Traveling with so much weight.

I have no doubt that anyone who travel the world with a bag full of photographing equipment weighing more than 15 kg. Please tell me what do you do when there is a prohibition to take it with you inside to the aircraft. Clearly not possible to send such a valuable cargo like a regular suitcase. Thanks for the tips.

The best option is to make it as inconspicuous as possible. Also, a call *before* the tickets are booked could allow you to carry it on board. You can also try and *charm* your way through and finally if all else fails, keep a photo vest in the bag, wear it and fill it up with the most heavy gear, some have done this. Basically these rules are arbitrary and enforced arbitrarily over most of the world. A few times that I've been stopped, I've explained the situation and have been able to get on without issues. YMMV.

I would second Vivek's two suggestions, make it inconspicuous as possible (which means no wheels and potentially two bags as small as possible) as well as loading up ones coat with lenses, etc. A third suggestion might be to avoid airlines if possible who have a reputations for enforcing carry on weight limits. In this last regard, any airlines that people have had problems with? I will mention to that I have had problems with: Air France and Calm Air. In the case of the latter,
the person behind me saw the hassle the woman checking me in was giving me and tried to put some equipment in his coat. She then tried to force him to weigh his coat! (She also had my checked bag put on a later flight). So both of these airlines are on my avoid list.

ricardo00 wrote:I would second Vivek's two suggestions, make it inconspicuous as possible (which means no wheels and potentially two bags as small as possible) as well as loading up ones coat with lenses, etc.  A third suggestion might be to avoid airlines if possible who have a reputations for enforcing carry on weight limits.  In this last regard, any airlines that people have had problems with?  I will mention to that I have had problems with:  Air France and Calm Air.  In the case of the latter,
the person behind me saw the hassle the woman checking me in was giving me and tried to put some equipment in his coat.  She then tried to force him to weigh his coat!  (She also had my checked bag put on a later flight).  So both of these airlines are on my avoid list.

One thing that I've always wondered about how the airlines enforce "carry on weight". I've never been asked to "weigh my coat" but basically this brings up a good point. I wonder how they deal with people who are obviously "heavy". I weigh about 155lb but I have regularly seen people weighing 200+lb on flights. Would they enforce "total" weight for a person on the flight? This would open a major can of worms....

As so often, money is most likely the solution to this problem. I was just on a flight with a budget carrier which had a limit of one carry-on with max 7kg. Well, I had a laptop bag with 6.8 kg and a camera bag with 8.5 kg. After some back and forth, and especially in light of this carrier's policy not to allow checking of laptops and camera gear, I was allowed to bring both bags on board. But I had to pay an excess baggage fee of $10 I think...

The only other time I remember weight of luggage and carry on being checked was on JAL flights from Tokyo to Hokkaido. (A few years ago,that airline was also encouraging passengers to use the bathrooms before boarding to save weight on takeoff...). Again, I had to pay an excess baggage fee but that was it.

So overall I wouldn't sweat it too much - unless perhaps you're booked on a bush flight in Alaska.

Joerg

AT some point airlines are bound to enforce a 'total weight' scenario. I too find it strange that while fussing over a few extra pounds of carry on weight, nothing is done about people who weigh a 100 lbs more than me. It is of course never going to be politically correct and you can bet lawyers will be all over with something like this, but it is bound to happen, IMHO.

On a bush flight  into Botswana earlier this month, our organizer had chartered an entire second plane for our luggage which meant that we could take our camera bags into the plane we were seated in.

I would be quite happy to pay for 'excess weight' charge for carry-on items, much like for checked bags. I do hope the airlines allow this if they enforce a strict weight limit policy for carry ons.

Meanwhile, if I expect trouble, I usually put some lenses and whatever else I can into my photo-vest and wear it BEFORE I get into the boarding line. I then transfer it back into my bags at my seat. 

