I have never understood why people do that... wouldn't you want to have your carry-on near your seat, in case you want to get something out during the flight? Plus, I wonder how often someone puts their carry-on up front and then forgets to retrieve it because it's not near them.

Anyway, in addition to being rude because it take up someone else's space, it's doubly rude because it slows down deplaning. If your carry-on is near your seat, you can retrieve it while you are standing in the aisle waiting for the line to move. But if it's up front, you have to stop in the aisle and hold up the people behind you while you retrieve it.

(While we're at it, let's not forget why we have so many damn carry-ons in the first place... it's because the airlines and the TSA have made baggage checking a hassle, and we can't trust them with the contents of our bags.)

I'm with you, Cousin Dave!

(While we're at it, let's not forget why we have so many damn carry-ons in the first place... it's because the airlines and the TSA have made baggage checking a hassle, and we can't trust them with the contents of our bags.)
Posted by: Cousin Dave at May 28, 2014 6:39 AM

The moment the TSA started confiscating stuff that I would ordinarily put in my carry on, I went to flying Southwest exclusively and checking my luggage.

Most of my friends and relatives have done the same.

There is nothing I cannot live without for four hours, that will not fit in a very small purse, or my pocket.

In general I have been very happy with the way Southwest does business.

But if it's up front, you have to stop in the aisle and hold up the people behind you while you retrieve it.

Also, when the people who sit up front board, there won't be room for their bags. Meaning they have to put their bag in the back and then swim against the current to get back to their seat. Messes up the boarding process.

Often people do it because they see (or reasonably fear) that overhead space in their own row in the back is full. They figure they'd better take advantage of any space they see, lest they be forced to gate-check the bag (and therefore risk its delivery being delayed if they have connections, have to frantically get everything they need out of it and hope they didn't forget meds, etc.).

Some people are just as repelled by the thought of traveling with it underfoot, even though the airline tells you you might have to. They know that if their own overhead space is already jam-packed, it's likely someone else stashed TWO bags, and why shouldn't they be able to store ONE?

It's still wrong, but I don't think it's because they're too lazy to wheel a bag down the aisle. They're grabbing space that they perceive is rapidly disappearing and to which they feel entitled.

This was (and is) one of my biggest pet peeves when flying. That and people who put all their luggage (2+ bags) in the overhead instead of putting one under the seat in front of them and leave no room for their seatmates' luggage.

This is one of the reasons gullible people think bullet trains would be better. They think the rudeness people exhibit on planes won't be shown on the trains; that there will be plenty of luggage space, head room, and legroom; and that a bar car serving a train with 500+ passengers won't be overcrowded.

They're imagining a tranquil and scenic journey right out of old movies. And they're willing to spend billions of your dollars on their fantasy.

...but I don't think it's because they're too lazy to wheel a bag down the aisle. ~ Posted by: Insufficient Poison at May 28, 2014 7:46 AM

It is. I used to fly every week for work and on every flight I took I saw people do that when the other bins were clearly open and have lots of space available.

It also amazed by the number and size of carry on the airline allow. I see people pulling suitcases on that clearly would not fit in the guide that says "your carry on must not be larger than this". Some of them have two large bags and a purse or backpack.

If the airlines enforced their rules, there likely wouldn't be a need for gate checking.

This is one of the reasons gullible people think bullet trains would be better. They think the rudeness people exhibit on planes won't be shown on the trains

MONORAIL!

This is one of the reasons gullible people think bullet trains would be better. They think the rudeness people exhibit on planes won't be shown on the trains

MONORAIL!

Posted by: Unix-Jedi at May 28, 2014 9:22 AM

There is less room for luggage on the Shinkansen, than on the average commuter airline, but the seats are nicer.

Somehow if you just let the market take care of it, it all works out.

The Japanese will generally fly if possible, even if the bullet train runs where they are going.

"They're imagining a tranquil and scenic journey right out of old movies."

Yep, Bing Crosby, Rosemary Clooney, Danny Kaye, and Vera Ellen are going to be sitting at a table in the dining car singing "Snooooowwww!" Evan back in the "good old days", most train service was not that good -- it was only a handful of the most popular lines that had the luxury services that people imagine when they think about train journeys. Most of it was more like riding the subway for 18 hours, and without the air conditioning.

If the airlines enforced their rules, there likely wouldn't be a need for gate checking.

Frontier, I've noticed, has a great reputation of enforcing their size/number of carry-on rules. Watching the entitled get turned away a the gate with their bags the size of a Smartcar is better than reality TV.

... also there is a special place in hell for people who think it's OK to take up an entire overhead compartment to spread out their coat.

There is less room for luggage on the Shinkansen, than on the average commuter airline, but the seats are nicer.

Use of luggage courier services is also a lot more common there, eliminating a lot of big bags from trains. There are some great luggage delivery services in the US, too, but they tend to be pricey -- $20-$25 for next-day delivery isn't really do-able for most of the US. So, if high-speed train travel becomes more of an option in the US, people are still probably going to do what they already do on planes (pack an over-sized carry-on denser than a neutron star and try to shove it in the overhead).