Dealing with tiny carry-on

I don't know how you can make that statement when the current set of regulations are rather fluid. I still have access to the notices that are sent out to the airlines and trust me they are constantly changing. They will not publicize every little change.

After your last post I made a call to my insurance agent who covers my gear. Nothing has changed as far as he is concerned and it is business as usual. They cover my gear just like they used to if it is checked. Have you checked with your insurance agent or is this just fear mongering to further your cause.

I took the time to refer to a few airlines websites to check what their current size limitations are. I checked one UK airline, one Canadian and two US carriers and from what I could see only the British airline has reduced size of carryon and the others have all gone back to their original sizes. I can remember during my years at the airline that there were people that thought that their items were valuable enough that they bought a seat for them. The courier option has been forth to you here.

What I am trying to get across to you is that there are options for you. We live in troubled times and maintaining the status quo is just not an option right now. It is much easier to complain than to try and be inventive to try and find a solution. It's hard times on everyone and probably including the people that you are flying to go shoot for.

[QUOTE=rhys]They're half the size that they were before. quote]

Sorry, but that's simply not true...

I have been trying hard to explain why it's a problem for all photographers. I'll try again. The UK government is pressing the other EU governments to adopt the same measures. This will effectively make the EU and UK off-limits for air-travel by photographers that need their gear to arrive intact. Once the EU adopts this then it will spread like a virus worldwide. Do you remember being able to board a plane with just a ticket and no ID for internal flights? Try doing that today - anywhere in the world.

This is a very scary situation with everybody falling for security measures that are more intrusive than need be, where everybody is under suspicion. In many ways the world is in its most dangerous phase since 1936. The big problem as denoted by Martin Niemöller is that people are all shoving their heads in the sand saying it'll never happen. It is happening. We need to defend our rights as human beings, as members of democratic society and as photographers.

Seriously just give up...

It's not a problem for photographers, as others have said, we will deal with it. It's really not such a big deal. The EU and UK will not be off limits for air travel by photographers... Thats absurd. Maybe they will be off limits to you and the high bar you've set, but maybe thatsa a good thing!

Hmm? I'm sorry but if security was more intrusive than it need be then why are there still terrorists boarding our planes? The government has a duty to protect us and I will respect anything they implement to make flying safer.

Please... Just stop with this rubbish! If you're not happy flying then don't. The airlines are private companies, operating within boundaries set by the authorities. But essentially they are providing a service to us, the consumer. If we don't like that service then we can move on and find someone else who offers something we do like.

Just to clarify, leaving the UK I don;t believe the restriction on bag size has anything to do with the airline. Here's an excerpt from aa.com:

"Each passenger departing from the U.K. is allowed one carry-on bag with maximum dimensions of 45cm long x 35cm wide x 16cm deep (17.7 inches x 13.7 inches x 6.2 inches) - including wheels, handles, side pockets - equivalent to a small laptop bag. All baggage will be screened by x-ray."

The airlines have their rules. You're not losing any "rights" at all, primarily because you can elect either to fly or not to fly. That decision is 100% yours.

You want everyone in the world to go on some crusade so you're happier when you get on an airplane. Well, ain't happenin', bro. Fly or don't fly. It should be pretty evident that we don't care. Make the decision and get on with it.

Enjoy your cruise...

From the official government website: Each passenger is permitted to carry one item of cabin baggage through the airport security search point. The dimensions of this item must not exceed: a maximum length of 45 cm, width of 35 cm and depth of 16 cm (17.7"×13.7"×6.2" approx) (including wheels, handles, side pockets etc.). Other bags, such as handbags, may be carried within the single item of cabin baggage. All items carried by passengers will be x-ray screened.

Which is exactly what three people above you have posted...

I have had things stolen from checked baggage and have had checked baggage destroyed by the baggage handlers.

The reduction in permitted carry-on means that either I won't be able to work abroad any more or I'll have to travel via sea and road. The fact is that every piece of damaged equipment means time spent sourcing replacements and more time spent trying to get money out of insurance companies or more time wasted spent people.

Having been through all of those situations, it seems to me to be foolish to put camera gear or laptops in checked baggage.

I'd FedEx it with insurance. If you declare full commercial value and pay for the insurance they will cover it - that's why their insurance exists.

It just occured to me, that I live overseas and buy from the US. A fair amount of my camera gear *IS* already airflown before I even have the opportunity to take it out of the box, just getting here. Heck my gear travels better than I do, it sees half a dozen states, Alaska, and then some on its maiden voyage

And they don't receive any special handling. The B&H boxes don't have fragile on them, but the gear has always arrived intact, and I haven't had to send it back due to 'sharpness' problems or anything like that. Hmm.. off the cuff I remember both my Sigma lenses, my 28 f/1.8 and my 20D were all flown in. None of them had any concerns.

Last I flew, my 350D and 17-85 were checked in, sitting in a Lowepro Rezo 140 case in an unpadded daypack/backpack. Amazingly, the whole lot survived and went on to take many more good photos.

I'll keep flying because I have to, but in retrospect, I think I should pack the gear a little bit better, maybe next time a Computrekker AW inside a hard suitcase. That's basically all I'd change.

FedEx is an interesting idea but for the fact that Customs and Excise (in Britain) get very excited about incoming parcels. If I send as zero value then I can't get it insured. if I send it as full value then I'd get whacked import duty and tax. It's an interesting problem that I have raised with UK Customs and Extortion to see what their answer is.

I've sent my gear ahead of me internationally but never to the UK so it could be different. The two declared values are different. The one is for insuring the value of your goods in the event of problems. I've been able to insure for this while declaring a zero value for the purposes of customs. I did make a change to this whole situation later on though and have a rider through my insurance company on my household policy. It covers it whether it is damaged by me, the airline, the shipping company, just about anything. I just view it as the cost of doing business.

I think that most people here are trying to help you find a solution to your issue.

I'm looking at several options at the moment. Really I'd like to get a campaign started to re-size the baggage limits and to increase security from its current inadequate level. In the meantime my next journey to the UK and back will probably be by ship.

Having said that, I'm looking at the following 3 options:
1. Shipping my gear separately.
2. Getting a Pelican and crossing my fingers.
3. Getting a case that fits the luggage specifications.

The first option I already have some ideas about. The second is simply a case of buying a Pelican (probably have to do that for option 1 too).

The third is the one I'm working on at the moment. I've been looking at the cases available and thus far I found one which is perfect save for the fact it is 1cm too long in one dimension - the Jessops Case 60. I emailed Jessops and they said they had to order 5,000 of a case to make it worthwhile asking the factory for a different size. I pointed out to them that as the current UK baggage restriction meant chopping a centimeter off the design made commercial sense but no reply thus far.

I looked at the stuff on the Ritz site but no joy. The regulations are: a maximum length of 45 cm, width of 35 cm and depth of 16 cm (17.7"×13.7"×6.2" approx) (including wheels, handles, side pockets etc.). I believe something a quarter inch or a centimeter under in each dimension is probably advisable.

Goodness, is this thread still running?

I'd suggest you go somewhere else for your campaign. Reading through the postings here, you've got approximately zero support on POTN so far.

He doesn't want a solution. He wants a boycott. Every suggestion has been met with a further tirade about carry-on baggae.

Some people you can help because they want help. Others, well...