Thai Airways rises to 20th in Skytrax 2026 rankings

I recently flew back to Los Angeles and was having some issues with the EVA Air website so I ended up booking on trip.com, and the Bangkok to Taipei segment was on Thai Air in both directions. Though the planes were newer and clean, they were smaller plans with a very cramped seat configuration. A comparable plan on EVA Air is infinitely more spacious.

Also the food was serviceable, but it was nothing special. EVA remains my favorite for that trip and I don't think Thai air compares with them on any level. Even the business class was not comparable to EVA.

11 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I recently flew back to Los Angeles and was having some issues with the EVA Air website so I ended up booking on trip.com, and the Bangkok to Taipei segment was on Thai Air in both directions. Though the planes were newer and clean, they were smaller plans with a very cramped seat configuration. A comparable plan on EVA Air is infinitely more spacious.

Also the food was serviceable, but it was nothing special. EVA remains my favorite for that trip and I don't think Thai air compares with them on any level. Even the business class was not comparable to EVA.

Maybe that is why EVA comes 11th.

I flew to Singapore and back on Thai's new A321-neo last week and it was excellent. Biggest screen I have ever had on a narrow body, nice cabin. Food acceptable for a two hour flight.

I don't do business for short haul but that looked excellent with fully lie flat beds.

Edited 18 hours ago18 hr by josephbloggs

THAI is still okay but not nearly as good as it used to be. Still a go-to for me though (depending where I'm going).

Josh, the airline YouTuber, has pretty bad things to say about Skytrax and its ratings system. I'm surprised they haven't sued him for libel yet, given many things he said about them.

My experience with EVA was nothing special and a confusing online booking system. But that was quite some time ago. I really didn't like Taipei airport. Have they built a new one in the last few years? The old one really sucked.

49 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

THAI is still okay but not nearly as good as it used to be. Still a go-to for me though (depending where I'm going).

Josh, the airline YouTuber, has pretty bad things to say about Skytrax and its ratings system. I'm surprised they haven't sued him for libel yet, given many things he said about them.

My experience with EVA was nothing special and a confusing online booking system. But that was quite some time ago. I really didn't like Taipei airport. Have they built a new one in the last few years? The old one really sucked.

No. It is an older airport which is perfectly adequate, and I put it on par with Swampy. But I have found EVA to be excellent.

2 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

No. It is an older airport which is perfectly adequate

So if it's the same place, what I recall about arriving/departing late night or wee hours was long corridors with no seating areas, except the odd enclave for families with small kids (play area), no shops at all. Only one non-descript little place selling coffee and pre-wrapped sandwiches. It was sterile and old. And trying to find your way back to any place that might be more likely to have a shop or cafe was near impossible.

I like Thai Airways. No complaints since Covid. They are my go-to carrier for LHR-BKK-LHR. They treat me well as ROP Gold, even though I've never paid for anything more than economy. The perks of membership are great. I travel twice a year in economy and once in business class. Business Class (on this route) is now excellent. Crew are exceptional. Regional and other routes may not be as good though.

As for SkyTrax, I have heard them referred to as "ScamTrax". Did ChatGPT and the results are below....

“Scamtrax” is a derogatory nickname used by some frequent flyers and aviation enthusiasts who are sceptical of Skytrax. It doesn't mean that Skytrax has been established as a scam; rather, it reflects criticism of its methodology, commercial relationships, and some historical controversies.

There are several reasons for the reputation:

1. The commercial relationship with airlines

This is probably the biggest source of suspicion.

Skytrax says its star ratings are not paid for. It says airlines can, however, pay to receive a detailed breakdown and reporting of the rating appraisal. (Skytrax)

That creates an obvious perception problem: Skytrax is simultaneously an industry ratings organisation and a commercial business dealing with the airlines it evaluates.

Skytrax's position is that the rating itself cannot be bought, and that paid consultancy/reporting is separate from the rating. That's an important distinction, but it doesn't completely eliminate the perception of a conflict of interest.

2. The star ratings aren't simply passenger ratings

People sometimes assume:

5 stars = passengers generally think this airline is excellent.

That's not actually what the Skytrax star rating means.

Skytrax says its star ratings are based on its own audits, examining hundreds of product and service criteria—typically 500–800 assessment items—rather than customer reviews. (Skytrax)

Consequently, an airline can have a 5-star Skytrax rating while an individual passenger has a dreadful experience.

The rating is essentially an assessment against Skytrax's methodology, rather than a straightforward measure of customer satisfaction.

3. The World Airline Awards are a different thing

This causes considerable confusion.

Skytrax's World Airline Awards are based on a large passenger survey. For the 2026 awards, the survey covered September 2025–August 2026 and involved travellers from more than 100 nationalities. (Skytrax)

So there are actually two substantially different concepts:

Calling all three simply "Skytrax ratings" makes things confusing.

4. The historical reviews controversy

There is a more concrete reason for the scepticism.

In 2012, the UK's Advertising Standards Authority upheld five complaints concerning claims Skytrax had made about the volume/reliability of its reviews and its procedures for authenticating them.

According to the ASA-related reporting, Skytrax had claimed a robust authentication process but could not provide evidence demonstrating that the claimed procedures had actually been followed. Skytrax subsequently agreed to amend some of its promotional wording. (Trustpilot)

That episode is an important part of the background behind the "Scamtrax" nickname.

It should also be distinguished from the current Skytrax star-rating methodology, which Skytrax says is based on its audit process rather than passenger reviews.

5. Some results don't match experienced travellers' perceptions

This is probably what you encounter most often on aviation forums.

For example, an airline can receive an impressive Skytrax rating while frequent flyers report substantial problems with things such as:

• inconsistent cabin service

• poor ground handling

• ageing aircraft

• unreliable operations

• poor disruption handling

• mediocre lounges

• weak customer service when things go wrong

That's not necessarily evidence that the Skytrax rating is fraudulent. It can simply reflect what is being measured and how heavily particular criteria are weighted.

There's also an inherent problem with a single global rating system: a passenger comparing, say, Singapore Airlines, Ryanair and a regional carrier may care about completely different things.

6. The awards themselves are less problematic than the nickname suggests

It's worth giving Skytrax credit for one thing: its World Airline Awards aren't an airline-paid award scheme in the conventional sense.

Skytrax explicitly says airlines don't pay an entry fee, don't pay to attend, and don't pay for use of the awards/logo. It also says the survey and awards process is funded by Skytrax. (SKYTRAX)

Airlines are permitted to encourage their passengers to vote, however, which introduces another potential source of bias—particularly if some airlines are much more proactive about soliciting votes than others. Skytrax says this is monitored and that airlines cannot offer incentives for votes. (SKYTRAX)

So, is "Scamtrax" fair?

I'd separate three different questions:

Is Skytrax literally a scam?
There isn't good evidence to support that characterization.

Is it reasonable to be sceptical about Skytrax's methodology and commercial model?
Yes. There are legitimate reasons to scrutinise it, particularly the distinction between its ratings, awards, reviews and commercial services.

Should a traveller treat a Skytrax 4/5-star rating as definitive evidence that an airline is good?
No. It's better regarded as one data point based on Skytrax's particular methodology.

For someone choosing airlines—particularly for expensive business/first-class travel between London and Bangkok—I'd put considerably more weight on the specific product (seat, aircraft, lounge, route, schedule), recent passenger experience and operational reliability than on the Skytrax star designation alone.

If you'd like, I can also explain why some airlines such as Qatar, Singapore and Emirates get very high Skytrax ratings despite frequent-flyer criticism, which is where the Skytrax debate gets particularly interesting.