orchidfan

1 hour ago, LALes said:

Every country in Asia is racist/xenophobic with their own, peculiar, often demeaning terminology for outsiders.  Gwailo in China, Gaijun in Japan, Farang in Thailand...

Hey Thailand, karma's a biatch  ain't it.

Nearly...it's laowai in China (pinyin) guilo in Hong Kong (and Cantonese speakers).....basically all meaning Foreigner. Fair enough I guess.

Most of us can't easily distinguish between most Europeans, north Americans, Canadians. Aussies, Kiwis etc.

Mitrphol, one of Thailand's largest sugar producers, farm thousands of hectares of cane in NE Australia, on plantations as flat and smooth as a billiard table, staffed by a handful of men,  and harvested by huge GPS guided machines.

(As shown to me proudly  by one of their senior men on his iPad.)

There is NO BURNING. Excess foliage and crushed pulp go into biomass fuels....which airlines, such as QANTAS are incorporating into their supplies..

Sugar cane used to be burned, in situ, decades ago, but not any more.

So Big Agra can do it when they want/need to.

3 hours ago, Robert Paulson said:

Who drives into Pattaya 

Agree. My thoughts exactly. Why would a German tourist drive a car (his?) Into Pattaya and then try to park in a bar area?

Would they not be drinking whilst there and then go and drive that car.....in the dimly lit back streets of Pattaya.

I only know 2 Germans here and both, whilst quite nice guys, are extremely argumentative, complaining and always right.

Both prolific letter writers of complaints to hotels, restaurants and airlines (but not on social media or websites !)

5 hours ago, Older and Wiser said:

That would imply there are no immigration facilities at the new terminal; that you still have to clear immigration at the main terminal. 

Immigration time varies with your arrival time. I usually arrive from the Philippines around 5pm; no sweat. But last year my flight on PAL, needless to say, was delayed 5 hours, meaning we arrived along with many flights from Europe. It took one and a half hours just to clear immigration. Incidentally, as a 77 year old, standing around for that length of time is no joke. 

Over 70? Why don't you take the priority lane? Or did you ?

3 hours ago, HuaHinNew said:

"

IMHO, the reason for all these issues of 90 day reporting are due to the Immigration Database and the 90-days reporting Database are not real-time synchronized.

 

I have incurred all the above issues as stated above, passport changes, leaving the country ...etc.

 

All I do is let the 90-day online report autofill the form, and it works each and every time, even though the information is outdated.

 

When I go to do my annual retirement renewal visa, I also get a 90-day manual report done, where the IO updates all my 90-daya report details that have changed since my last annual visa renewal.

 

IO agrees with me, online 90-day reporting software not always good.

 

 

"All I do is let the 90-day online report autofill the form, and it works each and every time, even though the information is outdated."

You mean you submit this even from outside Thailand or just when you get back? Surely you return date must be way out??

"Might, possibly, allegedly....."

This ex MP is covering his statement VERY carefully!😄

3 hours ago, OJAS said:

 

This advice certainly doesn't match my experience of being able, in practice, to file a 90-day report online following each foreign trip (my office is Rayong). That said, your particular circumstances do appear to be rather exceptional, though.

 

This year I'll be away (in Hong Kong) for about 3 months, returning early June.

So I'll see if online works 90 days after return....now that their 486, windows 98 has been "reset"

On 2/7/2024 at 7:33 PM, findlay13 said:

Boy did I pick a great time to leave. 24th March.I'll be back in June😉

Me too.

I'm leaving this month on the 20th, back on June 4th.

Just miss the crazy CNY in Hong Kong and Songkran here.

Perfect!

(Once you've done a few years of dragon dances,fireworks and wet T~shirt events, it's nice to get away!)

2 hours ago, proton said:

No leaks, builder did find debris in one pipe and adjusted another tap but it's still not switching on for all outlets. Will bleed it then adjust the pressure switch. Never understand why they dont build them with stainless steal tanks, they always rust and leak after a few years, 10 for the last one.

Hitachi...which I have, DO manufacture a stainless steel model in their range. A few thousand baht more.

Also,all the houses in our moo baan (Pathum Thani) have underground, sealed (cap/lid can be rotated and removed if required).

After more than 10 years the water in the tank is crystal clear. Tank is automatically filled from the mains.

We don't drink this water, but everything else in the house and garden has great high pressure.

Of course if the tank (1000ltrs I think) gets inadvertently emptied, the pump gets hot and switches itself off automatically (built in safety device)

Pretty simple prime ~once its cooled down, then back in full operation.

