Trump Just Signed a Law That Changes Life Aboard Airlines

The frequent fliers are mostly immune to all this and the family visiting grandma is often going to pick the absolute cheapest flight.

It has been disrupted already ... many times. Some disruptions came as a result of relaxation of certain regulations, such as allowing twin engine jets to fly over the oceans, or not forcing airlines to fly direct routes. There's also the revolution around using deep statistical modeling for capacity and route planning and scheduling. There's the business models of RyanAir and Emirates ... I mean, this industry has changed quite a bit.

Flying is also cheapest AND safest it has ever been (though more uncomfortable). Seems like market forces are working just fine.

This fall I recently started flying again after having not flown since 1999, and I've been making it a point to only fly Southwest because they're the only airline that's even remotely consumer friendly.

E.g. Amazon is disrupting retail. But even before Amazon existed, retail was highly competitive, with market forces driving down prices. (Indeed, there is a good argument that Amazon is decreasing competition even as it disrupts the market.)

This helps stratify the market as well, because those who travel light (mainly business people and people who fly a lot) now pay less than they used to. Those who fly irregularly (i.e., tourists) are more willing to pay the fees.

1. Wow, WizzAir, and Norweigan air has created a lot of competition on the airline front and price wars. EDIT: Forgot to mention their point to point system has also benefited many towns that wouldn't dream of traveling to Europe.

I've flow with Norwegian Air and I actually liked them. They're like the Southwest of transatlantic flights. The legacy carrier's response has been "we'll just lower our prices" and decrease benefits on all sides. (I.e. basic econ)

2. The newer carriers have had the money to lease new airplanes that are much more fuel efficient. I think that's where the legacy carriers have done does bad planning for the last decade. (They're just not buying 787s and they're depending on ERJ/CRJs)

I'd mostly worry that adding too many restrictions prevents existing airlines from coming up with innovative programs & business models that benefit everyone by realigning incentives — getting to the gate earlier, checking even small bags rather than dragging a huge roller onboard and holding up the boarding process, etc.

That said, these particular regulations don't seem particularly onerous.

I couldn't agree more. What you are describing is a cartel, or, at a later stage, a monopoly-ish entity.

Markets "where the barrier to entry is so high" sometimes snap into existence as a function of what they do, but also sometimes appear simply because it's easier to collude than compete.

Isn't that because the industry is regulated and the government is the actual barrier to entry? Not saying it's wrong, but saying that the market isn't working when you listed something caused by regulation is unfair argument IMO.

There were times when I sprung for priority boarding or emergency row seating, and times where I didn't - and in both cases, I appreciated the option. Let people decide if they care enough about extra leg room that they are willing to throw and that extra $30 for the better seat versus not (because if free, EVERYONE would want extra leg room).

Given two flights A and B, it could be the case that A is cheaper for the person who doesn't want checked luggage, whereas B is cheaper for someone who wants to check in a suitcase.

This really summarizes attitudes perfectly. Except there's no need to actually label anything, no one gives a shit about other people's stuff.

Once everything is accurately priced and tracked, there's no problem with space anymore. They know how many cubic feet of space they have, and they know what they've charged for.

Where is this rare? I have never bought an airline ticket, even in bare-bones economy, flying for business or leisure, with and without status, and not got an included checked bag. This is flying British Airways, United, Lufthansa, Delta, American, Japan, etc etc

Yet airlines keep offering me free baggage check at the gate on full flights. I actively try to avoid checking my bags, but I'm usually in boarding Group 3 or 4, so I'm forced to have my bag gate-checked. I hate it. Most people do. Some even try to untag their force-checked bags on the jetway when they see overhead luggage space, and then get told off because that is prohibited. I've resorted to buying an AmazonBasics underseat bag[1] so I never have to check my bag.

For domestic flights, in my experience few people want to check their bags. (exceptions exist of course, like in your case)

For international flights, checking bags is included in the cost of the ticket.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Amazon161214-Underseat-L...

the requirements (law) specifically states that only YOU may carry the opening mechanism for the case, and it must be a hard case. sure they might ask you to open it, but it will be tracked with great vigor, must be in a hard case, and only you can open it.

[0] https://www.surfdome.us/oakley_luggage_-_oakley_large_roller...

I'm always carry-on even with my free & priority checked bags thanks to status. For business travel, I like to move quickly through the airport. For personal travel, especially international, nothing is worse than pulling around a lot of luggage like a first-time tourist. Those pebble roads, tight commuter trains, and long step-walks in Europe can be a drag. Last month we travelled 21 days across 5 countries with just a carry-on.

In both cases, the airline losing your bag is a real pain to deal with on any trip – happened a lot to me on multi-connects but much less of a problem on directs.

What the hell am I supposed to do?

I would gladly pay money if they allowed me the usual old 23kg standard.

I disagree. It got cheaper and some of the price savings came as a result of removing the old perks(which are still there, but you have to pay for them separately). By the way, checked baggage was never free. There was always a hidden cost that was not reflected in the ticket price.

