Georgealbert

Yes, that is what I meant.

Yes, sorry your right, as you said the announcement tomorrow is coming from MFA, it is not from the Immigration Bureau, so will only effect embassies.

But there will also be other devices, not just phones and charger. Tablets, e-cigarettes, vape devices, bluetooth headphones, laptops, kids gaming devices and as @Trip Hop stated earlier, power tools. All have Li-ion batteries and some devices will be questionable quality.

Yes, but returning to profit just this year, with a lot of one off item listed, means that by ordering large now, if profits take a hit, they can again look for a handout again as the company hope to be clear of the bankruptcy order this year.

Yes, but still only a recommendation, not compulsory, but I now, believe this Thai Air Asia flight had one.,

If there is any increase in the bank requirements, and I am yet to be convinced there will be, I would hope that there are grandfathered rights in any new police order, like the current one.

That is a big jump from a cheap power bank catching fire on an aircraft, to using that, as a call to stop EVs being produced. “The battery in the mobile phone is consumer grade, optimised for maximum runtime at low cost. the EV battery, on the other hand, is made to industry standards with longevity in mind. The dissimilarities do not stop there and a key difference is how the energy is dispensed.“ https://batteryuniversity.com/article/why-mobile-phone-batteries-do-not-last-as-long-as-an-ev-battery#google_vignette

Fully agree. FAA data shows that the most common type of device to cause a fire on a aircraft are, Batteries or battery packs (40 % of all incidents), E-cigarettes and vape devices (20 %) Cell phones, laptops, and other electronic devices added together, account for the remainder of the incidents. (40%)

Report here, I believe. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/man-sets-himself-fire-outside-israeli-embassy-washington-2024-02-25/

This is from an aviation site, shows that any damage was minimal. “Cabin crew used a fire extinguisher and secured the power bank in a container. The aircraft continued to destination for a safe landing. The aircraft was able to perform the return flight on schedule” Below is from a study of human behaviour in emergencies, and seems to sum up what happened on this flight.

Found this from the fee increases made on 1 January 2004. Most went up by almost 4 times the then current amount. https://thethaiger.com/news/phuket/Huge-increase-visa-fees-next-year

A Li-Ion battery cannot be transported in the hold unless attached to the equipment it is intended to power. The attached battery must not exceed 100Wh in capacity. Airlines should require that they have been tested to UN standards by an independent authority, That would be totally impractical and impossible. In February 2016, ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation) which regulates the transport of Dangerous Goods in aviation, enacted a ban on transporting standalone lithium-ion batteries as cargo on passenger aircraft. The ban went into effect April 1, 2016, and remains in force. https://paguk.com/content/air-transportation-li-ion-batteries-0

The merriam-webster dictionary says it is. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vehicle

I believe it would be impossible/unrealistic to ban all the devices that have lithium ion batteries, but maybe better guidelines on the types of acceptable devices and having some standard markings on them. The danger there is that these markings will just be faked on cheaper devices.

Yes and the occurrences are becoming more common. FAA reported that between January 2006 and April 2022 there has been 357 incidents involving Lithium batteries, in the US alone. Report shows that all types of devices are involved, as we have both stated above, so banning power banks only, is not the answer. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-04/April 1 2022 Li-Batt. Thermal Events.pdf

Best post of the day, beat me to it, thank you. 😁

Yes agree with your comments, but the problem is not restricted to just power banks. Other common devices with lithium ion batteries, are most personal electronics such as cameras, cell phones, laptop computers, tablets, watches, calculators, e-cigarettes. The FAA reported that on average there was 1 incident per week, involving these devices, last year in the US.

Yes you are correct, no commercial aircraft carries water fire extinguishers. https://www.h3raviation.com/blogs/blog/choosing-the-right-fire-extinguisher-for-your-aircraft#:~:text=The FAA (Federal Aviation Administration,aircraft it is 2B%3AC. Many airlines are using fire containment bags, like below, for this type of incident, but this was on a budget airline.

First reaction already in.

Thanks 555555

Full details of the yearly statement are posted on their web site. The facts are there for information, if you don’t want to read it, no problem, but please there is no need to waste your time by posting to tell me you’re not going to read it. https://investor.bangkokair.com/en/downloads/financial-statements

Yes agree there many cheap products available, but UN3480 (lithium ion) or UN3090 (lithium metal), will not be stamped on any products, real or fake. This is just the UN numbers that identify dangerous goods and hazardous substance when being transported, not on the finished product. Typical power bank will look something like this, or less info

Maybe just follow the industry guidance issued by the International Air Transport Association (IATA). These guidelines are supported by The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), to which Thailand is a member state. Thai Airways, Bangkok Airways and Thai Lion Air are also all members of IATA. https://www.iata.org/contentassets/05e6d8742b0047259bf3a700bc9d42b9/iata-guidance-on-smart-baggage-with-integrated-lithium-batteries-and-electronics.pdf https://www.iata.org/contentassets/05e6d8742b0047259bf3a700bc9d42b9/lithium-battery-guidance-document.pdf

Yes you took pictures of Thai Airways planes at a Thai airport, I assume BKK, that I believe, but it still does not make these planes part of the Thai Airways current fleet. The A380s, which seem to be in your picture, of which there were 6 have been withdrawn from service in the last few years, and are not part of current fleet, this is how aviation all over the world works. Thai Airways will probably never fly them again, and if they are not sold they will be scrapped at some future time, maybe used as a new cafe in Bangkok. It still makes my post correct, Thai Airways, current fleet is 71 aircraft, which is measured the same as every other airline. British Airways use an old air port in the Cotswolds to put their unwanted planes, are these still part of British Airways current fleet? https://www.thesun.co.uk/travel/20838846/britain-eerie-airplane-graveyard-dump-jet/ It is probably cheaper, for Thai Airways, to store them at the airport than at one of the many aircraft graveyards. https://www.airportspotting.com/10-of-the-worlds-best-aircraft-graveyards/

So you not saying the financial statement is wrong, just in your own words “Says it all. Its creative accounting as usual”., could you please highlight where that evidence is? I posted the full statement earlier. What has their poor customer service to do with this thread? Yes I agree their refund policy has been crap, but that really is just an off topic rant and like most of this thread, just allows a bit of Thai (Thai Airways) bashing.