4 hours ago, JGon said:

There's absolutely nothing that the government of Thailand or any ASEAN country could do about air pollution this time of the year. It's the dry season, farmers have ingrained in their minds that they must burn the remnants of their old crops and everyone drives their diesel pickups and trucks everywhere. Even if by some miracle Thailand could stop all the burning tomorrow... it wouldn't change a thing! Because all the surrounding countries do the same thing or worse. This time of the year the winds usually come from Laos and China... and guess what?... They won't stop burning or using diesel vehicles... so the only thing you can do is deal with it (I usually travel away until the winds change and the rains come back).

Pretty sure Malaysia (under PM Mahatir) stopped it or reduced burning of Palm Oil empty fruit bunches (EFB's).

I was involved with big companies like Sime Darby,Guthrie etc introducing chipping and mulching  (compost) which proved very effective as a fertilizer etc.

Mahatir was adamant that the wide scale burning stop and even had strong words with neighbor Indonesia who, like Thailand, just disregarded the no burning protocol.

So, the Indonesian smoke just blew over Malaysia in the "right" wind conditions.

But there, the Big ex British plantation companies adhered more to the government's demands.

Not here !

4 hours ago, treetops said:

 

Different office, different rules.  I've done mine (and I know of others too) who have had on-line reports approved after being out of the country, and I also know of folk who've had them approved after obtaining a new passport where others have said this is not possible.

 

No real way to define the rules and just have to do what your office requires seems to be the solution.

 

Edit.  The good results I mention have all been from Jomtien immigration.

I was expecting a snag having gone so long with no reports (well I wasn't in the country!) And the new OP.

But thought that after doing this one in person report to "reset" the system, the next one I could do online.

BTW I'll again be overseas when the computer generated next report date comes up.

Anyway, its only a 20 min drive there , so no big deal. But it might bother some members living an hour or 2 drive to the IO.

Wonder if they'd accept a mail~in report in that case?

4 hours ago, Raymonddiaz said:

Did you pay 60 baht? i ALWAYS pay 60 baht to the lady there without a receipt.

Nope. Never pay anybody anything.

I did try and give one lady in that room B100......genuinely for coffee.

She laughed and handed it back to me.

Not even sure if 109 buys a cup of coffee

15 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

A quick search on the Google machine says Thailand is the only country with such a ridiculous ban.

Both Singapore (sales only until 10.30pm) and Malaysia have various alcohol sales restrictions.

Different from Thailand but restrictions just the same.

1 hour ago, DUNROAMIN said:

Really, Thai Airways sueing a passenger for his personal opinion, The airline must be desperate for cash. I mean, the comment would have fizzled away in a few days, and would it really affect Thai Airways, I seriously doubt it. Now Thai Airways will be known for their actions against passengers who complain about anything. More harm done than good. 

I remember talking to a Russian Airport Manager in a discussion about noise abatement and complaints from residents who lived close by to the airport.

He said that they listened to a complainant twice, third time they complained...... they moved them!!

For all of the non~aviation qualified members of this forum, I offer the following clarification :

HOLDING of arriving air traffic is mainly,  only used/required in the following circumstances.

1. When wx at the destination is deemed, by the pilot in command ,or his company, to be unsuitable, at the time, for attempting approach and landing. Pilot decision....wait or divert.

2. Traffic metering /flow control dictates that arriving traffic must hold to join the "sequence". Taking their turn, as directed by ATC , to exit the Hold and resume the Arrival or as directed by ATC. ATC decision *

*but the pilot can reject this holding if there are other reasons for them to divert to another airport or call minimum fuel/mayday fuel or onboard emergency.

3. Aircraft experiencing onboard technical problems which requires them to sort out the problem, dump fuel etc.

End of topic.

15 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Scheduled landing time for TG 465 was 07:20 hrs - any data for then ?

 

 

 

 

The metar times are in GMT (UTC), so ,say 2030 GMT  is 0730am Melbourne time.

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I haven't implied anything was done arbitrarily...  

 

It does appear as though you are 'trying to argue with me'... while at the same time repeating what I have pointed out throughout this thread... its rather odd.

 

 

 

erm.. ok.

 

 

No, not arguing with you Richard .but simply correcting possible misinterpretation of some of your comments...

Quote:

"If Thai Airways couldn't land due to low visibility and circled, its because ATC instructed them to do so...  then range became an issue hence the decision to divert."

