 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
kat.ryb, people who stay at expensive hotels should fly to the same standard - what's the point of staying somewhere posh if you travel grotty?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
achilles, aww, a smily would soften that 'tone of voice'! Although in case you're being serious - I'd rather trade down the travel if it meant I could trade up something else on the holiday, be it stay somewhere nicer, or not worry about eating and drinking on the slopes or whatever.
Have started to develop slightly less tollerance for end-of-Holliday hassle now unfortunately. Couldn't quite face the 4am transfer time for the cheap flight home though for the next trip - so I'm paying a premium to fly Jet2 with decent slot times and 22kg plus 20kg sports! Relative luxury 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
The list mentioned above is classic!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
Change your underpants, wear them again to go skiing the next morning.
|
Spot on - works perfectly. Of course you cold always do the inside out and back to front sketch that way 1 pair will last 4 days 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Mr Marmot, do you sing show tunes or Kylie Minogue songs while cleaning the house every day? Just askin'
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
halfhand, worked for me over the years. Also, every time I take out 6 shirts/tops for the evenings, and every year I bring home 3 or 4 unused. If we don't go out in the evening, then very often I'm wearing a shirt for around 3 hours in the evening, directly after a shower, in a comfortable and clean environment. If you can't re-wear a shirt after only 3 hours of use, you have some serious personal hygiene issues.
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Wed 22-02-12 10:50; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
achilles, travel grotty? Thomsons are not grotty. They might have put the squeeze on their allowances and "frills", that doesnt make them grotty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all your interesting comments folks! Mrs Dean has managed to get everything into 2 x 20 and 2 x 5, so a big well done to her! I just need to pray that no-one checks how many skis are in my ski bag now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Mr Marmot, Ill be hooking up with you for a room share on the EOSB
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Hells Bells wrote: |
I think the Marrmot is winding us up ! Shouldn't that list be laminated?
6 base layers.
Listen, let me give you some tips. After you go skiing, you get showered, bathed or whatever. Change your underpants, wear them again to go skiing the next morning. Perhaps a couple of spares might be necessary, but 13 pairs are beyond a joke. |
Of course I'm not winding you up. The list is already laminated, thank you.
I am a serious, if not very proficient, skier with all the necessary kit. My motto is; All The Gear - No Idea.
As for your tip, please understand that I have underpants for general wear and also specialist underpants, which I wear when skiing, which improve both my ability and confidence.
The specialist underpants are made by SuperSkins and are guaranteed to minimise any 'shrinkage' at temperatures down to - 30C. This means I am always ready for any action immediately and without having to resort to any surreptitious 'fluffing'.
If my ski boots were not unfairly included as part of my general 20Kg allowance (despite paying for ski carriage!) then I would have room for other specialist kit, that whilst not as essential, would allow me to enjoy my HOLIDAY even more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Hells Bells wrote: |
I think the Marrmot is winding us up ! Shouldn't that list be laminated?
6 base layers.
Listen, let me give you some tips. After you go skiing, you get showered, bathed or whatever. Change your underpants, wear them again to go skiing the next morning. Perhaps a couple of spares might be necessary, but 13 pairs are beyond a joke. |
Of course I'm not winding you up. The list is already laminated, thank you.
I am a serious, if not very proficient, skier with all the necessary kit. My motto is; All The Gear - No Idea.
As for your tip, please understand that I have underpants for general wear and also specialist underpants, which I wear when skiing, which improve both my ability and confidence.
The specialist underpants are made by SuperSkins and are guaranteed to minimise any 'shrinkage' at temperatures down to - 30C. This means I am always ready for any action immediately and without having to resort to any surreptitious 'fluffing'.