Pradeep

I have never had my carry-on weighed within the U.S. but I always fly Delta here. It seems in Europe they are much more strict and I have had it weighed a couple of times on Air France and KLM departing Italy where check-in is handled by a third party company (SEA). The only time I had a real problem was last fall flying from Detroit-Amsterdam-Thessaloniki where the only direct flight to SKGwas run by the discount carrier Transavia. They have a strict one carry-on policy that I was not aware of since I didn't check in with them in Detroit. I think this was the first time I have ever become irate with a gate agent and will never fly Transavia again. A couple weeks ago Air Berlin was pretty strict with carry-on weight as well.

Currently the only solution I know is to fly First/Business Class where I don't think they bother you about this. Domestic U.S. First Class tickets aren't always so extravagantly priced but flights to Europe are beyond justification for me at $5,000-$10,000. I too will be happy if they create a "total weight" classification for passengers.

This is why I switched to a complete Fuji XT1 mirrorless system for travel. A full bag (Tamrac Anvil 11 Slim) of everything I would need weighs about 1/3 the weight of my other bag filled with my Canon gear and easily slides underneath the seat of even the smallest jets.

ricardo00 wrote:... I will mention to that I have had problems with:  Air France and Calm Air.  In the case of the latter,
the person behind me saw the hassle the woman checking me in was giving me and tried to put some equipment in his coat.  She then tried to force him to weigh his coat!  (She also had my checked bag put on a later flight).  So both of these airlines are on my avoid list.

In the last six months a lot has changed for Calm Air going north from Winnipeg to Churchill and beyond. Calm Air has taken over First Air that used to fly our jet services added some scheduling and rebased here in Rankin Inlet. From Rankin you move to the smaller ATR air craft to travel to the communities.  

They have revamped their entire operations and are flying a 737-400 jet twice daily from Winnipeg to Churchill - Rankin Inlet weather permitting LOL The weights and luggage allowance is also some of the largest of any in Canada. You are now allowed 3 bags up to 120 lbs total (50 lbs per bag limit) this is the under the free allowance.

Check bags are under the normal luggage restrictions that all airlines have. The reason they do weigh the luggage and hand bags is that we have had folks put really heavy stuff above the seats in the compartments and this has caused issues. We like to bring back cheap southern groceries with us when we fly and they can be really heavy.  

there are still some check in folks who are not the best of service but you can find these types anywhere these days.

come visit us the birds are starting to arrive...oh yeah the cost is still more than a world wide vacation and then some.  

doug

nice to hear. I will be going for polar bears. The big advantage to the charter has been the ability to get camera equipment on board. hope this has been resolved at calm air.

It is better with the jet but as mentioned

"there are still some check in folks who are not the best of service"  which is a hit and miss

we find the earlier we get to the check in the better the mood...and then we have the weather delays /lack of information on most flights...flying to the north is like no other  :)

have a great day

Doug

I fly First Class on Delta (Domestic US) whenever I go on a photography trip. Delta has never asked about my personal weight, or the weight of my carry on bags. I generally use my Think Tank Airport Security V2 (rolling bag) or my Think Tank Airport Accelerator (backpack) with a laptop bag. Delta allows two carry on bags. Delta is strict about the size of the carry on bags (the limitations are posted on their web site). I have been asked to put a carry on bag in the Delta "Size Wise" checker contraption that is always somewhere around the ticket counters to prove the bag was within limits.

The only time I was ever questioned about my bag was at Gatwick Airport in England. I had to remove my laptop from the Lowe Pro bag I had to get past the size check. Once past the check point, I just put the laptop back in the bag. A somewhat meaningless exercise!

Though I did not read every detail of each posting, I did scan all of them.  

Several of you mentioned how to "conceal" weight.  Did any of you mention the reason for aircraft weight limits in the first place?  If everyone concealed weight, there would be a gross under-estimation by the airline company of total weight. 

During an Everglades controlled burn, I remember being told by the helicopter pilot that we were overloaded and that I had to remove a box of aerial ignition devices (ping pong balls) from the cargo compartment.  I did not think much of it and of course co-operated.  But on a commercial airliner flight, I also used to get a bit of an attitude about these luggage weight limits.   But I do not anymore. 

