Qantas to Introduce Group Boarding and Bag Tracking

[justinbrett]

I like BAs approach. 1 normal sized bag with no weight limit and 1 personal item, that has to go under the seat in front unless in an exit row or bulkhead. Works just fine.

I believe they do have a weight limit, but it's 23Kg.

AA is the same policy but no weight limit.

 

[justinbrett]

ensure that the current priority boarding lanes are actually properly managed so that SG and above can board first if they are already at the gate, or use the priority lane when they arrive from the lounge. VA do this adequately 90% of the time. It’s not rocket science.

The issue for QF is is often they have so many elite pax (SG and above) the PB line is longer than the normal line.

I think it's a really good step they are splitting the priority boarding to WP/P1/J then SG.

 

[tdimdad]

So, because the check-in desks are history, the logical and easiest place to control carry-on is at the entry to security. At the same time, entrance to security should require you to have a boarding pass to a near-future flight (within the next 6 hours?). This would weed out most interlopers who would bring extra stuff to the gate for someone and then leave.

1 bag per pax near your seat + a personal item. Simple and could be easily enforced.

 

[Pushka]

Welcome to AFF @PlaneHopperPal .

You are absolutely correct in saying a check at check-in would help restrict the amount of carry-on. Unfortunately the airlines themselves have pushed us away from the check-in counters and in fact abolished them altogether in many (?most) places.

The cure now would be greater enforcement at the gate, and an efficient gate-check process.

We flew KLM in May and at checkin they were weighing and tagging hand luggage for those in Y. No tag no fly.

 

[RooFlyer]

We flew KLM in May and at checkin they were weighing and tagging hand luggage for those in Y. No tag no fly.

Ah, yes; I admit I was thinking only of domestic flights in my reply to PHP.

 

[Ade]

I frequently see people with older kids 9 & 10 and even teens rush forward. It is a joke.

Happened a couple of weeks back in MAA. I took a pic, let me see if I can find it. The person that boarded with her "kids" were at least 16yo AI staff had to send them back, but in MAA, it is better to just let them board and get on with it

 

[Ade]

automated gate

That would also mean that accompanying guests (or those in the same PNR as the status pax) won't be able to board until their turn, unless, there is a way to let the check-in agent know that the non-status pax are travelling in the same PNR and they'd need to be marked as the same boarding group as the status pax ...

 

[Ade]

BLR does (or did) this pretty well

BLR did pretty well in May this year. Both QF international & 6E domestic. There were queues for each boarding group in Domestic. QF does PB very well out of BLR (usually gate 36 and 36A)

However, on issue with the QF PB (or boarding in general) at BLR is that once you are past the passport scanners, they have secondary bag search, which dilutes the benefit of PB. As WP I boarded first, but it took them over 5 mins to get to search all the 2 carry on bags I had. By the time they were done, there was a queue at the aerobridge and I had to wait in the bridge, even though I was scanned thru as the first pax after gate opened.

 

[Flashback]

I believe they do have a weight limit, but it's 23Kg.

AA is the same policy but no weight limit.

Well, yes, but unless you're carrying bricks I think it'd be difficult to have 23kg in such a small bag.

BLR did pretty well in May this year. Both QF international & 6E domestic. There were queues for each boarding group in Domestic. QF does PB very well out of BLR (usually gate 36 and 36A)

However, on issue with the QF PB (or boarding in general) at BLR is that once you are past the passport scanners, they have secondary bag search, which dilutes the benefit of PB. As WP I boarded first, but it took them over 5 mins to get to search all the 2 carry on bags I had. By the time they were done, there was a queue at the aerobridge and I had to wait in the bridge, even though I was scanned thru as the first pax after gate opened.

Must be a flights to AU thing, I don't recall ever having a secondary bag search flying out of BLR.

 

[Danger]

Qantas SG is ow sapphire. There’s no PB for ow Ruby / QF Silver, which is fine.

If you mean they aren’t in the group named Priority; I don’t think that matters, so long as they can board before the rest

But not all oneworld Sapphires are Qantas Gold.

My point was that when Qantas calls "priority boarding", all oneworld Sapphires could reasonably expect that includes them.

 

[RealtimeY]

Any frequent alliance traveller would probably be used to different airlines having different boarding sequences and levels of “priority”. I know CX religiously does F/OWE check in and boarding first even on flights without that cabin.

It shouldn’t be too hard to read the signs, look for the chevrons or listen to the boarding announcements which usually spell out who should be boarding. But I suppose this is QF so maybe it’s all just too difficult.

 

[dairyfloss]

But not all oneworld Sapphires are Qantas Gold.

My point was that when Qantas calls "priority boarding", all oneworld Sapphires could reasonably expect that includes them.

True - I get that; but so long as they have priority over non status pax, I think the benefit is considered applied. It’s only Emerald and >=J that are getting better, which [most?] ow Sapphires won’t have issue with.