If my ski boots were not unfairly included as part of my general 20Kg allowance (despite paying for ski carriage!) then I would have room for other specialist kit, that whilst not as essential, would allow me to enjoy my HOLIDAY even more. |
'Specialist underpants' - priceless!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
Getting back to my point, none of the arguments has convinced me that the current claim by airlines that ski-boots weighing 6Kg should be included as part of my 20Kg allowance when I have paid extra for ski carriage is fair or reasonable.
|
Woudl it be possibole to buy a more board bag type of bag and chuck you boots in with your skis in there (all nicely padded etc)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| kat.ryb wrote: |
| Quote: |
Getting back to my point, none of the arguments has convinced me that the current claim by airlines that ski-boots weighing 6Kg should be included as part of my 20Kg allowance when I have paid extra for ski carriage is fair or reasonable.
|
Woudl it be possibole to buy a more board bag type of bag and chuck you boots in with your skis in there (all nicely padded etc)? |
It's an idea.
At the moment I have one of those skitube cases for my skis. Works very well and keeps the skis protected from any damage. I'd be happy to use anything that allowed me to 'get my money's worth' from the extortionate ski carriage charges.
Would I get away with it, do you think?
Do boarders pay the same 'ski carriage' charge?
How much does a board weigh in comparison to a pair of skis?
Do boarders 'pad out' their skiboard bags with other items and get away with it? I might even have room for more of my special ski underpants!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
Do boarders pay the same 'ski carriage' charge?
|
Yes
| Quote: |
How much does a board weigh in comparison to a pair of skis?
|
Dunno. Same-ish I would think?
| Quote: |
Do boarders 'pad out' their skiboard bags with other items and get away with it? I might even have room for more of my special ski underpants!
|
Yes, although I stick to putting actual ski related stuff in there such as helmet, gloves, thermals etc mainly to hold the boots in place so they don't rattle about.. Its being able to get boots in which makes the massive difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
kat.ryb, I think the reason for the TO allowances is that a lot of customers have their own boots and not skis. So no need for them to pay ski carriage if they keep their boots within the weight limit. If you have skis (or board of course) and you pay for ski carriage then you can use the additional weight allowance for your boots if you wish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
within my board bag. i just have my board, bindings and boots. Sometimes I may put i a pair of board trousers wrapped in a towel so that they dont get ripped by the metal edge on my snowboard.
Last time I traveled with crystal they insisted that only 1 board/bindings/boots were in each bag. they were spot checking a few ( although I understand this is a rarity)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| queen bodecia wrote: |
| kat.ryb, I think the reason for the TO allowances is that a lot of customers have their own boots and not skis. So no need for them to pay ski carriage if they keep their boots within the weight limit. If you have skis (or board of course) and you pay for ski carriage then you can use the additional weight allowance for your boots if you wish. |
But that is the problem Q.B. More and more airlines are insisting that boots are NOT included in the extra charge you have paid for them to take your skis. They specifically mention it in their T&C stating that 'ski boots are part of your standard 20Kg allowance'. This has been the case for at least the past couple of seasons and we had it again a couple weeks ago at check-in on a Monarch Airlines flight run by someone who was far from reasonable.
I don't really mind what they want to charge me (within reason) but only that they they are prepared to take my ski boots as part of the 'ski carriage' charge and not try to hit me with a totally extortionate excess carriage charge at the airport. I'd even be happy to pay a separate additional ski-boot bag charge (within reason), if only they offered it. All they offer is the chance to pay a silly excess charge at the airport! As it was the check-in dragon said we would have to take our boot bags as hand luggage if we wanted to avoid an excess baggage charge of £60 per boot bag (i.e. £10 per kilo) each way! We all did this. Obviously the airline ended up carrying the same amount of weight, so why couldn't they have loaded the boots in the hold instead of making up traipse around the airport with boot bags and then end up having heavy boots in the overhead lockers.
These airlines do not make travelling with them a pleasurable experience, only a constant worry that you have adhered to all the onerous and intricate luggage rules they constantly come up with. Which is why the OP started this thread in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Mr Marmot, OK, joking aside - you do have a point here that some clarity and consistency is required.
Stupid policy you encountered when they're carrying the same stuff anyway.