You see, I like and record the "Air Disasters" TV series.  And so I google"air disasters caused by overloading the aircraft"   

There have been numerous disasters caused by airline negligence regarding overloading.  The aircraft reaches maximum ground speed but does not reach buoyancy; it races off the end of the runway and crashes.  Or, it does rotate and does begin to float, but crashes shortly after take off.   It is real and it is going to continue.  

Do any of the commercial airline companies have a scale where each person (luggage and all) is weighed?  I do not think so.  To reach estimation of maximum weight, don't they just count heads and multiply by an average weight?  I think so.  

There was one large airliner that had weight sensors in the undercarriage (landing gear), possibly the 747, not sure.

Clearly a lack of understanding of both aircraft and weight and balance exhibited in this thread.  I do hold a commercial multi-engine pilot license.  Every flight, regardless of how big or how small requires a weight and balance calculation to be done prior to take-off.  In the case of light aircraft with little payload, this can be a life or death calculation.  In the case of large airliners, the weight and balance envelope is very large and passengers alone and their carry-ons won't be enough to make the aircraft not air-worthy.  Virtually every airline accident due to weight and balance issues have been due to mishandling of cargo or not properly securing it causing it to shift creating a center of gravity outside of the aircraft's operational Cg window.  Since the airline does not weigh every passenger and it's carry on it has to make some assumptions which are as follows:

Weights

Average adult passenger weight 190 lb
Average adult male passenger weight 200 lb
Average adult female passenger weight 179 lb
Child weight (2 years to less than 13 years of age) 82 lb

Winter Weights
Average adult passenger weight 195 lb
Average adult male passenger weight 205 lb
Average adult female passenger weight 184 lb
Child weight (2 years to less than 13 years of age) 87 lb

These weights include a 16-lb carry-on bag allowance.  Checked bags are considered to be 30 pounds with heavy bags being 60 pounds.

Remember it applies these to everyone getting on the plane, some will be heavier, some will be lighter.  Just a few years ago the average weight was increased from 170lb to 190lb due to the massive obesity crisis we have in the USA.  In recent years, aircraft have shrunk seat pitch and more people are being put aboard the same airplanes as before without an issue.  Fuel of course also adds weight.  Very few flights, except those that are getting close to the aircraft's maximum range plus reserves carry full fuel.  They are required to carry enough fuel to get to their destination, and then on to an alternate in case they can't land there and then another 45 minutes.  This calculation is done with knowledge of the winds aloft.

This is a lot of info but the point is, unless you are in a light aircraft a few photographers with overweight carry-ons simply can not create a weight and balance issue on an airliner.

Very interesting E.J. for sure.  Thank you for that.  I like that stuff.  

But how can it be that "virtually every airline accident due to weight and balance issues have been due to mishandling of cargo or not properly securing it causing it to shift creating a center of gravity outside of the aircraft's operational Cg window."  That is what you wrote.


One can find many air disaster reports where the investigators determined that the cause was an aircraft that was simply overloaded.   And isn't load capacity on a large aircraft just as critical factor a factor as it is on a small aircraft?

What has envelope got to do with it? When you reach capacity, you reach capacity.

All aircraft have a load capacity, do they not?   And if an aircraft surpasses its load capacity, can it possibly float in the air ?      

I am sure there many more disasters that were caused by a weight shift....as you said were.  But in these few that took me 5 minutes to find....there is nothing about weight shift at all.   All were caused by overloading.  And none of these were small aircraft.  

 This one is a 19 passenger flight, and yes, they believe it was due to passenger obesity...but not cargo shift.   And it was close.  Investigators said maybe only 100 pounds would have been the difference. 

This one was also overloaded.....10 tons overloaded !

Here is one in which the airline simply failed to calculate the weight

Now I like this one a lot:

Samoan Air beginning to charge people according to how much they weigh.

http://en.people.cn/90777/8388162.html

The one in Gander, Newfoundlandwas also due to the flight crew not using the correct multiplication factor.  The plane was carrying a group of military people and investigators concluded if they had used a more practical multiplication factor, the plane would have rotated.  It was not weight shift.  I think they may have also concluded that icing was a factor.

