Luggage sizes

[Egg Centric]

If the rail industry wants passengers to use trains to get to airports, and other destinations, it is reasonable to expect that a passenger is able to carry the luggage they would be taking on their flight, which is usually one large case, a second hand lugage size bag or case and a smaller, underseat, sized "persoanal item. If not able to do that it would prevent the use of the train, and most people will drive or get a lift to the airport.

Long haul generally allows two large cases (three in first!), as well as the two hand luggage items, and that at a minimum should be allowed imo.

But we also just shouldn't be enforcing this rule much. As I said I have never actually had a problem so its not so much the rule that would cause me problems, but pointless enforcement.

 

[zwk500]

The vast, vast majority of passengers don't have huge amounts of luggage in my experience. It's just that provision on some trains is grossly inadequate.

It's notable that doubling the size of the racks on Pendolinos seems to have solved the problem there.

Agree completely.

 

[Angmering1974]

Long haul generally allows two large cases (three in first!), as well as the two hand luggage items, and that at a minimum should be allowed imo.

Not true in ecomomy except for some South/Central American countries to/from North America. It's usually Business Class that allows 2-3 bags.

1 x 20-23kg + 1 x hand luggage + 1 personal item is pretty standard for long-haul economy worldwide.

The vast, vast majority of passengers don't have huge amounts of luggage in my experience. It's just that provision on some trains is grossly inadequate.

It's notable that doubling the size of the racks on Pendolinos seems to have solved the problem there.

100% agreed

 

[Bletchleyite]

So I've just found something quite interesting about that 90 x 70 x 30 dimension - it was actually in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. So it seems it's more a case of TOCs sticking to what was there before and not updating it!

2. Condition 47 allows you to take up to 3 items of luggage into the passenger
accommodation of a train. One piece of luggage must be capable of being held in your lap
if required, whilst the other pieces must each not exceed 30 x 70 x 90cm in size.

https://www.plusbus.info/sites/default/files/pdfs/Nat%20Rail%20Conditions%20of%20Carriage.pdf

The NRCoT still appears to have some hangover from this:

Musical Instruments exceeding these dimensions, 30 x 70 x 90 cm

and

Furniture exceeding these dimensions, 30 x 70 x 90 cm

The current NRCoT doesn't actually give any maximum size, I remembered incorrectly, however this page on NRE says:

Items larger than 1 metre in any dimension that you cannot carry without assistance. This includes canoes, hang-gliders, large furniture and large musical instruments

Train Travel with Luggage | National Rail

You’re welcome to bring up to 3 items of luggage on the train, at no extra cost. Here’s everything you need to know about luggage on trains.

www.nationalrail.co.uk

What a classic railway mess! Perhaps GBR will take a look at this again - my guess would be them going with the LNER policy which aligns with economy class air travel as others have said, though I do think the 30cm needs revisiting to take into account holdalls and rucksacks if there was to be enforcement (the other dimensions are generous as it is - hardly any mainstream luggage on the market will be bigger than 90x70cm in the longer dimensions). If it's indeed an older policy going back to BR days, it probably harks back to when rucksacks had a metal frame and were typically wider but less deep than the square shape (same size in both width and depth) they normally are now. I did check a few common brands of 75l rucksack (probably the most common size for those camping on foot) out of interest, and found that almost all exceed a depth of 30cm, typically between 32 and 40cm. Of course two of these together easily fit into very little more than the space taken up by one large trolley, as they're normally only about 32-40cm wide as well!

Perhaps "200 linear centimetres" (h+w+d) is the most sensible approach, though that requires people being able to add up!

Of course a rucksack 32cm deep would easily squash into a sizer for 30cm, but increasingly airlines say "if it doesn't drop in with no force needed at all it doesn't fit", which does make things a bit harder with soft-sided luggage of all types, and makes my special IATA cabin size rucksack (precisely 56x45x25cm) a bit of a risk at times!

 

[Egg Centric]

Not true in ecomomy except for some South/Central American countries to/from North America. It's usually Business Class that allows 2-3 bags.

1 x 20-23kg + 1 x hand luggage + 1 personal item is pretty standard for long-haul economy worldwide.


100% agreed

Sorry you're right, turns out it's premium economy+ on most airlines that tends to do two bags. I'd just assumed economy was the same.

 

[zwk500]

So I've just found something quite interesting about that 90 x 70 x 30 dimension - it was actually in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage. So it seems it's more a case of TOCs sticking to what was there before and not updating it!

This feels very unsurprising!

What a classic railway mess! Perhaps GBR will take a look at this again - my guess would be them going with the LNER policy which aligns with economy class air travel as others have said, though I do think the 30cm needs revisiting to take into account holdalls and rucksacks if there was to be enforcement (the other dimensions are generous as it is - hardly any mainstream luggage on the market will be bigger than 90x70cm in the longer dimensions). If it's indeed an older policy going back to BR days, it probably harks back to when rucksacks had a metal frame and were typically wider but less deep than the square shape (same size in both width and depth) they normally are now. I did check a few common brands of 75l rucksack (probably the most common size for those camping on foot) out of interest, and found that almost all exceed a depth of 30cm, typically between 32 and 40cm. Of course two of these together easily fit into very little more than the space taken up by one large trolley, as they're normally only about 32-40cm wide as well!

