downright travesty of consumer rights, actually. Provide an alternative - even if that means paying an insurance premium.
Vandit
Posted by Richard Ditch on September 5, 2007 at 5:55 PM
Am I th only person who is disturbed by this sense of entitlement? As has already been mentioned, the real issue is total load, and everything put on board (passengers, checked items, and carryons) contribute to that load. Why is eveyone so eager to try to dodge the reasonable safety concerns of the airlines to sneak more weight on a flight?
We complain about the cost of air travel, but fuel costs are a big part of the cost of an airline ticket. And every ounce brought on board must be lifted into the air and dragged along to the destination.
If you want to bring along a lot of stuff, please have the integrity to disclose it to the airlines (so they can better determine the total weight of a flight), and pay your fare share of the total costs of moving it from one place to another.
Posted by Mia McPherson on September 5, 2007 at 6:27 PM
Richard,
I weigh about 105 pounds, should people who weigh 200 pounds be charged twice as much?
Posted by Joyce Harman on September 5, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Richard
I can see your point about being honest, however, honesty would have gotten my lens and camera in the hold with no insurance or guarentee that it would be there when i got home. There was no possible overwieght baggage fee to pay (I probably would have paid it), there was only one answer, make the bag weigh 12 kg. There is no way to know when you are going to get hassled, that is one of the biggest problems. On one airline or airport all is easy, then the next one enforces all possible restrictions. I looked up the baggage information about NW/KLM flying from Vienna, there was no wieght limit listed, and it said 2 carry on bags (one carryon, one personal item, whatever that is). Also, i have never had my carryon's weighed at any airport, ever. Not even the previous flight from Edinburgh 2 weeks after a terrorist attack at the Glasgow airport.
Insurance does little good if you arrive at the destination of a lifetime without your equipment, especially if it is a remote location.
Lia's comment is so true, if weight is the issue, we should just be charged by our total wieght, including all gear, then we can carry all we want, and still never be charged as much as the 350+ pounder I sat next to on a recent flight.
I like the vest idea and will always have one on in the future, thanks for that tip :)
Joyce
Against your point I'll point out that the airlines accept ZERO responsibility for electronic equipment and photo gear damaged in their baggage handling system. Even if they don't manage to drop it or run over it with baggage tractors (I've had both happen), things regularly disappear from their handling system- even from within locked hard cases while homeland security is lurking about. I'd pay extra for special handling of my photo gear if that's what it took, but better to play carryon games than simply to turn your gear over to them in the current system. And yes, to emphasize the point that I'd pay extra for decent handling, we're currently averaging well in excess of $1,000 a year in Fedex charges to ship gear ahead rather than let it fall into the competent hands of the airlines.
Posted by Mia McPherson on September 5, 2007 at 7:21 PM
Joyce, I have never had a problem with carry on weight and I was surprised to read about what happened to you. I would have a problem with slipping expensive equipment in to the unlocked luggage in the cargo hold uninsured.
Richard, I wasn't being a smart aleck in my question to you, but if it costs more per pound in fuel costs, then I am paying my share plus some. Or my flying saves the airlines money.
Posted by Richard Ditch on September 5, 2007 at 8:04 PM
Lia:
I agree with your point about total weight, and don't consider you being a smart aleck in asking. Just like I think that a person who can't fit into a single seat should have to pay for a second seat, or a wider one in First Class, rather than spill over on the poor person in the adjoining seat. I've had that happen to me in the past.
Hank:
I understand the concern about damaged items, and agree that the airline should be responsible for damages in transit. And I applaud your practice of shipping your gear via FedEx and paying the premium to do so.
Everyone:
There's another option here - take less gear. If you really need more gear, then accept the costs of taking it.
Posted by Mia McPherson on September 5, 2007 at 8:08 PM
Richard, I was on a flight from Atlanta to Colorado Springs where on one side of me the lady was so large she spilled under the arm rest onto my seat, and on the other side was a jerk who kept trying to pick me up, and the flight was a rather bumpy one at that. It was miserable, I can laugh at it now, but I wasn't then.
I felt like they should have paid me to be on that flight.
