Luggage sizes

[Bletchleyite]

One thing I've noted of late is that TOCs that operate 80x have pretty much all (if not all) switched to publicising a maximum bag size of 90x70x30cm rather than the "default" nothing longer than a metre in any direction as found on NRE.

Obviously 90x70cm is pretty massive and so unlikely to be an issue (and is probably just designed to put people off bringing particularly tall stuff like golf bags and surfboards), but making a long journey this weekend I noted a LOT of people who had bags (e.g. expanded trolley cases) that were likely a fair bit over 30cm in the thickness dimension. Rucksacks are typically "square" so are particularly likely to go over if packed tightly.

What has led to this change? I can't see it as relating to the Lumo incident because this is typically bags too big/heavy for the overheads anyway? It isn't enforced (I saw a lot of very big stuff) but it seems to have been done very quietly, first by LNER and now by others too - if they started enforcing, I suspect a lot of arguments would ensue, particularly as it makes very little sense and Accompanied Animals and Articles fares could be quite high, being basically a child fare?

In short it works for trolley bags, but not the all manner of other stuff people bring.

 

[hexagon789]

It isn't enforced (I saw a lot of very big stuff) but it seems to have been done very quietly, first by LNER and now by others too - if they started enforcing, I suspect a lot of arguments would ensue, particularly as it makes very little sense and Accompanied Animals and Articles fares could be quite high, being basically a child fare?

On the contrary, I have seen it enforced - twice now this year and not on LUMO either time before you ask.

In one case a large group were made by the, I assume Train Manager, to offload their rudiculous amount of luggage. And we are talking about seven or so massive eight-wheeled-cases plus other smaller wheelie cases and some backpacks - probably close to 20 items of assorted luggage among about 8 or 9 individuals.

That was at Edinburgh Waverley on a late-running Aberdeen bound Azuma.

I didn't witness what happened after that, but I saw them attempt to board initially and then get escorted off, after that my Queen Street-bound double 385 rolled in and blocked the view.

 

[zwk500]

The two things I would naturally think of luggage size restrictions for trains are either the luggage rack capacities (80Xs are not particularly roomy, and other trains have problems with the lower sector restricting the floor level space) or emergency evacuation routes being obstructed by luggage. Possibly both.
Certainly on the recent Crosscountry (Voyager both ways) journey from Bristol to Birmingham I made people's cases were poking out of the rack into the aisle both ways. Although people are also incredibly inconsiderate when stacking their cases in the racks if they're first on, which didn't help.

Airline hold luggage sizes are highly variable although interestingly most are bigger than 90x70x30 in at least one dimension: https://horizn-studios.com/en/journal/report/check-in-luggage-sizes/

Airline	Length	Width	Depth	Weight
British Airways	90	75	43	23 kg
Norwegian	250	79	112	32 kg
Ryanair	81	119	119	10/20 kg
Wizz Air	149	119	171	10/20/32 kg

 

[CM Punk]

I'd love to see EMR try and enforce this on the Skegness services.

 

[sprunt]

In one case a large group were made by the, I assume Train Manager, to offload their rudiculous amount of luggage. And we are talking about seven or so massive eight-wheeled-cases plus other smaller wheelie cases and some backpacks - probably close to 20 items of assorted luggage among about 8 or 9 individuals.

So roughly a suitcase and a piece of hand luggage each? That doesn't sound unreasonable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So roughly a suitcase and a piece of hand luggage each? That doesn't sound unreasonable.

You're permitted three items. This varies by TOC a bit but ignoring Lumo the strictest (LNER and Grand Central) has it as one big, one medium (airline hand luggage size) and one small (e.g. laptop bag/handbag). Indeed does not sound problematic at all and sounds like the TM was being unreasonable, unless they simply didn't have room and were going to arrange acceptance on another train and Delay Repay.

On the contrary, I have seen it enforced - twice now this year and not on LUMO either time before you ask.

