JimGant

Have reread the arcticles, can't find where it says the Thai was co share on FL350, I did see where ATC said that Thai was at FL340 though........

DB,

I got the FL350 from the news article Jai Dee posted above, namely:

Taiwan’s Far Eastern Air Transport Corporation revealed that Eastern Air’s Boeing 757 was flying at 35,000 feet above ground near Korea’s Cheju Island but was alerted by a Korean aviation control center to reduce altitude to 34,000 feet as there was another plane, suspected to be a Thai Airways, coming at the same altitude.

"Coming at the same altitude" must mean FL350 in the context of having China leave 35 for 34. Also, I never saw any article where ATC said THAI was at FL340. Only the article where THAI said they were at FL340.

Bronco, sorry for the shorthand. "FL" means flight level and is a reference using a standard altimeter setting (29.92 inches of mercury) that is dialed in above a certain altitude (18,000 feet in the States), where you're no longer concerned about actual altitude above sea level and, more importantly, above pesky mountains and stuff. With everyone on the same altimeter setting, relative separation is easier to handle by ATC. So, FL350 is 35000 feet indicated altitude when altimeter is set to 29.92 barometric pressure. If actual barometric pressure is different, which it usually is, actual altitude will not correspond to one's FL.

then my sense of the percentages is way off, eh?

And you are, of course, Canadian, eh?

Hmmm. THAI says it was level at FL340. ATC says he was co-altitude at FL350 with the Chinese guy, thus the descend order to FL340 for China. Makes sense the assigned altitude for THAI was FL340 -- but did he "bust" this altitude during his climbout? Can't imagine ATC basing their understanding of THAI's altitude on anything but a transponder-sent number.

THAI, if he's busted his altitude, is probably no higher than FL343 -- but the collision avoidance system at ATC is probably going nuts, especially if it hasn't noted that THAI has ceased his climb. (I'm sure both machinery as well as controllers are still trying to get used to the new 1000ft separations above FL290.) So, the controller tells China to descend (makes more sense to have THAI descend -- but maybe he wasn't on frequency yet).

Meanwhile, TCAS is monitoring the situation, notes the unacceptable altitude separation, but sees that THAI is not climbing, and is actually probably inching back to FL340. So, if TCAS is giving any 'resolution advisory,' it would be for China to climb. But for sure, don't descend.

Which, of course, is what ATC directs.

Whether ATC's descend order is the 'expedited' version is not clear. But at some point China realizes he needs to lao lao downward, and this could well be from the TCAS once it realizes the new parameters.

So, did THAI bust its assigned altitude? Equipment malfunction? Too much Soju the night before by the controller? Hmmm.

Airline spokesman Chang You-peng said the plane was told by flight controllers to reduce altitude from 35,000 feet to 34,000 feet.

According to air traffic control instructions, THAI's aircraft, TG659 routed Seoul - Bangkok, was flying in its right position with lateral and vertical navigation at 34,000 feet

Well, duh, ATC descended the Chinese guy level with the THAI (FL340). Even if ATC thought he had adequate lateral separation, the 1000ft descent makes no sense -- unless he got confused about the actual altitude of the THAI (which is hard to do today with altitude reporting transponders).

why didnt the alarm on the thai airways jet sound an alarm as well ?

It did:

THAI's airplane indicated a warning (TCAS) that another airplane was approaching. THAI's pilot-in-command followed the procedure indicated by TCAS

ICAO requires *all* airliners to have the latest version of TCAS II. And, so, as the reports indicate, this was a coordinated TCAS/TCAS event, with the THAI getting the warning to either maintain altitude or to climb -- while the Chinese is getting the command to crash dive.

Sure looks like an ATC foul-up. But I also wonder if the Chinese wasn't ignoring some initial TCAS advice as he responded to the ATC order to descend. TCAS trumps ATC, a lesson hammered home after that mid-air over Germany a few years back. So, if initially the Chinese ignored the TCAS to "climb", thus preventing a crossing altitude, at some point the TCAS computes that a climb is too late, thus an emphatic "descend" order -- the kind that splatters passengers against the ceiling.

Anyway, fun to speculate. The only thing that sounds certain is that the title of this thread is misleading.

This thread has got me thinking, especially with the holidays coming up.....

I've never donated anything in Chiang Mai, but as my closet runneth over, just where is there a Salvation Army equivalent in CM? Someplace, preferably, where you know your donation will be used as intended?

Just ask an agent at the Land Office what an acceptable rent rate would be. That's what we did, and were amazed at the low figure provided.

I forgot the percent we paid on that arbitrary rental figure, but I seem to recall 3%, not 1%. But I'm probably wrong. In any event, my wallet was still nearly full when we left.