Next time stuff your ski case with your special underwear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Mr Marmot, can't you fit your boots in your suitcase (stuff your special pants and socks in them to limit the space they take) and then put stuff that would normally be in your suitcase in with your skis? This is what we do as some airports will not let you have boot bags as hand luggage. We fold the boot bag flat in the suitcase. Im going with Jet2 and their weight limit for the ski bag is 32kg so we can stuff quite a bit of stuff in there. I might do as kat.ryb suggested and just put ski related stuff in there - thermals, salopettes etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Shimmy Alcott wrote: |
| Mr Marmot, can't you fit your boots in your suitcase (stuff your special pants and socks in them to limit the space they take) and then put stuff that would normally be in your suitcase in with your skis? This is what we do as some airports will not let you have boot bags as hand luggage. We fold the boot bag flat in the suitcase. Im going with Jet2 and their weight limit for the ski bag is 32kg so we can stuff quite a bit of stuff in there. I might do as kat.ryb suggested and just put ski related stuff in there - thermals, salopettes etc |
I thought about it Shimmy. The skiTube case I currently use doesn't have much room for extras but I could certainly change it to something with a bit more space, if it was the only way to resolve the issue.
Obviously, I already have coping strategies for the current requirements of the carriers I use regularly; for example I carry my skiboots as hand luggage in a rucksack on EasyJet, but every so often I get caught out when someone else has done all the trip organising and hasn't checked the 'luggage rules', as in our recent Monarch escapade.
My dream is that the airlines would stop being awkward and money-grabbing and just offer a service that suits me i.e 20Kg standard luggage allowance and a reasonably priced sking equipment carriage charge that included skis, boots and possibly even a helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Thomsons this year are doing 20kg hold luggage plus ski carriage (not boots) but ski bag can weigh 15kg. On Crystal forum it's stated that you can fill ski bag with clothes but not boots!!!. Hand luggage is only 5kg. This is better than previous years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
On Crystal forum it's stated that you can fill ski bag with clothes but not boots!!!.
|
Huh? Stuid airlines!
| Quote: |
Last time I traveled with crystal they insisted that only 1 board/bindings/boots were in each bag. they were spot checking a few ( although I understand this is a rarity)
|
Thats a nightmare! I'd be hurredly putting on my fleeses and thermals, gloves and socks to wear on the plane 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Getting back to my point, none of the arguments has convinced me that the current claim by airlines that ski-boots weighing 6Kg should be included as part of my 20Kg allowance when I have paid extra for ski carriage is fair or reasonable. |
It might not be "fair or reasonabler" if it were indeed the case.
But (as I pointed out earlier but you seem to have missed), it is NOT the case.
When you book ski carriage (with Thomson), you get 15Kg extra allowance. One pair of skis in their bag don't weigh anything like that, so you are getting enough to cover the boots.
And what is more, I have never yet had the ski bag weighed, and have always padded the skis with quite a lot of my clothing, so might well get away with more than 15Kg in that bag.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
[quote="Mr Marmot"]
| queen bodecia wrote: |
| kat.ryb, I think the reason for the TO allowances is that a lot of customers have their own boots and not skis. So no need for them to pay ski carriage if they keep their boots within the weight limit. If you have skis (or board of course) and you pay for ski carriage then you can use the additional weight allowance for your boots if you wish. |
But that is the problem Q.B. More and more airlines are insisting that boots are NOT included in the extra charge you have paid for them to take your skis. They specifically mention it in their T&C stating that 'ski boots are part of your standard 20Kg allowance'. This has been the case for at least the past couple of seasons and we had it again a couple weeks ago at check-in on a Monarch Airlines flight run by someone who was far from reasonable.
[/qiote]
IME that is not what they say at all.
They say that the boots must be included in your hold luggage, but nothing about 20Kg.