40cm deep seems reasonable - a train is meant to be more spacious than a plane after all!

Perhaps "200 linear centimetres" (h+w+d) is the most sensible approach, though that requires people being able to add up!

That just feels like being awkward for no good reason, and very few people actually know their suitcases's dimensions and of those very few are going to bother to check before getting on a train. Far better to have, as airlines do, fixed dimensions so that you can have a freestanding frame/box/shadow to compare against.
Ultimately, aligning to IATA dimensions as a published standard and then allowing a bit of common sense in enforcement seems a very reasonable policy. I used to travel with a suitcase, musical instrument, big sports holdall and rucksack routinely on Mk4 LNER trains as a student, and never had a problem getting things into the racks (both end carriage and overhead) even if the train was largely full. I could handle it all by myself but it would exceed some of the limits suggested here (including by me!) so I think the key bit is getting some sensible rules but allowing train managers to be proactive and sensible in what to permit on the train.

Of course a rucksack 32cm deep would easily squash into a sizer for 30cm, but increasingly airlines say "if it doesn't drop in with no force needed at all it doesn't fit", which does make things a bit harder with soft-sided luggage of all types, and makes my special IATA cabin size rucksack (precisely 56x45x25cm) a bit of a risk at times!

I think for rail there can be flexibility on luggage that isn't wholly in the racks. Planes need to be able to securely fasten the overhead bin door so that things don't jump out in turbulence or on landing. Rail should, in theory, be a smoother journey and so a requirement of 'must be securely stowed' without needing to fit all handles and straps in fine.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The only thing with airline limits is they have a thumping great luggage area in the deck under the passenger deck. So in theory luggage space on a train is a lot less per passenger.

But yes I would go for matching the IATA standard certainly with 30 depth relaxed to 40 depth.

Really it comes down to the fact that most rail travellers are bringing a lot less luggage with them than the average flyer does ?.

 

[irp]

Really it comes down to the fact that most rail travellers are bringing a lot less luggage with them than the average flyer does ?.

The average flyer still needs to get to the airport with the same kit, But this depends on so many variables. Try an international ham radio international expedition. OK, that can all go in the hold when flying. Railway is a different equation, as we no longer have a guards van, or luggage carriage.

Certainly trains that pass through Birmingham International are often full of large suitcases in the vestibules, close to the doors. It used (and may still be) on the underground from Heathrow)

Now we have the situation where folks are (say) going to EMF camp (A 4 Day very geeky camp), and getting the train from Birmingham New Street to Ledbury. 80 Litre backpack, Tent, Sleeping Bag, Carry Mat etc etc [You always know you are on the right train....]

Then we have those going to places like Corrour where you really need to take everything you are going to need to get to through however long you are staying.

I'm not picking on your comment, just reflecting that there are different needs for different folks.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But yes I would go for matching the IATA standard certainly with 30 depth relaxed to 40 depth.

There is no IATA standard for hold luggage. It varies widely between airlines. The weight standard is 23kg (presumably originating from imperial as it's roughly 50lb) for safety of crew handling, but as crews don't handle railway luggage I see no sense in a weight restriction.

 

[sheff1]

Presumably the 90 x 70 x 30 rule in the National Rail Conditions of Carriage was deliberately removed when the replacement National Rail Conditions of Travel were introduced. Anyone know the reason for the initial removal and/or why that reasoning is now apparently considered flawed by some TOCs ?

 

[CP&SLJR]

"Students moving across the country" : if trains can't handle that, then frankly what are they for? And as for "never designed to facilitate" - just look at what trains used to carry before cars were common. If students can't move across the country on trains, then I guess they will do it on buses? It's a sad thing if you have to have a car, or a parent with a car, to go to university.

Nobody is actually suggesting that we should return to the days of luggage vans and porters, but as somebody else has said, if trains can't handle large but reasonable amounts of luggage that people want to carry, then it is the trains that are at fault.

Starting to enforce luggage sizes would be just another item in the growing list of "Railways doing their best to remove the advantages that they have over air travel".

20 years ago on the East Coast mainline GNER and the various successors arranged for luggage to be put in the DVT/power car for the trains at the start and end of the university terms between London and Newcastle, Durham, York etc. Also possibly Edinburgh, Leeds etc. I’m not sure. Most students took 2 large cases as it would be everything for 9/10 weeks of term.

I assume this service continued until the introduction of the Azuma’s.

Obviously the DfT knew all of this when it specified the new trains but decided seating density would rule.

And in the meantime most of these Universities are around 20% bigger than they were then.

 

[zwk500]

20 years ago on the East Coast mainline GNER and the various successors arranged for luggage to be put in the DVT/power car for the trains at the start and end of the university terms between London and Newcastle, Durham, York etc. Also possibly Edinburgh, Leeds etc. I’m not sure. Most students took 2 large cases as it would be everything for 9/10 weeks of term.

I assume this service continued until the introduction of the Azuma’s.

Obviously the DfT knew all of this when it specified the new trains but decided seating density would rule.

And in the meantime most of these Universities are around 20% bigger than they were then.

When I was a student in the early 2010s LNER certainly offered a booked luggage service from York to the major stations at least at certain times.