???err mmm

43 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

ATC put the flight in a holding pattern  (due to low visibility at the airport).

 

The pilot diverted (after 20 mins of holding) due to fuel reserve concerns.

 

The decision the pilot made was to follow policy.

 

 

 

 

ATC do not arbitrarily "put aircraft into holding patterns" due to destination wx.

IF the pilot elects to wait and hold,then ATC will nominate a suitable, published holding pattern or make one up on the spot.

IF the pilot elects to divert, ATC will coordinate a route and level with adjoining sectors for the diverting aircraft to follow.

18 hours ago, BKKBike09 said:

 

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.

So, if they had the diversion fuel plus mandated reserve margins, (a flight which you quote as having taken 60 minutes) where would they have been after holding for another 30~40 minutes and the WX did NOT improve at Melbourne??

Diversion to Sydney cut off (no longer enough fuel reserves remaining ) and nowhere suitable to go!

Factor in that QF have flight Ops teams who would have assessed wx trends and advised their flight to wait it out.

SQ would have followed what QF did.

I believe that, given the situation and useable fuel remaining,  the Captain of TG made the correct decision.

PS. For other members, Australia and most international airlines and service providers, follow ICAO standards, not FAA. There are some differences !

21 hours ago, Brickleberry said:

Completely backwards way to respond to criticism.

 

Fair enough, the passenger might have been in the wrong (I don't know the specifics of the case). A better response would have been to respond to the complaint in a measured, intelligent way. Perhaps if they had explained the decision to the passenger on social media, they might have apologized and removed the criticism. 

 

Checking the weather yesterday reveals that conditions were not particularly dangerous at all. Partly cloudy, no strong winds.... Perhaps the customer had a valid point, hence the complete over-reaction by TA.https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/australia/melbourne/historic

This is tourist weather, NOT aviation weather.

Totally irrelevant to this saga.

Note "visibility" N/A.....

22 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

not true in Australia. If Airservices tell a pilot he has to divert, he MUST divert to the airport that Airservices directs him/her to as that airport has been advised by Airservices that flight XXX is being diverted to the alternate airport. The ONLY way the pilot would be able to override such a directive is if there was an emergency on board or if there was insufficient fuel to reach the alternate airport.

Wrong. Totally the pilot's decision when and where he wishes to divert.

Sometimes the flight plan will indicate their preferred/nominated alternate airport.

Sometimes that alternate will have developed unsuitable wx also, or it may already be "full" of other aircraft which have diverted there already,leaving no bays for de-boarding and only parking on taxiways. 

18 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

It would have been ATC who the flight in a holding pattern...  as highlighted by the flight radar on BKKBike09's post on page 4.

 

 

It would have been the pilot's decision to hold for weather improvement or divert to his alternate.

If he elected initially to try for Melbourne then he would have been instructed to hold, with a possible "onwards clearance time".

Its TOTALLY the pilot's decision to wait and hold or divert.

Not ATC's.

3 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

It would NOT have been the pilot's decision to divert to Sydney, that decision would have been made by Airservices (Australian Air Traffic Control) and the pilot would have had no choice but to adhere to that decision. What needs to be ascertained is whether or not the pilot made an announcement about the diversion and why. If an announcement was made then the passenger was obviously not paying attention.

 

Additionally what could the passenger actually be sued for? Surely not defamation, but TIT.

Sorry. Wrong . Airsevices does NOT have the authority or ability to "Close" an airport.

Only the owners of that airport have that authority.

Pilots ultimately make their own decisions whether to proceed or divert, with the assistance of advice on current and prognoses of weather, and their company.

This is the international "rule" / procedure these days....not like 50 years ago!

(I have 40+ years of  experience in this field)

4 hours ago, 1happykamper said:

Plenty of Thai beg.. Especially in Bkk. What law is the farang breaking? 

Yes there's a "resident" beggar outside my local 7/11...right at the entrance/exit for the shop....nearly every afternoon /evening.

He's not skinny BUT filthy dirty and clothed only in a pair of ragged black shorts.

He rummages through the bin for any edible scraps thrown away.

I give him some money every time I go by him, for which he is most grateful.

BUT 99% of local customers give him a very wide berth. No Buddhist empathy there. It's like (in their minds) he has the plague.....which he does not.

A few lice maybe.

Thing is,  that NO authorities or humanitarian organizations call by to offer help or find out his situation and why.

I think it takes a complaint or social media "outrage" to get any assistance !

Appalling really.