Oh, don't forget your passport. For some reason they wanted to see that before signing off on the lease.

Because the credit card company I use is MBNA.

Yeah, MBNA (now Bank of America) went from 1% to 3% a couple of years ago. That's when I switched to USAA Mastercard, which only charges a 1% foreign transaction fee, but they also give 1% rebates on all purchases, thus zeroing out the fee. I'm sure there are other credit cards out there still offering good deals -- but they seem to be getting fewer. Many debit/ATM cards, too, have crept past the 1% foreign exchange fee. Of course you won't know this until you do the math -- my bank (Suntrust) even pleaded ignorance when I confronted them. So, USAA now has my banking business too.

And if I should ever really CHARGE something without having extra cash in there, it's an astronomical rate.

Don't quite follow.... ? Are you saying you would have to carry a positve cash balance in a credit card account (which is unusual in itself) to avoid extra charges? Does this have something to do with exceeding your credit limit?

I guess a good way to avoid foreign exchange fees -- and still have the convenience of plastic -- is to use your Thai bank account and its debit card. Yeah, the telex rate used for wire transfers is a few points lower than the interbank exchange rate used for credit card and ATM transactions. But not so after you factor-in the 1% (or 3%) foreign exchange fee. And wire fees can be minimized per unit if several thousands are sent at a time.

Also, before making a major purchase in Thailand by credit card, which I no longer do ....Now, it's easier to just go to the ATM in advance.

Out of curiosity, why do you no longer use a credit card for major purchases in Thailand? Simply giving a blanket altert to your CC bank to expect purchases in Thailand -- some maybe up to your credit limit -- is easy enough to do.

(Curious, because many credit cards on Stateside banks still only charge a 1% foreign exchange fee -- and also give 1% rebates against all purchases, thus zeroing-out any cost. But many ATMs charge the 1% fee, plus a flat fee of several dollars. And credit card purchases have built-in additional warranties, plus you don't have to carry a large wad of cash from one -- or several -- ATM dumps.)

can go anytime up to expiration of his permitted to stay stamp -

What happened to the 'last 30 days of your 90-day permitted-to-stay' period? Has this gone by the wayside? Or is this only for support extensions?

Technically, I shouldn't have proved that I had one satang in a Thai bank, but I was asked to get a statement anyway.

Any feel for the minimum needed to satisfy them?

There is the 65K income option. And what this means is what finally came clear today.

Did you get a retirement extension, then, based strictly on having 65k income? I ask because another poster went the income route at CM Immigration, but they also wanted to see money in a Thai bank account (at least 200k was the 'recommended' figure, 'tho I doubt this is hard and fast, since technically you don't need *any* money in the bank).

Houston won't and they are known to be liberal. Just comes down to each Ambassador how they interpret the rules.

Is that recent? I know someone who got an O-A there 1.5 years ago.

The extension of stay based on retirement (from the 90 day "O" visa you acquire) does require 800K in the bank for three months.

Which says, if you haven't already opened a Thai account with 800k in it *before* last entering Thailand, your 90-day permitted to stay clock will run out before you can establish 3-months (90+ days) of the required 800k in the bank. I suppose Immigration could/would provide a temporary "under review" extension (like with a support extension) 'til your bank account matures. But the beauty of the retirement extension (vice support extension) was getting that one year extension stamp the same day.

As Sun Belt says, after Nov 15 you'll need the 800k in the bank before entering Thailand on a 30-day stamp, then getting a visa in-country, and finally your extension of stay. If Immigration won't give out "under review" extensions, opening a bank account early will also apply to your first retirement extension of your Non Imm O visa.

And you may have to shop around for a bank that allows you to open an account with only a 30-day stamp, as some, like Bangkok Bank, can be picky.

Sounds like having sufficient retirment income and a letter from your embassy has become even more attractive. (Now lemme see -- when the baht reaches 20-to-1, I'll no longer qualify....... )

I wonder if this applies for those using 65,000 monthly income as basis vice 800,000 in an account, since the consensus is that they want to see something in your account even if going the monthly income route? (For Chiang Mai Immigration, the figure '200,000 baht' was mentioned.)

For me, a joint account with the wife is just to facilitate matters of access when one of us dies. But if Immigration insists on single accounts -- even for those using monthly income as basis -- does anyone know if you can open a single bank account and also designate survivorship options in the application (e.g., a so-called 'Payable on Death' bank account)?

And if you're flying United Airlines......their ticket counter is "L" with drop off point "6" on the Departure Level.

But they're not one of the many airlines listed on the "6" kiosk, as their counter location was a last minute change -- and apparently changing signage on these kiosks isn't easily done. At least they weren't listed as of Oct 17th.