It generally is only enforced when the mickey is taken, though, not because you're 2cm over in one dimension but under on the other two (e.g. using sizers), or if they start saying a bag of M&S goodies or a coffee is an item of luggage. That would be very problematic and in my view unnecessary.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

ORR are taking a substantial interest, and it does follow on from the Peterborough incidents. TOCs must better control the risk of luggage causing injuries or worse, during an incident. There has also long been concerns around train evacuations when doors etc are blocked by luggage, and now an even greater focus on maintaining and ensuring clear disability/access.

I would anticipate that luggage restrictions will become more prevalent going forwards, as these risks will be specifically monitored.

People have been taking liberties with luggage for too long, but also the means in which they take it. Trolleys, bin bags etc all make management of it difficult. You now also have issues with these couriers taking all sorts of panniers, heat bags etc in addition to huge electric bikes or scooters. It was all going to come to a head eventually.

I believe there is also some sort of RSSB group that is looking at the future design of trains and standards around luggage provision.

 

[Bletchleyite]

People have been taking liberties with luggage for too long, but also the means in which they take it.

I think that's a line that very much exemplifies the anti-passenger arrogance of the industry.

People are not "taking liberties" with luggage. They are transporting the items they need to take on their trip (or wish to).

Moving too far in this direction (e.g. Lumo) reinforces the idea that the railway is just an adjunct to car ownership.

Sufficient space should be provided to store the luggage people wish/need to take on their trip. I can understand moving to a model of the free allowance being smaller and a chargeable option for larger luggage to nudge people towards smaller where they can (i.e. not profligately taking things they don't need), but if the railway goes the Lumo way in general (i.e. strict restrictions with no guaranteed* buy-up option) then a lot of people simply won't be able to use it any more - for instance, things like camping trips by train would become impossible.

* We might let you but we might not is fairly obviously not a useful policy and is worse than "we definitely won't let you" in many ways.

 

[jon0844]

While there are certainly fewer e-scooters being carried since the ban, there is a rise in the dodgy 1000W homebrew electric moped/motorcycles being carried on trains, and often blocking doorways or disabled areas. That and oversized luggage does point to a need for better education and enforcement.

Some trains have newer signs saying a wheelchair area must be kept clear by law, but older trains don't. Surely the law applies on ALL rolling stock, so at the very least all trains should have the new signage.

People obviously need to take luggage on long trips and holidays, and the industry wants to encourage people to travel by train, but that does mean providing adequate facilities to store bags safely too.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some trains have newer signs saying a wheelchair area must be kept clear by law, but older trains don't. Surely the law applies on ALL rolling stock, so at the very least all trains should have the new signage.

There is no such law, such signs are incorrect. Priority is to wheelchair users by law, but the law doesn't require the space not to be used for other things, simply that the other things are removed if a wheelchair user needs it. Obviously not ever putting other stuff there is an easier policy, but it's policy and not law (and it does annoy me when people falsely claim things are law because they won't stand behind their own policy and the reasons for it - the sign "trespassers will be prosecuted" is a classic!)

Depending on the train, some are multipurpose spaces, not dedicated wheelchair spaces.

 

[bcarmicle]

People are not "taking liberties" with luggage. They are transporting the items they need to take on their trip (or wish to).

I agree. The safety issues mean that the current restrictions are not unreasonable, but in the long term, the railway should be accommodating those items that individuals can reasonably transport when procuring rolling stock etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree. The safety issues mean that the current restrictions are not unreasonable

I think the 30cm dimension is unnecessarily small given the varying shapes of bags. From observation, hardly anything I saw on the trip this weekend was over in more than one dimension (I saw one bag that was probably over in two, but the passenger did only have the one and could have taken two smaller ones instead) but maybe 10% of the bags I saw were over in that dimension, largely bags that weren't trolley cases.

Change that one to 40cm and you've probably encompassed basically everything reasonable, and 40cm will probably still go in the overheads if it's otherwise not massive.

The 90cm one is basically the depth of an 80x luggage rack at the bottom level, anything bigger would obstruct the gangway door, so I can see the sense in that. I didn't measure the rack (just my own bag out of interest), but the 70cm one is probably the width of the rack.

Perhaps the 30 comes from the height of each slot, are they 60cm ish high so that gets you 2 in? In that case being strict on rucksacks/holdalls (which tend to be square in section) makes little sense as they tend to squash into any necessary space. Indeed Lumo creates yet more inconsistency and arguments by saying your second bag can be a holdall but without saying how big!

