BKKBike09

FWIW while glaucoma is often associated with elevated eye pressure, it is not the only defining symptom. It is possible to have normal IOP and still have glaucoma. The best test to get is a visual field exam, which any decent hospital will be able to do for you. IOP also varies during the day (I forget if it's higher in pm or morning).Also, if you've ever had laser eye surgery to correct short sight, your IOP may under-read because the cornea is thinner than normal, so less resistant to the puff of air from the eye pressure measurement machine. Those puff of air machines also aren't as accurate as the old-fashioned way in which numbing drops are put in the eye before the doc uses a physical probe to mechanically measure pressure. If you want an accurate reading, ask the doc to do this (although same under-read caveat applies if you've had some types of laser surgery).

No, it is not a grey area...foreigners are not permitted to own firearms in Thailand. Yes, it is a grey area although, as per my comment, outside Bangkok it's very challenging and even in Bangkok these days it may not be possible. You also chose to ignore my comment "the key requirement was always to have a tabian ban because that means having a 13-digit Thai ID number and a work permit, so basically meaning people with Permanent Residency". You've changed your tune in subsequent posts to accept that foreigners with PR were / are permitted to own firearms in Thailand. A foreigner with PR is a foreigner. I imagine you'll respond to this post by telling me that the law changed in 2017 and that since then foreigners have not been able to obtain permits for firearms. The law, in fact, has not been changed: the proposed amendments have never been gazetted and so remain just that, proposed amendments. Foreigners with PR continued to be able to apply for a firearm permit (and I know a number of successful applicants). However since the Siam Paragon shooting all permit issuance in Bangkok has been under intense scrutiny, hence my comment "even in Bangkok these days it may not be possible". As per my original comment it has always been very challenging for foreigners to obtain permits outside Bangkok. In the provinces it is down to the local District Chief (Nai Amphur). Many of them don't approve applications for Thais, let alone foreigners. To return to the OP: if this foreign fool had a permit in his name issued in Phuket, it would not have been issued by the police. If anything was 'signed by a local policeman' it may have been the character reference letter that is supposed to accompany each application: said letter however needs to be signed by a Pol Lt Col or higher rank (or civil servant C5 and above). If it turns out that the foreign fool had some piece of paper signed by a copper saying "this man is allowed to have this gun" or whatever, that would not be a legal permit. So, yes, gun ownership by foreigners is a grey area.

This is one of the most bizarre things I've ever heard of. He had a permit, was it in his name or his wifes name I wonder? Does it matter? What if my wife had a gun with a permit - is that mine too? The permit(s) were almost certainly in his wife's name. If he was dumb enough to keep a handgun in his car, then doesn't matter whether it was in her name or his name, there'll be charges of unlawful carry of a weapon in public and - if the registered owner of the gun isn't in the car at the time - charges of unlawful possession. If the guns were in the house then it's a grey area: if the house or the rental contract isn't in the name of the registered owner of said guns, then I can see police charging for unlawful possession. Gun permits don't actually specify the location where the guns are to be kept but it is implied that it will be the registered owner's address as per their ID card/tabian ban, which is put on the permit. Since his wife isn't from Phuket likely that the address on the permits was another province. (As an aside, the penalty for failing to advise a change of address is only THB 500 ...) The fact that the article talks about carry charges suggests guns were in a vehicle. Gun ownership by foreigners is a grey area: outside Bangkok it's very challenging and even in Bangkok these days it may not be possible. The key requirement was always to have a tabian ban because that means having a 13-digit Thai ID number and a work permit, so basically meaning people with Permanent Residency.

The UK currently does a pretty good job allowing illegal migrants to stay and do pretty much what they please.

Doubtless a weapon purchased through one of the Ministry of Interior schemes to provide 'cheap' guns [50K for something like a CZ 75 vs 90K in a gun shop] to state officials and others of similar ilk.

"she proved a puny plaything in the mighty grip of Fate" - love it.

If this was shortly after take-off not sure why the Captain didn't immediately return to SVB or divert to the nearest suitable airport. Keeping a demonstrably violent passenger un-restrained until arrival in London 12 hours later (or Dubai 5 hours away) doesn't sound particularly good from an aircraft safety perspective.

Does your wife speak to your kids in Thai? That is important. It doesn't matter if the kids speak back in English. Unless your wife speaks English absolutely fluently, she is not helping them. Even if her English is grammatically perfect, she should still speak to them mainly in Thai. There are some good Thai-only (medium of instruction) schools - in Bangkok, Thawsi in Phrakhanong is one of them. Our daughter went there Por 1-Por 4. Then went to Int School. Her Thai however is still only okay, although she gets the cultural side of things. She reads well but her vocab is pretty basic. If your kids don't want to be civil servants then Thai fluency, especially reading/writing, becomes less important.

Maybe the PM should ask the Finance Minister what he thinks. Oh. wait. The PM is also the FM ...

He runs the risk of each note changed being treated as a single offence ie change 5 x 200 EUR notes = 5 individual counts of currency fraud. Then factor in any other previous transactions that come to light, which would be additional offences. Thai 'justice' system doesn't allow for pleading to aggregate multiple offences into one count. And if he changed any in a difference province, that is a separate judicial process that starts after case in Phuket is concluded and any time has been served.

Ah, good 'ol USDT. The launderer's friend. Not of course that I'm suggesting this guy had that amount of USDT for anything other than legitimate reasons.

Or Version 2: At the interview... Q] turn the key, does it start ? A] Huh? Q] Don't worry, you can learn on the job. you got the job, start today.

