Welcome!

We're glad you are here. This is the place to ask for bag advice, help other people out, post reviews, and share photos and videos.

TOM BIHN Forums Statistics

Collapse

Topics: 14,585   Posts: 188,393   Members: 6,557   Active Members: 310
Welcome to our newest member, Sharron99O.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can't quite make the purchase

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • cpau
    replied
    My ideal is aeronaut organisation (flexibility) in a 40-41" bag, since as someone else mentioned there is quite a bit of space left over if you pack efficiently in the larger bag - hence a real need for a smaller version. And NOT longer than 19".

    Yes, I've mentioned that before (like since 2008!) but so far been disappointed. Also, with the downhill direction Qantas is taking, having a 41" bag is more important than ever, because the other carriers here in Australia have stricter carry-on limits. Plus there is the european limits to consider. Not everyone is in the USA and carries massive 45" carryons ;-)

    Leave a comment:


  • Curmudgeon
    replied
    It sounds to me that you are describing the Air Boss?
    It is the size of an Aeronaut and the style of the TriStar.
    They are ugly to me but evidently well made.

    Ed
    I hope I'm not describing the Air Boss. To my mind, the Air Boss resembles the Tri-Star. I very much like the look of the Tri-Star, but prefer the layout of the Aeronaut. I just seem to want both. I want an Aeronaut that looks more like a Tri-Star. Less duffel, more suitcase.
    Last edited by Curmudgeon; 08-24-2011, 11:08 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jaon
    replied
    Originally posted by peregrina View Post
    Hey, I'm in TO too and have a Aeronaut; will get the Tri-Star to join the club
    Alas My time in the GTA is over. I got home this morning. Now if I can only decide on a travel bag and get it by Christmas. I'll be back in the GTA sometime in January or possibly early February. DD # 3 is expecting her first baby.

    Leave a comment:


  • peregrina
    replied
    Hey, I'm in TO too and have a Aeronaut; will get the Tri-Star to join the club

    Leave a comment:


  • AVService
    replied
    Originally posted by Curmudgeon View Post
    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.
    It sounds to me that you are describing the Air Boss?
    It is the size of an Aeronaut and the style of the TriStar.
    They are ugly to me but evidently well made.

    Ed

    Leave a comment:


  • jaon
    replied
    Originally posted by Maria View Post
    Maybe a Toronto get-together? Like Maverick held in the park in DC (?) a while ago?
    I'm still interested in this idea. Is anyone else?

    Leave a comment:


  • bbcamp
    replied
    Curmudgeon:

    Everybody has their own sense of aesthetics, so ymmv.
    But I wouldn't say that the Aeronaut has a "duffel style" shape. Quite the contrary, when in use it looks like a soft-sided suitcase (which it is). Think Tumi, but designed by someone who understands how bags work.
    And I'll second Lotuseater, it holds its shape remarkably well when under or over-packed. I, too, started out with a ca. 2003 MLC. It was easy to pack, but couldn't hold its shape and everything wrinkled. Packing the Aeronaut took some getting used to, but the physics of how the bag carries and holds its shape have won me over.
    And I love the split handles for carrying a sweater or jacket--I would never buy another bag without this feature. (So hearing above that the Tristar handles don't work this way will probably keep me away...drat!)

    Oh, and the end pockets are great for stuffing (and forgetting) dirty laundry.....

    But as I have said elsewhere on the forum, if you travel with a laptop, it will fit in the Aeronaut, but is just a bit difficult to get in and out. The Tristar trumps it here.

    good luck!

    bb

    Leave a comment:


  • gmanedit
    replied
    Curmudgeon: "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." I put dirty laundry in a stuff sack. The stuff sack can go in an end compartment. Easy and "organized."

    Leave a comment:


  • holoholo
    replied
    Originally posted by Curmudgeon View Post
    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.
    I too get lazy and found that those cheap compression bags work really well with the Tri-Star. Just shove those dirty things in the bag and flatten them into a nice flat rectangle block that fits perfectly into one of the compartments. Packing cube gets thinner, compression bag gets bigger, but space stays the same (sometimes get more space).

    Leave a comment:


  • pretzelb
    replied
    Originally posted by Curmudgeon View Post
    I believe the Aeronaut is the perfect bag for me. I like the way it's organized and contents accessed. The problem is that I'm not sold on its appearance. I think I prefer the suitcase type form factor of the Tri-Star over the duffel style form factor of the Aeronaut. If the Aeronaut could just be given a little more structure, I'd be happy.
    One problem could be that with structure comes weight (I assume). So to make a large bag hold it's form might make it even heaver. To be honest, once it's filled it's not going to alter it's form. Only time it's not pleasant looking is when it's empty but then it should be in storage right? I also find the flexible nature a benefit as I am able to move the bag to fit nearly any gap I need on a plane or hotel room.

    I'd like to also own a Tri-Star but I haven't bought one yet. I find even on short trips my Aeronaut is good. Plus I already have tons of bags.

    Leave a comment:


  • jaon
    replied
    I'm amused by the idea. I'll be there that last two weeks of July. I'm game for something if it's within that time frame. SO will be playing bridge for large portions of that time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maria
    replied
    Maybe a Toronto get-together? Like Maverick held in the park in DC (?) a while ago?

    Leave a comment:


  • jaon
    replied
    I'll be in the GTA in late July, mostly Mississauga. I'll be heading into Toronto at least a couple of days though. I don't have either a Tri-Star or an Aeronaut. I do have a Swift, little Swift, small Cafe bag and Side Effect though.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maria
    replied
    Originally posted by blackfungi View Post
    maria, we will be the only torontonians with both the tri star and the aeronaut. it's cool to have something that pretty much no one has in toronto.
    If we happen to pass each other with either bag - or carrying both! - at least we shall recognize one another!

    Leave a comment:


  • blackfungi
    replied
    Originally posted by Maria View Post
    Lotuseater - You've convinced me I should have...BOTH! Just in case.

    Okay, I didn't need much arm twisting. But it's decided!
    maria, we will be the only torontonians with both the tri star and the aeronaut. it's cool to have something that pretty much no one has in toronto.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X