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

For anyone saying that passengers aren't taking liberties - I'm sure many rail staff can tell you of the sights they've seen with students moving across the country, the bales of bin bags going to Skegness etc.

People are using public transport for things it was never designed to facilitate - just this morning, I saw someone with a huge TV in a massive box and then sticking it on the train in a doorway etc, causing at least 2 mins of delay in the process. The bloke was kicking off that station staff weren't assisting.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For anyone saying that passengers aren't taking liberties - I'm sure many rail staff can tell you of the sights they've seen with students moving across the country, the bales of bin bags going to Skegness etc.

These are all things the railway traditionally did provide for, and still needs to if we are serious about reducing car ownership, even if it charges extra for large quantities. It has only become a problem since trains ceased (aside from a few like Pendolinos) to have van areas. Some trains (XC Voyagers) have even gained a van area and this makes a huge difference.

The re-emergence of luggage delivery services is an interesting thing and these could fulfil a role (I think there's another thread on this for further discussion of it, though), but if they are using courier companies (which are usually regarded as unreliable) people won't use them, and they probably need to be station-to-station to be useful as you often don't have an address - nobody for instance is going to be able to ship their tent to a campsite, they simply won't accept that.

People are using public transport for things it was never designed to facilitate - just this morning, I saw someone with a huge TV in a massive box and then sticking it on the train in a doorway etc, causing at least 2 mins of delay in the process. The bloke was kicking off that station staff weren't assisting.

Probably easier to have a TV delivered these days (shops often won't even have them there to collect), but if you're allowed a bicycle* then it's not unreasonable to want another item of the same size. And years ago there would have been porters you could pay to assist.

If anything, luggage volumes have significantly *reduced* with the advent of the trolley case.

* Please don't start that debate on this thread; whether bicycles should be carried or not is a slightly separate debate and is speculative - I'm aiming this thread as being a discussion of what's actually happening on a fairly creeping and not-very-enforced basis.

 

[The exile]

Other than a few exceptions at either end (to rule out light but very bulky items and to rule in luggage belonging to people of reduced carrying capacity) is it not possible to work up “if you can carry it all at once unaided from outside railway property and on to the train, then you can bring it on board” [subject to restrictions on dangerous items etc] into some kind of rule?
At the same time, bring back more bays of four and the luggage storage space they created between the seats.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Other than a few exceptions at either end (to rule out light but very bulky items and to rule in luggage belonging to people of reduced carrying capacity) is it not possible to work up “if you can carry it all at once unaided from outside railway property and on to the train, then you can bring it on board” [subject to restrictions on dangerous items etc] into some kind of rule?

That was actually the rule applied by Virgin West Coast for many years. That is, unless you have booked assistance for reasons of disability you simply need to be able to carry it all yourself in one go (e.g. no leaving some unattended while you take the rest and come back for it, for obvious reasons).

Avanti appear to have joined the 90x70x30 club recently, which seems to be something 80x operating TOCs all go for, presumably because of something about the dimensions of the racks on those units. I suspect as noted above it's that the bottom shelf is 90cm deep (the width of 2 seats, basically), the rack is 70cm wide and each shelf is 60cm (30cm x 2) deep? Anyone on one now and got a tape measure?

 

[jon0844]

There is no such law, such signs are incorrect. Priority is to wheelchair users by law, but the law doesn't require the space not to be used for other things, simply that the other things are removed if a wheelchair user needs it.

Sorry that's what I meant. Wheelchairs taking priority. Without the signs, some passengers are going to argue the point and say 'there is nothing to say I must move' in a time where people are self entitked.

Once an area is full up with bags or bikes it's often going to be hard to deal with, so those areas should be kept clear and only used by people who can move.

 

[Egg Centric]

I think that's a line that very much exemplifies the anti-passenger arrogance of the industry.

People are not "taking liberties" with luggage. They are transporting the items they need to take on their trip (or wish to).

Moving too far in this direction (e.g. Lumo) reinforces the idea that the railway is just an adjunct to car ownership.