What this mainly means is that with the airlines who charge per bag, you must have them in your main hold bag rather than in a separate boot bag. But with Thomson (the subject of this thread), they don't charge per bag, so the combination must not weigh more than 35Kg (including your ski allowance).
| Quote: |
These airlines do not make travelling with them a pleasurable experience, only a constant worry that you have adhered to all the onerous and intricate luggage rules they constantly come up with. Which is why the OP started this thread in the first place. |
That, I am inclined to agree with 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| livertransplantplease wrote: |
| Thomsons this year are doing 20kg hold luggage plus ski carriage (not boots) but ski bag can weigh 15kg. On Crystal forum it's stated that you can fill ski bag with clothes but not boots!!!. Hand luggage is only 5kg. This is better than previous years. |
And that is precisely what I did when travelling with them earlier this year (and have also done on previous trips).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
alex_heney, fair enough. My only TO airline experiences are with Thomson and I've never found it to be a problem. I pay extra for ski carriage but I don't put anything other than skis and poles in the ski bag. Everything else goes in my holdall including ski boots, weight 15-18kg. Having a lightweight holdall certainly helps as I do no scrimp on clothing, or 'womens necessities'! My understanding was that you could use part of your ski carriage weight allowance to include boots if you wanted to, or if you don't book ski carriage you can take boots at no extra charge if all your hold luggage together is less than 20kg. I just don't like to have an extra bag, after all, it's me that has to carry them all!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| alex_heney wrote: |
| Mr Marmot wrote: |
| Getting back to my point, none of the arguments has convinced me that the current claim by airlines that ski-boots weighing 6Kg should be included as part of my 20Kg allowance when I have paid extra for ski carriage is fair or reasonable. |
It might not be "fair or reasonabler" if it were indeed the case.
But (as I pointed out earlier but you seem to have missed), it is NOT the case.
When you book ski carriage (with Thomson), you get 15Kg extra allowance. One pair of skis in their bag don't weigh anything like that, so you are getting enough to cover the boots.
And what is more, I have never yet had the ski bag weighed, and have always padded the skis with quite a lot of my clothing, so might well get away with more than 15Kg in that bag. |
Sorry Alex, I didn't purposely miss anything you have previously taken the trouble to point out. My complaint may well only relate to those carriers I have been mentioning (including Monarch & EasyJet), and not the carrier that the OP had mentioned.
The ones I am referring to allow 20Kg hold luggage. If you pay additional for ski carriage this is for one set of skis only. They clearly confirm that the ski carriage charge does not include any allowance for ski boots and that if you take ski boots they must be included in your general 20Kg hold luggage allowance.
I plead guilty to any charge of raising a subject relating to, but not entirely only about, the precise original question raised by the OP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Mr Marmot, Thompson, Monarch & Easyjet? Blimey, you're really scrapping the aviation barrel with that little lot. Join us toffs on the grown-up airlines (23kg, yeah baby), then this thread will become null and void.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Dr John wrote: |
| Mr Marmot, Thompson, Monarch & Easyjet? Blimey, you're really scrapping the aviation barrel with that little lot. Join us toffs on the grown-up airlines (23kg, yeah baby), then this thread will become null and void. |
Dr John, flying cheaply allows me to buy more snazzy skiing underwear!
Truth is I am often restricted by routes available and what my skiing colleagues have booked for us.
But, I really do envy you your grown-up jet-set life style and your 23Kg luggage allowance - yeah baby yeah! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Flew with Thomson last winter to Innsbruck, having previously used various other outfits. At check-in they insisted ski boots are included in 15kg limit, I wasn't taking skis as I pointed out, no they said I still had to pay £50 excess, one way! For the return I stuffed what I could in my pockets, round my neck, down my trousers, down my socks, wore as much as I could, just about managed to walk to the check-in desk with a very suspicious gait! Even contemplated wearing the ski boots, no doubt the cabin crew would have chucked me off. No problem on return at Innsbruck, check-in there didn't bother to weigh the cabin bag. Ski boots? No problem sir, our pleasure. The sweat was pouring off me!!
15kgs? Back home I weighed the gear. My hard Delsey case weighs some 5kgs empty, ski boots 7kgs, total 12kgs, leaving just 3kgs, if you travel with Thomson, for all your clothing and mountain kit!!