Liquids and gels in carry-on luggage adheres to Stateside rules, namely: small tubes/bottles that can fit into a single 1-quart ziplock bag is ok. I didn't remove the ziplock bag from my carryon when going thru the security screener, and had no problems at both Bangkok and Narita (which also officially endorses the ziplock bag rule). However, Stateside, I found out they want the bag removed and placed in a container for separate screening (I hadn't done that and was thus pulled aside).

Again, this was United going Stateside. Other carriers and destinations may have different rulings -- but I only checked with United.

I would tend to think this consul got his facts crossed considering he's the only one reporting the rules in this manner but who knows, maybe he's the only person who is reporting the rules correctly.

Why do I have the feeling the problem lies with MFA and Immigration being on two separate pages........

They no longer require the medical certificate.

Good to know. I always felt embarassed about my rubber stamped medical certificate when I walked into Immigration drunk, with my gonads in a wheelbarrow..........

The same requirement does not exist on a change from a tourist visa or 30 day stamp, as long as the money is in the bank, you are allowed to do the change. You then are granted a 90 day “under consideration stamp”

Hmmm. Several folks here -- wpcoe immediately comes to mind -- went from 30-day stamp, to Non Imm O, to one year extension same day. There was no "90 day under consideration" involved.

Which doesn't mean what you're saying isn't the rule -- only that several exceptions, then, have been noted.

(Oh, that's right, we're talking Thai Immigration here. Sorry.)

My embassy say the assets like bonds, stocks and mutual funds, do not count as income, unless you sell them and lead to pofits, and then it will count as income,

Your embassy is making it harder than it has to be. Thai Immigration is just looking for 'positve cash flow,' and if selling bonds at a loss results in the requred cash flow, viola! If you have a zillion stashed away, sell a piece every year to meet Thailand's cash flow requirement, even at a loss, why should Thailand -- or your embassy -- care about the capital gain or loss aspect of this deal.

Yeah, I'm sure some twit at your embassy (polyester tie, right?) enjoys playing accounting semantics at your expense. And, sure, maybe 'income' was the translation your Foreign Service got from the Thai directive. But, hey, was this 'gross' income (before taxes) or 'net' income. I'm sure Mr. Polyester Tie would stumble all over this question.

I kinda like the Yank approach to income, er, cash flow verification: "We swear that he swore that his income/cash flow/profits/dinero/whatever is over x baht per month." That's what I call a helpful fellow-countryman being paid with my tax dollar.

As far as your unhelfpful fellow-countryman, I'd piss in his boot given the chance. Foreign Service types, unfortunately, seem to be overly-haughty, regardless of nationality.

(Not that this diatribe helps you -- but I sure feel better!!!)

the latest 3 months records of the account book of any Bank in Thailand with the account name of either or both parties need to have the amount of money not less than 400,000 Baht.

Interesting disconnect with this official statement condoning spousal joint accounts with that of the poster who was told his spousal joint account *couldn't* be used to satisfy the 800k requirement for retirement extension.

Madness, sheer madness -- err, TIT.

And yes, I went from 38 visa runs straight into Non-Immigrant O and it did cost me B. 2000 only.

But, was that the end result? Did you not pay an additional 1900 baht and get a one-year extension stamp, which you seemingly would qualify for?

If not, what's you next step?

If you use pension income the bank passbook will probably only be glanced at

Lopburi,

In your experience using your pension income as primary, does Immigration need a letter from your bank to go along with the passbook glance...........or will just the passbook with a reasonable balance suffice?

Went to the Chiang Mai Immigration and asked them what documents I needed to stay in Thailand.

Officers very friendly, helpful and explained in detail.

Visited my Dutch Embassy in Bangkok to officially verify my income from Holland.

Returned to the Immigration in Chiang Mai, within 5 minutes they assessed my paper work, [Dutch Embassy statement, Thai bank account with B. 72.000 in it] and kept my passport, asked me to return in 3 days. In 3 days I received my Non-Immigrant O visa promptly and with a smile.

Dutch,

Just for clarification, are you saying you converted your 30-day no-visa-required stamp into a Non Imm 'O' -- and that was it? Or, in addition to paying 2000 bt for this conversion, you paid another 1900 bt for a one-year extension of stay based on retirement or family support?

Besides bank book, did they require a bank letter attesting to amount and foreign source?

What about a medical certificate -- heard this is no longer required (but a lot of BS floating around).

Thanx.

Anyone have recent experience with "La Casa?"

A few years back, it seemed a nice place for Italian (but, I'm notorioulsy 'not picky.').

Show air ticket to Thailand

For a multiple Non Imm 'O' ? What possibly could they be misinterpreting from MFA to demand this? Surprised they don't demand 'multiple' roundtrip tickets.....

Fortunately, never heard this about the other honorary -- or even MFA -- consulates in the US.