I guess those of you who suggested that it is a money thing are right too; i.e. the airliners are clipping you for your added gear ?  

Fly Southwest !  I love you Southwest 

Lesson for me ?  Don't get on a plane if I do an eye scan and the majority look to be obese.......especially if it is freezing rain outside....uhuh!

And here is another question for you:  I guess we all know why Americans are so overweight, but.........  What makes the Samoans a heavy people ?   Click for some answers.  

Yes of course there are exceptions - a 19 passenger plane has much less leeway than a big airliner.  And of course if you scour the entire history of aviation accidents you will find some.  The 727 was back in the days of 170lb limit - 10 tons is 20,000 lb on a plane that has almost a 200,000lb take off weight and it isn't exactly a first world carrier operating under an FAA or EASA license.  What you won't find is a major carrier operating in North America or Europe that have had a major accident simply due to weight in the last 50 years.  Of course if you start looking at fly by night (no pun intended) operators here running on no margins you are going to find accidents but it is extremely rare and simply has not happened among the world's major airlines in a very useful long time.  As I said earlier, with lighter airplanes, an accurate weight and balance which involves weighing all people and all cargo and distributing it properly in the plane is imperative. Helicopters are especially sensitive to balance.  Even most weight related accidents have other causes - often center of gravity related.  Most aircraft can and will get off the ground even significantly overweight and there are even special ferry permits that can be gotten for when that is needed but if they are out of Cg there could be very serious problems. But there are other factors such as temperature and elevation of the airport, humidity, performance levels of the engines, runway length wing contamination such as frost, etc that play a role.  The biggest issue is generally not with the excess weight, unless some of the other factors like a very high temperature at a high elevation airport with a short runway, but rather that the weight is not distributed properly causing the aircraft Center of gravity to be either too far forward or too far aft.  If it is too far forward the aircraft may not get off the ground since there isn't enough elevator authority for the lift required to get a nose heavy place off the ground.  The even more dangerous condition is too much weight in the rear causing an aft Cg - in that situation the airplane can rotate too soon before the wings have generated enough weight to keep the airplane flying resulting in a take off stall and the plane goes up and immediately noses into the ground.

Again, the point here is that a photographer's equipment is not going to cause an airliner to crash and from a photography equipment standpoint, which is what this thread is about, that's a red herring.  

P.S. The person sitting next to me that weighs 350lb and uses up half of my seat in addition to his luggage is much more of an issue than my 160lb and 35lb of camera gear

Thank you for that very thorough explanation E.J.  

"P.S. The person sitting next to me that weighs 350lb and uses up half of my seat in addition to his luggage is much more of an issue than my 160lb and 35lb of camera gear"  

Yes, of course this is true; good point. 

Blck-shouldered Kite wrote:Thank you for that very thorough explanation E.J.  

"P.S. The person sitting next to me that weighs 350lb and uses up half of my seat in addition to his luggage is much more of an issue than my 160lb and 35lb of camera gear"  

Yes, of course this is true; good point. 

I wasn't so explicit, but this is precisely what I meant

Vivek wrote:

Blck-shouldered Kite wrote:Thank you for that very thorough explanation E.J.  

"P.S. The person sitting next to me that weighs 350lb and uses up half of my seat in addition to his luggage is much more of an issue than my 160lb and 35lb of camera gear"  

Yes, of course this is true; good point. 

I wasn't so explicit, but this is precisely what I meant

Yes Vivek, you did make that point.   And I did notice it when I first scanned the thread.   I apologize for not acknowledging your comment, which came before E.J's. and was saying almost the same thing.  But from my perspective, "200+ lbs." (as you wrote) is not that much.....  You see, I weigh 222.      

Looked at your website too.  Your bird images are superb !   You might want to slow down the speed of that slide show a little.  Just my impression.  My brain was just settling in to one image of a bird and it moved to the next one.   A person recently told me that mine is too fast....and your's is faster than mine.  But a great bird gallery and what bokeh!

Robert