A couple of years ago I flew with Thomson to the Caribbean, I took snorkelling kit with me, at check-in they said my case was over the limit by 2kg, suggested I put something from my case into my cabin bag, they made me open it up and virtually unpack it at the check-in desk and on seeing my snorkelling gear said take it out and put it in your cabin bag!! Now I have ocean fins and they measure 63cm in length, my cabin bag is regulation size. I boarded the plane with these bloody great things sticking right out of the bag! The cabin crew were amazed by the check-in suggestion.
Thomsons- never again!!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Mr Marmot, Good man, you want to save money on the flight so you can buy more gear, nothing wrong with that. But hold one just one cotton-picking minute, the meagre weight allowance on the "budget" airlines means you're now over the allowance because of all the kit you've bough. Damn, what a pickle.
The beautiful irony being that if you didn't waste money on so much unnecessary kit you probably wouldn't be over the allowance. Life must be one big puzzle to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
davidthornton, hold baggage allowance with Thomson is 20kg. You need to find a lighter weight holdall, mine is only 800g unladen, ski boots are about 5kg so that leaves 14kg for clothing, shoes, cosmetics, hair straighteners, simple! I doubt I'd be able to lift anything heavier into my car!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| davidthornton wrote: |
Flew with Thomson last winter to Innsbruck, having previously used various other outfits. At check-in they insisted ski boots are included in 15kg limit, I wasn't taking skis as I pointed out, no they said I still had to pay £50 excess, one way! For the return I stuffed what I could in my pockets, round my neck, down my trousers, down my socks, wore as much as I could, just about managed to walk to the check-in desk with a very suspicious gait! Even contemplated wearing the ski boots, no doubt the cabin crew would have chucked me off. No problem on return at Innsbruck, check-in there didn't bother to weigh the cabin bag. Ski boots? No problem sir, our pleasure. The sweat was pouring off me!!
15kgs? Back home I weighed the gear. My hard Delsey case weighs some 5kgs empty, ski boots 7kgs, total 12kgs, leaving just 3kgs, if you travel with Thomson, for all your clothing and mountain kit!!
A couple of years ago I flew with Thomson to the Caribbean, I took snorkelling kit with me, at check-in they said my case was over the limit by 2kg, suggested I put something from my case into my cabin bag, they made me open it up and virtually unpack it at the check-in desk and on seeing my snorkelling gear said take it out and put it in your cabin bag!! Now I have ocean fins and they measure 63cm in length, my cabin bag is regulation size. I boarded the plane with these bloody great things sticking right out of the bag! The cabin crew were amazed by the check-in suggestion.
Thomsons- never again!!!! |
Sorry to hear about your tribulations with Thomson, David. Hopefully they will go out of business because others join you in not using them again because of their dismal service.
Out of interest, I have also never had any problems on the return leg of any charter flights. Is it just a British 'computer says no' attitude?
Also, I was surprised to see on a recent charter flight returning from Geneva (Monarch) that they had no facilties at the check-in desk to weigh luggage! How does that work? And this was after the outward leg check-in dragon wanted £60 excess baggage charge each way from me. They are all a bunch of dirty thieving bar stewards, IMO!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr John, Thompson is not a budget airline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Dr John wrote: |
Mr Marmot, Good man, you want to save money on the flight so you can buy more gear, nothing wrong with that. But hold one just one cotton-picking minute, the meagre weight allowance on the "budget" airlines means you're now over the allowance because of all the kit you've bough. Damn, what a pickle.
The beautiful irony being that if you didn't waste money on so much unnecessary kit you probably wouldn't be over the allowance. Life must be one big puzzle to you. |
Don't I know it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Marmot, it's a lightweight wheeled holdall. Carries everything easily and without adding unnecessarily to weight allowances. I've seen 2kg wheeled hard suitcases for sale now too. The luggage industry is clearly starting to catch on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
sometimes this site should be renamed Smugheads 
