I'm not sure whether this post should be considered a request for future products, or comments on existing bags, or just a dump of the things going through my mind. I want a travel bag. I'm looking at both the Tri-Star and Aeronaut. Neither seems to give me exactly what I want. I think I've finally come to the conclusion that the Aeronaut might better fit my needs. The biggest factor is my own sheer laziness. The Aeronaut's large main storage compartment seems compatible with my lazy streak. It looks like I can just cram my dirties into that main central compartment without worrying about organizing anything. Whereas with the Tri-Star, there may be too much organization. While fine at the beginning of a vacation, when I'm done I'm not sure I want to make the effort of trying to properly wash, organize and repack everything into it's tiny little compartments. I want to stuff and go.
So if the Aeronaut is the proper bag for me, why haven't I bought one yet? The problem is one of aesthetics. I hope this isn't sacrilege to you folks, but I actually find the Aeronaut to be a little bit on the ugly side. Not coyote-eat-your-own-arm-off ugly, but it's not a particularly good looking bag either. So what bugs me? I can start with the whole trapezoidal shape. I assume there's a purpose. but if so, it's lost on me. i don't get it. Next, I don't understand the handle. Why is there a long detachable handle, when there's no reason for it? There's no opening under the handle. Third, I think I want the bag to keep it's shape better. In pictures, the bag seems to sag quite a bit under the handle. I just don't find that aesthetically pleasing. I think I prefer the looks of the Tri-Star. I think I like the standard suitcase like styling it employs - rather than the duffel like styling of the Aeronaut.
So I think what I want is a hybrid of the Tri-Star and the Aeronaut. I want the general suitcase like form factor of the Tri-Star, but with the large central compartment of the Aeronaut. I want the handles of the Tri-Star to replace those handles on the Aeronaut. You'd probably have to add some new seams to support those handles, but those new seams might also provide some of the added support I want (anti-sag).
Other threads in this forum suggest Tom is working on a new, smaller Aeronaut. Perhaps he's considering some of these other changes as well. At least I can hope.
Thanks for listening. Sorry if I've offended the faithful.
So if the Aeronaut is the proper bag for me, why haven't I bought one yet? The problem is one of aesthetics. I hope this isn't sacrilege to you folks, but I actually find the Aeronaut to be a little bit on the ugly side. Not coyote-eat-your-own-arm-off ugly, but it's not a particularly good looking bag either. So what bugs me? I can start with the whole trapezoidal shape. I assume there's a purpose. but if so, it's lost on me. i don't get it. Next, I don't understand the handle. Why is there a long detachable handle, when there's no reason for it? There's no opening under the handle. Third, I think I want the bag to keep it's shape better. In pictures, the bag seems to sag quite a bit under the handle. I just don't find that aesthetically pleasing. I think I prefer the looks of the Tri-Star. I think I like the standard suitcase like styling it employs - rather than the duffel like styling of the Aeronaut.
So I think what I want is a hybrid of the Tri-Star and the Aeronaut. I want the general suitcase like form factor of the Tri-Star, but with the large central compartment of the Aeronaut. I want the handles of the Tri-Star to replace those handles on the Aeronaut. You'd probably have to add some new seams to support those handles, but those new seams might also provide some of the added support I want (anti-sag).
Other threads in this forum suggest Tom is working on a new, smaller Aeronaut. Perhaps he's considering some of these other changes as well. At least I can hope.
Thanks for listening. Sorry if I've offended the faithful.
Comment