My point is that that is the service you are getting from regional/express airlines these days. Some of them offer ‘personal item only’ basic tickets which means ‘carry ons’ are extra; and de facto ’carry ons’ are actually checked bags, because everyone knows they are going to offer complementary gate check – and it turns out you can in fact often just check the bag for free at check in. And of course this allows you to pack things in that bag that can go in the hold, but that you wouldn’t be allowed to take through security, like standard size toiletry bottles.

What’s weird is, I agree, the way it’s described and marketed. Carry on add-ons should be sold as ‘small checked bag’. As it is, if you know your carry on is going to be gate checked it’s easy to plan where you pack your lithium battery devices; if you don’t you’ll be doing the gate check shuffle.

▲

ceejayoz an hour ago | parent [-]

> My point is that that is the service you are getting from regional/express airlines these days.

But it's unnecessarily implemented in a costly, inefficient, annoying way that makes the entire experience worse to no one's benefit.

▲

jameshart an hour ago | parent [-]

See original post, I guess?

A lot of the constraints in how airlines can market service levels are imposed by the ticketing aggregation standards and how fares show up in searches. There are also issues with creating differences in luggage standards between regional and long haul flights because of through ticketing.

It’s probably more complicated than it looks from the outside, and all falls into the same problem of overall air travel inscrutability caused by the ‘it makes sense to the people who are in it but looks Byzantine from outside’ problems the original article here is complaining about.

	▲	ceejayoz an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I tend to doubt it's more complicated than it looks. It's a way to make more money off people for worse service, with the externalities going on people who can't do anything about it.