Posted by Tom Webster on September 5, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Rich, you are not the only person disturbed by this sense of entitlement. Having been a pilot for 15 years you can bet your sweet a$$ I was keenly aware of load capacities and weight distribution. Anymore, the big game seems to be how people can cheat "the system". People want everybody else to be responsible for the insurance on their equipment and be responsible flyers with the exception of themselves of course. Perhaps the next time a plane goes down some of these people might begin to think load capacities and weight limits are serious subjects. Let's just hope these people are not on the plane that goes down.
Posted by Joyce Harman on September 9, 2007 at 6:26 PM
All
Personally I like the idea of paying by weight, that way the pilots know exactly what load they are carrying, everyone could pay thier fair share, the 100 pounders will get by cheap, maybe the fatties will loose weight and us photographers could carry our loads. Rationing equipment is fine if you are going someplace with only one type of shot needed, but what about a trip where you need a variety of equipment including a big lens, flash gear, some macro, etc. I want to take advantage of everything a trip has to offer. How about the teachers amoung us, you need to be prepared with a variety of gear, etc.
The hold on an airline is a totally unsafe place to check anything other than clothes and stuff you can afford to have lost or mangled. I do check my tripod, but that is a bulky thing to steal and fairly hard to mangle.
Tom, do you have any suggestions for us out there? Insurance only pays after you get home, does not replace equipment on the way out.
I'll speak up and say that our "work around" using Fedex really works. It isn't cheap, but the gear arrives reliably, on time, and in good shape. It gets expensive, but as I said, I'd happily pay the same to the airlines if they would provide the same level of security, safe handling, and on-time delivery.
Another good option which we use when available is gear rental- especially lighting equipment. In most cases when working in or near major metro areas we can rent the large light kits we need about as cheaply as we can pay to ship our own one way, cutting the costs in half right off the bat. These same photo companies also rent cameras and lenses, but we don't avail ourselves of that option except when we need a lens not in our kits.
Anything you can add for dealing directly with the airlines Tom? If there's a way to assure security, care in handling and reliable delivery I'd love to hear about it.
Posted by Mia McPherson on September 10, 2007 at 9:41 AM
I'm making the trip I am on now by private vehicle which is a darn good thing because I had to pack clothes for three seasons, summer, fall and winter. I've gone from 90 degree heat and will be in places where it is below freezing. I need my camera gear and lap top gear. I expect to fully drive over 5000 miles by the time I am done. I just can not imagine making a trip like this by planes because of weight restrictions.
Discussion
16 repliesi have only posted a couple of times, but plan on joining more regular discussions and posting of photos. I wanted to share my experience this summer that could have been a serious problem. Flew from here to Manchester England, no problem, from Edinburgh (after the bomb threat) to Munich, no problem. Pack wieghed 18kg on the scale in Vienna, Austria with camera bodies, several lenses, etc. Looked big so the agent had it wieghed, told me it had to weigh 12 kg, no more. I talked to the office, same story, told them i was a photographer, no change. Told me i had to put the extra in my checked baggage, no insurance possible.javascript:%20x()
So, i put my bags on the floor down out of sight of the agent, put my biggest lens and body in my small computer bag, which did look small so they did not question it. Put batteries and odd stuff into my checked bag and made wieght. Slung the computer bag over my shoulder as if is weighed nothing and passed the weight. javascript:%20x()
If i had not had space in my small computer bag, or if i could not have gotten out of sight of the agent, i hate to think what would have happened. I have never been weighed with checked baggage. I hope this does not happen to others, but i did notice all the agents at the counters in Vienna were looking at folks' carry on bags. Life is getting worse out there. How are others getting large bags onto the planes?
Joyce
My solution is always to carry a compact photo vest, putting it on and adding a few items from my camera bags if I see heavy loads for a flight. Large zippered pockets in a jacket or windbreaker help too.
So - eat less, carry more! :-)
That's my motto - as I just got a big sucker 600 mm lens..
Sandy r
I've only been stopped once - by Cathay Pacific leaving Hong Kong. I told them it was all camera gear valued at over $10k - showed it to them and they not only allowed it, but gave me a Priority tag in case security caused problems (they didnt).
Otherwise, carrying a camera vest is a good idea, as Kah mentioned above. Stuff things into it, and put them back in the bag afterwards.
Another strategy is to remove all batteries, chargers, etc and stuff them in your checked bag.
