"One bag" travel, which bag is best?
in [Airline Travel]
|
Next: AF IAH - CDG
From: erilar on 4 Aug 2006 15:18 In article <8eh6d2ld8poddspn01eht4pmqann1q0hi2(a)4ax.com>, B Vaughan<me(a)privacy.net> wrote: > I don't understand the public transport thing. The human body is less > bulky around the legs than around the chest. In a packed tram, you can > always find a bit of unused real estate on the floor, while a backpack > on your back will be punching people in the face. In which case you remove the pack from your back and do the same. -- Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar), philologist, biblioholic medievalist http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
From: erilar on 4 Aug 2006 15:24 In article <jgv5d2ll812ugcen02cjtcn2jnlflmds27(a)4ax.com>, dontuse(a)fell-walker.co.uk wrote: > Following up to Larry in Berkeley > > >Many airlines are now enforcing the old rule that a carryon may not > >weigh more than seven kilos. > > (UK) New Department for Transport guidelines on cabin baggage > come into effect this month. Passengers are now only allowed to > take hand baggage on board that is a maximum length of 56cm > (22in), width of 45cm (18in) and depth of 25cm (10in). > We recommend that you check your baggage dimensions before > starting your journey to save delays. I just went over and measured my Eagle Creek bag. It fits, as long as I don't pack it fuller than I can strap down to 10. I weigh it to make sure I don't have too much in it to begin with, and some stuff gets discarded. -- Mary Loomer Oliver (aka Erilar), philologist, biblioholic medievalist http://www.airstreamcomm.net/~erilarlo
From: B Vaughan on 4 Aug 2006 16:16 On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:18:38 -0500, erilar <erilarloFRY(a)SPAMchibardun.net.invalid> wrote: >In article <8eh6d2ld8poddspn01eht4pmqann1q0hi2(a)4ax.com>, B >Vaughan<me(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> I don't understand the public transport thing. The human body is less >> bulky around the legs than around the chest. In a packed tram, you can >> always find a bit of unused real estate on the floor, while a backpack >> on your back will be punching people in the face. > >In which case you remove the pack from your back and do the same. Miguel Cruz had said that a backpack was MORE convenient on cowded public transport than a wheeled suitcase. If you're going to do the same thing with it that you do with a suitcase, but you also have to take it off (no mean feat in a crowded tram) and put it back on, then it's less convenient on public transport, not more. Welcome back to r.t.e., Miguel, even if you're just looking over the fence. -- Barbara Vaughan My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup
From: Jack Campin - bogus address on 4 Aug 2006 17:43 > Miguel Cruz had said that a backpack was MORE convenient on cowded > public transport than a wheeled suitcase. If you're going to do the > same thing with it that you do with a suitcase, but you also have to > take it off (no mean feat in a crowded tram) and put it back on, then > it's less convenient on public transport, not more. On a crowded bus, if I've got a seat, I can put the backpack in my lap. I have never seen anyone do that with a wheeled bag, it always takes up floor space. And since you can't move the thing without angling it 45 degrees, it takes up the space of two people whenever its owner moves - usually with random jiggles backwards to bash people.in the ankles. Wheeled bags are not designed to be lifted - you can't use both hands to get an ergonomic grip the way you can with a backpack. Dangling the whole weight off one arm is a good incentive not to even try. ============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ============== Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760 <http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975 stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
From: Donald Newcomb on 4 Aug 2006 21:23
"RPSinha" <rpsinha(a)null.void> wrote in message news:030820060955513592%rpsinha(a)null.void... > Another suggestion was Rick Steves Convertable carry-on bag; $99. > <http://travelstore.ricksteves.com/catalog/index.cfm?fuseaction=product& > theParentId=8&id=139> > > Do you have any expereince with these? Or, do you have another > recommendation? I recently purchased the Rick Steves Convertible Carryon bag as a lower cost alternative to some of the other maximum carryon bags (e.g. Red Oxx, Tough Traveler, Patagonia). I have not yet traveled any great distance with it, only a one-week road trip. Here are some random observations: Pluses: 1.. Converts to backpack. Has a hip belt, which the current Patagonia MLC lacks. 2.. Fairly light weight. 3.. Small laundry bag was included. Minuses: 1.. Does not come with shoulder strap. Must purchase separately. 2.. Lacks any support to hold a rectangular shape. Even using packing cubes it becomes a fairly shapeless blob. I'm looking for some sort of light-weight stiffeners to add to the load. 3.. I dislike the "portrait" format and would prefer the bag open in the "landscape" mode. 4.. I would like more internal organization. The Tough Traveler Tri-Zip looks better organized to me. 5.. The compression strap ends dangle free with no place to be tucked away. > Finally, do you find any particular *colors* either very good or not so > good for rugged travel? Some shade of brown? Almost all my luggage is black. The only advantage of black is that you can match luggage from different manufacturers without any problem. With other colors it would be impossible to get a match. I'd imagine that any light color would be not so good since it would show dirt and wear. -- Donald R. Newcomb DRNewcomb (at) attglobal (dot) net |