>Now everyone wants to fly with a mountain climbing backpack

Airlines have gotten better at designing and running routes in such a way that the airplane is as full as it can be. Also after regulations were relaxed airlines now use the hub-spoke model instead of being forced to do direct flights between two small-markets (and thereby making ticket more expensive), which results in, again, full airplanes. Years ago there was a good chance that at any given time I would fly in a half-empty plane, now it rarely happens. I think this is what you're noticing.

> I'm not checking my $10k in camera equipment because people aren't checking their dirty tshirts.

Occasionally I travel with expensive equipment (e.g. I have a high-end mini-PC) and in those cases I opt to pay $20 for zone 1/2 priority boarding so that I put my stuff in the overhead compartment ahead of zone 3/4/5 masses and therefore limit the risk of having it gate-checked. I like that I am able to make that choice, as opposed to not having the choice.

Having to pay bag fees sucks but then again, before separate bag fees we were still paying them, we just didn’t know how much of the ticket price they really were.

An analogy would be purchasing a PC; savvy folks can save hundreds while unsavvy people trying to do the same are very likely to accidentally compromise on things that are important to them.

I don't think the solution is regulation; I think it's to teach common sense.

There is literally no lying whatsoever going on here.

People usually have multiple choices available. Certainly they have alternatives to flying United Airlines out of Newark. That someone does not like these other choices does not mean they do not exist.

How do you think this actually change impacts people _while_ on the plane since vapes have already been banned from carry-ons? Your comment doesn't seem to be relevant to this change.

The question is: if I am not allowed to bring (potentially expensive and/or hard-to-find) e-cigs on board, what do I do when I land? Can I put them in checked luggage? Do I have to throw them out if I forget they're on me? Too bad?

I don't have any answers but I personally use an e-cig to keep me from going back to the real thing (real cigarettes that is).

I think they could easily be checked in baggage with the same precautions as a firearm. Battery out, fluid reservoir empty, and in a flight-approved, locked container.

That said, I was on a cave tour once and some jackass was vaping inside the cave. The guide reminded him "no smoking" and he kept on puffing, explaining, "I'm not smoking. It's a vape." It was already too late to remove him from the tour.

People didn't ban cigarette smoking specifically because of the cigarettes. It was because it was the most common means for people to blithely pollute the local air. Vape fluid might be less overtly toxic and more pleasant-smelling than cigarette smoke, but that doesn't mean I want your candy-flavored solvent precipitating out of the air onto my clothes. When you're in an enclosed space without openable ventilation windows, like a cave or airliner cabin or elevator, don't smoke, don't intentionally fart, don't take your shoes off to air out your stinky socks, and don't vape.

For instance, 'just think, there was a time when you could smoke proper analog cigarettes on Concorde with the flight attendants able to sell you more, by the box of 200, duty free. They even had books of matches spare to help you light them.'

Seriously, doing that is often extremely difficult. For many in tech, and people oriented / facing work, there is a cycle of stress and or anxiety relief that amplifies when quitting.

Ability to create and interact with people in difficult or higher pressure scenarios are all, can be, very significantly impacted.

For many, really quiting takes a significant life event, or a substantial period of time away from the triggers as well as the cigarettes.

Of course people vary. Some can do it cold, others patch, others can use drugs like Chantix.

In my own scenario, Chantix was very bad news. Did not work, and I had those side effects. Big. Was scary and all escalated over a matter of a couple weeks.

I had started in the military, and quitting was a serious struggle. Vapor pens got me off tobacco, and the benefits were more or less immediate! Overall well being shot up fast, and continues on a slow ramp up.

As harm reduction, I have little question in my mind. The two are almost not comparable. Night and day type stuff

I have been diluting the percentages down and it has reached the point where I am going longer times without thinking about it much. All that with marginal inpact on create and people handling / interaction too.

Life has been tough on a number of fronts, basically denying me the time / space needed to deal hard core.

Vaping ranges from a fairly tepid thing to obnoxious big clouds where the room ends up a sticky mist!

Mutual consideration points to some regulation, and so far I see nothing unreasonable.

People judging others harshly on various vices has never been a thing I find productive. (Not implying you are, just making a germane point here) Minimizing harm, making sure people have options, treatment when they get into trouble are all much more productive and sane policy.

In basic terms, vaping is not even in the same class as smoking is. The big cloud people do approach that, and a few of them going to town can make a mess on par with smokers generally, but doing that is an edge case.

The vast majority will do it in the same way people use wine, as an example. Real addiction will creep up on people. Happens, and the very last thing they need is a toxic culture adding difficulty to what will already be difficult enough. Just embracing harm reduction would have a hard to miss, positive impact.

[0]: https://www.inc.com/bill-murphy-jr/the-drunk-passenger-diver...

Yeah, it will absolutely be abused. Everything is a "threat".

It seems to me these points potentially balance out some of the power that flight attendants have, however.

This should not be allowed. Items in a bill should be passed by their own merit, not by the merits of other 'must pass' things they hang off of.

With so many planes having touch screens on the seat in front of you I wish they'd get rid of the service cart altogether, let people select what they want and then deliver it as convenient.

First, I was told all regulations are bad, this nuance is only coming up now In response to hypocrisy being pointed out.

Second, which industries have historically implemented regulations without a legal requirement? The banking, insurance, tech, healthcare and energy industries all seem to fight regulation pretty hard.

Mundane laws like this get passed all the time.