It is absolutely incredible that airlines can force you to check in valuables and not accept any liability for them. It is a downright travesty of consumer rights, actually. Provide an alternative - even if that means paying an insurance premium.
Vandit
We complain about the cost of air travel, but fuel costs are a big part of the cost of an airline ticket. And every ounce brought on board must be lifted into the air and dragged along to the destination.
If you want to bring along a lot of stuff, please have the integrity to disclose it to the airlines (so they can better determine the total weight of a flight), and pay your fare share of the total costs of moving it from one place to another.
I weigh about 105 pounds, should people who weigh 200 pounds be charged twice as much?
I can see your point about being honest, however, honesty would have gotten my lens and camera in the hold with no insurance or guarentee that it would be there when i got home. There was no possible overwieght baggage fee to pay (I probably would have paid it), there was only one answer, make the bag weigh 12 kg. There is no way to know when you are going to get hassled, that is one of the biggest problems. On one airline or airport all is easy, then the next one enforces all possible restrictions. I looked up the baggage information about NW/KLM flying from Vienna, there was no wieght limit listed, and it said 2 carry on bags (one carryon, one personal item, whatever that is). Also, i have never had my carryon's weighed at any airport, ever. Not even the previous flight from Edinburgh 2 weeks after a terrorist attack at the Glasgow airport.
Insurance does little good if you arrive at the destination of a lifetime without your equipment, especially if it is a remote location.
Lia's comment is so true, if weight is the issue, we should just be charged by our total wieght, including all gear, then we can carry all we want, and still never be charged as much as the 350+ pounder I sat next to on a recent flight.
I like the vest idea and will always have one on in the future, thanks for that tip :)
Joyce
Against your point I'll point out that the airlines accept ZERO responsibility for electronic equipment and photo gear damaged in their baggage handling system. Even if they don't manage to drop it or run over it with baggage tractors (I've had both happen), things regularly disappear from their handling system- even from within locked hard cases while homeland security is lurking about. I'd pay extra for special handling of my photo gear if that's what it took, but better to play carryon games than simply to turn your gear over to them in the current system. And yes, to emphasize the point that I'd pay extra for decent handling, we're currently averaging well in excess of $1,000 a year in Fedex charges to ship gear ahead rather than let it fall into the competent hands of the airlines.
Richard, I wasn't being a smart aleck in my question to you, but if it costs more per pound in fuel costs, then I am paying my share plus some. Or my flying saves the airlines money.
I agree with your point about total weight, and don't consider you being a smart aleck in asking. Just like I think that a person who can't fit into a single seat should have to pay for a second seat, or a wider one in First Class, rather than spill over on the poor person in the adjoining seat. I've had that happen to me in the past.
Hank:
I understand the concern about damaged items, and agree that the airline should be responsible for damages in transit. And I applaud your practice of shipping your gear via FedEx and paying the premium to do so.
Everyone:
There's another option here - take less gear. If you really need more gear, then accept the costs of taking it.
I felt like they should have paid me to be on that flight.
Personally I like the idea of paying by weight, that way the pilots know exactly what load they are carrying, everyone could pay thier fair share, the 100 pounders will get by cheap, maybe the fatties will loose weight and us photographers could carry our loads. Rationing equipment is fine if you are going someplace with only one type of shot needed, but what about a trip where you need a variety of equipment including a big lens, flash gear, some macro, etc. I want to take advantage of everything a trip has to offer. How about the teachers amoung us, you need to be prepared with a variety of gear, etc.
The hold on an airline is a totally unsafe place to check anything other than clothes and stuff you can afford to have lost or mangled. I do check my tripod, but that is a bulky thing to steal and fairly hard to mangle.
Tom, do you have any suggestions for us out there? Insurance only pays after you get home, does not replace equipment on the way out.
Joyce
Another good option which we use when available is gear rental- especially lighting equipment. In most cases when working in or near major metro areas we can rent the large light kits we need about as cheaply as we can pay to ship our own one way, cutting the costs in half right off the bat. These same photo companies also rent cameras and lenses, but we don't avail ourselves of that option except when we need a lens not in our kits.
Anything you can add for dealing directly with the airlines Tom? If there's a way to assure security, care in handling and reliable delivery I'd love to hear about it.