Cheers,
Matt

 

[pretentious git]

The solution is not as complicated as it appears. Having previously worked as an agent at LHR for years, the delays and frustration for boarding arose due to the amount of carry on luggage allowed onto the aircraft. ITs that simple! Nobody monitors this anymore, and waiting until passengers arrive at the gate to insist bags are checked into the hold just causes chaos and fights. If hand luggage is monitored at checkin in with the 7kg limit reinstated, people are boarded much quicker. Yep, dont overcomplicate things......board those needing assistance & FFs with higher status first, then the remaining passengers according to rear first (if theres only one door) or middle first if there are doors front and rear. Its logical. No need to spend so long arguing about who has the right to snaffle up more than their fair share of bin space. If the hand luggage is limited to a reasonable amount then there is no issue with bin space up top. If people have paid for business seats and the bin space above those seats can handle more than the standard allowance then they can have more carry on allowance, but ONLY if the business class carry on is contained within the business seat bin spaces. On a recent couple of flights out of the US last month each person got onboard with at least 3-4 times the amount they should have. Bins were full in no time, before most passengers were even onboard. It was ridiculous, then we all sat for ages while the crew tried to sort out the mess so we could take off. What a farce.

Very true!

 

[dk4]

...entrance to security should require you to have a boarding pass to a near-future flight (within the next 6 hours?). This would weed out most interlopers who would bring extra stuff to the gate for someone and then leave.

The problem with your suggestion is that domestic airports actually want those "interlopers" air-side.

The business model for most major airports in Australia requires that domestic terminals operate like a shopping centre, to be able to make an overall profit. That means airports want anybody and everybody air-side as quickly as possible after arriving at the kerb (which is advantageous to us as fliers, as it means it's in the airport operator's best interest to minimise security processing times), then they can maximise passenger/interloper retail exposure time, as large domestic terminals generally don't have much shopping/eating/drinking land-side (Every minute a person is standing in a process queue, is a minute lost to them potentially spending money.)

 

[tdimdad]

The problem with your suggestion is that domestic airports actually want those "interlopers" air-side.

The business model for most major airports in Australia requires that domestic terminals operate like a shopping centre, to be able to make an overall profit. That means airports want anybody and everybody air-side as quickly as possible after arriving at the kerb

[Off-topic]
OK, I understand the model and it is something I didn't think of but makes sense when you look at the terminals. But how many of those people going through the security are non-flying public, and even more so, how many of them visit a shop in the terminal while there? 5%, 10%? Is that genuinely a significant income stream to them?
[/Off-topic]

 

[Ade]

Must be a flights to AU thing, I don't recall ever having a secondary bag search flying out of BLR.

Could be. Had a similar secondary bag search ex-CMB to India. I enquired why this additional screening when we just finished a security at the gate. I was told it was the Indian government requirement to have bags secondary searched ex-CMB (or any airport ex-SL).

As I noted earlier in another thread, upon baggage collection at MAA, all those arriving from CMB were hand picked for additional bag search. I was HLO and was stopped as I walked towards the exit. I was questioned where I come from and to show my passport. I showed my AU passport and told I just got off the AI flight from CMB. The customs officer asked if I started by journey from CMB and I said nope, I started from CBR and I was let go. However, the guy that followed me was searched thoroughly.

 

[RooFlyer]

But how many of those people going through the security are non-flying public, and even more so, how many of them visit a shop in the terminal while there? 5%, 10%? Is that genuinely a significant income stream to them?

If they are in the terminal, that means they are parked, at least one hour at max short-term rates. That goes directly to the airport. Not saying they'd encourage terminal entry for non flying pax just for that, but it would be a lot more than their cut of in-terminal shopping.

$16 at HBA for between 1 and 2 hours of parking.

 

[tdimdad]

If they are in the terminal, that means they are parked, at least one hour at max short-term rates. That goes directly to the airport. Not saying they'd encourage terminal entry for non flying pax just for that, but it would be a lot more than their cut of in-terminal shopping.

$16 at HBA for between 1 and 2 hours of parking.

[off-topic]
Makes one wonder then how do the airports run their business in locations where access to the airside is for flying pax only?
And in SYD, by far the most convenient way to get to the airport is by train (though with about $16 station fee per person per trip).
[/off-topic]

If screening the baggage allowance before security and limiting access to the airside is not a viable option, then it leaves it to the gate. At the start that can cause some disgruntled moments and delays until people learn to prepare for it.

Based on the earlier track record, the current overload of the bins with more than 1 piece each (or oversized items) is likely to continue. The only improvement QF can then provide is to try to steer people to place their bags near their own seats instead of any early spot available (looking at those sitting in the middle of Y but dumping their bags at the front...).

 

[Rembrandt]

I recently traveled domestically in Japan with JAL. JAL used group boarding and it worked well and thought our airlines should use it too, so happy to read Qantas is going down this path.

 

[Himeno]

I like BAs approach. 1 normal sized bag with no weight limit and 1 personal item, that has to go under the seat in front unless in an exit row or bulkhead. Works just fine.

The last time I flew BA, I was in row 1. They insisted that I put a bag under the non existing seat.