I’m sure there’s horror stories out there of course, there always is, but 99.99% of the time checking a bag is only marginally less convenient than trying to fit everything in my carryon.

Thankfully it's not as big of a deal now that airtags/trackers are readily available.

There are times when I know I have to check a, usually, pretty small bag. But especially because of the delayed baggage issue or because of last minute changes to flights because of weather or whatever, I probably carry-on (with a light load) 9 times out of 10. Especially with dress being more casual these days I usually don't really need more than carry-on unless I'm activities requiring some amount of gear.

Baggage claim is usually pretty quick but even 5-10 minutes sucks after flying.

I’ve also had 2 bags fail to make it with my plane meaning I had to wait 24 hours for a courier to deliver them. It also makes connecting or flight changes much more dicey.

I definitely think I’ve been unlucky recently but the fact that I could be unlucky is why I avoid it as much as possible

Except it has changed in the last couple of decades (probably not due to 9/11, but still), because size and weight limits for hand luggage keep getting smaller and smaller. I have always travelled light and avoided checking in luggage except for very long stays abroad, but it's becoming increasingly difficult.

For example, both Qatar and Etihad (very common airlines to travel between Europe and Asia) now limit hand luggage to 7 kg (and in the case of Etihad, they don't even allow the typical "personal item"). 7 kg is laughably little, a standard cabin bag already weighs 2. Pack a laptop and you'll struggle to pack even summer clothes for a few days. Let alone winter clothes or -oh, the luxury!- buying some souvenirs at your destination.

Fortunately, in my experience, they mostly just don't look. But they could, if you're unlucky. And even if they don't, the dwindling limits also reduce practical slack, i.e. with a formal limit of 9 kg I would feel comfortable packing 10 or 11 because most airport staff probably wouldn't be strict about that, but with 7, packing 10 or 11 starts looking like a real gamble.

> 7 kg is laughably little, a standard cabin bag already weighs 2

One thing that I have done is move from roller luggage to a travel backpack. I personally use the Osprey Farpoint, but there are many in the category to choose from. Not only is it much lighter than hard sided luggage, but it's typically much more forgiving of dimensional requirements, and can often fit in overhead bins, where hard sided luggage may not be able to (if you're the last person trying to put something in the bin).

And on top of all of that, it's been much more reliable for me - I've had and seen roller luggage fail pretty often - at both the wheels and the handle. Neither of those exists on the bag, which just keeps trucking.

I get that for many people a travel backpack isn't an option. But if it is something that might work for you, I highly recommend it.

But do you think one can pack as much as in roller luggage, while conforming to the size limits? I've always been under the impression that roller luggage would be more efficient in this respect, but have no real experience traveling with a backpack.

They're typically advertised by volume, so 30L, 40L, etc., so you can get one the size you want. I think carry on size is typically advertised as 35-40L. They've got all the same stuff as roller luggage - straps, dividers, etc., depending on what you want. Although, IMO, the best setup is to just get a bag with the volume you want and use packing cubes.

The great advantage of backpacks is that they're soft. Every carrier has their own "box" that your item is supposed to fit into. As long as you don't have too much stuff, you can just squeeze your bag into the box. But with a hard sided roller, it either fits or it doesn't.

I do have a larger travel pack and sometimes favor a slightly larger wheeled pack. But even though it's a bit heavy for any really long schlepping, it's lighter than the wheeled frame and is a lot easier to deal with on trains etc.

Has a plane ever been hijacked by a couple of European descent traveling with their own children? The lengths we go to to pretend everyone is the same is mind boggling.

Certain groups perform attacks of this kind.

It's not necessarily because they are backwards or evil or something. They just can't resist militarily, so they go for soft targets.

If the situation was reversed, and there was some kind of hegemonic global Islamic caliphate with an ostensibly unbeatable military, perhaps you would get some random Poles or Spaniards blowing up planes.

People who aren't in groups in those kinds of situations, don't do things like that. Why would they? Why do we pretend that they would?

If, on the other hand, you randomly select people for additional checking, they can't predict that and can't learn how to circumvent it, they just have to take a stab at an attack and hope they don't get unlucky.

Basically, any deterministic aspect of security is predictable, which makes it vulnerable.