Sufficient space should be provided to store the luggage people wish/need to take on their trip. I can understand moving to a model of the free allowance being smaller and a chargeable option for larger luggage to nudge people towards smaller where they can (i.e. not profligately taking things they don't need), but if the railway goes the Lumo way in general (i.e. strict restrictions with no guaranteed* buy-up option) then a lot of people simply won't be able to use it any more - for instance, things like camping trips by train would become impossible.

* We might let you but we might not is fairly obviously not a useful policy and is worse than "we definitely won't let you" in many ways.

Yup. If we start enforcing these dimensions rigorously I'll have to take the train even less. I already go to a substantial effort to use it when driving is more objectively sensible.

Eventually we're going to end up in a situation where the longer distance services are being run for an incredibly niche set of circumstances and that point the pressure from taxpayers to shut them down will become irresistable, and we'll be left with commuter services only.

Any other industry would observe large amounts of luggage and see an opportunity of some kind! I believe Lumo do have a courier service actually?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yup. If we start enforcing these dimensions rigorously I'll have to take the train even less. I already go to a substantial effort to use it when driving is more objectively sensible.

Eventually we're going to end up in a situation where the longer distance services are being run for an incredibly niche set of circumstances and that point the pressure from taxpayers to shut them down will become irresistable, and we'll be left with commuter services only.

Any other industry would observe large amounts of luggage and see an opportunity of some kind! I believe Lumo do have a courier service actually?

I've created this thread as an adjunct to the non-speculative discussion to discuss options and have replied to your post in it:

Dealing with the "luggage problem" - options

Creating this thread as an adjunct to https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/luggage-sizes.274769 for speculative discussion of options. Yup. If we start enforcing these dimensions rigorously I'll have to take the train even less. I already go to a substantial effort to use it when driving is...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[urbophile]

Have you seen the amount of luggage that the upper-classes used to take on their annual jaunts to the seaside, the Continent, etc? Almost literally everything but the kitchen sink (and they had enough servants to bring one of those too probably). Now that the plebs want to travel with a minuscule fraction of that, we have chaos. It's such a pity that nice Mr Rees-Mogg isn't minister for transport; he would have made them walk if they couldn't squeeze their holdall into the third-class cattle-truck.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I do feel that these luggage size rules are another example of the railways wanting to just deal with simple things. They do not want to be involved in anything unusual or difficult. Another example of where car ownership unfortunately provides a more flexible and friendly travelling experience - usually door to door as well !.

Granted there have to be lines drawn where people are going too far with luggage quantities and/or size.

It would be nice if the restrictions and/or rules were at least consistent across the rail industry.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be nice if the restrictions and/or rules were at least consistent across the rail industry.

The problem with this is that you end up with the worst one!

90x70x30 does seem to be becoming a standard, but the 30 is too small for holdalls and some rucksacks which tend to be more square in shape and squashable - very rarely is one as much as 70cm wide (that's huge), but something like 80 x 40 x 35 would be a very common size for a 75l* or thereabouts backpacking rucksack or similarly sized holdall, and there's nothing really gained in insisting that person brings a trolley case to put it all inside as well just to keep to arbitrary dimensions. But is nominally too big!

90x70x30 is a fairly standard size for a large trolley case (fairly sure my biggest is that size) but that applies only to trolley cases really.

Most staff won't see a rucksack of that nature as big and won't challenge it (just as most airlines won't challenge a large hand luggage rucksack that's slightly over 56x45x25 as it'll squash down to that when put in the overheads), but if we end up moving to having sizers then it's likely to result in a lot of conflict.

* That nominally actually adds up to 112l, but rucksacks aren't totally uniformly shaped and often have things like curved backs so in reality a 75l will be about that size.

 

[Shepley]

Excessive luggage in now a legitimate issue on Azumas although that may be as much down to insufficient space as the social class of some passengers.

The solution needs to be a combination of (a) greater awareness of size limits (b) the reintroduction of luggage space at the ends of trains and (c) the promotion of reliable and reasonably priced courier services delivering either to addresses or destination stations.

An effective regulator could move operators in this direction over a period of time while ensuring consistent standards.