The servicing isn't free if you miss the interval by more than a month. Meaning if 12-month service is due on 15 Jan, you have until 15 Feb to get it done free. Can also take it in up to a month early. Outside that, it's paid (not that the cost is very high). It can also be a bit of a palaver to get a service appointment, compared to Honda, say. With Honda I'd always just ring them and say 'I want to bring car in on X day to be serviced' and that was that. With BYD (2 dealerships) I was told next available date was in a week, on a weekday. Not a big issue but I can see certain dealerships getting very busy as they sell more and more cars.

A point to note is that not all BYD dealerships have accident repair facilities. So if you ever have a fender bender repair might be a little more involved than say with a Jap car. After some dozy tw@t rear-ended the Atto last month, the dealer I bought from in BKK originally wanted me to take it to their repair shop in Pathum Thani, 40km or so from where I live. Ended up taking it to another BYD dealership in Ramkamhaeng Soi 5,263 or something (BYD CG near Ram 150'ish) - still about 20 km from home. However, they did a good job of repairing. It was a heavy shunt.

Short answer. No. Longer answer. Faster you ride, the more you'll feel bumps. Tyre pressures (and also the tyres themselves) and shocks make a difference. Seats can have padding added. Standing legs bent makes a difference. I have an ADV at the moment; used to have a PCX. Both pretty comfortable.

Yesterday, there was an individual of the same name showing as a PE teacher on the web site of an international school in Bangkok. Not on the web site today. Innocent until guilty etc, and for every bad apple there are probably 99 decent hard working teachers who get tarred by the same brush.

On the WX not improving - I posted earlier the METARs for the time period in question. Here they are again: Fog came and went pretty quickly, as is often the case. Melbourne regularly has fog, being on the coast. So there'd be a reasonable expectation that this wouldn't sock in the airport for the whole day. Plus Melbourne has CAT IIIB ILS (albeit only on one runway) which allows for min rwy viz down to 75 metres. Even when the METAR stated FOG (briefly), the reported viz was 200 m. Not sure why "SQ would have followed what QF did"; presumably TG would have had that option. I've never said that the TG captain didn't make the correct decision and I never would: I wasn't in the cockpit. In my original post I also made the point that you need to know TG company policy on WX diverts, which I don't. To me, this is all just a look at how different carriers may deal with a certain non-urgency situation.

True. I looked it up and Melbourne has CAT IIIB with 75m RVR and 0 decision height, but only on one runway (16). So extended fog can cause a lot of problems with extended spacing for arrivals and departures. Even if the plane / crew are CAT IIIB capable, landing is the easy part. Taxying to a gate in thick fog at a big airport is probably more stressful. Melbourne does have 'Follow Me' service I believe - basically a van that leads the way.

It's not hindsight. The SQ and QF (and likely others) elected to hold and then continue on to Melbourne. None of us know why the TG flight elected to divert. Diversion isn't a lightly taken decision; adds considerably to airline costs, amongst other things. Melbourne has a CAT IIIB ILS which allows for landing with a 75 metre RVR (Runway Visual Range - basically what you can see on the ground) and I believe 0 decision height. Since Melbourne, being coastal, does have a propensity for fog, logically one would assume international flights going there would use CAT IIIB capable aircraft and suitably trained crews. Also, as any pilot should know, fog often develops and dissipates pretty quickly. Morning fog (which this was) usually burns away pretty quickly. And indeed on that day, it did just that. You can see from the WX data that visibility fell off quickly (from '9999' which is 10 km down to 1.5 km to 200 m at 7.30 am and then up to 1.2 km and 7 km by 8.30 am). BTW - you keep referring to 'FAA' regs. Thailand actually operates under EASA (Europe - a complete PITA compared to FAA but that's a whole other topic), and Australia is CASA.

It took that TG flight a further 60 minutes flying time for the diversion to Sydney. So they must have had enough fuel for that + mandated safety margin. Meaning they had the endurance to stay in a hold for 30-40 minutes and then continue on to Melbourne (which is what both the SQ and QF flights that arrived at that hold at the same time as that TG flight elected to do). So. Three flights faced the same conditions. Two stayed in a hold. The TG diverted.

Here's another one that chose to hold at exactly the same time: SQ from Singapore. Only spent 30 mins in the hold.

Need to know what the WX was at the time that caused the diversion (historic aerodrome forecasts - METARs - for 28 Jan at YMML). Also need to know TG company policy on diverting. The TG flight was in the hold to north of Melbourne for one orbit and then went off to Sydney at 2047 UTC. A QF flight from HK entered the same hold very shortly after (2051 UTC) the TG flight departed and then held for 40 mins before continuing on to land at Melbourne. TG QF

Both need to attend if child is under 20, according to MFA web site, unless the non-attending parent gets a letter from district office saying that he/she consents to the child having a passport.

In Bangkok (and on MFA web site is says everywhere) they require both parents to attend if the 'child' is under the age of 20, unless a parent that doesn't attend provides a letter of authority allowing their kid to have a passport, which letter has to be issued by the district office where the parent's ID card is issued - can't just be any old letter ... Which can lead to the ridiculous situation whereby a 19-year old, living independently overseas, can fly solo into Thailand on a soon-to-expire Thai passport but then needs parental authority to get a new passport to fly out ... (I speak from recent experience) They take the photos at the passport office using a professional grade digital camera. It all looks very efficient (in and out in 15 mins if you book an appointment) until you start to consider how much money was wasted to buy 1,000 or whatever cameras, 1,000 fingerprint scanners, 1,000 printers, 1,000 computers, 1,000 tables and chairs and then to pay wages of 1,000 passport processing staff.

He may be an attention seeker, but in that case the passive aggressive shouty man has succeeded in adding 50,000 subscribers to Dr K's YouTube channel in 24 hours. Impressive! 'Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind' and all that. Yesterday - 2.28 million Today - 2.33 million