Has the weight allowance for Intl. flights changed?
 

My wifes co-worker is going to the Phillipines son and was told the weight allowance has dropped to 50 vs. 70 lbs. per bag. we flew Lufthansa last winter Chicago to Delhi and then it was still 70 lbs. Any info?

What airline? I just checked Continental. It's 70lb per piece; 2 piece for coach, 3 for business.

It is American.

From aa.com, tickets issued 3/1/05 or after, 50lb per luggage, even for international flights.

Keep in mind that it's allowance per bag. Once is still allowed 2 checked bags, for 100lb total.

And since AA doesn't fly to The Philippines, what airline is he/she on? How about connecting from a different US airline?

Seems odd. I'll have to double check this one. Thanks for the help. :-)

Odd about what? Airlines are constantly changing their rules, and try to squeeze the most out of the passengers. So, this is not surprising. You pay for meal on domestic flights, you pay a lot for taking pets, you get less baggage allowance, etc...

Whats odd is being told about using AA to fly to a place they in fact don't service. I just heard the price of jet fuel will jump up by 25% so expect fare increases. Larry.

Maybe it's AA to NRT and then a JL code-share?

I think this is a good thing. The people with the enormous suitcases will be paying for more of the fuel they burn. Many of them are carrying 100 pounds more luggage than I do, so if they pay more it might help keep my ticket costs down. That's a selfish view, of course, or economic self interest. They are mainly in the business of carrying <i>passengers</i>.

In January, I had checked in two bags at Narita, returning to D.C. I decided to put my coat in a duffel that I had folded up in one of the checked bags. The check-in lady said I was only allowed 2 checked bags. I knew that was the rule in economy, but I was flying in first class. I pointed out that I had * Alliance Gold status so was allowed 3 bags. This was ANA.

Last year I sat next to someone who went to Alaska to go Salmon fishing. It cost so much to ship home the fish, it would have been cheaper to buy it at the local grocery store.

But I guess it wouldn't taste the same.

When I showed up at the airport for a 4-week trip to Europe, I was told that if that's all the luggage I had, I could just carry it on. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a little discount for people who pack lite.

A discount, yes, or a coupon for a free drink.

My first thought: isn't it possible that you just need to think about the math here, relating AA's weight allowance to its addition of seats (Less Room in Coach)? Maybe it doesn't come out exactly right, but if the total weight permitted for the plane remains constant, and the number of passengers increases, then doesn't it make sense that they'd have to reduce the weight allowance for baggage?

Yes, I guess it does, but second idea: a difference of 20 lbs. per person over a couple of hundred people is much more than the eight or so additional seats per plane times 70 (or 50). So are we going for a larger margin of safety, more weight allowance for extra fuel, more extra weight for paid cargo, or -- at the risk of starting a narsty attack on the Horror That Is American Obesity -- adjusting to compensate for a statistically weightier average passenger?

It really has nothing to do with weight issues. Most US airlines continue to allow 70lbx2 for international flights, regardless of seat pitch. Just a way to get a few more dollars from those who're taking lots of stuff - and the usual business or leisure traveller really won't take that much.

Also to bring it more inline with the international practice of 20kg or 44lb. The only question is whether other airlines will follow suit.

Actually, let me correct myself. The baggage allowance for US carriers is generally 70lb x 2 = 140lb. The new AA allowance is 50lb x 2 = 100lb. It's still way more generous than the common international practice of <b>total</b> weight of 20kg or 44lb.

Air freight is extremely profitable for the airlines. Lowering the total passenger baggage load leaves more capacity for cargo. (Fuel tanks are already filled to the top for international flights, so no safety isues there.)

Okay, follow-up question: How much cargo do these international passenger flights usually take? What does it tend to be?

I am really no expert on this, but cargo payload is a complex issue. The factors involved include:

- Cargo load volume
- Cargo weight
- Maximum takeoff weight of plane
- Fuel onboard of aircraft
and many more...

But I would think that even if say all 300 passengers on a widebody aircraft will be checking 100lb instead of 140lb of luggage, the total difference is only 12,000lb. And I would say that on most routes, very few passengers will be taking the maximum, so the difference per flight with this policy may be a few thousand pounds.

Consider that the maximum payload of a 747 freighter is about 250,000lb, that's really a drop in the bucket.

Also, on routes that are not as far, I think the limiting factor on a passenger jet is cargo hold volume and not cargo weight. So, a little more passenger baggages simply mean carrying a little more fuel. No significant effect on how much cargo they can put on this flight.

Again, this is just some ideas I have. Really not an expert on this.

I am really no expert on this, but cargo payload is a complex issue. The factors involved include:

- Cargo load volume
- Cargo weight
- Maximum takeoff weight of plane
- Fuel onboard of aircraft
and many more...

But I would think that even if say all 300 passengers on a widebody aircraft will be checking 100lb instead of 140lb of luggage, the total difference is only 12,000lb. And I would say that on most routes, very few passengers will be taking the maximum, so the difference per flight with this policy may be a few thousand pounds.

Consider that the maximum payload of a 747 freighter is about 250,000lb, that's really a drop in the bucket.

Again, this is just some ideas I have. Really not an expert on this.

It's mostly commercial and industrial cargo, but I have no idea what it accounts for as a percentage of overall weight.

My BIL, who worked in the cargo/baggage field at CLE, told me US Mail was their cash cow, and they tried to load as much of that as they could. CLE, however, doesn't have a lot of international flights, and the mix on them might be different.

Ok, a few thousand pounds is still a ton and a half of stuff. That's a truckload. It is exactly 1.2% of the 747 cargo load that you gave, rkkwan.

If your airline flew 14 international flights per day, and you could carry an extra ton and a half of cargo on each flight then you could carry the equivalent of a jumbo cargo load on them every 7 days.