 

[Bletchleyite]

LNER, Lumo and Grand Central do seem to have prominent publicity of sizes. Other TOCs seem not to, but other TOCs don't have as much of a problem in most cases - Avanti for instance seems to have solved the problem by doubling the luggage rack capacity at refurb - since that I've never seen one full. With 80x, one rack in each of the door pocket spaces instead of seats would seem a sweet spot, and is close to what Avanti have done with theirs. XC seem to have significantly less of a problem since they introduced the shop-replacement van area which is similar to that on a Class 156.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The problem with this is that you end up with the worst one!

90x70x30 does seem to be becoming a standard, but the 30 is too small for holdalls and some rucksacks which tend to be more square in shape and squashable - very rarely is one as much as 70cm wide (that's huge), but something like 80 x 40 x 35 would be a very common size for a 75l or thereabouts backpacking rucksack, and there's nothing really gained in insisting that person brings a trolley case to put it all inside as well just to keep to arbitrary dimensions. But is nominally too big!

90x70x30 is a fairly standard size for a large trolley case (fairly sure my biggest is that size) but that applies only to trolley cases really.

Indeed the expandable option on most luggage tends to be in the 30Cm direction. Just measured the two wheely bags that I have. One is 65Cm x 43Cm and the other a little smaller. However both are 28Cm deep at empty (lying flat and crushed !). so they are easily over 30Cm by the time I have rammed everything in or the contents have slopped down to the one end in transit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed the expandable option on most luggage tends to be in the 30Cm direction. Just measured the two wheely bags that I have. One is 65Cm x 43Cm and the other a little smaller. However both are 28Cm deep at empty (lying flat and crushed !). so they are easily over 30Cm by the time I have rammed everything in or the contents have slopped down to the one end in transit.

It does strike me that the 30 is very much the issue with those dimensions. Make it 40 and you'll encompass almost everything that is still genuinely luggage rather than specialist stuff like golf bags. Though I would permit golf bags and the likes at a fee, perhaps on the condition of booking a bicycle space to put it in (similarly things like surfboards that don't exceed the dimensions of a bicycle).

(Duplicated to speculative thread for further discussion)

 

[superkopite]

Why would you have any objection to golf bags? Their footprint is very small. I have taken golf bags on trains for years and have never gotten in anyone's way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why would you have any objection to golf bags? Their footprint is very small. I have taken golf bags on trains for years and have never gotten in anyone's way.

I don't have an objection to them, but they haven't been officially allowed for quite a long time (the "nothing more than 1m long in any dimension" in the NRCoT that has been there for a very long time trips on them), or at least were subject to an Accompanied Animals and Articles fee.

As long as the club heads are protected so can't cause damage I don't see any problem with them as such aside from that they don't fit a regular rack and may be dangerous in the overheads due to being very heavy and hard, hence my suggestion of allowing bicycle spaces to be booked for them.

Curiously, though, while LNER's policy page says 90x70x30 is the absolute maximum it also shows a picture of a golf bag and says to ask staff about space if you've got anything very big! Clear much?

 

[TheBigD]

Excessive luggage in now a legitimate issue on Azumas although that may be as much down to insufficient space as the social class of some passengers.

The solution needs to be a combination of (a) greater awareness of size limits (b) the reintroduction of luggage space at the ends of trains and (c) the promotion of reliable and reasonably priced courier services delivering either to addresses or destination stations.

An effective regulator could move operators in this direction over a period of time while ensuring consistent standards.

LNER removed 21 (20std/1first) seats from their 9 car Azumas to provide an extra 11 luggage stacks, which is usually sufficient.

From my experience, when there are engineering works and pairs of 5 cars work the some of the reduced Edinburgh services, the lack of luggage space is a serious problem.

On my last trip there were announcements from the guard before/after every stop regarding luggage, with a lot of luggage left in the vestibules and extended dwell time at stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's interesting that the changes to the Pendolino and LNER 80x luggage space (and Avanti's spec of their 80x from the start) is just putting it back to roughly what BR had on the Mk2 and Mk3. Funny, that, it's almost like BR had it all worked out already!